a review of oxfam gb’s community led · amida 161 266 6/2011 36 2 ocettohe east layamo 79 386 29...

A review of Oxfam GB’s COMMUNITY LED

TOTAL SANITATION (CLTS) initiative in

Kitgum/Lamwo districts, northern Uganda,

between July 2009 and July 2010

Part II

Review of Oxfam Kitgum CLTS - Part II - Annexes Dec 2011 2 | P a g e

Foreword

This report contains more detailed information about certain aspects discussed in the first part

of this documentation:

Contents Foreword ............................................................................................................................... 2

Villages triggered ................................................................................................................................ 3

Kitgum ................................................................................................................................... 3

Lamwo .................................................................................................................................... 5

Pawma .................................................................................................................................... 8

Okwone Bone ..................................................................................................................... 10

Aboo .................................................................................................................................... 13

Lukwor East ....................................................................................................................... 15

Health .................................................................................................................................................. 16

Pamwa .................................................................................................................................. 16

Bone ..................................................................................................................................... 17

Aboo .................................................................................................................................... 18

Lukwor East ....................................................................................................................... 22


Villages triggered

Kitgum

Below is the list of the already triggered villages in Kitgum, as well as the current sanitation

status whenever it is possible to provide it:

Villages triggered by OXFAM in 2009

Table 1: Villages triggered by OXFAM in 2009

This information has not been updated as I was not able to access to the latest sanitary data of

Mucwini sub-county.

Villages triggered by the EHD with OXFAM support in 2010

Table 2: Villages triggered by the EHD with OXFAM support in 2010, Kitgum district

S/

n

Village Parish Sub

county

H/H

Pop

Total

Pop

Triggering

dates

Latrines

before

triggering

Latrines in

July 2010

1 Agula. A Bura Mucwini 53 450 2009 23 36

2 Obele Pobec Mucwini 39 195 2009 2 15

S/

n

Village Parish Sub

county

H/H

Pop

Tol

Pop

Triggerin

g dates

Latrines

before

triggerin

g

Latrine

s in

6/2011

1 Alel West Pawidi Lagoro 64 326 6/2010 15 24

2

Onyalla Pagwok Namokora 129 560 7/2010 19 76

3 Labwor

Omor

Lolwa Orom 49 401 7/2010 10 19

4 Acut Omer Palwo Omiya

Anyima

88 457 6/2010 12 No data

5 Oruma Ogwapoke Mucwini 57 249 7/2010 6 No data

6 Manwoko

South

Akworo

Labongo

Amida 114 625 7/2010 10 46

7 Pamolo

Central

Labongo

Layamo

147 938 7/2010 34 80

8 Okwongo

Bone

Lumule Kitgum

Matidi

72 278 7/2010 12 18

9 Lemo

Bongolewic

West

Pondwongo Kitgum

Town

Council

111 247 7/2010 30 74

10 Ateng Pajimo Akwang 180 919 7/1010 33 No data


Villages triggered by the EHD in March 2011 by the support of UNICEF

S/

n

Village Parish Sub

county

H/H

Pop

Tota

l pop

Triggering

dates

Latrines

before

triggerin

g

Latrines

in June

2011

1 Cilon Orom 28 150 4/2011 16 28

2 Boroboro Namokora No

data

No

data

4/2011 45 69

3 Balangor Omiya

Anyima

No

data

No

data

4/2011 11 37

4 Balakwa Lagoro 62 No

data

4/2011 15 18

5 Onyaa Kitgum

Matidi

46 No

data

4/2011 14 30

6 Lukwor

East

Amida 176

742 28/4/2011 21 50

7 Atura Layamo No

data

No

data

4/2011 17 37

8 Oget Akwang No

data

No

data

4/2011 20 30

9 Kalala Mucwini No

data

No

data

4/2011 16 18

10 Tangi

Agoro

Kitgum

Town

Council

123 960 4/2011 25

Table 3: Villages triggered by the EHD with UNICEF support, in 2011, Kitgum district

Villages triggered by the EHD with the support of CARITAS in May 2010

Table 4: Village triggered by the EHD with the support of CARITAS

S/n Village Parish Sub

county

H/H

Pop

Tota

l

Pop

Triggerin

g dates

Latrines

before

triggerin

g

Latrines

in 2011

1 Parwec

Alango

Kitgum

Matidi

88 5/2010 No data 68

2

Tamangu Akwang No

data

No

data

5/2010 No data No data


Villages triggered by the EHD with the support of World Vision in June 2011.

