WASPA Asia

Project Report

3

Wilgoda Line Community Survey Summary Report

2006

Rashika Nishshanka, Shyamalie de Silva and Alexandra Clemett

Water ManagementI n t e r n a t i o n a l

I n s t i t u t e

Wastewater Agriculture and Sanitation for Poverty Alleviation

i

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

2 Population and Demographics of Wilgoda Line .............................................................. 5

Age ........................................................................................................................................................ 5

Education ............................................................................................................................................. 6

Income Generating Activities............................................................................................................. 6

3 Legal Status and Physical Infrastructure......................................................................... 7

Tennancy.............................................................................................................................................. 7

Housing Size and Materials ................................................................................................................ 7

Infrastructure and Facilities ............................................................................................................... 8

Amenities.............................................................................................................................................. 8

4 Community Perceptions of the Project ............................................................................ 9

Responses from the Community ....................................................................................................... 9

5 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 10

The Community and the Project ...................................................................................................... 11

References .............................................................................................................................. 12

Annex I: WASPA Asia: Wilgoda Line community (UC employed community) Households Survey 2006,Kurunegala .............................................................................................................................................. I

ii

Acronyms, Abbreviations and Sinhala Terms

FGD Focus Group DiscussionGPS Global Positioning SystemsLA Learning AllianceMC Municipal CouncilNGO Non-governmental organizationNWSDB National Water Supply and Drainage BoardSEPA Social Services Participatory Development FoundationWASPA Wastewater Agriculture and Sanitation for Poverty AlleviationWHO World Health Organization

Ela CanalWewa Irrigation tankAnicut Weir

1

1 Introduction

The WASPA Asia Project

The Wastewater Agriculture and Sanitationfor Poverty Alleviation in Asia (WASPA Asia)project aims to identify and test solutions forsanitation and decentralized wastewatermanagement, for its use in agriculture. Thetheory behind the project is that sustainablewastewater management, and beneficial usein agriculture, can only take place ifwastewater is holistically managed andinterventions take place throughout thewhole chain of the process from theproduction to disposal or use of thewastewater. This includes improvedsanitation, contaminant reduction, wastetreatment, disposal, use in agriculture andpromotion of hygiene behavior.

It is also part of the premise of theproject that the means of achieving theseaims lies with the involvement of localstakeholders. The project will thereforeestablish “Learning Alliances” (LAs), in sitesin Sri Lanka and Bangladesh that bringtogether the main stakeholders:communities; local authorities; communityorganizations; government departments;non-governmental organizations (NGOs);and experts, to work on this issue. In eachsite the project team will conductparticipatory assessments of the currentsituation with the LAs, and facilitate thedevelopment and implementation ofparticipatory action plans to testtechnologies for safe waste managementand application in agriculture. Experienceswill be shared through LAs at different levels(local, intermediate and national) andlearning events.

This report, and the work that went intothe data collection, are part of that processof LA formation. The objectives of thiscomponent of the work were:

To introduce the project background toevery household in one of the projectpilot communities.

To determine how many householdsthere were in the community (as officialrecords were deemed inadequate) andto number each house for easy futurereference.

To collect basic household informationincluding number of householdmembers, primary income generatingactivities, age and education. Somesimple questions about access tosanitation, housing infrastructure andwater facilities were also asked as aprelude to a more detailed health andsanitation survey that will be conductedin the coming months.

To develop a site map using globalpositioning systems (GPS) points.

Project Location

In Sri Lanka, Kurunegala has been selectedas the city in which project activities will takeplace. A full description of the project site isgiven in another report produced by thisproject. The report includes: waterresources; population and demographicinformation; sanitation infrastructure andwaste management facilities; andagricultural data (see Nishshanka et al.2006).

2

The population of Kurunegala MunicipalCouncil (MC) area was estimated to be28337 at the time of the 2001 Census(Department of Census and Statistics 2001).In 2004 the number of houses in themunicipality was calculated to be 7500 ofwhich 7442 were on the sanitation register,6930 had sanitary latrines, 442 hadunsanitary latrines and 70 had no latrines(Chief Public Health Inspector, personalcomment 2006).

