How do residents of informal settlements decide where to get water in informal settlements of Khulna and what are the challenges they face in doing so? Is there transparent information available to them? Is there accountability for the systems that are built in the neighbourhood? A working paper by WIN partner, the Bangladesh Water Partnership Download the full working paper: Key topics covered: Integrity assessment; water integrity risk mapping, service delivery in informal settlements and the roles of NGOs, utilities, and communities in setting them up and managing them over time; water quality and maintenance challenges; corruption challenges. Key findings: Residents want more transparency on their water systems, water quality, and maintenance. There are also significant accountability concerns in how water systems are set up and maintained in informal settlements, including illegal abstraction linked to ineffective regulation enforcement, unclear mandates for service provision, and absence of mechanisms to share concerns or get responses. Geographies: Khulna, Bangladesh Who should read this: Researchers and practitioners focusing on service delivery in informal settlements, to understand root causes of service challenges. Abstract Access to safe water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services in low-income and informal settlements in Bangladesh is constrained by governance weaknesses, lack of accountability, fragmented mandates, and uneven institutional responsiveness. This paper examines integrity-related barriers to WASH service delivery in Montu Kaloni and Nurani Mahalla in Khulna, both in the service jurisdiction of the Khulna Water Supply and Sewerage Authority (KWASA). Applying the Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-Corruption (TAPA) framework developed by the Water Integrity Network (WIN), the study adopts a mixed-methods design combining field observations, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and structured household surveys (n = 40 per settlement). Integrity issues were assessed using a five-point Likert scale (Very low–Very high), standardized to a 1–10 scale, and subsequently aggregated through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to derive weighted integrity deficiency scores and rankings. AHP prioritization assigns the highest normative weight to transparency (46.6%), followed by accountability (27.7%), participation (16.1%), and anti-corruption (9.6%), reflecting stakeholders’ perception of governance importance. Transparency is seen by communities as being critical for integrity in service provision, while anti-corruption actions are given the lowest rating largely because they are seen as intransigent issues that are hard to address. Aggregated deficiency results reveal a contrasting empirical pattern in informal settlements. Across the study area, accountability-related deficiencies account for 69% of total integrity deficiency, compared to 22% under transparency, 7% under participation, and 2% under anti-corruption. Overall integrity deficiency is 2.32 times higher in Montu Kaloni than in Nurani Mahalla; specifically, Montu Kaloni records 1.99, 2.44 and 1.80 times higher deficiencies under transparency, accountability, and participation respectively, while anti-corruption-related deficiency (2%) is observed only in Montu Kaloni and is absent in Nurani Mahalla. Transparency deficiencies constitute 21% of total integrity gaps in Montu Kaloni and 24% in Nurani Mahalla, while participation deficiencies represent 7% and 9% respectively. Resident fetching water from community tube well in Nurani Mahalla - photo courtesy of the author (Banlgadesh Water Partnership) Issue-level AHP and Likert-based ranking clarifies the drivers of integrity deficiency. The highest-ranked issue—indiscriminate use of submersible groundwater systems—reflects weak regulatory enforcement, inadequate service coverage, and ineffective oversight of groundwater abstraction and water quality management. Political mediation required for new connections in disputed settlements ranks second, revealing dependence on informal power structures and the absence of clearly operationalized legal mandates for service provision in contested land areas. Lack of knowledge regarding grievance submission procedures and limited awareness of formal application processes indicate failures in public communication on services and institutional responsibility for ensuring that communities understand their rights and entitlements. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that while transparency carries the highest theoretical weight, structural accountability failures—stemming from unclear mandates, land tenure constraints, weak enforcement, limited grievance redress, and fragmented institutional coordination—dominate in practice. Participation gaps reflect restricted community engagement, donor-driven planning processes, and limited awareness of civic rights, while anti-corruption concerns remain comparatively limited but embedded within broader governance weaknesses. By presenting TAPA weightage alongside aggregated integrity deficiency and ranked issue-level evidence, the study demonstrates a clear divergence between normative governance prioritization and empirical integrity breakdown in informal settlements. Strengthening WASH governance therefore requires integrated improvements across all TAPA dimensions, with particular emphasis on institutionalized accountability, improved transparency of service standards and tariffs, inclusive participation mechanisms, and enforceable anti-corruption safeguards to achieve equitable urban service delivery. Shallow tube well (Lobon Panir Kall) - photo courtesy of the author (Banlgadesh Water Partnership)

