1 / 41

Water and Sanitation

Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys Data Interpretation, Further Analysis and Dissemination Workshop. Water and Sanitation. Overview of presentation. Water (4 table) Sanitation (3 tables) Drinking water and sanitation ladders (1 table) Handwashing (2 tables).

nara
Download Presentation

Water and Sanitation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multiple Indicator Cluster SurveysData Interpretation, Further Analysis and Dissemination Workshop Water and Sanitation

  2. Overview of presentation • Water (4 table) • Sanitation (3 tables) • Drinking water and sanitation ladders (1 table) • Handwashing (2 tables)

  3. Background – What’s included in MICS? Drinking water • Use of main drinking water source • On premises? • Off premises? • Application of household water treatment • Time-to-source (round-trip) • Who usually goes to the source to collect water?

  4. Indicators and definitions Proportion of the population that uses an improved drinking water source • Piped into dwelling, plot or yard • Piped to neighbour • Public tap/standpipe • Tube well/borehole • Protected dug well • Protected spring • Rainwater collection 4.1: Drinking Water [MDG Indicator]

  5. Bottled water presented two times Bottled water is an improved source if also source of other purposes such as cooking and handwashing is also an improved source

  6. Country Example

  7. Poorer segments of the population have lower access to improved sources of drinking water

  8. 1990 2008

  9. 1990 2008

  10. Indicators and definitions Percentage of the population applying any of the following treatment methods • Boiling • Add bleach/chlorine • Use water filter • Solar disinfection 4.2: Water treatment

  11. Responses may total to more than 100 percent since households may be using more than one treatment method

  12. Country Example

  13. Country Example

  14. MICS5 Data Interpretation, Further Analysis and Dissemination Workshop

  15. Country Example

  16. Overview of MICS5 contents • Water (4 table) • Sanitation (3 tables) • Drinking water and sanitation ladders (1 table) • Handwashing (2 tables)

  17. Background – What’s included in MICS? Sanitation • Use of improved sanitation • Safe disposal of child faeces(U5 questionnaire)

  18. Indicators and definitions Percentage of the population that uses an improved sanitation facility which is not shared • Flush/pour flush to: • piped sewer system • septic tank • pit latrine • Ventilated improved pit latrine • Pit latrine with slab • Composting toilet 4.3: Use of improved sanitation [MDG Indicator]

  19. Indicators and definitions Percentage of the population that uses an improved sanitation facility which is not shared • Is this facility shared with other households? • No -----------> Private facility • Yes • Households you know? • No ---------> Public facility • Yes --------> Shared facility • How many households? 4.3: Use of improved sanitation [MDG Indicator]

  20. WS5 table doesn’t present the 4.3 indicator value. Use of improved sanitation facilities includes information on shared or public sanitation facilities which is not included in this table

  21. Be careful when comparing with results from previous MICS surveys: indicator needs to be recalculated by taking into account information on shared facilities Those using a shared or public sanitation facility of an otherwise improved type of sanitation facility are excluded from the indicator

  22. Country Example

  23. The poorest in Nigeria are 5 times less likely than the richest to use an improved sanitation facility

  24. Indicators and definitions Percentage of children age 0-2 years whose last stools were disposed off safely • Child used toilet/latrine • Put/rinsed into toilet/latrine 4.4: Safe disposal of child faeces ]

  25. It may be argued that disposing of diapers with solid waste is adequate; this eventually depends on how solid waste is handled about which we do not have information.

  26. Overview of MICS5 contents • Water (4 table) • Sanitation (3 tables) • Drinking water and sanitation ladders (1 table) • Handwashing (2 tables)

  27. Compare with tables WS1 and WS6

  28. Country Example

  29. Overview of MICS5 contents • Water (4 table) • Sanitation (3 tables) • Drinking water and sanitation ladders (1 table) • Handwashing (2 tables)

  30. Indicators and definitions Proportion of households with a specific placefor hand washing where water and soap are present Assessed through observation Proportion of households with soap anywhere in the dwelling 4.5: Place for hand washing 4.6: Place for hand washing

  31. Country Example

  32. Expected patterns Drinking water coverage is higher than sanitation coverage Urban coverage is higher than rural coverage Open defecation rates are higher in rural areas than in urban areas Piped connections into the household, dwelling, plot or yard are higher in urban than in rural areas The use of shared improved sanitation facilities is higher in urban than in rural areas

More Related