Table 5: villages triggered by the EHD with World Vision in 2011, Kitgum district

Lamwo

Below is the list of the already triggered villages in Lamwo district as well as the current

sanitation status of them when it is possible:

Villages triggered by OXFAM in 2009

S/

n

Village Parish Sub

county

H/H

Pop

Tota

l pop

Triggering

dates

Latrines

before

triggerin

g

Latrines

in June

2011

1 Miciri

Klaki

Lamwo Palabek

Kal

120 150 2009 02 28

2 Pamwa Kal Palabek

Kal

61 No

data

2009 04 69

3 Ocula

South

Pkalab

ule

Lokung

3 Beyogoya-

Makerere

Anaka Palabek

Gem

No

data

2009 01 37

4 Loi Te

Okworo

Alaa Padibe

East

62 No

data

2009 10 18

5 Pudibu Kal Madi Opei 46 No

data

2009 5 30

6 Agoro

Dem

(Upscale)

Kal Palabek

Kal

176

742 2009 10 50

Table 6: villages triggered by OXFAM in 2009, Lamwo district

S/

n

Village Parish Sub

county

H/H

Pop

Tota

l

Pop

Triggerin

g dates

Latrines

before

triggering

Latrines in

2011

1 Lukwor

West

Amida 161 266 6/2011 36

2

Ocettohe

East

Layamo 79 386 29 No data

3 Pem Akwang No

data

No

data

6/2011 No data No data


Villages triggered by the EHD with OXFAM support in 2010

S/n Village Parish Sub

county

H/H

Pop

Tot

al

pop

Triggering

dates

Latrines

before

triggeri

ng

Latrines in

June 2011

1 Itiba Bungu Paloga 486 120 6/2010 03 18

2 Larac

Odong

Pawach Agoro 268 109 6/2010 03 16

3 Pauma

Mede

Kal Palabek

Kal

217 41 6/2010 09 17

4 Padwat

East

Padwat Palabek

Ogili

141 374 6/2010 12 43

5 Agula

Luboyoko

B

Lupulingi Agolo 412 87 6/2010 04 6

6 Lacari

Belbmunu

Alaa Padibe

East

415

113 6/2010 19 33

7 Kafata Patanga Palabek

Gem

742 174 6/2011 15 56

8 Lodwak

East

Dibolyec Lokung 267 68 6/2011 26 20

9 Pama Okol Madi

Opei

426 99 6/2011 15 18

10 Latic

Odokogw

ok

Abakady

ak

Padibe

West

485 115 6/2011 10 68

Table 7: Villages triggered by the EHD with OXFAM support in 2010, Lamwo district


Villages triggered by the EHD in March 2011 by the support of UNICEF

S/N Village Paris

h

Sub-

County

HHs Total

Pop

Triggerin

g dates

Latrine in

use

before

CLTS

Latrines in

use after

CLTS

1 Cwiny

Muribe

A

Agoro 88 March

2011

11 32

2 Doggw

enyu

Madi

Opei

93 March

2011

04 14

3 Dogudi

A

Paloga 86 March

2011

09 66

4 Aboo Padibe

East

66 March

2011

08 13

5 Lobiri Padibe

West

95 March

2011

11 26

6 Awach Lokung/ 170 March

2011

30 56

7 Odube Palabek

Ogili

101 March

2011

17 92

8 Bia B

Magala

Palabek

Kal

102 March

2011

12 45

9 Amina Palabek

Gem

91 21 56

Table 8: Villages triggered by the EHD with UNICEF support in 2011. Lamwo district


Comparison between Adopter before CLTS and after CLTS and between adopters and non

adopters

Pawma

Comparison between Adopter before CLTS and after CLTS

From this 27, 15 build it before CLTS and 12 after, to see if these two groups had different

motivations, influential actors or source of information regarding hygiene and sanitation the

following analysis was made:

Why did you construct your latrine?