by Barbara Schreiner, Executive Director, Water Integrity Network In 2006, a small group of people came together to do something that had never been done before: to name corruption as a water and sanitation crisis, and to do something about it. Founded by IRC, SIWI, Swedish Water House, Transparency International, and the World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme, the Water Integrity Network was born out of growing concerns among water and anti-corruption stakeholders that integrity failures were undermining the sector's ability to serve people, especially the poorest. “Globally, the water sector is riddled with corruption that often negates the impact of development and hits the poor most severely. Corruption reduces water supply, quantitatively and qualitatively, and increases scarcity and pollution. It distorts decision-making for new projects and misallocation of existing schemes. Corruption also skews democratic principles, reduces the domain of public action and ultimately undermines the rule of civil society. Corruption stunts water development and makes it harder and costlier to reach the Millennium Development Goals on poverty, water supply and sanitation services and environmental sustainability.” (WIN 2007) Twenty years on, the mission is the same, but the world around us has changed and demands an innovative response. --- What two decades of work has built For a long time corruption in the sector was widely acknowledged in hushed tones and rarely addressed head-on. WIN helped change that. Today, WIN works with over 65 network partners and allies, running country programmes in Bangladesh, Kenya and Uganda as well as projects across Southern and Eastern Africa and Latin America. WIN develops practical integrity risk mitigation strategies with civil society, utilities, small service providers, regulators, and local governments. We train more than 200 water professionals on integrity topics every year and contribute extensively to global and national research and integrity advocacy. Together with partners, we have made it clear that the sector benefits from integrity: not just accepting the status quo and the losses from corruption. We have also shown there are many ways sector stakeholders can promote change, starting from within the sector.Utilities serving over 13 million users in Bangladesh, Kenya, Bolivia, Peru, Mexico and Uganda have used integrity tools to diagnoses internal risks and work on procedural changes for field operations, improved accounting systems, as well as stronger grievance mechanisms, public hearings and user communications. This means they lose less and account for more, and in the process, they reduced non-revenue water levels, improved reputation and position in regulatory rankings, improved response time for connections and repairs, and closed off easy opportunities for fraud. In Kenya, Mexico, Bangladesh, and Nepal, integrity management improvements among community groups—often starting small, with posting tariffs publicly or setting up user communication channels, recording expenses, or building links to local officials—rebuilt trust between users and providers and improved their financial position enough to pay off bills and expand their systems. We expanded accountability mechanisms in multiple programmes: with regulatory reforms towards formalisation in Honduras and Kenya and especially with support to social accountability campaigns and groups. In Kenya, youth parliaments developed tools to monitor whether politicians delivered on their campaign promises for water and sanitation. In Nepal, WIN facilitated the creation of a WASH Media Forum. In Mexico, civil society partners co-created the Chiapas Water Agenda, securing written commitments from 14 deputies and 9 electoral candidates on water governance reform. Integrity-informed advocacy has also reshaped how budgets are allocated, how contracts are set up, and how bills are paid: schools increased budgets for school WASH in Bangladesh based on results of integrity assessments. Local municipalities did the same in Guatemala for local WASH services. In Mozambique, integrity-focused advocacy protected the sector from major budget cuts. In Zambia, government responded to integrity advocacy by making sure overdue utility bills of public institutions were paid. Perhaps the least visible but most foundational part of WIN's contribution has been to break the silence. We do this with research and networking, for example around the publications of the Water Integrity Global Outlook and with more specific groundbreaking research on sexual corruption or water services in informal settlements. We make problems likes corruption something we can do something about, rather than just suffer through. --- Why this work cannot stop None of this means the work is done. Far from it. Ensuring universal access to clean water and sanitation requires a three-fold increase in investments. Without integrity at the heart of that investment surge and the systems that manage it, more money will simply mean more waste, more capture by vested interests, and more broken promises to the communities waiting for safe water. With climate change, and as floods