1

MSUNDUZA DRY

SANITATION PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT

DECEMBER 1st – DECEMBER 14th 2011

2011 Msunduza Swaziland

Okunhon Eseosa (Dipl. Ed, B.Sc, M.Sc)

Lecturer University Of Applied Sciences,

Turku Finland

(Evaluator )

2 Table of content

Acknowledgement

Summary

1. Introduction 7

1.1 Sanitation systems 7

1.1.1 Enviro-Loo toilet 7

1.1.2 Composting / Urine diversion toilet 8

2. History and Background 8

2.1 Swaziland 8

2.2 Msunduza and state of Sanitation 9

2.3 Msunduza Dry Sanitation Project 9

2.4 History of Msunduza Dry Sanitation Project activities 10

3. Objectives 11

4. Evaluation questions 12

5. Method 13

6. Meetings 13

7. Workshops 15

8. Transect Walk and Observations 16

8.1 Mntulwini Zone 17

8.2 Mncotzini Zone 17

8.3 Maqobolwane Zone 18

8.4 Mncitsini Zone 20

8.5 Ghobholo Zone 21

8.6 Corporation Zone 21

9. Discussion, Comments and Reflection on Objective questions 22

10. Recommendations 26

11. Concluding Remarks 28

12. Tables 30

Table 1: Summary of Observations and recommendations 30

Table 2: Sanitation Experts and Zones 34

13. References 35

14. Annexes 36

Annex 1: Evaluation Time table 36

Annex 2: Questionnaire / Salvation Army 37

Annex 3: Questionnaire / City Council 38

Annex 4: Questionnaire / Homestead and community toilets users 39

Annex 5: Swot Analysis 40

Annex 6: Launching the Green Living Movement 42

Annex 7: Pictures 43

3

Acknowledgement On behalf of the Sustainable Development Department of the University of Applied sciences Turku (TUAS – used later in the text), I would like to express my deep thanks to the people of Msunduza community (Men Women, and Community leaders) for their cooperation, collaboration, and invaluable contribution in making this evaluation a success, and a useful learning event. I would specifically like to thank the Sanitation Experts for their valuable time, patience and hospitality during the field works and community visitations. Their active participation enriched the evaluation exercises. Thanks also go to Ms Sari Huuhtanen of Global Dry Toilet Association of Finland, for her suggestions and provision of valuable information guide to this report. To Mr. Jari Hietaranta, for his supportive views and insights and finally I would like to express my sincere thanks to my departmental Head Mrs. Sirpa Halonen for offering me a learning and challenging opportunity such as this. Okunhon Eseosa (Dipl. Ed, B.Sc, M.Sc) (Evaluator); Lecturer / International Relations Department of Environmental Sciences Faculty of Technology, Environment and Business Turku University of Applied Sciences (TUAS) Sepänkatu 1, FI-20700 Turku, Finland Tel: +358 2 26335506; +358407071420 eseosa.okunhon@turkuamk.fi www.tuas.fi Photo Credit: Anniina Kirstinä, Jonna Heikkilä and Eseosa Okunhon

4

Summary With a recorded annual population growth of 5-6%, the informal settlement of Msunduza is faced with rapid urbanization. This phenomenon is further hindered by lack of proper sanitation. Currently, the dry sanitation project is providing essential support to meet sanitation and hygiene needs of the community. A total of 16 toilets were built between 2007 and 2008 and an additional 13, built between 2008 and 2011; making it a total of 29 dry sanitation toilets constructed till date. Transect walks and interviews were conducted for on-field observations and discussions with the community people. The transect points included individual household toilets and community meeting points toilets respectively. All the information’s gathered were recorded and a summary presented in a tabular format Table 1. Most of the visited toilets were in good conditions. However, in some cases, (Table 1) the evaluator observed poorly fitted covers with missing screws for the Enviro-Loo types of toilet. This permits accessibility of flies and rain water to the faeces collection chambers. Some of the older toilet designs built by the earlier contractor, had heavy concrete slab-covers on their collection chambers. Attempts to open these chambers by the evaluator and assisted by the zonal sanitation expert proved abortive as they were relatively too heavy to be opened by one or two persons. Hand washing devices were missing in almost all the visited toilets except for Mabuza toilet in Maqobolwane (Table 1). In addition, the evaluators also observed that the constructed height of most stairways to the toilets especially in the community meeting points, were high and lack adequate provision of pedestals to take care of people of age and disability. All household visited and interviewed recalled being taught and advised by the sanitation experts on issues of health, cleanliness, usage, management and basic hygiene. While some household reported that few toilet owners had prevented their usage in the past, some reported worries and confusion on what to do with content as toilets are becoming full. Only one toilet owner Mr. Dlamlendze in Maqobolwane expressed disadvantage of toilet concept and was thinking of converting his toilet to a flush-type toilet as a result of fear of mismaintenance by the homestead leasers. The general perception of acceptability within the community people was highly positive. Among the toilet owners and non-toilet owners interviewed, there seem to be a high level of satisfaction among the people. The previous stigma (reported in the last evaluation report of 2008) attached to the concept and ideas of the project seem to be fading away. As more people are accepting the idea behind the project and are willing to talk about it, many more are hoping to have their own toilets. On the whole, most respondents interviewed, said that dry sanitation toilets had lots of advantages to them and were happy and satisfied to have them. But some owners of the Enviro-loo type of toilets were not contented with the fact that children could easily unscrew and play with the waste collection chamber covers. This act has in most part, resulted in rain water seeping into the collection chamber. Also, improper management of toilet facility in some homestead was also observed to have increased occurrence of smell and flies. Reportedly, the issue of theft and vandalism in some community meeting points toilets was becoming a growing cause for concern; this on a long term, has affected the use and maintenance of such facilities. On the issue of toilet availability for all, it was observed that most interviewed non-toilet owners, cherished the idea and concept of the toilet and showed high interest in having their own toilets. The majority of people have the notion that the project was supposed to provide everyone with a dry sanitation toilet and they couldn’t see the reason while some were given and others not. The sanitation experts explained that this has also been an issue with them as

5 they have to explain over and over again the idea of the project to the non-toilet owners of the community. The issue of sanitation experts not being provided with a toilet themselves was also highly criticized and spoken about by respondents. Some viewed the sanitation experts as trick stars who knew “the disadvantages of the toilet concepts, and not having one to themselves but are willing to impose ownership to others” The current criteria, used by the community leaders, for the location, allocation and selection of toilets beneficiaries seem to be weak, undefined and very unclear. The sanitation experts themselves weren’t so clear as to why some people were actually selected as beneficiaries of the toilets. Cut across the community and the total number of toilets visited in the different homesteads, it was obvious that most of the toilets owners were satisfied while some were not actually interested in having the toilets due to the responsibilities of maintaining, cleaning and caretaking of the toilets. Many viewed these responsibilities as the responsibilities of the sanitation experts. In Mncitni zone, the sanitation expert in-charge of the location reported a case of a toilet owner threatening her to remove the toilet from her homestead as she was reportedly fed up with having to clean the toilet and fetch dry substances like sawdust herself. Construction quality of all the new toilets visited was in good condition; most especially the newer ones constructed by the new contractor, Mr. Mabuza. It shows that the contractor has done a good work. However it is worth saying that most of the recommendations made by the evaluation team of 2008 especially in Maqobolwane e.g., replacement of concrete slabs to easily removable iron type, were yet to be carried out. When interviewed, the new contractor, Mr. Mabuza commented that although he has tendered a quotation for repairs on those toilets, he was yet to receive a feedback from the Salvation Army. He attributed the delay probably to the transfer of the previous captain of the Salvation Army, Mr. Piete and the accession of the new Captain, Mr., NlanNla who at the time of the evaluators visit was just 13 months in office. Mr. Mabuza was quite optimistic that with time, the new captain would look into the proposal and effect necessary disbursement of fund for such repairs to be carried out. There was however a glimpse of uncertainty while expressing his opinion. Sanitation experts expressed their views on the financial cost per toilet, presented by the new contractor Mr. Mabuza. This cost according to them, was relatively high and not sustainable. One sanitation expert’s, opinion was that presenting this cost per toilet, to non-toilet owners, would have a greater constraint to realizing and achieving the goal of capacity building and sustainability. Sanitation experts should be given orientation and guides for construction. The economic and social sustainability of the project after completion is questionable since most of the non-toilet owners interviewed reflected excessive cost of owning one and were still hoping to have their own toilets provided by the project leaders. There were no visible challenges of use of local materials in trying to mimic the toilet or evidence of people trying to build or imitate the toilets themselves. Finance seems to be an issue deterring local interest. Furthermore, it is important to take into account during the next phase of the project, the impact of interventions in sustaining the project. Official positions need to be clearly defined to boost accountability starting from the Salvation Army, the community leaders, City council and down to the sanitation experts themselves. Analytically, the strengths of the dry sanitation project were innovations in technology, positive attitude towards new Information, education, motivation through incentives, active participation by the sanitation experts. Additional strengths include partnership from Finland, involvement of women, and diverse possibilities of compost usage.

