|Title||WASH II report on QIS data analysis: Findings from the second round 2014|
|Publication Type||Progress Report|
|Year of Publication||2015|
|Authors||Ahmed, M., Ahammed Gazi, A.F, Islam, M.|
|Publisher||IRC and BRAC|
|Place Published||The Hague, The Netherlands and Dhaka, Bangladesh|
The BRAC WASH programme was launched in May 2006 in 152 upazilas (WASH I area) of Bangladesh to contribute to the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by providing integrated water services, sanitation and hygiene promotion in collaboration with government and other stakeholders. In October 2011, the programme further expanded to 25 new upazilas (while continuing in the original 152 upazilas) mainly hard-to-reach areas under the name WASH II. Today BRAC WASH works with communities in 250 upazilas with a special emphasis on poor and ultra-poor households that do not have access to safe water supply and sanitary latrines.
From its conception monitoring played a crucial role and new additions and adaptations were made several times for the improvement of the programme. Programme inputs and outputs were measured routinely from the beginning, but there was a need to measure the performance of the programme as well as changes in the behaviour of the individuals and households. That’s why the Qualitative Information System (QIS) was introduced in the programme which measures the programme’s performance using progressive scales. The data was collected from representative sample upazilas.
The first performance monitoring round for 177 upazilas took place in 2012-13 and the 2nd round took place in 2014-15.This report contains the results of two outcome monitoring rounds of the new 25 upazilas in the WASH II areas of the BRAC WASH programme.
The results from the Village WASH Committee (VWC) indicators show significant improvement have been made in the overall VWC performance. All the VWCs are active and female members of all the VWCs are regularly attending the meetings.
Household indicator results are mixed. In the sanitation section significant progress has made been compared to the previous round while in case of water there is still a lot more to do in increasing improved water source coverage and water management. 87% of households drink water that is arsenic free, but only 20% of the households properly managed water from source to cup. 57% of the households have access to a hygienic latrine and almost all the members of the households that have a latrine are regularly using it. The provision of hand washing in and around the latrine increased substantially this round (38% vs. 25%). Still rigorous hygiene promotion activities are needed to improve this situation.
Sludge management after latrines were filled up shows a trend for burying the contents (59%) and a small percentage (3%) across all wealth categories have begun to use the compost productively. Almost thrice as many girls’ latrines provided jointly by BRAC WASH and the school authority scored higher in cleanliness in comparison to boys’ latrines (66% vs. 23%) were found clean. This means that extra attention needs to be paid to upgrading/maintenance of the boys’ latrines with active participation of the student brigade members. 96% of schools have disposal facilities and water available in the latrines while half of the schools have adequate funds for operation and maintenance. The percentages were 52% and 27% respectively in the previous round.
The findings on the Rural Sanitation Centres show that centres which received loans and training from BRAC are doing better than those which received only training (75% vs. 45% at and above benchmark). The percentages were 93% and 53% in the previous round. During the monitoring period essential sanitation products were more readily available in these centres. However, 12% of the BRAC supported centres (receiving loan and orientation) are not in business anymore. A reason may be that due to the increase in sanitation coverage demand for their work has dropped.
The copyright of the documents on this site remains with the original publishers. The documents may therefore not be redistributed commercially without the permission of the original publishers.