Two drains flow though the city: theWan Ela and the Beu Ela. The Bue Ela isthe traditional irrigation channel that wasconstructed to provide water to the paddyarea from Wennaru wewa (the tank markedon the map as “upper catchment”) but whichnow flows through the city collecting storm-water runoff and other wastewater. Thoughthe Wan Ela appears to originate from theKurunegala tank in the middle of the map, itis actually a drain for agricultural run-off fromland to the north-east. As with the Beu Elathis now receives city wastewater (NationalWater Supply and Drainage Board(NWSDB) 2005; Jayakody, 2006). Thesecanals join at Wilgoda Anicut where thewater may be stored or flow directly toagricultural lands, depending on theirrigation needs of the farmers who controlthe water flow from this point onwards(Figure 1.1).

Five key stakeholder groups areidentified within the project intervention area.These are: the farming community that usesthe wastewater; a low income communityresiding in Wilgoda Line, close to Wan Ela,where there is open dumping of waste andopen defecation; local governmentagencies; NGOs; and those owningcommercial or manufacturing premises.

Farmers are the intended directbeneficiaries of the project and although theWilgoda residents are seen as wasteproducers it is also intended that they willbenefit from improved waste managementand sanitation, which should directly impacton health.

Wilgoda Community

This report focuses on one of the keystakeholder groups: the Wilgoda low incomecommunity, which is officially called WilgodaLine. The term “line” was originally used todefine the accommodation developed for theworkers on the tea estates in Sri Lanka.They were not individual houses but wereessentially a row of rooms with limitedinfrastructure such as common taps andlatrines. In Wilgoda the accommodationwas originally constructed for themunicipality laborers using a similar designand was thus also called “line”. The areahas however been developed by thecommunity members and the term “line” isnow used more to describe a shanty or slumarea.

It must also be noted that this is not ahomogeneous community (see Nishshankaet al. 2006) however, for the purposes of thisreport and for simplicity this report will referto the Wilgoda community or Wilgoda Line,as the project intends to address the needsof all the people living in Wilgoda Line.

The area is located within IluppugedaraGrama Niladari Division under KurunegalaDivisional Secretariat, and is bordered onone side by the Kurunegala-Wilgoda mainroad and on another by the Wan Ela. It wasoriginally built for municipal

3

Figure 1.1: Kurunegala study area

Upper catchment

City area

Wastewater Agriculture area

Area after the anicut

Bue ela

Wan elaAnicut

Wilgoda low-income community

Nelligahapitiya

Illukpitiya

Kahatagaha yaya

GaleyayaPallepotta

4

labours and is therefore still crown landbelonging to the Kurunegala Municipal Council.However, over the years several informaldwellings have been established in and aroundthe line houses and the population of thesettlement has increased. As a consequence,government data on this community, thoughavailable, was not considered accurate by theproject team. Therefore, a baseline survey wasconducted to obtain some basic household data,including: population and demographics; andphysical, environmental and sanitary conditions.

The survey found that there were 114households in Wilgoda Line, where household isdefined as a group of people eating from thesame cooking pot. In this instance it was foundthat the household is almost synonymous withthe housing unit, in which a number of familiesmay reside but living as one household. Thecommunity was found to be a mixture of mainlySinhala and Tamil people, with many marriagesbetween the two groups. There are some basicfacilities in the area including a few tea shops, apre-school and some latrines, but generally theinfrastructure is poor.

Methodology and Data Analyses

The survey was based on a simple two-page

questionnaire designed to be answered in a veryshort time. This was necessary as previousvisits to Wilgoda Line and informal discussionswith some community members had highlighteda distrust of NGOs, charities and especiallyforeign aid workers. Therefore the majority ofthe time spent with each household wasintended to be: to describe the project; to providea simple introductory leaflet to the project,written in Sinhala and Tamil; and to elicit theirinitial opinions about the project. Only a smallpercentage of the time was intended to be usedto collect basic household data and makeobservations. All households in the communitywere interviewed, with any adult family memberanswering the questionnaire. The questionnaireis provided in Annex I.

Each house in Wilgoda Line was numbered,using stickers, for later identification. Accordingto the survey all the houses have housenumbers given by the municipality except three.The houses which do not have a house numberhave been newly constructed by people whohave no legal rights to have a house within thepremises.

The data was coded and summarized intotables which include: family details; incomesource; condition of the house; and educationlevel.

5

2 Population and Demographics of Wilgoda Line

In total 587 individuals live in Wilgoda Line, ofwhich 407 are considered adults (over the age of14) and 180 are considered to be children. Ofthe total population 302 (51%) are male and 282(49%) are female.

