Powering Health

Home » Step-Wise Approach to Power Your Health Facility » 6. Make Investments Sustainable »

Maintenance

There are two critical components needed for effective system maintenance: training and funding. While significant progress has been made in including training programs with facility retrofit efforts, funding for replacement parts remains a serious constraint to system sustainability.

The Challenge:

Energy systems are no different than any other medical equipment – to function properly they require regular maintenance, and when components break, there needs to be the funding and technical know how available to fix them. Let’s face it – in the vast majority of cases stakeholders have failed to establish proper maintenance programs for distributed energy systems. The results are heartbreaking – millions of dollars of stranded equipment rendered useless because of what is typically an inexpensive broken part.

Many of the fundamental maintenance challenges are the same regardless of the technology utilized. Whether it is lack of routine maintenance on a generator or failure to keep batteries filled with water in a solar PV system the results will eventually be the same – system failure. Specific maintenance requirements for different technologies are discussed in the technologies section. Specific annual maintenance and replacement costs for diesel and solar PV systems can be calculated using the hybrid system optimization tool.

The maintenance challenge can best be explained by the following scenario which is the standard model for health facility energy system improvement programs:

1. A donor provides funding to the Ministry of Health to purchase 50 solar PV/diesel hybrid systems for rural health clinics.
2. In addition to the capital funding, they provide funds to train local technicians and hospital maintenance staff on proper maintenance protocols. The donor also funds a one year maintenance contract with the equipment provider/installer.
3. The systems function well for 1-4 years, at which point the batteries begin to fail. (note: field lifespan of batteries in health facilities is typically much shorter than manufacturer’s specifications as a result of improper use). Charge controllers or inverters are other typical components which fail.
4. The donor program which supported the initial equipment purchase has ended, the MOH and local health facility do not have the funds to replace the batteries, and the systems fail.
5. Tens of thousands of dollars of solar panels and other equipment are rendered useless as a result of the failure of a relatively inexpensive component.

How do we change this paradigm?

Solutions:

Unfortunately, there is no easy solution to the maintenance challenge. Huge improvements from the status quo can be achieved with the proper training of technicians and health facility staff, and this can easily be added to a donor supported program. But who will fund the replacement parts required for these systems? Ideally, a maintenance fund should be created at the time of system installation but this is very difficult for most donors to structure in a way which meets their budgetary protocols. The following options have been tried with some success:

1. Budget Line Item – Ideally the MOH should include a line item in the annual operating budget of public health facilities for energy system maintenance. However, co-mingling of energy system maintenance funds with overall facility operational budgets has not been overly successful for two reasons:
• System failure can not be predicted and is therefore often not included in the facility’s yearly operating budget request.
• Even if money is provided for this purpose, it is often used or other perceived priorities if the system is operational at the time the funds are received.
2. Revenue Generating Activities – Often efforts are undertaken to add some type of revenue generating activity (such as cell phone charging, selling excess electricity or water to the community, etc) associated with a health facilities energy system. This has proven effective to provide a source of routine maintenance funds, but these schemes often fail to raise sufficient revenue to cover the replacement costs of critical components.
3. Long Term Maintenance Contracts – Upfront payment for maintenance contracts has been used with mixed results. To be effective, both the structure and duration of the contract needs to be carefully considered. Typically, maintenance contracts are purchased from the installation company for an initial period of 1-5 years. Trouble free performance of the systems during this “honeymoon” period can be an incentive to not renew the contracts with system failure following in short order. Experience had demonstrated that health facilities are reluctant to sign maintenance contracts with the private sector because of the cost.

If maintenance contracts are used, they also need to be structured in a way that provides a strong incentive for the contractor to optimize the performance and lifetime of the system – not just replace parts when they break.

The bottom line is that the systems which have been the most sustainable are those associated with a long term source of funding which can support replacement parts. These include systems at private health facilities which either charge for services or have annual budgetary support from a developed country partner and systems associated with long term donor programs such as childhood immunization cold chain improvement programs.