1 / 38

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING OF SEVEN REGIONAL WATER COMPANIES

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING OF SEVEN REGIONAL WATER COMPANIES. Presented by: vera muhaxhiri. CONTENT. Introduction Absolute performance of water sector Relative performance of water sector Relative individual performance Relative comparative performance Conclusion Steps forward.

orsin
Download Presentation

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING OF SEVEN REGIONAL WATER COMPANIES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ANNUAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING OF SEVEN REGIONAL WATER COMPANIES Presented by: vera muhaxhiri

  2. CONTENT • Introduction • Absolute performance of water sector • Relative performance of water sector • Relative individual performance • Relative comparative performance • Conclusion • Steps forward

  3. Water is essential, indeed: without it, there will be no existence…and as such it shall be used carefully. The best for this is that water should be treated almost as all other businesses. Water treatment and distribution are businesses which are faced with high costs.

  4. INTRODUCTION • Performance of water companies were evaluated by taking into consideration key performance indicators • ! Performance indicators for 2007 were estimated by reliable data • Absolute performance ensures achieved level • Relative individual performance justifies development trends within the company • Relative comparative performance provides activity results from the best to the worst, as well • It determines position of each company in relation with sector average • (Non) development trends necessarily requires explanations • Relevant stakeholders has contributed in trends development

  5. Absolute performance how sector stands in 2007?

  6. KEY FACTS OF PERFORMANCE IN 2007 (I) • According to the evaluations, coverage with water services is 72%, and with wastewater services is 50%. • 58% of water produced is not billed. • 78,348,252m3 water were subject to losses and abuse • in average from overall 217l water produced, only 91l are billed • €7,834,825 are expenses on behalf of non revenue water • the water sector would benefit an amount of €595,230 if NRW would have been decreased for only 8% = with grants provided by government!

  7. KEY FACTS OF PERFORMANCE IN 2007 (II) • Billing percentage has remained the same to 92% • Metered consumption has dropped to 81% due to reduction in proportion of customers with meters to 2%. • Operating costs per m3 of water produced has increased to €0.10 • Average tariff is €0.35, where the difference of €0.25 is supposed to cover inevitable amount of water losses; necessary capital costs, risk of non-collection; and minimal reserve fund

  8. KEY FACTS OF PERFORMANCE IN 2007 (III) • As operating costs per 1 billing point are €5.14,incomes are €7.94 • Revenue collection is increased to 61% • Operating cost has been covered by cash (WCR=1.03) • Debtors requirements has reached to €63,888,776; and obligations toward creditors are €11,301,052

  9. KEY FACTS OF PERFORMANCE IN 2007 (IV) • Staff performed more efficiently although indicator of 7.35 is still high. • Water quality is 2% • In average, water supply is …..(?) • Average customer complaints are….(?) • In general, companies has been very responsible toward reporting to WWRO

  10. Relative performance were sector development trends progressive or regressive in 2007 compared to 2006 ?

  11. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007 / 2006 (I)

  12. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007 / 2006 (II)

  13. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007 / 2006 (III)

  14. Relative individual performance what are development trends within a company in 2007 compared to 2006?

  15. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007/2006 RWC Prishtina, SH.A.

  16. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007/2006 RWC Hidroregjioni Jugor, SH.A.

  17. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007/2006 RWC Hidrodrini, SH.A.

  18. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007/2006 RWC Ujesjellesi Regjional, SH.A.

  19. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007/2006 RWC Radoniqi, SH.A.

  20. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007/2006 RWC Bifurkacioni, SH.A.

  21. PERFORMANCE DEVELOPMENTS 2007/2006 RWC Hidromorava, SH.A.

  22. Relative comparative performance who is the best performing company?!

  23. Non-revenue water %

  24. Billing percentage

  25. Metered consumption %

  26. Staff efficiency %

  27. Customer complaints

  28. Working rate

  29. Working coverage rate

  30. Operating cost per m3 of water produced

  31. Collection rate %

  32. Water quality

  33. Water supply

  34. Water service coverage

  35. Wastewater service coverage

  36. CONCLUSION • In 2007 compared to 2006, water sector has performed much better in relation to key performance indicators • All companies has shown progress in 2007 compared to 2006 in relative individual performance this may be a result of • Serious engagement of companies’ management staff • Establishment of Boards of Directors • Contribution given by Donors and Consultants • WWRO role

  37. STEPS FORWARD • Preparation of Performance Report for 2007 • Publication of the Performance Report • Regional benchmarking of water companies

  38. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

More Related