430 likes | 1.16k Views
School Water, Sanitation and Hygiene SNV Experience. Call to Action – WASH in Schools Meeting The Hague, May 2011. About SNV. WASH in Schools in SNV. Cambodia: “Unlocking Toilet Doors, Unblocking Student’s Access to School Sanitation” Initiative and WASH in Schools advocacy.
E N D
School Water, Sanitation and HygieneSNV Experience Call to Action – WASH in Schools Meeting The Hague, May 2011
WASH in Schools in SNV • Cambodia: “Unlocking Toilet Doors, Unblocking Student’s Access to School Sanitation” Initiative and WASH in Schools advocacy. • Lao/Ethiopia: CLTS in Schools via fun games and songs • Tanzania: From School WASH mapping to policy changes and advocacy for WASH in Schools.
Structure of the Presentation Achievements About School WASH Mapping Challenges Ahead
School WASH Mapping - Background • A joint initiative by SNV – UNICEF- WaterAid in 2,300 schools in16 districts (2009) • Purpose: To get a comprehensive picture of WASH situation in all schools in the selected districts; to explore the underlying causes of the (poor) situation; and to develop strategies for improvement • Physical mapping: Data collection • Governance and Validation Inquiry • District Feedback Meetings • National Stakeholders Workshop
Facts and Figures • 11% of schools meet the minimum standard in pupil/DH • 6% (or 174 schools) has no latrines • 20% (or 562 schools) has over 100 pupil per drop hole • 6% of the existing latrine is rated as “good standard” • 9% of all school is rated as having “clean” latrines • 1% has soap, 4% has adequate water; 6% has HW facilities • 4% school has facilities for children and adults with disabilities • 48% of latrines for girls has no door • 43% have never been inspected on WASH situation by LGAs • Latrines have never been emptied in most school
Underlying causes Facilities (quality and quantity) Governance structure Resource allocation & management Poor WASH situation in Schools
Overcrowded Rapid deterioration of facilities A major barrier to hygiene education Inadequate facilities(quality and quantity) Heavy burden for effective O&M Facilities become abandoned or unused Not attractive to use by children Severe lack of facilities
Weak Governance Structure • Unclear role; responsibility and ownership • Unclear and ineffective coordination on funding and institutional arrangements at National level • No arrangement for O&M of Facilities • Inadequate inspection and enforcement • Low level of community participation and consultation • Weak leadership and guidance from LGAs and Village Government • Low level of trust between community and village leaders
Poor Resource Allocation and Management • Discrepancy between schools in urban and rural/remote area • CG/LGCDG are late, fragmented; inadequate; unpredictable • Weak transparency on resource allocation • Top down direction on fund utilization • No distinction between government’s fund and parent’s contribution • Low priority given to School WASH at all levels
Recommendations • Focus more on quality (of the learning environment and achievement) and not just quantity (enrolment rate) • Strengthen national coordination and management for School WASH • Identify champion to strengthen political support and priority for SWASH • Strengthen SWASH monitoring, inspection and enforcement • Explore fund flow mechanisms for SWASH from central government to schools • Provide financial incentives for good performing schools • Improve financial transparency at all levels • Strengthen community involvement and ownership in SWASH • Strengthen home and school linkages to improve the effectiveness of SWASH
From Mapping to Action: Achievements to Date MOU Between 4 Ministries responsible for Sanitation and Hygiene signed in 2010 and is being operationalised National School WASH Guidelines to be developed by 4 Ministries with support from SNV and UNICEF (2010) National Strategic Plan for School WASH (2010 – 2015) National Sanitation and Hygiene Policy is being developed (with higher priority and attention given to WASH in Schools) Thematic Working Group for School WASH established in 2010; chaired by MOH and MOEVT; supported by SNV and UNICEF
MOHSW Management Committee (Meets weekly) National Sanitation & Hygiene Steering Committee (NSHSC) Chair: MOHSW (Meets 2 times a year) Water Sector Development Programme Water Sector Working Group (WSWG) (Meets 4 times a year) Education Sector Development Committee (ESDC) (Meets 4 times/year) Education Sector Development Committee Task Force (Meet 4 times/year) Health Sector (HSSPIII) Technical Committee – Health SWAp (Meets twice/ year) Thematic Working Group: Rural Water Supply & Sanitation Component (Meet 8 time/ year) Thematic Working Group: Urban Water Supply & Sewerage Component (Meets 8 times a year) National Sanitation & Hygiene Technical Committee (NSHTC) Chair: MOHSW (Meets 4 times a year) Education Sector Cross Cutting Issues Technical Working Group (Meet 4 times/ year) Health Promotion (Sanitation, Hygiene, Environmental Health Management and Climate Change) Technical Working Group (EHM & CC-TWG) Chair: MOHSW (Meets 12 times a year) Environmental Health & Climate Change Sub-Group Co-Chairs: NEMC & MOHSW (Meet 6 times/year) Household Sanitation & Hygiene Technical Working Group (HHSH-TWG) Co-Chairs: PMO-RALG & MOHSW Supporting DPs: WSP & WaterAid (Meets 6 times a year) School WASH Technical Working Group (SWASH-TWG) Co-Chairs: MOEVT & MOHSW Supporting DPs: UNICEF & SNV (Meets 6 times a year) 18
Reflection on the 6 key messages • Contribute evidence: Yes, very much • Increase investment : Potentially high • Demonstrate quality : Not yet showed results • Monitor WASH in Schools: Still weak with no enforcement, need to be linked to performance monitoring and incentive-based fund allocation • Involve multiple stakeholders: Starting • Engage those who set policies: Yes, very much
Low priority for WASH in Schools: A difficult trade-off Teachers participation: Workload vs. motivation and incentive Engaging community and parents participation: Building trust & cohesion; changing of mind-set Enforcing minimum standard vs. fund availability Investing in WASH in Schools: Some for All or All for Some? Coordination at all levels: Agreeing on roles; responsibilities and mandates; harmonizing guidelines and standards. Performance monitoring Uncoordinated Funding for WASH in Schools Political interference vs. Political support Taking WASH in Schools to Scale - Challenges Ahead!
1 Thank You!