The number of housing units identified andnumbered in Wigoda Line was 114. This wasconsidered, after analysis, to be equivalent tothe number of households even though therewere some 144 families living in those housingunits. This is because households wereconsidered to be people who shared a cookingpot, whilst families were married couples andtheir children and consequently one householdoften consisted of extended families. Thenumber of families living under one roof isbetween one and four, with the vast majority(80%) being single family households and 14%being two family households (Error! Referencesource not found.).

Figure 2.1: Families per household

1424

81

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4Number of families

Per

cent

age

ofho

useh

olds

The number of individuals living in a singlehousehold ranged from one to 16. Five memberhouseholds were most common with 24% ofhouseholds having five members and with themean average being five members. Four, sixand three member households were also

common but 22% of households had sevenmembers or more (Error! Reference sourcenot found.). These fairly large household sizesare a particular issue because of the small sizeof the housing units and the absence ofsanitation facilities within most homes.

Figure 2.2: Individuals per household

7

12

24

14

8 74

1112

20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Number of individuals

Per

cent

age

ofho

useh

olds

In addition, discussions with communitymembers and the high percentage of thepopulation that are children, suggests that thepopulation is growing rapidly, often as a result ofearly marriages and high fertility. This is puttinga great deal of pressure on the facilities andmeans that there is very little privacy.

Age

Ages were grouped into those below the age of14, who were considered to be children, andthen in ranges of 10 years. The results showthat the average age of the community is young,with 31% counted as children and 25% in therange 14-25 years. The number of older peoplewas very low with just 5% over 55 years of ageand 9% between 45 and 55 (Error! Referencesource not found.Error! Reference sourcenot found.).

6

Figure 2.3: Age distribution of the population

139

17

25

5

31

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

<14 14-25 25-35 35-45 45-55 >55

Age groups (years)

Perc

enta

ge o

f ind

ivid

uals

The World Health Organization (WHO) reportthat of the 1.8 million people that die every yearform diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera);90% are children under 5, mostly in developingcountries (WHO, 2004). Therefore, this groupwas also divided out and was found to accountfor 8% of the population (48 individuals). Inaddition, though the official age of adulthood is14 in Sri Lanka, the age at which a person iseligible to vote is 18, and the number of peopleover the age of 18 was recorded as being 353(60%).

Education

Out of the total adult population (over the age of14), 392 (96%) responded to the questionregarding educational background. It was foundthat around 91% of these people had not takenOrdinary Level examinations but only 75 (19%)were illiterate (Error! Reference source notfound.). A positive finding was that only four ofthe children under the age of 14 were reported tonot be attending school at the time of the survey,though obviously this is difficult to verify and itappeared to the interviewers that children arenot attending school continuously since there isno motivation from the parents.

Figure 2.4: Education levels of the populationof Wilgoda over 14 years of age

75

131150

31 5 15

Illiterate

<grade 5

Grade 5-10

O/L

A/L

No response

Income Generating Activities

The main income generating activity in WilgodaLine is employment as municipality laborers(26% of all individuals over 14 years of age),because the settlement was originallyestablished for municipality employees. Afurther 12% of adults are involved in variouskinds of unskilled labor and 16% are employedas mechanics, hotel or shop staff, tailors,teachers and clerks to name a few of the manyactivities. However, by far the highestpercentage of adults (45%) is unemployed.

Although income diversification is usuallycommon in low income households 68% saidthat they only have one source of income; 27%have two sources; and 4% have three. Thosewith more than one income generating activitywere usually those households that includedmore than one family. It is likely that many ofthese households also engage in small scaleinformal activities for which they receive non-monetary payments or which are not regularsources of income. As this was not a fulllivelihoods survey, this level of detailedquestioning was not undertaken.

7

3 Legal Status and Physical Infrastructure

Tennancy

It was found that of the 114 houses in WilgodaLine some were constructed by the municipalityand some were constructed by communitymembers. All the houses constructed by themunicipality have legal permission and inaddition a few of the houses constructed by thecommunity also have legal status granted by theMC. According to the community 84 of the 114houses (74%) are legally constructed. Howeverfamilies are essentially MC tenants and areentitled to continue living in the houses providedthat a member of the household is a MCemployee. This lack of security is a major issuefor community members as exemplified by thesituation of one lady who explained that: “themain problem is not having a house; because ofthis we are vulnerable. My mother recentlyretired from the MC and we were at risk fromlosing our house so we forced my youngerbrother to get a job in the MC even though hedid not want it, because he understands that thewhole family needs a shelter.”