6 The main weaknesses of the project were the absence of good communication between community members, community leaders, city council, Salvation Army, Finland and the local sanitation experts, lack of space for gardening possibilities, excessive focus and attention given by the sanitation experts to toilet facilities, bureaucracy, temporal settlement, commitment challenges, clumsiness in role definition, cost per unit toilet, commitment challenges by local stakeholders and lack of facilities for monitoring/ follow-up. Thus, as observed, the lack of communication has limited opportunities to addressing problems related to the toilet management. There is an opportunity to tap and use additional expertise and knowledge provided by Mr. Bheki Matambo, Availability of land resources in the corporation area for use as compost test fields, possibility to learn from other experiences e.g., Zambia counterparts, and appoint back-up project Assistant to support, guide and assist in coordinating activities of the sanitation experts and report activities to all stakeholders especially in the post-Toilet building and capacity building phase. Vandalism, commitment after end of funding for project, uncertainty of financial management, loss of priority and interest needed to sustain the momentum while scaling up the interventions, uncertainty of possible changes in city council´s administrative plans for the settlement, personal conflicts, local leadership are possible threats to the project.

7

1. Introduction All over the world, it is evident that the reality of people living in slums and their inherent problems cannot be ignored or overemphasized. This problem is further compounded by the massive trends in urbanization which in recent times contributes immensely to challenges faced by public health today; especially in developing countries. In 2005, it was estimated that about 970 million people lives in slums out of which 70% lives in Africa (1). A huge number of people most especially in the developing world are without access to basic human necessities such as access to safe drinking water and inadequate excreta disposal system, either in the form of a personal or private toilet or a public toilet commonly shared with a reasonable number of people (2). According to Mike Davis and Robert Neuwirth, only about 10-15% of the urban population benefit from access to the sewer networks (1, 3, and 4). It is estimated that about 80% of the urban population depends on on-site facilities such as septic tanks and pit latrines which, unlike sewers, are usually the responsibility of households. Yet, not all households are in a position to solve this problem on site, whether due to lack of space, property, land ownership and or landlord´s attitude. As a result the majority of poor household use communal or shared pit latrines (6). In some urban areas people still have bucket latrines and “wrap and throw methods” or “flying toilets” are still the realities of the day. The Millennium Development Goal on environmental sustainability is `to halve by 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. Currently 2.6 billion people (more than one third of the world population) lack access to basic sanitation. To achieve this goal, a huge, verifiable increase in toilets is required (5). Increasing access to improved sanitation needs an urgent programmatic response. Thus, to bring about high quality health intervention, fulfilment and promote the Millennium development goals in Msunduza, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland (MFA) granted a five year financial support for the improvement of the state of sanitation in the community. This evaluation report presents a two weeks findings of the second evaluation survey 2011 that was conducted between December 1st and December 14th 2011. The evaluation is the second assessment of the dry sanitation project in Msunduza.

1.1 Sanitation systems

"Sanitation" refers to the principles and practices relating to the collection, removal or disposal of human excreta, household wastewater and refuse as they impact on people and the environment. The main objective of a sanitation system is to protect and promote human health by providing a clean environment and breaking the cycle of diseases. In order to be sustainable, a sanitation system has to be, not only economically viable, socially acceptable and technically and institutionally appropriate, but should also protect the environment and the natural resources (11). It should also involve a wide selection of technologies. Such technologies must make provision for good sanitization and treatment of waste, together with a possibility for recycling of waste generated to soil and agricultural systems. Examples of such technologies includes: – the Enviro-loo and the composting type of dry sanitation toilets.

1.1.1 Enviro-Loo toilet

This is an example of a dehydrating type of toilet. It is basically a sealed waterless, on-site, dry sanitation toilet system which does not use or require water or any chemicals or electricity (power) to function. This type of design makes use of radiant heat and a properly position air ventilator for air exchange to evaporate and dehydrate waste matter turning it into a safe, stabilized and odorless dry material that can be used later as fertilizers in the farms, It offers a standard of respectability and convenience, and does not have any prohibitive costs

8 or strain on precious water resources. Since it's a sealed system, waste cannot leak out and conversely, storm water cannot penetrate and flood the container. It is environmentally friendly and does not pollute the environment.

1.1.2 Composting or Urine diversion toilet

With increasing water shortages and declining water quality, the compost contributes to the solution of waste problems and the elimination of water pollution. It utilizes the principle of urine separation and processes human waste into a nutrient-rich fertilizer for use as a soil amendment. Risks associated with water-borne waste disposal, including contamination of ground and surface waters and the spread of disease-causing bacteria, are virtually eliminated by the aerobic decomposition of waste material in the collection chamber. Waste is combined with carbonaceous material (wood chips, sawdust, chopped leaves, or other loose organic materials). The decomposition process generates carbon dioxide and water vapor, which are vented by natural ventilation. The carbon-nitrogen balance is maintained, and friendly bacteria do the rest, provided the temperature is above freezing. A good mixture of the collected Nitrogen-rich urine with water can be applied directly to growing plants. This is important, because too much urine in the composting toilet can retard or flood the decomposition process. The final solid decomposition product (mostly the added sawdust or other carbonaceous materials) is nitrogen-rich, humus, which can be applied as soil amendment in the farms. The number of times the toilet needs to be emptied depends on the amount of use and the size of the container. This type of toilets may be installed indoors or outdoors in a separate building (12).

2. History and Background

2.1 Swaziland

The kingdom of Swaziland is a small landlocked country comprising of just over 17,000 sq kilometers and it is comparably the size of Wales. It is arguably the smallest country in the southern Hemisphere, situated between the Republic of South Africa and Mozambique at a latitude of 31 degrees, 30 minutes east of Greenwich and a longitude of 26 degree, 30 minutes south of the equator. Swaziland is an independent state with a fully autonomous government that falls under the Monarch who is the Head of State. It has its administrative capital at Mbabane. Official estimates place real GDP growth at 1.2% for 2009/10. Swaziland comprises magnificent mountain scenery with unique, ancient rock formations. The kingdom comprises four topographical and climatic areas varying from 400 to 1800 meters above sea levels, each with its own unique characteristics (7). The mountainous Highveld to the west features rivers, waterfalls and gorges and has a temperate climate of warm, wet summers and dry winters when the temperatures can rise sharply during the day and cold during the nights. Winter snow falls occasionally occur on the higher ground. The area is generally not suitable for agriculture although much of it is given over to forestry. The subtropical Middleveld, at a lower altitude, is made up of lush, fertile valleys and has a warm climate that is ideal for cultivating a diversity of crops and it is here that much of the country´s agricultural activities occur. Further to the East is the Lowveld which is the largest region covering about 40% of the country, and is also subtropical. While the area is drought-prone, sugar is successfully grown commercially on a wide scale under irrigation. Cattle’s farming is also extensively carried out here. Much of of the area is typical African bush where a wonderful profusion of indigenous wild life, birds and flora are found in protected areas. The smallest region is Lubombo, which borders with Mozambique. This subtropical area is typified by mountainous scenery and support abundant plants and animal life. Mixed farming is the main activity here.

9

2.2 Msunduza and State of Sanitation Msunduza is situated in the hills that form the backdrop of Mbabane. It is the largest and oldest low income settlement of Mbabane, covering a total area of 20 square kilometers, and a population of 16000 people (13). It is located south east of Mbabane city and incorporates the Mntulwini, Gobholo, Mncozini, Mncitsini, and Magobolwane neighbourhoods which make up its five local administrative divisions (7). The proximity of Msunduza to Mbabane city has resulted in it becoming a sizeable and dense settlement. The settlement density is about average compared to mid-sized urban centres. The economic activity of the area is composed primarily of small-scale trade, labour and agriculture. However, many families still grow a portion of their own vegetables and staple food (maize) for consumption. The average household family size in the area is about 7 people. Msunduza is an informal settlement, bound to the North by the Salvation Army clinic, to the south by the Cooperation Mountains, East by the Fountain Mountains and west by the Mbabane River. The settlement is characterized by lack of space, lack of access by vehicles and unstable population.