and droughts compound existing fragilities, the risk of rushed spending and misallocation, bypassed procurement rules, and emergency funds diverted from those most in need will only grow. WIN's work on water integrity and climate adaptation may be its most consequential yet. --- The crisis we cannot ignore Yet today, the space for integrity work is shrinking in ways we could not have imagined a few years ago. Across the world, civic space is closing: civil society organisations face increasing restrictions, watchdog groups are silenced, and environmental defenders — including those fighting for water justice — are imprisoned or killed. The rise of autocratic and populist movements has brought with it a systematic dismantling of transparency mechanisms, independent media, and accountability institutions. For the poorest and most marginalised communities, who depend on these safeguards to have any voice at all, this is a direct assault on their ability to claim their right to safe water and decent sanitation. And precisely at the moment of greatest need, the funding environment for this work has turned hostile. For the WIN network, which has relied on the support of governments committed to development, this is not an abstract trend. It is an existential pressure. The work that has taken twenty years to build — the country coalitions, the training programmes, the research, the tools — is now at risk of being dismantled not because it has failed, but because the political will to fund it is faltering. --- Twenty years and still needed The case for integrity work is stronger now than it has ever been. When budgets are squeezed and every aid dollar must stretch further, the last thing the sector can afford is to lose a portion of every dollar to corruption and mismanagement. Integrity work is not a luxury for good times — it is precisely what is needed when resources are scarce. Integrity is the mechanism by which every available dollar reaches the people it was meant for. It is how the poor secure a voice, a seat at the table, and a claim to the water that keeps them alive. WIN's twentieth anniversary is not a moment to rest. It is a moment to think creatively about what comes next and how to overcome the constraints we are operating within. Success will require new kinds of funding, courage, and a new level of collaboration. Relationships, not capital alone, will define who can sustain this work. Networks like WIN exist precisely for this moment: to connect the people and organisations who share this mission and help them achieve more together than any could alone. Twenty years ago, a small group of organisations came together because they believed that corruption in water and sanitation was both a cause and a consequence of poverty, and that naming it honestly was the first step to changing it. That belief is as true today as it was in 2006. The work continues: mark this moment and help us carry it forward, with transparency, accountability, participation, and anti-corruption. If this work matters to you — if you believe that every dollar invested in water should reach the people it was meant for and who need it most — then make that visible. Share this piece. Bring up transparency, accountability, participation, and anti-corruption at your next meeting. Connect us with others who share this mission. (You can also donate here)

New guideline for local governments to implement water and sanitation climate adaptation projects with integrity: key risks and practical mitigation measures that make sense at local level In brief: New guideline introduces Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-corruption (TAPA) for local governments as the critical foundation for climate resilient WASH. Provides examples of how political capture and undue influence in early planning stages can lead to maladaptation, where projects shift risk rather than reducing it (e.g., seawalls that protect wealthy areas while accelerating erosion elsewhere). Practical and tested at local level, the guidelines identifies straightforward integrity risk mitigation measures across the adaptation project lifecycle (from planning to monitoring) and in the enabling environment. Water is the primary medium through which climate change affects communities. Floods, droughts, storms, sea-level rise, and rising temperatures are already disrupting drinking water supplies, damaging sanitation infrastructure, and deepening inequalities—especially for those living in informal settlements and low-income areas. While national governments set policy and global donors provide funds, it is local governments that are closest to communities experiencing climate impacts. They receive central government transfers for climate-related projects, they deliver context-specific solutions and services, and they are most directly accountable to local people. Local governments need to get climate adaptation right. For this, they need financing and support. They also must addres governance and integrity risks. Corruption, unjust resource distribution, and mismanaged infrastructure can exacerbate vulnerability to climate change, weaken responses, and divert needed resources for responses at local level. This can lead to maladaptation. And yet, safeguards and oversight mechanisms on the use of climate funds do not always extend as strongly to the local government level, especially in emergencies. An integrity guideline for local government climate adaptation work A new