Those people who do not live in MC housesare in a more uncertain position because theyhave no legal status even as tenants.

Discussions with the MC in September 2006revealed that they have plans to construct newhomes for the residents of Wilgoda Line and thattenders have gone out for the construction of125 homes near the slaughter house, which isclose to the current settlement. However,exactly how this process will proceed and whatfacilities will be available is not yet known. TheMC did however feel that the process may takeseveral years and that in the mean time it wouldbe necessary to improve facilities in Wilgoda

Line, particularly sanitation.

Housing Size and Materials

There are two types of houses constructed bythe MC; both are approximately 250 ft2 but onetype consists of a kitchen, two rooms and aportico, while the other type has a kitchen, aportico and a wide hall without partition. Thepeople have found that the available space isinsufficient for the large families and havetherefore added to the original buildings. Bycontrast the houses constructed by communitymembers have a wide variation in size. Most ofthe houses are approximately 100 ft2 or more,and have one room for every purpose and nopartition.

The structures themselves differ quiteconsiderably in terms of the roofing, floor andwall materials but it is not simple to determinethe material used to construct the roofs of manyof these houses as they are in a state ofdisrepair and are patched with polythene orpieces of metal.

In general the houses constructed by themunicipality have tiled or asbestos roofing, butmany of the “illegal” dwellings use metal sheets(Figure 3.1). The majority (92%) of both illegaland legal structures has cement floors (25 and80 housing units respectively); with just 5 illegaland 4 legal structures having mud floors. Wallswere more difficult to categorize as they wereoften constructed from a number of materialsincluding wood, metal sheets and meshes,especially the internal walls. However if thedominant building material is considered then77% were constructed from brick (Figure 3.2).

8

Figure 3.1: Roof material of legal and illegalhousing units

37

5

42

30

05

1015202530354045

Tiles Asbestos Metal Sheets

Roof material

Num

ber o

f hou

ses

legal illegal

Figure 3.2: Percentage of house wallsconstructed from various materials

77%

8%

13%2%

Bricks

Mud

Wood

Others

Infrastructure and Facilities

An electricity supply is received by 46% ofhouseholds of whom 7% use their neighbor’sconnection. Those who have their ownconnection paid for it themselves.

There are four common taps used by 89households for all purposes including bathing,drinking and washing. A further 24 householdshave individual water supplies for which theypaid the National Water Supply and DrainageBoard (NWSDB) and one person uses theirneighbor’s supply.

Thirty one households have private latrinesthat were constructed by the municipality butsome latrines are not in a good conditionbecause of their age. In addition there are eightcommon latrines in Wilgoda Line that wereconstructed by an NGO. These are used byaround 78 households or 414 individuals, whichaccounts for 71% of the population of the area(Table 3.1).

Table 3.1: Latrine facilities in Wilgoda Line

Latrine People Households

Number % Number %Individual 155 26 31 27Shared 414 71 78 68Neighbor’s 18 3 5 4TOTAL 587 114

Amenities

There are not many amenities in Wilgoda Linebut there are two small shops and a video centerthat are owned by individuals living in thecommunity. There is also a pre-school, as welland a children’s park.

The communal infrastructure is reasonableas there are street lights and storm water drainsbut according to the community members thesedrains are not well maintained and flooding is acommon problem because people drop litter intothem. This was frequently raised in focus groupdiscussions (FGDs) as one of the main issuesthat they would like to address to improve theenvironment in the area, especially as they feelthat it increases the number of mosquitoes whichcan cause Dengue, Malaria and Filariasis.

The paths between the houses are alsonarrow and muddy, which is worsened duringthe rainy season and by the overflowing drains.

9

4 Community Perceptions of the Project

The final questions in the questionnaire weredesigned to get the respondents to start thinkingabout the project and providing the project teamwith their ideas about what was needed inWilgoda Line in relation to the project. Thereason for asking these questions was that initialmeetings in the community had revealed thatthey were disillusioned with NGOs, particularlyforeign NGOs, and various projects that hadpromised them things but had not met theirexpectations. The team therefore felt that it wasappropriate to thoroughly describe the project inevery household and to elicit their opinions onthe possible interventions and the methodologiesfor implementing them. This was seen as thevery first step in initiating the participatory actionplan process. The two questions that wereasked were:

1. What kind of project activities would you liketo see the project carrying out, within thescope of the project that we have outlined toyou?