The topography of the Msunduza division is mostly hilly with a series of ridges. The hilly nature of the area makes the construction and maintenance of roads and other public amenities such as pipe born water costly. Annual rainfall ranges on average, between 1200 mm – 1400 mm per annum. The long rains season is from October to March. Summers are hot and humid with frequent rain, while winter months are cold to warm and dry. The summer temperatures range between 15 degree centigrade and 26 degree centigrade. Although the vegetation in the district is evergreen, there are no gazetted forests. Erosion along steep slopes during the raining season is a problem (7).

The current sanitation situation of the five administrative district, together with a sixth zones “Corporation” is average due to lack of proper solid waste management in most homesteads and a high frequency of dumping of grey water into the street and street gutters.

2.3 The Msunduza Dry Sanitation Project

Globally, small urban communities are playing an increasingly important role in the economic development of any country. Most of these communities lack adequate sanitation that is greatly hampered by lack of government incentives for sustainable development and further compounded by the reality, of the limited skilled human resource within the local authorities of these communities to address their impending sanitation concerns. Rapid and unplanned population growth in these small communities has also placed enormous pressure on the capacity of these local communities to provide adequate water supply and sanitation services for their growing populations. Unless concerted action is taken, the devastating impact of poor sanitation services in small communities will continue to increase, significantly; thereby curtailing prospects of achieving the MDGs for water and sanitation.

With a population growing at a rate of 5-6% per annum, Msunduza community lack proper waste disposal facilities such as clean toilets, clean water and technical knowhow on sanitation issues. In a feasibility studies carried out in 2004 by group of students from the department of sustainable department of TUAS, About 85% of the household in the informal settlements around the project area had some kind of toilet connected either through the municipal sewage system or into a private dug septic tank. A high percentage of households do not have any kind of toilet or access to the public sewage system. 10% of households with toilet systems do not have water closets; while Household with the septic tank systems, lacked the financial capacity for emptying and maintaining their tanks when full. Wastes

10 from filled tanks overflows to the environment, thereby creating public and environmental nuisance and vulnerability to sanitation related diseases like typhoid, cholera etc. A significant number of toilets in the neighborhood are in disrepair and not in use. Among the Ten schools located in the project area, most are equipped with old WC appliances which consume a lot of water. Some do not have hand washing facility as a way of minimizing cost due to high tariff on water. Schools in this neighborhood are highly interested in the dry toilet sanitation initiative. Some schools see the improved sanitation advantage of this project for their pupils in addition to their ability to use the by-product of the dry toilet system as compost for their school gardens. The city council of Mbabane together with the Msunduza central committee have expressed support, cooperation and approval for the project and has worked with the project workers in addressing the sanitation priorities and viability of the dry toilet sanitation initiative for the community. TUAS in association with the Global Toilet Association of Finland is currently implementing a major initiative to address the sanitation needs of poor people, living within the Msunduza region of Mbabane Swaziland. The Dry Toilet initiative has been designed to achieve the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) targets for water and sanitation in small communities like Msunduza.

The Msunduza dry sanitation project is being implemented in partnership with important stakeholders entrusted with specific tasks in the process. These are the Salvation Army which plays a fundamental role of coordination, administration, monitoring, decision making, book-keeping (local level) and providing a good information and knowledge of the project area. The Global Dry Toilet association of Finland which provides the technical and financial assistance required for the project, community based groups like the youth foundation at Mncitsini, and local schools whose roles as part of the participatory target groups are indispensable. So far, the project which began in 2007 has run through two phases.

The Msunduza Dry Toilet Initiative project has a clear pro-poor focus, intended to generate desirable outcomes that would have a lasting effect on the poor. The 3rd phase of this project is intended to focus on institutionalized capacity building programs which will regularly update the capacity of stakeholders, and thereby make a contribution to the reduction in pollutant loads entering into the surrounding environment. It is envisaged that on project completion, these outcomes, would lead to improved health status and productivity of the population in the Msunduza community

2.4 History of the Dry Sanitation project Activities A feasibility study of the entire community of Msunduza was carried out in 2007 by students from the Department of environmental studies of TUAS, together with other project coordinators from Finland in cooperation with local sanitation experts from Msunduza. The purpose of the study was to ascertain condition of local sanitation and hygiene, local knowledge about sanitation and composting, cultural attitudes about new concept of Dry toilets, mapping of possible places for building of dry toilets etc. Lectures were kept at local schools to educate the youth about composting. A total of 12 indigenes were trained as local sanitation experts to oversee local community outreach and coordination of the project in various locations. Today, eight local sanitation experts, work a total of 60-70 hours per month, visiting and educating people at their homes as well as public places in the community about the importance of sanitation and benefits of composting using the by-products of the dry toilet initiative. In December 2007, the first pilot dry composting toilet was launched. In comparison, the Environ-Loo toilet was also introduced in February 2008. The idea was to allow local people to compare and contrast the benefits of using both designs

11 and to choose thereby the best which serves them better. With the statistics of choice and preference known, most vulnerable homestead was selected by group of students from Finland at the beginning of February 2008. A design and building competition involving local contractors was organized. Construction of more Dry Toilet continued through 2008 with a total of 20 disease preventing “Andy-Handy” hand washing after-toilet devices given out as well.

With the absence of financial incentive from the local Authorities, Schools, women and youth organizations in Msuduza has been encouraged and educated about the importance of subsistence farming and natural composting. This knowledge has highly improved their level of hygiene as well as livelihood. A comparative studies comparing the outcome of this project to that carried out in Zambia has been carried out also by the students of TUAS. It is worth mentioning that at this stage, the Dry Msunduza Sanitation project has achieved a lot in reducing the level of infection through improper sanitation among the local people of Msunduza community.

3. Objectives

3.1 Long term Aims / Objectives 2009-2011 The Msunduza Dry Sanitation project evaluation plan for 2009-2011, specifically state that “The project aims to improve living conditions and especially sanitation hygiene in the project area. It builds knowledge in the community about environmental sustainability and decreases problems caused by poor sanitation. The ambitious aim is to build a new sanitation culture in Swaziland where dry toilets have been unknown before. The Msunduza Dry Sanitation Project is a part of the Dry Sanitation Development Programme for Africa and Asia of the Global Dry Toilet Club of Finland. The objective of the programme is to develop a functional model for dry sanitation in developing countries. The objectives of the project support the poverty reduction strategy of Swaziland, Millennium Goals of UN and the development policy of Finland” (9).

3.1.1 Evaluation objectives 2009 The direct / overall objectives of the project are:

A. Improved sanitation hygiene B. Increased composting and home gardening C. Increased livelihood and participation in the project area D. Improved know-how of applicant

12

3.1.2 Evaluation objectives 2011 In fulfilment of the overall aims of the project, the following objectives were selected for the 2011 evaluation. • Ascertain appropriateness of the dry sanitation project to the community and determine

what extent the dry toilet sanitation project has met the needs of the local people and the local community at large.

• Determine through site visitation, extent of changes made as a follow-up of the recommendation made by the last evaluation team in 2008

• Ascertain reliability and Sustainability of the project idea, including the ability and willingness of the toilet owners and users to maintain facilities

• Determine acceptability and success of hygiene education, with particular attention to hygiene-knowledge and behavior especially appropriateness and use of hand washing materials.

• Determine efficiency and effectiveness of the local implementing team, including capacity building of staff members, and effective monitoring of toilets by the Sanitation experts.

• Identify current inherent problems linked with the project and make possible suggestions that could improve project implementation

4. Evaluation Questions 2011: 1. How motivated are the toilet owners / users, sanitation experts, community leaders and Stakeholders toward fulfilling the goals of the project? , 2. To what extent has Communication and community participation played a part in the Project? 3. Has user maintenance and good practice improved?