Graph 1: Motivations to build latrines. Before and After CLTS, Pawma

Therefore there is no significant different among the answers, the main three reasons are first

to avoid diseases, second for comfort and third for privacy

Who influenced you in taking the decision of building your latrine?

Graph 2: Influence in building the latrine, before and after CLTS, Pawma

From this graph we can conclude how important was Oxfam triggering in building latrines

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Comfort Privacy Security Avoiddiseases

Socialpressure

Others

Before CLTS =15 20% 13% 0% 87% 0% 7%

After CLTS =12 50% 33% 8% 92% 0% 8%

Total =27 33% 22% 4% 89% 0% 7%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

No one Family NGO Gov Neighbour

Others

Before CLTS =15 47% 13% 33% 0% 0% 0%

After CLTS =12 8% 17% 83% 0% 0% 0%

Total=27 30% 15% 56% 0% 0% 0%


Whom do you contact regarding hygiene and sanitation issues?

Graph 3: Contact regarding sanitation, before and after CLTS

Who is you main source of information regarding sanitation?

Graph 4: Main source of information, before and after CLTS, Pawma

From 1 to 5, how much do you think the following actors and organizations help your

community regarding hygiene and sanitation?

Graph 5: Evaluation of VHT, HA, Gov, NGO; Pawma

Latrine adopters versus non adopters

Apart from the analysis made above another was going to be made in order to find

representative difference between the actor, source of information or influence regarding

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

LC VHT HA NGO Others

Before CLTS 7% 87% 0% 0% 0%

After CLTS 8% 83% 0% 0% 0%

Total 7% 85% 0% 0% 0%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%

VHT HA NGOs Pupils School Media Family Others

Before CLTS 67% 0% 33% 0% 0% 13% 0% 20%

After CLTS 50% 0% 58% 0% 0% 25% 0% 33%

Total 59% 0% 44% 0% 0% 19% 0% 26%

0,000,501,001,502,002,503,003,504,004,505,00

VHT HA Goverment NGO

Before CLTS 5,00 3,83 2,42 4,42

After CLTS 4,87 2,93 2,20 4,87

Total 4,92 3,21 2,39 4,75


hygiene and sanitation matters, but as the sample size of the adopters is 27 and the non

adopters is 5, the results cannot really be extrapolated.

Okwone Bone

Comparison between adopters before CLTS and after CLTS

From these 15 owners, 7 construct their latrine before CLTS and 7 later. The differences

between them are:

Motivations to build their latrines

Graph 6: Motivations to build a latrine, before and after CLTS; Okwone Bone

Main source of information on Hygiene and Sanitation issues

Graph 7: Main source of information, before and after CLTS; Okwone Bone

Whom to contact regarding hygiene and sanitation

Graph 8: Main contact regarding sanitation, before and after CLTS, Okwone Bone

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Comfort Privacy Security Avoiddiseases

Socialpressure

Others,specify

Before CLTS 57% 14% 0% 71% 0% 0%

After CLTS 43% 14% 0% 100% 0% 0%

Total 50% 14% 0% 86% 0% 0%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

VHT HA NGOs Schoolchildre

n

School Media Familymemb

ers

Others

Before CLTS 57% 57% 0% 0% 0% 14% 0% 0%

After CLTS 14% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Total 36% 79% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 0%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

LC VHT HA NGO Others NA

Before CLTS 0% 29% 43% 0% 0% 29%

After CLTS 0% 43% 57% 0% 0% 0%

Total 0% 36% 50% 0% 0% 0%


Who influences you in your decision of building your latrine

Graph 9: Influence in building a latrine, before and after CLTS, Okwone Bone

Opinion of the role played by the VHT, HA, NGOs and Government in helping

improving the challenges of the villages. They scale given was from 1 to 5 being 1

nothing and 5 a lot.

