Development Needs Maintenance Too

Updated on May 13, 2025
by abhijat

Why the Social Sector Must Embrace the AMC Model for Long-Term Impact

Dr. Sarika Kulkarni, Founder, CEO – Raah Foundation.

Introduction:

The Gap After the Grant

In most programs, the funding ends when the project period ends. So does the attention. What’s left behind is either a burden on communities or underprepared local institutions. Even in participatory models, once the external support leaves, communities often lack the technical capacity or resources to troubleshoot issues, adapt to evolving needs, or sustain innovation.

This creates a cycle of “one-off development”where each new program starts from scratch rather than building on or maintaining what already exists.

Raah Foundation: A Journey Shaped by Experiential Learning”

Raah Foundation was born from a deep-seated passion—a desire to drive sustainable change and transformation. Coming from outside the development sector, I had little knowledge of how programs were conceptualized or implemented. The pressing question was: How can one ensure that transformation and change are permanent? My education was unconventional. I had two primary teachers: engaging conversations with people—those affected and those already driving change—and sheer observation. By immersing myself in these experiences, I absorbed invaluable lessons that became the bedrock of Raah Foundation. This journey of experiential

learning not only shaped my understanding but also instilled the resilience and insight necessary to build an organization committed to lasting impact.

One of the most haunting sights I’ve witnessed is the trail of broken promises scattered across our villages—check dams choked with silt, dry wells, defunct borewells, failed plantations, shattered solar panels, abandoned pumps, and forgotten livelihood projects. From Jawhar to Ransai, from Solapur to Jalna—the story is heartbreakingly the same.

Every few kilometers, women and girls walk past these lifeless structures, their faces etched with exhaustion and silent sorrow. Their eyes, lingering on what could have been, speak of dashed hopes and daily struggle. It was these moments—these glances—that pushed us to dig deeper and find a better way.

Was it an infrastructure problem? Was it a solution problem?

Was it a maintenance problem?

Was it a problem with the way the solutions were implemented? Was it a people problem?

Was there a problem with the community support or buy in? Was it a climate change problem? Or

Was it because organizations were doing that they knew the best and funders were supporting what they understood the most? Or

Was it wisdom of the visible – limit to conversations about what can be seen and avoid what is invisible.

I was getting extremely restless and anxious.

Post-project sustainability emerged as one of the most significant challenges in the development sector. Too often, as soon as an implementing organization wraps up or donor funding ends, even the most promising interventions begin to unravel.

Through these observations and conversations, I realized that for change to be enduring, it must be community-driven, context-specific, and adaptable. Experiential learning taught me that sustainable development isn’t about imposing solutions but about co-creating them with the communities we aim to serve.

The Imperative of Sustained Infrastructure: A Data-Driven Case for Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMC)”

Soon it became obvious that locations in Maharashtra were not alone. This was a global problem. Shockingly studies indicate that 30% to 40% of water supply systems in low-resource settings become non-functional due to inadequate maintenance and lack of post-project support. This translates to an estimated $1.2 to $1.5 billion in wasted investments over two decades. (Source: Lockwood, H., & Smits, S. (2011). Supporting rural water supply: moving towards a service delivery approach. IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre). A World Bank review found that 10 out of 21 evaluated projects failed to sustain benefits after completion, despite initial success. ( Source: World Bank ). Globally, tree survival rates in plantation projects without maintenance are often very low ranging from just 30% to 60%, depending on the region, species, and climate conditions. A study conducted between 2012 and 2016 by the Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective found that only 10% of saplings reported as planted were actually found on-site, with survival rates in some plots as low as 3.6%. In areas like Dera Mandi, only 23% of 6,000 trees survived due to poor maintenance. Conversely, in regions where maintenance was better, survival rates were higher. (Source: Indian Express). The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) reported a survival rate of 64.5% between 2007 and 2013. However, independent surveys by environmental groups estimated actual survival rates between 10–25%, attributing the discrepancy to inadequate maintenance and poor site selection. (Source: Wikipedia) Government audits (e.g., CAG reports) have revealed that the survival rates in India Compensatory Afforestation projects as low as 20–40% in some states where maintenance was minimal.

Situation outside India too is not great. A study analyzing tree survival and growth data from 176 restoration sites in tropical and sub-tropical Asia found that, on average, 18% of planted saplings died within the first year, rising to 44% after five years. (Source: UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology). Large-scale afforestation efforts in China’s arid and semi-arid regions have faced challenges, with survival rates dropping to as low as 15% due to environmental degradation and impacts on soil moisture. (Source: Wikipedia). In the Great Green Wall initiative in Africa, reports show variable success, with some areas reporting less than 15% survival where follow- up care was weak. In Latin America Reforestation projects that were community-managed or NGO-led with minimal post-plantation care saw less than 50% survival in many instances.

In contrast, projects with structured maintenance (AMC-like models)—regular watering, fencing, community stewardship, and monitoring—achieve 70–90% survival rates or higher. In another study by The Project Management Institute, observed that many projects fail due to the absence of appropriate sustainability plans, emphasizing the necessity for comprehensive post- implementation strategies.

Imagine if all of these projects and interventions were successful and provided the necessary impact? We would have probably met the UN SDGs much earlier and world probably would have been a better place!. Maybe we could have done things differently – we could have paused, observed, analyzed and used different frameworks to measure outcomes and impact.

May be...may be…

Since 1960, approximately $5.7 trillion has been allocated globally to foreign aid aimed at poverty reduction. However, the long-term effectiveness of these investments remains uncertain due to limited impact assessments beyond the initial project phases. (Source: World Economic Forum)

Despite the scale of investments poured into development, many interventions still fail to deliver lasting change. It’s a frustrating reality. When I couldn’t find convincing answers within the sector, I began looking elsewhere—and that’s when something clicked.