13

5. Method

Working within the limited time frame of the evaluation exercise, (Annex 1), an in-depth review of the 2008 evaluation report was carefully studied by the evaluator to access the issues and propositions made in the document. Various themes identified in the document were used as a framework for this evaluation. To help examine these themes, valuable evaluation objectives were then developed and tailored along with the propositions made by the 2008 evaluation team to represent part of the objective of this evaluation. To fulfil part of these objectives, questionnaires were designed to determine the psycho-socio, environmental and technological impacts of the project on the stakeholders and toilet owners respectively. (Annex 2, 3 and 4). All features such as land depression, gullies and slopes (e.g., flood or rain water ingress during rainfall etc), that could in any way affect the functioning of the dry sanitation toilets was noted during the visual survey /community walk. On the whole, active participation method was used (8). The History of the project, administration and mandate was replicated from the original application document submitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland (MFA) 2011(10). Furthermore, in order to understand the role of stakeholder’s accountability, effectiveness and participation in the project, an attempt was also made by the evaluator to question the level of understanding and interest of the project by the stakeholders. This was necessary in order to ascertain changes (if any), made to questions and suggestions raised by the previous evaluation team in 2008. To do this effectively, discussions and interviews were held with all the key players of the project team in Msunduza (Annex 2 and 3). The interviews examined the following: Objectivity, knowledge of project, administrative attitude, participation and general practices related to toilet use and general hygiene. All meetings and interviews were held with: Toilet owners and Caretakers (Annex 4), The captain of the Salvation Army, Chief Health Inspector of the city council of Mbabane, The local community leaders, the contractor as well as the sanitation experts. Direct observation, informal conversation and interview methods were used during site visitation to assess the conditions, usage and impact of the toilets on toilet owners and users in all the six zones. Swot analyses by respondents were recorded (Annex 5). Summary of findings and observations together with a recommendation for strengthening the project is finally drawn.

6. Meetings. 6.1 Meeting with the Sanitation Experts

On arrival, the evaluator was introduced by the Dry sanitation project coordinator, Jonna Heikkila to the sanitation experts; she spelt out the purpose and duration of the evaluation. On the whole a total of 8 sanitation experts were met. They are actively involved in the six zones of the project (Table 2). Each of the zones, except for the corporation zone (2 sanitation experts) has one sanitation expert each. Ms. Phindile shares responsibilities of the Mncozini zone with Ms. Mbatsana Georgina. In brief, the evaluator was informed that, the sanitation experts meet on a regular basis on Tuesdays to discuss issues, challenges and other affairs concerning the project. The evaluator was told that changing zone among the sanitation experts was often done to alleviate broodiness among toilet owners, encourage learning and sharing of new knowledge in other districts. It also helps to boost confidence and motivate interest among toilet owners who would otherwise not cooperate or open up to the sanitation expert in charge of the zone in question.

14

6.2 Meeting with the Central Committee

Most members of the central committee were absent during the scheduled meeting. One delegation from the committee was however present together with 2 sanitation experts. The delegate aired his views on the general outcome, perception and impact of the project on the community as very positive and a success. He said that the people of the community were very satisfied with the project and wish that it continues. He however commented on some few hindrances and shortcomings like the impact of rain, during the raining season, hindering the fetching of dry materials like sawdust by toilet owners, and the need to have more toilets built for the people. According to his opinion, more toilets should be built in the Mntulwini region of the settlement. He emphasized the need to educate the people on the use of local materials in replicating the building of the toilet. Sustainable impact of the newly launched Green Living Movement (GLM) on the project was discussed at length. Small scale farmers are usually more vulnerable to adaptation concept in terms of climate change. Hence, by using a participatory approach of getting to the “root” and thereby improving local knowledge, GLM actively engages in training, teaching and sharing information’s with local farmers on new concepts of sustainable agriculture and agro-forestry.

6.3 Meeting with the Salvation Army – Cpt. Nhlanlan

Two meetings were held with the new Captain of the Salvation Army - Captain Nlanlan. The first visitation meeting went very well as planned. The captain was very delighted to meeting and discussing affairs of the project with us. Although he has been in office for just 13 months, he praised his predecessor Captain Piete for a good work. He was of the opinion that the project has been a success and above all, a blessing to the people of the community at large. Few additional inputs and suggestions were however raised by him. Based on the feedback of the sanitation experts, he asserted that educating the people on good hygiene and how to use and maintain the toilet still remains a priority. Building new additional toilets and empowering the people on how to be innovative in building the toilet themselves by using local materials to ease expense, would make the project more sustainable. A date was set aside and proposed by him to join the evaluator for some toilet visitation. The second meeting was for an interview. The general conclusion resulting from the interview was that improvement should be made on the communication part of the project between stakeholders, and the need to teach the people the concept of composting as some of the toilets were getting filled up and the fear that the local people might not be able to afford building the toilets on their own, together with how to encourage some of the locals who still believe in the flush toilet type, in comprehending the concept of the dry sanitation.

6.4 Meeting with the Chief Health Inspector of the City Council – Ms. Ellen

The meeting / interview with Ellen of the City Council were equally successful. Issues, comments and suggestions originating from the discussions and interview included; Improving better communication between the stakeholders, defining roles and responsibilities of all parties involved. Actively involving the city council from the permit seeking phase to the complete toilet inspection phase (to avoid conflict), better conflict management among the sanitation experts, more hygienic education on the use of dry sanitation toilets, development of a quarterly-based report system between the stakeholders, setting up an intermediary channel to give valuable feedback to the city council, better enlightment through awareness campaign in the community via the community leaders, improving composting skills of the people through organized workshops and seminars, devising a better security method against vandalism and also fostering the use of local materials to make the project sustainable at the long run

15

6.5 Launching the Green Movement

The green movement of Msunduza was launched on the 2nd of December 2011, at the Msunduza community hall (Annex 6). The launching attracted a large number of participants ranging from representatives from the Dry Sanitation project Finland, representative from the dry sanitation project Msunduza, Representatives and students interns from Finland, children and youth from the Msunduza community, local church pastors, environmental activists, representatives from women groups and dancers alike. The history and overall purpose and objectives of the movement were spelt out by the organizers. Topics range from the systematic empowerment of the people through self dependency and sufficiency in food production, conservation of local resources and the environment, respect for qualitative not quantitative values, socio-religious and environmental link of green living to HIV, were addressed. Speakers for the day included: Msunduza Green movement coordinators Mrs Futhi and Ireen Ngambi, Local pastor – Mr. Samuel, A student of sustainable development of the University of Applied Sciences Finland – Ms Anniina Kirstinä, Dry sanitation Project coordinator Jonna Heikkilä, project and local environmental activist Mr. Matambo Bhekie Ngobese. Details of the day’s activities and cuisine is represented in Annex.6

6.6 Youth Farm at Mnctsini

The youth farm at Mnctsini was visited on the 4th of December 2011. The farm was found not to be in use (Pic.YF.1&2). The sanitation expert in charge of the zone, Mr. Sibusiso confirmed that, although the farm was previously used for some time, the advent of high rain that was, prone to excessive flooding washed away all the crops that were sowed. This occurrence discouraged the youth from continuing. At the time of visit, the evaluator was told that most of the youth in the zone has relocated in search of better jobs. Mr. Sibusiso, also confirmed that the community leaders in the zone has promised giving a new and better farm location to the youth. This location could not however be confirmed as the community leaders were reportedly slow to respond to their call. The evaluator was also told that the implication of the youth farm not been used, has had adverse effect in empowering the youth of the community. In addition, as most of the toilet owners in the neighbourhood do not have enough land / space for subsistence farming; practical use of compost from the toilets will be hampered in many ways. In future, it is feared that reuse of the compost from these toilets would be a problem; should the community leaders fail to provide a suitable farm location for the youth. None of the youth were however available for interview as at the time of visit.

