UNICEF-Lilongwe
Sanitation Review Report:
1.0Purpose:
This report reviews the data collected by the three sanitation review teams in order to make recommendations for the design modifications of sanitation facilities in primary schools and households.
2.0Outcome:
While the information presented by the sanitation review teams is of varying of quality, it is clear that the process was innovative in attempting to evaluate sanitation facilities. The review presents a good starting point for the evaluation of technical options suitable for schools.
The report also notes that children spoke very candidly about their sanitation facilities and gave good insights for improvements. From the findings, children appear to be effective and keen advocates for improved sanitation both in their schools and communities.
Beyond technology options, the reports also gives indications that workmanship and cleanliness are two equal and important factors for students when it come their sanitation facilities in school. If children feel at risk that the latrine will collapse or feel it is disgusting, they will not use the latrine and will go to the bush. Technological factors can contribute to some degree to ensure better workmanship and maintenance. However, the most effective means to ensure that the facilities are in good working order is to combine latrine construction with a school organized monitoring and supervision activities, as well as, a school hygiene programme. Ideas on designing these programmes should be explored during the project orientations with teachers and school committees.
This report is broken down in two sections. Section A is the outcome of focus groups and design recommendations. Section B is a tabular presentation of findings from site visits including sanitation options and costs.
3.0Section A
The focus groups with students were an integral part of the information collection and data analysis. Information came from the following schools:
- Children in Standards 6, 7, and 8 in Malenga Mzoma Full Primary School, Uhoho Junior Primary School, Lisale Full Primary School from Nkhata Bay District and Nkhata Bay Secondary School.
- Children from LukaliFullPrimary School, and KanyerereFullPrimary School, Rumphi district
- Children from ZambweFullPrimary School, Nkhangira School: and Nkhangwa CDSS in Chitipa District:
- Students from MasasaSchool-MzuzuCity Assembly
- Kapiriminyanga and NziziaSchools in Kasungu District
- MtentheraSchool in Lilongwe District
- ChautaSchool in Ntcheu District
- ChigotiSchool and Vocational Training and Rehab center in Chiradzulu District
- KholongoPrimary School in Chikwawa District
- NdirandeSchool in the City of Blantyre
3.1Why Children do not use latrines and urinals?
Children in Standards 6, 7, and 8 from MalengaMzomaFullPrimary School, said that some students did not use the latrines because of the smell and that the holes of the latrines were too big for small children. In the rainy season, students said that the traditional latrine floors become muddy and disgusting because of the leaky roof structure.
The students from UhohoJuniorPrimary School from Nkhata Bay District, did not like their traditional latrines because the grass roof leaks during the rains, wood poles rot, and the soil walls that dirty them. Moreover, the main problems associated with their latrines were the bad smell, flies, termites and the problems of latrines collapsing. Because of the fear of the latrine collapsing, the younger children did not use the latrines. However, teachers added from a school in Chitipa District that poor use and fear of the latrines stems from lack of exposure in their homes. When children first come to school they often misuse latrine by defecating on the floor and not into the hole.
Normally, the male students construct the urinals in their school. Many boys from UhohoJuniorPrimary School from Nkhata Bay District, do not use the urinals and prefer to use the bush because they feel that the facilities are not good. The major issue related to the urinals was the lack of privacy. They said that users can be seen, and the structure was poorly made as children constructed it. Some boys did not like the fact that urinals did not have a roof and the soak away pits became full with the rains. There is also a high risk that the urinal fences would collapse because it is made from grass and poles and subject to termite attack.
In LukaliFullPrimary School, Rumphi district, children mentioned three major groups who do not use the latrines: deaf, standard 1 girls, and lame/cripple students. Deaf children do not understand the important of using a pit latrine; standard 1 girls feel the hole is too big, and the lame have no support. Furthermore, traditional latrines were seen as not suitable for the blind because there were no clear demarcations for position of the hole, i.e. no footrests.
Children in Standards 6, 7, and 8 from MalengaMzomaFullPrimary School, said that the disabled children in the school do not use latrines. In particular, the blind children have to go to the bush because of the poor state of the latrines. The blind children must crawl and feel their way toward the latrines. It is, therefore, seen as a better and more hygienic option for the blind children to use the bush. Blind students also have a difficult time aiming into the hole, so for the sake of other users, it is better for them to use the bush.