Graph 10: Evaluation of the VHT, HA, Gov, NGOs, before and after CLTS, Okwone Bone

Comparison between adopters and non adopters

Main information source

Graph 11: Main source of information regarding sanitation, adopters, non adopters, Okwone Bone

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

No one Family NGO Goverment

Neighbor

Others

Before CLTS 14% 57% 14% 14% 0% 0%

After CLTS 29% 14% 14% 43% 0% 0%

Total 21% 36% 14% 29% 0% 0%

0,001,002,003,004,005,00

VHT HA Goverment NGOs

Before CLTS 3,43 4,29 2,86 3,14

After CLTS 3,86 4,14 2,43 3,29

Total 3,64 4,21 2,64 3,21

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

VHT HA NGOs Schoolchildre

n

School Media Familymemb

er

Others

Adopters 36% 79% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 0%

Non adopters 60% 53% 0% 0% 0% 13% 0% 7%

Total 48% 66% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 3%


Main contact regarding Hygiene and Sanitation matters

Graph 12: Main contact regarding sanitation, adopters and non-adopters, Okwone Bone

Opinion of the role played by the VHT, HA, NGOs and Government in helping

improving the challenges of the villages. They scale given was from 1 to 5 being 1

nothing and 5 a lot.

Graph 13: Evaluation of VHT, HA, Gov, NGOs, adopters and non adopters; Okwone Bone

Visits from the HA.

Graph 14: Number of visits of the HA, adopter and non adopters, Okwone Bone

0%10%20%30%40%50%

LC VHT HA NGO OTHERS

Adopters 0% 36% 50% 0% 0%

Non adopters 0% 33% 40% 0% 7%

Total 0% 34% 45% 0% 3%

0,002,004,006,00


Adopters 3,64 4,21 2,64 3,21

Non adopters 3,60 4,87 2,60 2,53

Total 3,62 4,55 2,62 2,86

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Once a week Once everytwo weeks

Once amonth

I do notknow

Adopters 50% 29% 7% 14%

Non adopters 20% 67% 13% 0%

Total 70% 96% 20% 14%


Aboo


From the 12 that declared to have latrines through the questions, 7 did it before CLTS and 5

after. The possible differences among the two groups are studied below:

Motivations:

Graph 15: Motivations to build latrines, before and after CLTS, Aboo

Influence in the decision making of building the latrine:

Graph 16: Influence in building a latrine, before and after CLTS, Aboo

Main source of information regarding hygiene and sanitation

Graph 17: Main source of information regarding sanitation, before and after CLTS, Aboo

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Comfort Privacy Security To avoiddiseases

SocialStatus

Others

Before CLTS 43% 29% 0% 100% 14% 0%

After CLTS 40% 60% 0% 100% 40% 0%

Total 42% 42% 0% 100% 25% 0%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

No body Family NGO Goverment

Neighbor Others

Before CLTS 14% 43% 29% 29% 0% 0%

After CLTS 40% 40% 0% 20% 0% 0%

Total 25% 42% 17% 25% 0% 0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

VHT HA NGO Pupils School Media Family Others

Before CLTS 100% 71% 29% 14% 0% 29% 0% 14%

After CLTS 100% 80% 0% 0% 0% 20% 0% 20%

Total 100% 75% 17% 8% 0% 25% 0% 17%


Contact regarding hygiene and sanitation

Graph 18: Main contact regarding sanitation, before and after CLTS, Aboo


Main source of information.

Graph 19: Main source of information, adopters non adopters, Aboo

Contact regarding hygiene and sanitation

Graph 20: Contact regarding sanitation, adopters non adopters, CLTS, Aboo

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

LC VHT HA NGO Others

Before CLTS 57% 86% 14% 0% 29%

After CLTS 40% 80% 20% 0% 0%

Total 50% 83% 17% 0% 17%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

VHT HA NGOs Pupils School Media Family Other

Adopters 90% 55% 10% 5% 0% 20% 0% 10%

Non adopters 92% 75% 17% 8% 0% 25% 0% 17%

Total 88% 25% 0% 0% 0% 13% 0% 0%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