7. Workshops 7.1 Workshop 1, Matambo´s Garden Corporation 5th December 2011 This workshop was held at Mr. Matambo´s farm (Pic.MG. 1), located in the corporation zone of Msunduza, Mr Matambo introduced the key concepts of permaculture and composting and its methodologies. (Pic.MG.2). He highlighted the significance of working together as a team, towards a shared understanding of the meaning and purpose of composting (Pic.MG. 3). The meeting brought together two toilet owners in the corporation zone and the sanitation experts under the same learning roof. Mr Matambo highlighted the need to be extra careful when handling human waste and urine for fertilizer. Children on the most part should be prevented from having contact with human wastes. Composting techniques, handling, usage and breaking the stigma associated with use of human waste for composting were also highly discussed. The need for a test field to demonstrate compost usage was also proposed, information about possibility of land provision by the community leaders in the corporation zone were also highlighted. Some of the identified challenges were lack of space for using the compost as most toilet owners do not have sufficient land for compost usage, logistics of transporting human waste from various homesteads to text fields and provision of drum for

16 doing so. Having a sanitation club that will include the local people, owners of dry sanitation toilets and the sanitation experts was also deemed a way forward. As some of the toilets are now getting full, it was agreed that a more practical workshop, that would involve the sanitation experts towards actually doing the composting in practice would be necessary and should be planned as soon as possible.. Mr Matambo promised to be a part of the workshop when organized. 7.2 Workshop 2 Tokhoza, 19th Dececmber 2011 The workshop was convened at the Tokhosa Resort conference hall (Pic.TK.1). The workshop was designed to achieve an understanding of the need for active participation, knowledge sharing, communication and innovativeness as a process and to maximize interaction and knowledge sharing between the organizers from Finland and the local sanitation experts. Participants included the Dry sanitation project coordinator Mrs. Jonna Heikkilä, The project evaluator Mr. Okunhon, Sanitation activist Mr. Bheki Matambo, Student representative from Finland Miss Anniina and of course the Project sanitation experts themselves (Pic.TK.2). The overall framework of the discussion was centred on reaffirmation of who a sanitation expert is, including his /her roles and responsibilities, Importance of innovation in capacity building, presentation skills required by sanitation experts while addressing community people, basic information about the enviro-loo, composting, and a lecture on water-energy nexus. An effort was made to enlighten the sanitation experts on global health issues as it relates to the dry sanitation project. A lecture and a pictorial slide assessment of the use of compost in Zambia were also presented. Discussions were held at various points to bridge the gap between ignorance and enlightenment of the sanitation experts. It also created a forum and an opportunity for the sanitation experts to identify, learn, and discern global sanitation-related questions relevant to the future of the Dry sanitation Project in Msunduza.

8. Transect walk and observations

A visual inspection of the toilets in all the six districts was conducted by the evaluator accompanied by the sanitation experts assigned to each of the zones, to determine if the toilets were hygienically used, structurally sound and in usable conditions specified by design. Visited toilets consisted of both the newly built toilets and the older ones alike. A total of 26 toilets were visited (Table 2). The evaluator verified use / condition of toilet by observing the presence of faeces and / or flies, smell and general condition of the toilet together with the physical surroundings of the toilet. Most toilets visited were sited on good / level ground. Layouts were properly sited and the Pathways to most toilets were cleared of bushes and hazards except for the Zionist toilet in corporation district. Questions about basic household information, knowledge, hand washing practices and attitudes about the toilets were asked during the interviews (Annex 4). Interview was not conducted in the two toilets in Msunduza primary school due to the fact that the school was on holiday and the gate to the school was closed at the time of visit. It was not possible to revisit the school due to time constrain. The recycling center toilet was met in very good condition. All interviews were conducted primarily with the toilet owners or, when the toilet owners were not available, another adult member of the household or caretakers in the case of toilet in the community meeting places. Questions were asked in English in an open question format. The sanitation experts acted as translators between the evaluator and the toilet owners / respondents respectively. Summary of all toilet observation, deficiencies, shortcomings and suggested remediation / intervention is recorded in Table 1.

17

8.1 Mntulwini Zone 8.1.1 Community meeting point toilet, Mntulwini This toilet is located and built in the community meeting point area of the zone. It is a dry sanitation type toilet. On visitation, the care taker was met absent as a result of her, been bereaved. The sanitation expert Mrs Phindile showed the evaluator around. On inspection, the toilet was found to be in good condition, well constructed with a pedestral rail (presumably to take care of the old, elderly and disabled users) on the stairways to the toilet, it was clean, not locked and accessible to all who wanted to use the facility. The sanitation expert explained the reason behind it been opened, to be the prevention of possible breakage by local youth and hooligans in the neighbourhood. There was no hand washing device and the urine separator was not functioning properly because the connecting hose was missing (Pic MNT.3). The urine collector was filled with rain water because the lid was missing (Pic MNT.4). The excreta collection chambers were found locked to prevent refuse been thrown into the chambers by local youth and hooligans around the neighbourhood. Both toilet seaters in the toilet were been used. It was difficult to ascertain why both toilet seaters were been used as the collection chambers were locked. But when viewed from inside the toilet, the excreta collecting chambers were found to be heaping up and needed to be spread. There were no smell and flies. Although availability and proper use of sawdust was observed, there was absence of “direction on how to use the toilet” in sight. 8.1.2 Recycling Centre toilet This toilet is a dry sanitation type toilet. The toilet facility was met very tidy. Clean and dry material well used. There was no smell or presence of flies. The toilet facility did not have any hand washing device present. There was no pedestal either. Access to the recycling centre is strictly on official opening hours during which, the evaluator was told, the gates are opened. Gates are closed on other times. There was a small test-field prepared by the side of the toilet that will be used for composting when the compost from the toilet is ready.

8.2 Mncozini Zone There were a total of four toilets comprising of 2 dry sanitation (1 old and 1 just newly built), and 2 Enviro-Loos, in this zone. The sanitation experts in-charge of this zone is Georgina Mbatsana (3 toilets), and Phumzile (1 toilet) respectively. Below is a breakdown of observation from visitation. 8.2.1 Samuel Dupe`s Toilet This is an Enviro-Loo type of Toilet. It was built in 2009 and used by 6 people in the homestead. On visitation, the toilet was found to be clean, no smell and flies. (Pic. MNC.1). On observation, the excreta collection chamber was seen to have lots of sawdust material. During the interview, the evaluator was told that the lid covering the excreta collection chamber was not properly secured and hence easily removed by the kids. This event has on the most, allowed rain water into the chamber. Application of sawdust was the only available option to dry the water content in the chamber. There was no hand washing device but Inscription of Toilet usage, was found attached to the toilet door. Some signs of erosion was also observed close to the toilet. (Pic.MNC.1). Large parcel of land used for farming was observed been tilled for sowing in the neighbourhood (Pic.MNC.2). Opportunity and readiness for compost usage was a positive factor. The evaluator was shown around the farm fields.

18 8.2.2 Phumzile Mansilela´s toilet This toilet is an Enviro-loo type of toilet, used by 6-7 people. At the time of visit, the toilet was met clean and well kept. Although built in 2008, the evaluator was informed that usage of the toilet was prohibited after completion by the toilet owner. Proper usage started in the early part of 2011. Ventilator latch was not well fastened and secured (Pic MNC.3), while dry materials well used. (Pic. MNC.4). On interview, the users seemed to well contended and happy with the toilet. The only fear expressed was the uncertainty of emptying the toilet when full and the lacking knowledge of secondary composting. 8.2.3 Josephina Ngubeni toilet This toilet was built after the 2008 evaluation. It is an enviro-Loo type of toilet (Pic.MNC.5). At the time of visit, the toilet was found to be clean and well maintained. The owner was very satisfied with the toilet. Lack of on-site working tools prevented the collection chamber from been inspected. Visible sign of sawdust was observed inside the toilet. Direction / description of how to use the toilet was absent. No visible crack or sign of failure on the collection chamber cover. Ventilator was well secured and latched to the wall and the air-inlet of the collection chamber open, free of debris and clean. (Pic.MNC.6). 8.2.4 Community Meeting Point Toilet Mncozini. This toilet is one of the just completed toilets built in 2011 (Pic. MNC.7). It is a dry sanitation-type toilet. On visitation, the door of the toilet was found to be a bit stiff and hard to open and close. The sanitation expert reported that they are yet to find a caretaker for the toilet and as a result of this, the toilet is not been used yet. Although relatively new and unused, the urine separator hose was found to be dangling low and not properly connected, while the urine collector was missing completely.