In Mzuzu city, children noted the importance of latrines but also pointed out that despite this urination and defecation is done indiscriminately, even with the presence of latrines and urinals. In MsasaSchool, many children did not use the latrines because of the poor hygienic condition of the latrines. Many children preferred to go in the banana groves or wait until they went home.
3.2Why children like and use latrines and urinals?
Children feel it is important to use a latrine for prevention of diseases like cholera. In addition, the latrine offers privacy and protection from snakes in the bushes. Having a latrine in the school was also seen as prestigious and places the school at a high status. Without a latrine children must travel far from classrooms to the bushes to defecate and therefore a latrine is also seen as convenient. The students from Uhoho Junior Primary School from Nkhata Bay District feel the presence of the latrine beautifies their school and latrines produce little odor. In a focus group in the Southern Region, latrines were described as giving dignity and a sense of respect to the user. This comment tied in with the common statements about latrines providing privacy or the need for privacy by the user.
Children from Rumphi district appreciated the quality of the VIP latrine construction by GTZ. The cement floor was smooth and easy to mop. But as well, the boys and girls latrines are clearly separate.
The children appreciated the design of the VIP latrines for a number of other reasons: no wooden planks so it would not rot, the pits were lined so will not collapse, and the hole was deep and it will not fill quickly. Also, the vent pipes decreased smell.
Boys felt that the presence of urinals assisted in keeping the latrines clean and prevented misuse of latrines and decreased the numbers of latrine users. The children from a school in Rumphi district felt urinals had hygienic benefits and the smell in the latrines is decreased. Urinals for girls were also being considered for construction.
Some students in Chitipa District did say that they like the traditional latrine with dirt platform because if soiled, the mess is absorbed. If the toilet is misused it is more noticeable with a cement finish. Teachers also felt the value of the traditional latrines was that children had the opportunity to build them and develop latrine building skills which could be used in their homes.
4.1There were a number of associated issues related to sanitation promotion design, use and planning
4.1.1Security:
Two main issues discussed repeatedly were the risk of collapsing latrines and also separating the school premises from neighboring settlements.
In the peri-urban community of MasasaSchool, the close proximity to neighboring settlement has meant that children come into daily contact with strangers who try to frighten children, often taunting them with threats of witchcraft. The positioning of some of the latrines is in such away that some children feel unsafe and at risk. As a result of cases of harassment in the MasasaSchool, the headmaster has asked children to go to the latrine in pairs.
The risk of collapsing latrines can originate from rotting wood eaten by termites, wood damaged by water or sandy loam soils. In Mzuzu, there were reported cases of children who had nearly fell into the latrines within the last year. In many schools visited by the sanitation review teams, the latrines had collapsed.
4.1.2Cleanliness
The issue of use and maintenance of facilities seems to be paramount over technology types and options. Cleanliness of latrines is a major problem, and as a result 50% of students do not use latrines. Students feel there should be disciplinary action for people who misuse facilities.
With few latrines per school, more daily maintenance is needed. This work fell predominantly on girls. In some cases, girls must clean them more than twice a day. Two additional considerations come to light. First the time spent by girls to fetch water from a distance away from schools. Second, the health implications of frequent contact with unprotected water sources that could increase contraction of bilharzia and other parasites.
It was noted that among the technology options, the maintenance of traditional latrines was more. Girls had the smear the mud floors daily and boys repaired the grass roof and rafters seasonally.
4.1.3Gender Disparities:
According to sanitation review teams, none of the interviews in the central or northern region reported any particular problem related to gender disparity. However, in the analysis of the information presented, there are some gender differences related to the operation, use and maintenance of sanitation facilities in schools.
In just about all schools visited, it was the schoolgirls primarily who cleaned the latrine. The official rhetoric was that both boys and girls cleaned the latrines, but with further investigation in most co-ed schools, it was the girls from Standards 3-8. For example, in LukaliFullPrimary School in Rumphi District, girls between standard five and eight were responsible for cleaning latrines. However, the boys only have to clean latrines if they misuse it. Therefore, cleaning latrines is relegated to a chore for girls primarily or a punishment for boys.
Furthermore, girls were given the primary responsibility of fetching water for cleaning, collecting materials for thatching and materials like leaves for cleaning. Boys would assist in collecting materials but were primarily responsible for construction of facilities. This follows the similar social allocation of roles within the household.
