Evaluation Sewage and Drinking Water System Sint Maarten

The aim of this advisory service was to give an independent, non-binding advice about two proposed designs for the sewage and drinking water system of the Island Territory of St. Maarten.

In September 2005 the Government of St Maarten followed the recommendation of UNESCO-IHE and made a its decision for the winning bid. In this way UNESCO-IHE contributed directly to a step forward in the implementation process of a sustainable sewage and drinking water system for the island.

In the year 2000, two proposals to manage and extend the sewage and drinking water system were developed by two bidders, a private and a public party.

As the Island is small and stakes are high, the government of Sint Maarten requested an independent technical, economic, financial and institutional evaluation of the two proposals, before ultimately reaching a decision on the issue of selecting a sewage and drinking water system.

UNESCO-IHE accepted the invitation from the government of St. Maarten to carry out the evaluation study since it is part of its mandate to assist (local) governments in policy and decision-making by providing independent expert advice.

The approach and methodology which were applied in the evaluation were based on independent technical, economic, financial and institutional evaluations of the two proposals, and a participatory and transparent process, involving St. Maarten’s decision- and policy-makers and relevant stakeholders in series of dialogues and workshops.

The aim of sessions with decision and policy makers was to agree on ultimate evaluation criteria, indicators and their relative weights, while the session with stakeholders had a more informative character ensuring that main findings from the first two sessions are shared with the wider public of the island.

The actual assessment of the proposals centered on two main questions, i.e. the extent to which the party took the freedom to deviate from the governmental references, and secondly the extent to which the intentions of the party were risky and innovative. With respect to the first question, it was clear that both bidders reacted similarly. Both parties based their intended strategies heavily on the existing documents and references provided by the government. Neither of them took the effort to deviate from these references, using their expertise and creativity, adding additional value to their proposals. With respect to the second question it became clear that the private party was more innovative, opportunistic and risk-taking compared to the public company. The private company intended to make the largest investments, with a rapid connection policy, with the lowest leakage rates, with the cheapest external financing, and the largest challenges towards its internal and external organization.

However, the more aggressive strategy of the private bidder did not qualify them to also win the tender. The evaluation result using the evaluation criteria gave the proposal from the public local company a competitive advantage over that of the foreign private party. The local company’s proposal scored better on seven criteria, while the private party outscored the public party on only one criterion, and on two criteria, they approximately drew. Neither of the proposals fully complied with the given terms of reference nor was of the professional level expected for proposals for a project of this size, importance and potential impact.

This advisory service was carried out by 12 UNESCO-IHE staff supported by the local counterpart team.

In September 2005 the Government of St Maarten followed the recommendation of UNESCO-IHE to choose between the two bids. The final report is also used to draft a Project Specification Document addressing the shortcomings of the selected bid, before the project will be implemented.

The project was successfully completed within 6 months.