8.3 Maqobolwane Zone 8.3.1 Gama toilet This is an old design of dry sanitation type of toilet earlier constructed in 2009, by the winner of the design competition referred to in section 2.4; (Pic. MAQ.1).The toilet is reportedly constructed to be used by 12 people in the homestead. At the time of visit, the toilet was not in use. It was also observed that rain water drains-through, between the wall of the toilet and the collection chamber (Pic. MAQ.2). The sanitation experts reported that the caretaker of the toilet in the homestead has moved out of the neighbourhood and as a result, the toilet is temporarily closed until a new caretaker found. On interview, neighbours from the homestead reported that they have never used the toilet facility because the sanitation expert has prevented them and that the toilet was always locked. The collection chamber cover was also observed to be made of wood covered with a thin metal slate to possibly prevent the wood from been damaged by rain water. (Pic.MAQ.2) 8.3.2 Dlamlendze Toilet This is also an old type of dry-sanitation toilet earlier constructed by the old contractor (winner of the 2009 design competition). (Pic. MAQ.3). It has a concrete slab system covering the collection chamber (Pic. MAQ.4&5). As at the time of visit, the toilet was not in use. The owner of the toilet reported during an interview, that the toilet has never been used, and that he was thinking of converting the toilet into a flush-type toilet. When asked, whist this was so, he reported that flush system was easier and would serve the homestead better as the leasers of the homestead lack maintenance and cleanliness. Although he reported that the tenants were not interested in using the compost from the dry sanitation toilet, there was an evidence of a mini-garden near and close-by the toilet (Pic. MAQ.4). When further questioned about this, he ascertained that it was his farm and that since he has moved away from the homestead, he feared that the tenants would not be able to look after the toilet

19 properly. He concluded that the tenants were not actually interested in the dry sanitation type of toilet and that at his age; he could not afford to be cleaning the toilet after the tenants. 8.3.3 Mabuza´s Toilet This toilet is an old design-type of dry sanitation toilet (constructed also by the winner of the 2009 design competition). It is used by 4 users in the homestead. At the time of visit, the toilet was met clean and well kept. There was evidence of crack observed on the wall (Pic. MAQ.6). The waste in the collection chamber was quite wet and there were evidence of flies (Pic. MAQ.7). On interview, the evaluator was told that the wetness observed in the collection chamber was as a result of rain water seeping through the edge of the walls into the excreta collection chamber. There was a hand washing device in use. (Pic. MAQ.8). 8.3.4 Magongo´s Toilet This toilet is also an old type of dry sanitation that was constructed without a urine separator by the winner of the design competition. It has been in use from 2009. The total number of people using the toilet in the homestead is about 7. At the time of visit, the toilet was found to be clean. The door of the toilet was in good condition. Heavy concrete slabs were also observed covering the collection chambers. It was practically impossible for the evaluator to lift the slab to observe the condition of the collection chamber. However, there was no smell and evidence of flies around the toilet. Ventilator need to be fixed to avoid rain drips during the raining season. Hand washing gargets were also missing. Users of the toilet were very satisfied with the toilet. 8.3.5 Community Meeting Point Toilet Maqobolwane This is one of the newly constructed dry sanitation types of toilet. It was constructed with a urine separator in 2011 by the new contractor Mr. Mabuza. It is yet to commence usage. The toilet was met very clean with the handle of the door removed. The urine separator was not connected and there was no urine collector in sight either. The sanitation expert informed the evaluator that the door handle was stolen by the hooligans in the neighbourhood and that the incidence has been reported to the police. A suitable caretaker is yet to be found. 8.3.6 Kumente´s toilet This is also a dry sanitation-type of toilet. The toilet was met clean and in use. The total number of people using the toilet in the homestead is about 10. There was no odour / smell or flies around. The toilet had only one toilet seater in use while the other was not in sight /installed. The condition of the door was very good. The base of the collection chamber had no dry materials. The evaluator was informed by one of the tenants in the homestead that the owner of the toilet does not reside there and as a result, no one in the homestead actually want to take responsibility of maintaining the toilet. The interviewed tenant confirmed that she and her colleagues are not actually interested in the idea of composting as they, according to her, are not farmers. “We work in Mbabane and have no time for farming; we would have been probably interested, if the property was ours”. 8.3.7 Spot´s ground toilet This toilet is an enviroloo type of toilet. At the time of visit, the toilet premises were met clean. The caretaker of the toilet was met absent inspite of the fact that, there was an active game activity going on. There was no possibility to view the interior and the waste collection chambers of the toilet as the toilet was locked. Spectators were asked if they knew about the toilet and the frequency of their visitation to the spot´s ground; frequency of their usage of the dry sanitation toilet facility. Most interviewed spectator and game participants responded that they have never used the facility. Some said open defecation in and around the nearby bushes was their usual habit. The sanitation expert in-charge of the zone said that he knew nothing

20 about her absence. According to him, the toilet was mostly opened on weekends to respond to the usual weekend game activities.

8.4 Mncitsini Zone 8.4.1 Gogo Mncina´s toilet This toilet is one of the newly completed toilets. Positioning of the toilet is likely to be prone to water erosion from a somewhat small hill directly opposite to the toilet location (Pic. MCT.1). Toilet seaters was well positioned and the urine separator well linked to the urine collection chamber. There was however no urine collection container in sight probably due to the fact that the toilet was yet to be completed (Pic. MCT.2). Part of the stairways to the toilet was damaged (Pic. MCT.3A). The waste collection chamber was yet to be completed as the doors were yet to be installed (Pic. MCT.3b). At the time of visit, the toilet hasn’t commenced usage. 8.4.2 Jenny Dlamini´s toilet This is an Enviro-Loo type of toilet built in 2009 (Pic. MCT.4).The toilet has always been in use after completion in 2009. On visitation the toilet were found to be very clean. (Pic. MCT.4). The metal door to the toilet, together with the collection chamber latch was in good conditions. The air inlets to the collection chamber on both sides were blocked, (Pic. MCT.5), while the direction of sun to the chamber was also hindered by tree branches. The owners promised to cut the branches obstructing the rays from the sun to the chamber. The toilet seater was found to be filled with excreta yet to be pushed down to the collection chamber. During the interview, the owner of the toilet confirmed that this was not done because they ran out of sawdust. Owners /users were well pleased and contented with the toilet. Numbers of users in the homestead was between 4 and 5. 8.4.3 Community Meeting point toilet, Mncitsini This is a dry sanitation type of toilet (Pic. MCT.6). The toilet was found to be in good condition but closed as a result of the caretaker´s absence. The sanitation expert informed the evaluator that the caretaker has actually relocated from the neighbourhood and that a suitable replacement was yet to be found. The toilet has been reportedly closed for the past 3months. The surrounding of the toilet was found to be indecent while the urine chamber, was covered with grass (Pic. MCT.7). There was no possibility to check the interior of the toilet as it was locked. The urine separator hose was available but not connected to collection container (Pic. MCT.7). The excreta collection chambers were both locked. There was no hand-washing device in place either. 8.4.4 Granny Mnis toilet This is an old Enviro-Loo system toilet built in 2009, with a winding lever system that transfers the waste from the toilet seater to the collection chamber (Pic.MCT.8). The toilet was found to be dirty, littered with papers and full of excreta in the toilet seater, while the winding lever system was found not to be functioning properly as it should. Key to the toilet was missing, but replaced with a rope (Pic. MCT.8). The sanitation expert reported that the toilet owner does not want to take responsibility. The toilet owner was not found for interview. One of the dissatisfied interviewed resident claimed that she does not use the toilet because of the non-functioning hatch problem. The lack of spade, rake and excreta pushing instrument was also another factor, she claimed. The collection chamber cover was also found to be broken (Pic. MCT.9). It was observed that the toilet users do not use sawdust material after toileting. There was smell and some flies.

21

8.5 Ghobolo Zone 8.5.1 Nicholas Dlamini, David Ghinidza and Dumi Sani´s toilets These are newly completed toilets. The three toilets were very clean at the time of visit. (Pic. GH.1; GH.2; & GH.3). All the toilet features were well connected and there were no evidence of fractures on the walls. David Ghidniza´s toilet had a bit of positioning problem; i.e., accessibility to rain water, been blown by wind into the toilet via the ventilators on the wall. Noticeable evidence of this was observed on the wet toilet walls / floor as at the time of visit (Pic. GH.2). All the toilet owners were well contented and happy with their toilets when interviewed. There was a huge optimism and plan by toilet owners to use compost in the future. Total numbers of users for each toilet were 6, 9 and 6 respectively. 8.5.2 Community meeting point toilet, Ghobolo This toilet is a dry sanitation-type of toilet (Pic. GH.4). At the time of visit, the toilet was not in use and the surroundings was met in an unsanitary condition littered with rubbish. The lock to the toilet was broken and there was no urine separator in place either. The two WC seaters were clean and the wooden door was in good condition. There was no hand washing device in place.