2. Can you give us advice on how you think weshould implement this with the help of thecommunity?

The reason for the second question was thatsome people in the village had said that therewere or had been a number of societies but thatthey had failed due to lack of commitment on thepart of the members; and others said that theyouth of the area in particular were keen toimprove the conditions. Hence this question wasdesigned to see if other people reiterated thosesentiments or provided other ideas.

The team did not have much expectation ofresponses to these questions because they areobviously difficult to respond to especially in aninterview context, and such issues were

therefore intended to be covered in FGDs, thiswas just seen as an opportunity for those withstrong opinions and also for others to startthinking about it prior to FGDs.

Responses from the Community

It was felt that good discussions took place whenthe interviewers initially introduced the projectand that this was very important in gaining theconfidence of the respondents. It also seemedthat they had a good idea about wastewater andsolid waste generation from the city.

As expected the interviewers found thatmost people found it difficult to respond to thesequestions but they did express their appreciationof any positive interventions arising from theproject. This also provides a lesson in itselfwhich is that a substantial effort will need to bemade to introduce the project concepts to thecommunity and to gain their trust.

What they did say was that they too suffer asa result of the pollution of the canal due to thebad smell, mosquito nuisance and over flowingof the canal during the monsoons, which theybelieve creates health and sanitation problemsfor everyone living in the community. The mainissues of that the community membersexpressed in the interviews were: the fact thatthey have no legal rights to their houses or landas they are MC tenants; the problem of drug andalcohol addiction; and the difficulty of taking careof children, especially adolescents.

The requests that were made in relation topossible project interventions were:

Clean the canal that flows through the areaand construct drains within the residentialarea;

10

Provide a place to collect solid waste in bulkwithin Wilgoda Line;

Provide a water supply for the newlyconstructed latrines; and

Improve the overall water supply system asthe current facilities are inadequate.

The second question appeared yet more difficultto answer and the respondents did not really

offer any solutions for implementationmechanisms. However, several key informants,such as one man who had voluntarily cleanedthe shared latrines; a young man who wasinterested in supporting and improving hiscommunity; and a handful of other seeminglymotivated people, did give the impression thatcommunity mobilization would be possible if itwere to address their needs.

5 Discussion

This survey was only designed to provide somebasic information about the people andconditions in Wilgoda Line and to act as ameans of introducing the project, but it hasactually yielded some very important informationthat will be a sound basis for the remaining stepsin the development of Learning Alliances andparticipatory action plans. It has also providedthe team with an opportunity to get to knowsome of the community members personally andfor residents to know more about the project.The use of local language Sinhala and Tamilflyers was considered extremely important in thisprocess as they allowed the residents to read alittle more about the project once the team hadleft, and to share them with other familymembers.

During the interviews the team observedseveral things, most notably the concern peoplehad with lack of ownership of houses, which theycontinuously mentioned. They all expect legaldocuments from the municipality granting themthe rights to the land on which their houses areconstructed; however it is the intention of the MCto move these people within the next five yearsto a newly built apartment block. The reason forthis is that they are municipality employees andthe MC feels that the accommodation is sub-standard. They do however acknowledge that

this proposal is awaiting funding and that it maynot happen within the planned five year period:and also that even if the move takes place, theconditions in Wilgoda Line need to be improvedin the interim period (MC Engineer, personalcommunication, September 2006).

It was also clear that the communitymembers expected quick physical outputs, evenif this may not be realistic. This appears to havehappened in the past with different organizationsconstructing latrines and distributing compostbins, but the sanitary awareness programmeshave either not taken place or have not beensufficient to influence the community.Consequently people do not maintain and usethe latrines or compost bins at present, althoughthere is on-going work to improve the use of thecompost bins. People appear not to be awareabout the sanitary usage of latrines, and menand women are using the toilets withoutconsideration of gender (it was intended that fourof the latrines would be used by women and fourby men). The children do not even use thelatrines but defecate beside Wan Ela or the sub-cannels that run thought the premises. The lackof water supply to the latrines is also a majorissue for both personal hygiene and keeping thelatrines clean. As a result a few families close tothe latrines have got-together and locked them,

11

only unlocking them for their personal use.Many of the community members that the projectteam spoke to, felt that certain activities were theresponsibility of the MC, not the community. Forexample, the drainage system in Wilgoda Line isnot in a good condition and the community isunwilling to take responsibility for cleaning it.Generally the relationship between the MC andthe community appears to be poor because thefacilities supplied by them are not adequate.