In sectors like infrastructure and technology, Annual Maintenance Contracts (AMCs) are standard practice. They’re built-in safeguards—ensuring continued performance, regular upkeep, and timely repairs.

So, why don’t we do the same in development?

What if we structured our programs, whether in rural development, health, education, or climate action—with an AMC mindset? A model that plans not just for implementation, but for durability and resilience over time. It’s a simple shift in thinking with powerful implications: more sustainable outcomes, more accountable systems, and greater value for every rupee spent.

It’s time we adapt to what works—and make long-term sustainability non-negotiable. It’s time we plan properly – long term with post project support in mind. As Cynthia Low, in her article on business analysis, reiterates the timeless adage “Failing to plan is planning to fail.”

Why an AMC makes sense in the development sector:

Post-project sustainability and long term functionality: Many projects collapse once donor funding ends or the implementing NGO exits. An AMC-like structure ensures ongoing technical, financial, or advisory support. Infrastructure degrades and an. AMC like structure will ensure sustained This will ensure sustained operations and the initial investments continue to deliver benefits providing an extremely high SROI.

1.Ownership transition: AMCs could support community-led maintenance, allowing a gradual transfer of responsibility while keeping systems functional—be it water structures, solar assets, farm input centers, or digital This also builds confidence among beneficiaries exciting them into maintain judiciously.
2.Cost predictability: Planning for maintenance costs as a budgeted component from the start (say, 5–10% annually of the project cost) improves financial transparency and
3.Data and feedback loops: Ongoing visits under an AMC can feed real-time monitoring and adaptive learning, improving future program design.
4.Donor confidence: It signals a commitment to outcomes, not just outputs—something increasingly demanded by A strong case of AMC has the potential to increase the availability of funds.

An AMC in the development sector could mean:

*Annual follow-ups to ensure systems are functional and goals are being met
*Periodic capacity-building or training refreshers for community institutions
*Minor repairs or advisory support to sustain impact
*Structured feedback loops to inform future design
*Even corpus-funded maintenance to reduce donor fatigue

AMC would ensure long-term stewardship and accountability by going above and beyond mere project completion—but creating a change that is long term and creates virtuous cycle of growth and development.

Possible AMC models in the sector:

NGO-led AMCs: Implementers provide annual health checks, training refreshers, or minor repair services.
Community-based AMCs: Local groups (like SHGs or water user associations) are trained and financed for periodic maintenance.
Third-party AMC services: For hardware-heavy interventions, external vendors can be
Philanthropic-backed Endowment AMCs: A corpus fund ensures AMC funding beyond the project’s active years.
Community raised fund: Community contributes a small monthly amount for a maintenance pool that is used when needed.
Government support through a maintenance Community leverages govt. Scheme and undertakes regular maintenance.

Communities that own and benefit from these structures must take a proactive, leading role. However, they need to be triggered, organized around a shared vision, and involved from project inception to foster true ownership. Extensive training and building capacity to leverage

government funds are essential. Implementing organizations must integrate these elements into project design.

Potential Challenges:

*Administrative complexity: AMCs within grants require careful planning and donor
*Community dependence: Poorly designed AMCs may hinder community Communities must understand their roles and engage proactively.
*Resource limitations: Limited staffing or remote locations can impact NGOs may need to assign dedicated staff for extended periods, with funders providing necessary support.
*Government support: Local governments must simplify access to funding schemes for

AMC-like mechanisms in the development sector must be embedded as core design elements, tailored to local contexts and scaled to match the intervention’s nature. They are not an

afterthought but essential for long-term impact and resilience. Without ongoing support, the sustainability of community-based projects is at risk. AMCs are crucial for maintaining project benefits, maximizing investments, and achieving lasting outcomes. What’s needed is a community-owned AMC, with NGOs providing training, leadership, and technical skills, ensuring smooth handover and support for at least two years.

To Conclude:

As the saying goes, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Development work is not a one-time fix; it’s a long-term commitment. Just like infrastructure, social initiatives require consistent care to thrive. By adopting the AMC model, we ensure our efforts stay sustainable, resilient, and truly transformative for the communities we serve.

Reviving the Godavari: A Blueprint for River Basin Conservation

The Godavari River, India’s second-longest, is vital for agriculture, industry, and biodiversity in multiple states. It serves as a water source for millions, supporting irrigation networks that enhance agricultural productivity. Its biodiversity provides habitat for various species, maintaining ecological balance. However, industrialization and urbanization have harmed its health, causing environmental imbalances.

Industrial pollution poses a significant challenge, with untreated effluents from factories degrading water quality and harming aquatic life. Heavy metals and excessive nutrients deplete oxygen, affecting fish populations and disrupting the food web. Effluent treatment plants have been established to regulate industrial discharge, but stricter enforcement of regulations is needed for long-term success.

Another threat is the destruction of riparian habitats due to deforestation and sand mining, which increases erosion and reduces groundwater recharge. Riparian afforestation programs have been initiated to restore floodplains, stabilize soil, and filter pollutants.

Overfishing and habitat degradation threaten fish populations and livelihoods. Unsustainable fishing methods have replaced traditional practices, harming aquatic ecosystems. Community-led conservation initiatives promote sustainable fishing and protect riverine biodiversity through cooperative management and awareness programs.

Integrated conservation measures for the Godavari River offer a model for sustainable river basin management in India. Technological interventions and community engagement address environmental degradation, but continued policy implementation, scientific research, and public participation are critical for the river’s health. A coordinated management framework can balance economic growth with ecological sustainability, ensuring the future of India’s water resources.