LC VHT HA NGO Sanitation

committee

Others

Adopters 50% 83% 17% 0% 17% 0%

Non adopters 13% 88% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Total 35% 85% 10% 0% 10% 0%


Opinion of how much, contributes the following actors in improving the hygiene and

sanitation situation in the village being 1 a lot and 5 nothing,

Graph 21: Validation VHT, HA, Gov, NGOs, adopters and non adopters, Aboo

Lukwor East


From the 28 interviewees which declared having a latrine, 25 did it before CLTS and 3 after, so

the detail analysis between the two groups in order to find representative difference has not

been done as in the other villages.

Who influenced in the decision of building a latrine?

Graph 22: Influence in building a latrine, Lukwor East


Main source of information regarding sanitation:

Graph 23: Main source of information regarding sanitation, adopter and non adopters. Lukwor East

0,001,002,003,004,005,00


Adopters 5,00 4,17 3,33 4,73

Non adopters 5,00 4,75 1,75 4,75

Total 5,00 4,40 2,70 4,74

0%

20%

40%

60%

No body Family NGOs Neighbor

Others Noanswer

Total 54% 21% 14% 4% 4% 4%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

VHT HA NGO Pupils

School

Media

Family

Other Noansw

er

Adopters 81% 7% 0% 0% 0% 8% 0% 0% 12%

Non adopters 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 36% 0% 7% 14%

Total 65% 3% 0% 0% 0% 18% 0% 3% 13%


Main contact in Hygiene and sanitation matters

Graph 24: Main contact regarding sanitation, adopters and non adopters, Lukwor East

Opinion of how much, contributes the following actors in improving the hygiene and

sanitation situation in the village being 1 a lot and 5 nothing,

Graph 25: Evaluation of the VHT, HA, Gov, NGOs, adopters and non adopters, Lukwor East

Health

Pamwa

Questionnaires: diseases last month

From the 50 cases reported:

Graph 26: Diseases last month, Pamwa

A distinction between the diseases reported by the interviewees who had latrines and the ones

who do not have latrines has not been made in Pamwa as the sample size was so small. But a

detailed incidence of the four types of Water and Sanitation diseases selected can be seen

below:

0%20%40%60%80%

LC VHT HA NGOs Others

Adopters 31% 62% 8% 0% 0%

No adopters 14% 43% 0% 0% 0%

Total 25% 55% 5% 0% 0%

0,001,002,003,004,005,00

VHT HA Gov NGOs

Adopters 3,69 3,08 3,15 4,23

Non Adopters 3,54 3,21 3,36 4,68

Total 3,59 3,17 3,29 4,54

Malaria 50%

Typhoid 8%

Diarrhea 18%

Others 8%

No one 16%

Dont know 0%


Below five

Graph 27: Water and Sanitation related diseases detailed, bellow 5; Pamwa

Above five

Graph 28: Water and Sanitation diseases, above 5, Pamwa

Bone

Health unit

The records from the group above 5 were consulted from February 2010 until August 2011. The

results though are not worth to represent in a graph as it is only recorded two episodes of

Water and Sanitation diseases: One in March 2011 and another in December 2010.

The records of the group below five were consulted from November 2009 until August 2011. The

following graph shows the result of that group:

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1 1

1 3 1 2

1 6 1 9

2 3

1 3

1 3

2

0 1

1

1 1

0

1 1

3 1

1 0

1 0

2 1 0

0

0

1

0 0

0

0 0 0 1 1

0 1

0 2

0

2

0 0 0

2

Diarrhea Intestinal warms Eye infection Skin infection

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2

1 0

1 3

1

1 1 1

1

1

1 1 1

1

2 4 3

1

0

3

2

2

4

1

2

4

1 3

2

1

4

1

2 3

2

1

0

9

2

0

1

2

1 1 3

0

2

0

1

1

1



Graph 29: Water and Sanitation related diseases, below 5, Bone

As you can see in the figure only 7 episodes have been registered from which 4 were diarrhoea,

2 intestinal warms and 1 skin infection

From the health unit analysis it is not possible to determine any kind of conclusion towards any

decrease or increase in the W & S diseases rate as the incidence rate is so scarce and spare.