8.6 Corporation Zone 8.6.1 Bheki Matambo´s toilet This toilet is an enviro-loo type of toilet. It is controlled by the mini-garden owner / sanitation activist Mr. Matambo. At the time of visit, the toilet was met clean and well managed. All the gargets but a hand-washing device, instruction of how to use the toilet, were met in place and the toilet seater in good condition as well. On interview, Mr. Matambo explained that the toilet, presently serves as an example to others in the neighbourhood and would in future, be a focal point of reference when teaching practical-related composting techniques. He responded to the missing hand-washing device as a temporary action taken by him to avoid theft by the hooligans in the neighbourhood. He was very contented and satisfied with the toilet. 8.6.2 Diana`s toilet This is also an Enviro-Loo type of toilet built in 2009 and used by 9 people in the homestead. The toilet was met clean (Pic. COP.1), with an inscription of how to use the toilet on the toilet wall (Pic. COP.2); Collection chamber was almost full (Pic. COP.3). The toilet has reportedly never been emptied. There was however dry material in sight inside the toilet (Pic. COP.1); The positioning of the toilet was quite good except for some tree branches obstructing access of the sun rays to the collection chamber. There was an expression of uncertainty of how to manage and use the compost when the toilet eventually gets filled up. Empty drums, ready for secondary composting was seen around the toilet premises (Pic. COP.4). Toilet owner was well pleased and excited with the toilet. An adjacent field for crop cultivation was also observed in the homestead. 8.6.3 Jabu Maphalala´s toilet The collection chamber of this enviro-loo type of toilet was met wet in spite of it been treated with ample lot of dry material (Pic.COP.5). The cover was not properly fastened and secured. The door and the securing bolts holding the ventilator channel to the wall of the toilet were well secured. The exterior and interior of the toilet was clean, except for the presence of flies and some smell. The toilet serves the need of 13 people in the homestead. The wc was full of excreta and needed to be pushed down to the collecting chamber (Pic.COP.6). Possibility of the toilet been prone to flooding was observed as it was located and built near a steep slope

22 that could channel rain water directly into the toilet location during the raining season. Evidence of some dried flood water was observed around the toilet. Toilet facility had no hand-washing device when it was visited. There was no inscription on how to use the toilet either in the toilet facility. 8.6.4 Spot´s Ground toilet This toilet was met in a deplorable condition. The toilet door was missing and not found in sight (Pic.COP.7), the toilet surroundings were very untidy while the ventilator latch was loose and unsecured to the wall (Pic.COP.8). No dry materials observed in toilet but an empty bucket, whose purpose was unclear. The collection chamber was found almost empty when inspected. The care-taker was not available as at the time of visit. The sanitation expert in charge of the zone explained that the reason behind the door missing, was as a result of heavy wind that removed the door from its position. The door, according to him was placed in safe hands, nearby the toilet, to prevent theft. He claimed that as soon as funding is made available, the door will be repaired. The sanitation expert explained that the toilet has not been in use as a result of the community leader’s delay / prohibition for use. Vandalism according to him was rampant in the neighbourhood. 8.6.5 Zionist Toilet The condition of this toilet was deplorable at the time of visit. The toilet was met unlocked, smelly and completely unhygienic. The only accessible path to the toilet, together with the surroundings of the toilet was full of unmanaged grass / weeds. The WC was found almost full of excreta, filthy with old unpushed excreta to the collection chamber. There were no dry material found inside the toilet and no evidence of it been used after defecation either. Neither instruction of how to use the toilet, nor a hand washing device were observed in the facility. It was difficult to collect further information about the toilet as people met in the homestead shied away from been interviewed. The caretaker of the toilet was not available for interview. The sanitation expert explained that the responsibility of managing the toilet had falling on him in-spite of all efforts, made by him to get the people practically involved in the management and maintenance of the toilet. According to him, he has had no option than to report the case to the community leaders of the area. He regretted that till date, nothing has been done by the community leaders on the issue.

9. Discussion, comments and reflection on objectives question 9.1 Motivation and maintenance. Results emanating from the interviews conducted and the observation made during the transect walk shows clearly that maintenance of toilet facilities in some homesteads together with motivation was lacking both on the part of the stakeholders and the toilet owners as well. Most toilet owners seemed to lack the urge to take responsibilities. Community leaders present an attitude that under-rate the importance of their role in achieving the goals of the project. Stakeholders seemed to take the project, as a secondary responsibility, outside their normal day to day activities. Improving on the current remuneration incentive (if there are), e.g., monetarily or otherwise would boost stakeholders dedication and commitment to the overall goals of the project. The importance of maintenance, management and hygiene promotion roles within the community by all parties involved, must be well understood in order to fulfil project goals. Toilet owners should be made to feel a sense of full ownership in addition to respect and dignity accorded by the sanitation experts to boost the morale of the toilet beneficiaries.’ Project leaders, should also incorporate better social mobilization methods in raising awareness and education of the toilet owners. The present method of verbal instruction, employed by the sanitation experts, lack foundation of a good hygiene-education training. It neglects the people’s opinion as well. There is therefore a need to

23 organize a formal hygiene- awareness workshop that would address the role and importance of cleanliness and diseases prevention to the toilet owners and the community at large. 9.2 Participation, communication and hygienic behavior One of the objectives of the dry sanitation project was to attain a positive behavior change in the community with respect to hygiene and sanitation. In the entire neighborhoods visited by the evaluator during the field trip, it was observed that communication within the project management was weak while outside the confines of the project, it was almost lacking. Most non toilet owners interviewed had little or no knowledge about dry sanitation concept, except for the interest of just having their own toilet. Community leaders must therefore create enough time to hold educative and information-dissemination and information meetings with the community people. This will afford them the opportunity to explain via the sanitation experts, the working principles and advantages of the project to the people. Deliberations in such meetings should be flexible and respect people’s opinions and afford the opportunity of the people to make their voices heard and express their individual opinions. In brief, the community leaders should endeavor to incorporate better participation and empowerment strategies to boost the interest of the people towards fulfilling the objectives of the project. Lack of community participation and inadequate communication strategies by the stakeholders still remain a pending factor to be reviewed. Project overseers from Finland should, as a reinforcing strategy, endeavor to enable the efficiency of the sanitation experts by enabling the input of the Salvation Army and the City council respectively. To do this, there will be a need to better review an understanding of the project dynamics, objective and role playing in a formal meeting with both stakeholders of the project. The impact of this will be enormous and will contribute to improving the project´s implementation strategy. Opinions gathered from the interview, points to the fact that, community meetings with the community leaders and members of the community seem weak at the moment. Efforts should be made, to allow community member to express their criticisms and opinions of the project during such meetings. Such views and criticisms will help the project managers to better improve upon and fulfill the objectives of the project. Some toilet owners felt that they were been used as “project puppet and a testing ground by the white folks”. The evaluator therefore suggest that for better participation among the people, toilet owners should be entrusted with complete sense of ownership and not been targeted or addressed as partakers in project. Opportunities should be created for encouraging toilet owners to participate in their own little way, allowing them to reflect on their own short comings like poor maintenance and experiences (with the new technology compared to old toilet habits) and thereby learn from such in process during educational visitation or meeting. Also, the present one-way information method used by the sanitation experts, in getting health improvement information across to the toilet owners seems to be unsuitable for achieving the desired behavioral change. The evaluator was informed by the sanitation experts that lots of efforts is made to engage the toilet owners in health talks during visitations, but the impact of such information sharing, is not seen or reflected in the attitudes and behaviors of most of the toilet owners. The use of “full control method” by the sanitation expert should be minimized or used to complement responsibility sharing among the toilet owners. 9.3 Gender Disparities None of the interviewees in the six zones reported any particular problem relating to gender disparity in toilet usage except in Maqobolwane, where, Mr. Dlamlendze (One of the toilet owners, but not resident in the homestead) was of the opinion that he would have appreciated that the women tenants in his homestead, were given their own section of the toilet. “Men, according to him are not suppose by culture, to clean after women´s excreta”. He complained that with his age, the responsibility of fetching dry materials and maintaining the toilet in his