WIN guideline provides a practical, project-cycle framework to identify and counter integrity risks at local level, helping ensure that adaptation investments related to water and sanitation deliver real and lasting outcomes. The guideline complements broad climate-resilient WASH (CR-WASH) frameworks and guidance that desribe what resilience looks like, with practical input for local frontline implementers to ensure that these efforts are not undermined by governance failures. This guideline was developed with review and input from county government officials in Makueni, Kenya, and is supported by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). It is global in scope and includes specific case studies and examples from Kenya (Makueni, Kitui, Isiolo, Marsabit — Ward Climate Change Planning Committees), South Africa, Bangladesh, and the Philippines. Key findings Integrity failures — including corruption, political capture, and weak oversight — are a major but underacknowledged driver of failed climate adaptation in water and WASH, turning well-funded projects into maladaptation. Every stage of the adaptation project cycle carries specific, documented integrity risks: from nepotism in staffing and biased technical assessments, to procurement fraud, substandard construction, and falsified monitoring data. Emergency and disaster response contexts are particularly high-risk, as expedited procurement and urgent fund disbursements frequently bypass standard accountability mechanisms. Community participation and feedback mechanisms are not just good practice — they are a practical anti-corruption safeguard, as demonstrated by Kenya's Ward Climate Change Planning Committees. Addressing integrity risks does not require large budgets: simple, low-cost tools (standard operating procedures, conflict-of-interest disclosures, participation checklists, community monitoring groups, and anonymous hotlines) can significantly reduce corruption risk. Key recommendations 1. Embed TAPA (Transparency, Accountability, Participation, Anti-Corruption) across the adaptation project cycle, from pre-planning integrity scans to community-led monitoring and public disclosure of results. 2. Formalise community oversight by establishing ward- or community-level monitoring committees with a clear mandate, basic training, and direct links to official grievance and correction mechanisms. 3. Prepare before a disaster strikes by developing emergency procurement plans, pre-vetted supplier lists, and clear financial controls that remain active during crisis response. Download: Water Integrity Network (2026). Guideline for Local Governments: Integrity in Water and Sanitation Climate Adaptation. Berlin: WIN. Practical guide for local governments on effectively implementing water and sanitation climate adaptation projects with integrity across the full project cycle. or read online: Go further: Understand maladaptation with insight from the Green Climate Fund Share insight on water and sanitation climate adaptation integrity risks including mismanagement and climate-washing and other cases of misrepresentation. Find out more about ways climate finance tracking could be strengthened with civil society

The Water Integrity Network is putting integrity at the heart of water management and the delivery of water and sanitation services. Clean water needs clean governance Integrity can make the water and sanitation sectors more resilient, more equitable, and less vulnerable to corruption, and malpractice. Join us in advocating for integrity and ensuring clean water management and services, for all . FIND OUT MORE News SEE ALL POSTS Upcoming June 24, 2026: Integrity Talk 17 on Climate Finance Tracking: Where is the money going and is it really ensuring water resilience? RSVP Water integrity? It's essential Corruption and integrity issues happen everywhere and in all sectors, but in water and sanitation, the impact is particularly dramatic, for people's lives, communities, economies, and ecosystems. We can change this, with integrity . We can ensure resources are used where intended and most needed. We can fix the leaks and systematic weaknesses that leave infrastructure at breaking point and pollution unchecked. Stand with us for change. What you can do Water integrity is not a pipe dream. There are many practical ways to ensure water is managed with integrity, without impunity. We can start by realistically discussing integrity risks and corruption issues. We can then nurture integrity through Transparency, Accountability, Participation, and Anti-corruption measures. Join us and be part of the change. Get training TRAINING Understand integrity risks ASSESSMENTS Strengthen your work with integrity TOOLS Become a partner NETWORK Newsletter Sign up to our newsletter First name Last name Email SUBSCRIBE Thanks for subscribing! Partner network Our network, events, and tools are open and available to all. We welcome collaboration, questions, and feedback. Organisations that wish to show their commitment to improving integrity in water and sanitation management and actively collaborate on integrity programmes are also invited to partner with us formally. Take a stand for water integrity: become a formal WIN partner now. JOIN WIN

View our Water Integrity programmes from around the world. Programmes

View our Publications to learn about global water integrity, discover integrity assesment best practices and case studies from around the world. 1 2 3 4 5 Publications