The feasible explanation for this low rate would be in my opinion:

1: They go to another health clinic that I am not aware of

2. They do not go to the clinic although they are ill for lack of money or strength

3 They do not suffer as much Water and Sanitation diseases as we would expect concerning

their low latrine coverage.

We did not perform any kind of data collection that would confirm any of these three

hypotheses The only information to confirm a bit more theory number three than the others is

the testimony of one of the three VHT that told me that diarrhoea used to be very common in

the camps but since they are home it is malaria and cough instead.

Aboo

Health unit

Graph 30: Water and Sanitation related diseases, above 5, Aboo

1 2 2

1 1

Water & Sanitation related diseases Below 5

Number of episodes

2 1 2 1

Water & Sanitation related diseases Above 5

Number of episodes


Only 6 incidences since August 2010, from this 6, 3 are intestinal worms, 2 eye infections and 1

diarrhoea episodes.

Graph 31: Water and Sanitation related diseases, below 5, Aboo

Only 2 episodes in a year, 1 case of diarrhoea of and another one of skin infection.

As in Bone, the health unit data does not say as much as for being able to draw a conclusion

towards a tendency of increase or decrease in the W&S related diseases since CLTS.

Questionnaires: Diseases last month:

From the 22 cases reported:

Graph 32: Diseases last month, Aboo

1 1

Water & Sanitation related diseases Below 5

Number of episodes

Malaria 32%

Typhoid 0% Diarrhea

13% Others 14%

No one 41%

Don´T know 0%


If we make a different analysis of both adopters and non adopters:

Graph 33: Adopters, non adopters diseases, Aboo

Graph 34: Adopters diseases, Aboo

Graph 35: Non adopter diseases, Aboo

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

3

0 0 0

5

0

4

0

3 3

4

0

Adopters

Non adopters

Malara 29%

Typhoid

0%

Diarrhea

21%

I do not

know 21%

No one 29%

Others 0%

Adopters

Malaria 37%

Typhoid

0%

Diarrhea 0%

I don´t know

0% No one

63%

Others 0%

Non adopters


Lukwor East

Health Unit

Graph 36: Water and Sanitation related diseases last month. above 5, Lukwor East

Graph 37: Water and Sanitation related diseases, above 5, Lukwor East

10 10 15

20 15 16

11 17 17

21

10

17 23

15 11

Water & Sanitation related diseases Above five

Number of episodes

2 1

4 2

11 11 9

7

3

6 6 8

12 11 11

Water & Sanitation related diseases Below five

Number of episodes


Questionnaires

From the 46 cases of diseases reported:

Graph 38: Diseases last month, Lukwor East

If we divided the number of cases between adopters (n=12) and non adopters (n=15):

Graph 39: Adopters, non adopters diseases Lukwor East

Detailed Water and Sanitation diseases rate:

Above five

Graph 40: Water and Sanitation related diseases, above five, Lukwor East

Malaria 52%

Typhoid 2%

Diarrhea 11%

Others 9%

No one 24%

I dont know

2%

0%

50%

100%

17 1 3 2

9

0

8 0 1 2

2

1 Adopters

Non adopters

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2 1 0 0

2 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 1

8

11 17 15 13

10 14 14

11

9 12 19 14

6

0 2 2

1 1 0 2

2

8

1

1

1 0

2

0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 3

1 0 2



Below five

Graph 41: Water and Sanitation diseases, bellow five, Lukwor East

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

0 0 0

1

2 2 1 2 1

0 0

3 4

10

5

2

0

1

1

3 4

2

2 1

4

2

2 3

1

1

0

0

1

0

4 2

3

3

0

2

4 2

1

0

4

0

1

2

0 2

3 3

0

1

0 0 1

3

0 1

Diahrrea Intestinal warms Eye infection Skin infection

a review of oxfam gb’s community led · amida 161 266 6/2011 36 2 ocettohe east layamo 79 386 29...

Documents