PIH/ZL Executive Summary of Greif Water Backpack Pilot Findings 1

Partners In Health/Zanmi Lasante Greif Water Backpack Pilot Executive Summary of Findings March 2012

Executive Summary

Background

In late 2011, the Clinton Foundation along with Greif International approached Partners In Health/Zanmi

Lasante (PIH/ZL) in Haiti to collaborate on a pilot field testing of a backpack specifically designed for

transport of water. Zanmi Lasante, Partners In Health’s Haitian Sister organization, with over 5,000

employees, 2,500 of which are community health workers, and close to 30 years of experience working

in Central Haiti, was a natural fit for such a field testing. Greif had already conducted small-scale field

testing earlier in the year to assess interest in such a product in other parts of Haiti. PIH/ZL ultimately

decided to pilot the bags with the help of 20 community health workers living and working in the

greater-Mirebalais area, denoted by the blue oval on the map below.

Aim

To assess the durability and likability of the Greif-designed water backpack for use of transport and

storage of water for household use in rural Haiti.

PIH/ZL Executive Summary of Greif Water Backpack Pilot Findings 2

Methods

Using quantitative and qualitative survey questions developed by Greif and adapted to the local context

and into Haitian Creole by a team of PIH/ZL, PRODEV, and Greif individuals, 19 community health

workers and 1 community health worker supervisor were chosen by the PIH/ZL community health

coordinator to select households to participate in the pilot field testing. After receiving a one-day

training introducing the water backpack concept and reviewing the surveys, each community health

worker selected twenty (20) households in their catchment area to deliver a water backpack. Household

with greater barriers to access to water were prioritized. In exchange for receiving a water backpack

each head of household was asked to participate in answering 2 surveys, one at the beginning as they

were handed their bag, focused on access to water in their area, and the second, after one month of use

of the water backpack, to share about their experiences in using the bag. Initial surveys and bag

distribution took place in late December 2011, with 380 households receiving one bag each and

agreeing to participate in a follow-up survey one month later. Follow-up surveys were conducted in late

January and early February 2012. All surveys were collected and compiled by the PIH/ZL leadership team

for data entry and analysis in mid-February, 2012.

PIH/ZL Executive Summary of Greif Water Backpack Pilot Findings 3

Results

N=380

Sex F: 75%; M: 25%

Mean Age 37 yrs Min: 15 Max: 75

Mean Household size 6 people Min: 1 Max: 21

Did you use the water backpack? Yes: 100%

Did you use water backpack for drinking water? Yes: 97%

Did you use water backpack instead of a bucket or other container? Yes: 99%

Is the water backpack comfortable on your back when filled with water? Yes: 100%

Frequency of use of water backpack for transporting water 21 times a week Min: 4 Max: 40

Did you use other containers for transporting water in addition to the

water backpack? Yes: 40%

Did you have problems with water leaking from the back pack? Yes: 22%

Did you have problems keeping the water backpack clean? Yes: 4%

When using the water transported by the water backpack for drinking, was

the taste of the water different than when you transported it in another

container? Yes: 4%

If yes, what difference in taste? tastes better

Is the size of the water backpack right for your needs? Yes: 100%

Did anything break or become problematic during use? Yes: 4%

If yes, what?

Did you use the water backpack for purposes other than transporting and

storing water? Yes: 0%

If yes, what?

Will you continue to use the water backpack for transporting water? Yes: 100%

Would you like to purchase a water backpack? Yes: 100%

If yes, how much would you pay to buy a water backpack?

Mean: 37 HTG

($0.93 US)

Min: 5 HTG

($0.13 US) Max: 100 HTG ($2.50 US)

What did you most like about the water backpack?

What did you most dislike about the water backpack?

How long did the water in a full backpack last? Mean: 3 hrs

How many times did you refill the bag each day? Mean: 3 times

On average, how much time did you spend transporting water each day

using the water backpack? Mean: 2.6 hrs Min: 30 min Max: 8 hrs

What did you use for treating your water? How did you keep the water

backpack clean?

Water transport: More water, same amount, or less water than with using

other transport methods? More water: 72%; same amount: 23%; less water: 5%

Did you spend more time, the same amount of time, or less time

transporting water using the water backpack?

If you spent less time transporting water, what did you do with your extra

time? other work (90%); rest (4%); social activities (6%)

When you compare how you used to transport water with transporting

using the water backpack do you feel more comfortable, the same, or less

comfortable using the water backpack?

More

comfortable:

100%

Did the water become contaminated after transporting water using the

water backpack? Yes: 1%

If yes, was it more contaminated, the same, or less contaminated than

using another transport and storage method? same level of contamination

Which method of water transport do you prefer? Water backpack: 100%

I liked everything; I liked that you could carry it on

I liked everything; the spout needs to be changed to

better control water

Aquatabs, chlorox, boiling water, PUR; Hung the bag

on a nail upside down to dry; washed it frequently

Thread holding bag together came undone n=2; spout

too large n=9

More time: 15%; same amount of time: 25%; less

time: 60%

Summary of findings after 1-month of use of Greif Water Backpack in PIH/ZL pilot sites

PIH/ZL Executive Summary of Greif Water Backpack Pilot Findings 4

Conclusions

Households living in the communities in and around Mirebalais, in the rural, Central Plateau of Haiti,

overwhelmingly approved the water backpack as their preferred mode of transporting water from the

source to their home. On average, these 380 households spent over 2.5 hours a day each just in

transport of water alone, with over 60% noting that this actually represented a decrease in the amount

of time spent transporting water each day using other transport methods. After one month of use, most

all bags remained in functional condition, with very little structural problems. Community members

suggested a change in the spout to allow more control of the volume of water being released at any

given time as well as development of a smaller model that children could transport, both of which we

understand are currently worked on by Greif. Community Health workers reported that households that

were not a part of the initial pilot continue to ask when they will receive their bag. Community members

also noted that carrying water on their back was much more comfortable than carrying water on their

heads, also freeing up their hands for other purposes. Overall, community members in the rural, Central

Plateau of Haiti provided unanimous enthusiasm for the Greif water backpack.