The work of maintaining latrines in school is a heavy responsibility for girls if there are many users. Sometimes, Standard 3-8 girls are organized up to three times a day to clean the latrines as in MasasaPrimary School, MzuzuCity. In NkhangiraSchool, Girls from Form 1-4 clean latrines twice a day drawing water from water from the borehole each time. Traditional latrines require even more work to keep clean because of collecting mud and smearing the surfaces, work the girls found strenuous.
Adolescent girls did not feel that poor sanitation facilities deterred them away from attending school. It was rather the cultural belief related to menstruation, and that girls should not move about when they have their periods. When girls attend school during their menstrual cycle, they appreciate having water nearby the latrines, as found in hand washing facilities. If there are no latrines at the schools, girls use neighboring latrines from households in the community.
It was found in some schools that boys preferred using the bush to the latrines, especially younger boys. It was stated in one school that sensitization on latrine usage should focus on boys, especially young boys.
Teachers felt that girls are unlikely to use the urinals because of the decreased privacy for user. As such, adolescent girls are unlikely to use urinals.
4.1.5Children’s recommendations for Sanitation Technology Designs
For the disabled (crippled children), it was felt that pedestals on the latrines would assist and support them to use the latrine. Separate latrines that are kept clean for children with disabilities would also be important, since they have to crawl on the floor. Footrests could be designed to better guide blind students. Gloves could be given to lame to support themselves while touching the ground. In addition, children in a school for the handicap felt that rails were important and squat pans.
All children interviewed felt that an improved latrine with a cement slab facilitates regular cleaning and maintenance and eventual usage because clean latrines are likely to be used over dirty or smelly latrines.
The children also added that the latrines should be designed to have adequate light, which allows for ventilation. Latrines should also have doors to prevent use of the latrines by outsiders who may dirty the premises and the responsibility falls on the girls to then clean up the mess. Moreover, children from Rumphi district noted regarding VIP latrine built by GTZ that even with the blind corners, the user could be interrupted.
When asked if there was anything that they would change about their current facilities, the children in Standards 6, 7, and 8 from Malenga Mzoma Full Primary School, responded that they would prefer the improved latrines with cement floors, iron roofs and burned bricks because the required less maintenance and was easier to keep the latrine clean. They also noted that there are no place in the latrine to properly store tissues (leaves/papers) or ashes.
There were some discrepancy on the size of the drop hole cover. Some children suggested that drop hole cover sizes should be made smaller. However, reports from MtentheraSchool in Lilongwe District, was that the children felt the latrine size (approximately 90 cm) and drop hole size (10 cm) were too small. There are differing opinions among children. When the drop hole is too big, young children do not use them. Alternatively, if the hole is too small, the area around the drop hole becomes messy.
Some other design modification suggested were better drains around the latrine and for aesthetic appeal the walls should be painted.
Teachers feel that improvements in urinal designs were needed to improve drainage, privacy and greater usage.
4.1.6 Design Modifications
Based on the outcomes of the focus groups and review of the interview guides from both households and schools, the following points have been highlighted for consideration in making design modifications to sanitation facilities:
Spatial planning of latrines is very important and often overlooked in sanitation promotion. Latrines were viewed useful to students because of the close proximity to classrooms. Also it was latrines, away from regular supervision by school authorities, that are often prone to abuse by outsiders who either steal fixtures or indiscriminately use the latrines. Therefore, beyond the design specification, the Consultant will be requested to include some guidelines for spatial planning. Moreover, reduction of smell can be achieved by ensuring VIP latrines face the direction of the wind, this should form part of the construction guidelines.
Latrine spacing between girls and boys are important. The girl latrines that are very close to boy latrines or adjacent to them are often not used by the girls because of privacy and social factors like shyness. Therefore significant space should be made between latrines and girls. Under no circumstances should the boys and girls latrines be in the same block.
The issue of theft in schools is a growing concern and affects the use and maintenance of facilities. In the designs, the Consultant will be asked to make modifications to minimize the use of doors, hinges, rafters, tiles and iron sheets. This will also save overall costs for construction of materials, which are constraints for communities.
One option proposed is that for latrine blocks only one door, which could be constructed at the side, and blind corners be placed at each individual latrine. This would decrease costs and if the door was eventually stolen, the latrines still would still retain some privacy for the users. See the LisaleFullPrimary School, Mankhanbira, Northern Region Review (page 7/20), as an example.