The Community and the Project

It was clear that maintaining a long-termrelationship between members of the communityand project team would be a big task since mostof them are expecting fast physical outputsthrough the project. According to the WASPAproject work plan it was intended that aparticipatory process to develop a holisticcommunity action plan would be initiated beforeany interventions were undertaken: and certainlyit is still felt that all interventions should beproperly planned to avoid problems such asthose being experienced with the latrines,

however it is also now felt that there should be aparallel process to initiate some simpleinterventions or positive activities that engagethe community and increase their support for theproject in the longer-term. It is therefore theintention of the project team to propose somesmall, low-cost activities and to initiate them withthe support of the community. Such activitiescould take several forms such as removing solidwaste from canals, holding a health day orengaging the children in relevant activities.These ideas will be collated into a shortdocument to be discussed with the community.

Discussions with the community and furtherresearch also revealed that a similar project tothe WASPA project is being undertaken inWilgoda Line. The project, conducted byPractical Action and Social ServicesParticipatory Development Foundation (SEPA),focuses on community governance and solidwaste management. It has subsequently beenagreed that further activities in Wilgoda Line willbe collaborative efforts by the two projects. It ishoped that this will address some of thecommunity’s concerns about NGOs, and willenhance community cooperation and theeffectiveness of interventions.

12

References

Department of Census and Statistics. 2001. Census of Population and Housing 2001 Database. SriLanka: http://www.statistics.gov.lk/census2001/database/index.asp. Accessed 04.09.06.

Jayakody, P. 2006. Mapping of Kurunegala and Rajshahi Study Sites: in IWMI. 2006. WASPAIntermediate Report. WASPA Project Document. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water ManagementInstitute.

National Water Supply and Drainage Board (NWSDB). 2005. Initial Environmental Examination Report: InRespect of Greater Kuruneghala Sewerage Project. Sri Lanka: Ministry of Urban Development and WaterSupply.

Nishshanka, R.; de Silva, S.; Clemett, A.; Dissanayake, P.; Jayakody, P. and P. Jayaweera. 2006.Background Report: Kurunegala, Sri Lanka. WASPA Asia Project Report 1 (unpublished). Colombo, SriLanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI).

World Health Organization (WHO). 2004. Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS ANDFIGURES. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/en/factsfigures04.pdf. Accessed 24.10.06.

I

Annex I: WASPA Asia: Wilgoda Line Community (UC employed community) Households Survey 2006,Kurunegala

Household number given by Project …………… Household number given by the Municipality…………………………...Date…………….. Interviewer……………………………………………

1. Information about the household headName of household head:Address:Number of years/months after residency:

2. Information about the familyName of the informant………………………………………………………………………….…Name of family member Male/

FemaleAge Education level (grade) Main income generating activity (be specific e.g.

laborer in a factory, unemployed, shop worker)

3. Condition of the house (observe and make notes, there is no need to ask this question)Permanent/temporary construction……………………………………………………Legal/illegal construction………………………………………………………………

Circle the correct one Specify otherType of roof tiles asbestos metal sheets Cadjans otherType of floor cement mud otherTypes of walls bricks mud wood other

II

Size of the house (Area/number of rooms)……………………………………………………………………..Electricity………………………………………Connection via municipality/not……………………………………………………………

4. Water sources: What water source does your family use for each of the following activities? (you can write more than one source if they usedifferent sources at different times).

DrinkingCookingToiletBathing

5. Sanitation Facilities5.1 Do you and your family have access to any sanitation facilities? Yes / No

5.2 If yes, what facilities? ………………………………………………………………………

5.3 If no, what do you do? ……………………………………………………………………..

6. Project and the community(Explain that we have been informed by the community that they are unhappy with projects coming here, promising things and not delivering them.Explain that we can not promise any changes or major interventions but that we would like to try to work with them to help them solve some of theirsanitation related problems (note this can only come after you have carefully introduced the project).

6.1 What kind of project activities would you like to see the project carrying out, within the scope of the project that we have outlined to you?

6.2 Can you give us advice on how you think we should implement this with the help of the community?