24 homestead has become a heavy responsibility. His proposal therefore was to have his toilet converted to a flush-type of toilet. Roles sharing among males and females within the same homestead still carry a deep social- cultural stigma. Women on the most part, were seen primarily responsible for cleaning the toilets. While some women reported that sawdust fetching was a burden, others had the responsibility shared by their children who sometimes help to fetch dry materials for the toilets. 9.4 Vandalism Most toilets visited were in good shape except the meeting point toilet at Corporation with a missing door. The sanitation expert in charge of the zone reported that the said toilet door was blown away by wind during high storm. He said that the door in question was kept in good hands. On the whole, it was observed that, only the community meeting point´s toilets that didn’t have care takers were the ones often prone to abuse by hooligans who, indiscriminately abuse toilet use and sometimes steal toilet materials like toilet handles etc. The community leaders should intensify their effort to addressing the issue of hooligans having devastating effects in breaking, stealing and abusing toilet materials and facilities. 9.5 Disability, old people and Pedestals None but one of the toilets in all the 6 zones had one pedestal. This was the community meeting point toilet at Mntulwini. When asked if there was anything that they would change in community meeting point facilities, aged respondents in some district, thought that pedestal supports would be very practical and helpful in support them to the toilets. No disabled person was interviewed. It is however not clear to the evaluator if the original designs of the toilets built on high grounds were to include pedestals or not. The importance of pedestal especially for the community meeting point centers, cannot be over-emphasized. It will cater for the aged / old people and handicapped people and assist them in using such toilet facilities. Most of the interviewed people including the sanitation experts complained about the absence of such a provision. If one of the criteria’s for selecting beneficiaries is age and disability, then it would make more sense to consider the dignity and independence of this group of people when building toilets especially on high grounds, in the future. 9.6 Hand washing devices None of the visited toilets had soap nor a hand-washing device, except for one in Maqobolwane owned by Mabuza, All the community toilets visited had no hand washing devices nor soap either. Observation showed that the Mabuza´s hand-washing device had neither water nor soap and had a leak. When interviewed, one of the toilet users in the Mabuza´s homestead said they were planning to replace the broken plastic container and that in the mean time, they use other hand washing device which was not visible to the evaluator. The necessity and importance of washing after defecation should be emphasized if one of the objectives of the project is to be fulfilled. The current methods of health talks by the sanitation experts seems to have succeeded in teaching the people, with little chance of their remembering what has been taught. Many of the toilet owners do not apply what they´ve been taught. The evaluator is of the opinion that the people should not only be told / taught what to do during regular visits, but also be given the chance to meet in a formally organized community meeting, where men along side with the women in the most part are allowed to think, discuss and thereafter slowly relate new concept to their own experiences. This will improve application and thereby foster improvement in their hygienic behavior. 9.7 Working Tools and Gargets for the Sanitation experts Sanitation experts are not provided with working tools like screw-drivers, shovels, rakes and bolt openers. Provision of such materials will give them full accessibility to the toilets where they can correct poor maintenance when need be. During the evaluator visit, the sanitation

25 experts complained about direct exposure to possible diseases especially in cases, were toilet owners, think of the maintenance of their toilets as responsibilities of the sanitation experts. Hand gloves should absolutely be provided, to prevent them from direct contact with human excreta. Provision of rakes will be a plus to push and spread heaping excreta into the collection chambers when need be. 9.8 Women Empowerment During the evaluation period, the evaluator had the opportunity to interview various women in different homestead in and around the project areas. Some of the women interviewed were toilet owners while others were non-toilet owners living in the neighborhood. Lack of support, either on domestic affairs or on simple backyard subsistence gardening by the men folk was a problem. In most families, the indigenous women interviewed gave the opinion that fighting against gender violence and alcoholism, were other major phenomenon’s which largely affect the community at large. All women interviewed were between 22 and 46 years of age and have secular knowledge in subsistence farming. They all acknowledged the extreme importance of subsistence farming to their families. Some of the women interviewed said that there has been a remarkable shift from the reliance on self produced food to marketed food. They gave some examples saying that in the Msunduza community, the average annual production of maize has fallen. Much more, foods are now bought from the market, which means that people are now increasingly engaged in non-agricultural activities that bring them money. Nevertheless, some said that cultural heritage of small gardening among the women still remains strong, if only they could have more support and better knowledge of how food crop yield could be improved. Most women still consider themselves as good subsistence farmers and said that crop cultivation still remain their primary livelihood, even if most of their incomes and foods were derived from other sources than farming. But despite the magnitude of these changes, all the women interviewed said that they have been able to maintain a basic level of food security through subsistence gardening around their homestead. The compost from the dry sanitation project, according to them will be of enormous benefit when the time comes. Optimistically, most of the non toilet owners interviewed, said they were aware of the dry sanitation project and expressed their interest in having their own toilets together with the willingness to learn more about the use of compost from the dry toilets as fertilizers in their farms. A woman from the Mntulwini district spoke about how she could grow more vegetables for sales outside her family consumption. Indeed, if properly addressed, the evaluator believed that the indigenous women of Msunduza community could develop a new livelihood strategy, discovering their ability to sustain their various household through better knowledge of farming practices and by learning to use human feaces as compost. The significance of such practice will also be manifested in the lives of their children through improvement in health and reducing malnutrition and mortality rate. In future, many women could organize as groups, forming social enterprise, cooperatives or women organization using the skills learned from the dry sanitation project. The evaluator strongly believed that this will reinforce women self-esteem and above all, rediscover them as potential entrepreneurs.

26

10. Recommendations: The current assessment indicators used by the project is weak because it only measures success of the toilet infrastructures and to a limited extent, the hygienic habits and behaviors of the local people. It does not define community roles, participation in the monitoring process and capabilities in promoting good health. The people should be encouraged more to feel a sense of project ownership. The sanitation action plan and implementation strategies of the project should therefore prioritize, define and enforce the following:

1. Encourage the people to feel and have a sense of ownership. 2. Encourage activities of the project to be more community led than just been

committee driven 3. Toilet inscription signs should be painted boldly on all the meeting point toilets. 4. Hygiene message and direction for toilet usage, should be painted on the toilet walls

(especially the community toilets) instead of the previously laminated ones which could easily be removed or torn apart by children or hooligans in the case of community toilets..

5. Provide pedestal supports in the community meeting point´s toilets to aid the disabled and elderly when using the toilets.

6. Initiate or incorporate a better permanent hand-washing device, to be made possibly with cement; and a rubber hose which would prevent ease of theft by hooligans. The advantage of this would be that it will promote “hand washing” habit especially after toilet use.

7. Plan, develop, or update the map showing location and position of all the toilets till date. The present available map is not current and does not show the location and positions of the newer toilets built after the 2008 evaluation. A copy of such map should also be placed in the recycling center, public library and at the waste information center as well.

8. Define credibly all conflicting and misleading roles, duties and responsibilities of all available positions and offices. Develop also a reward and recognition system to encourage the sanitation experts. Salary increment or building a reward toilet for each of the sanitation experts would be a plus.

9. Promote a better stakeholders dialogue between the community leaders, Salvation Army and the City council. Organize mass discussion meetings, to empower and capacitate all toilet owners for action. Stakeholders in collaboration with the community leaders should also develop local modalities and activities to boost hygiene and sanitation promotion. Community leaders and the stakeholders should endeavor to listen and act upon feedback from sanitation experts. Outcome of meetings, discussions should be acted upon abruptly. Responding quickly to emergent issues and encouraging dialogue would improve communication.

10. The present one-way information flow system from partners in Finland is not sustainable. It has not succeeded in engaging the stakeholders. Presently, The Salvation Army and the City council merely act as receivers and dispatchers of information’s as they receive it from Finland. The evaluator recommend a balanced two-way communication process, where-in beneficiaries (Stakeholders) will not only serve as recipients of information but also function as information providers and managers. This idea would allow for a more meaningful participation especially in the decision making process at various stage of the dry sanitation project cycle. This system would also bring about a deeper sense of ownership among the beneficiaries.

11. Promote better coordination between Salvation Army and the City Council and if possible mobilize local mass media from Mbabane for publicity and awareness. The waste information center and the recycling centers should be equipped with more information and materials about the dry sanitation project. Use of postal’s will be a plus

27

12. Create an enabling framework for community test fields (possibly one for each of the zones) for the use of compost.

13. In future, develop and implement compost collection facility especially from those toilet owners who do not have the possibilities for using the compost for farming.

14. Create a project assistant position to Facilitate and possibly coordinate and report all affairs on a quarterly basis to the City council, Salvation Army and to Finland in general. Strongly recommend the appointment of Mr. Bheki Matambo.

15. For the dry sanitation project to be sustainable, the project leaders should promote and encourage local technological innovations or possibly train and equip local Manson for using local materials to mimic the dry toilet sanitation construction. The present contractor could also be challenged in this field.

16. Encourage transparency in the building cost of the sanitation toilets to the sanitation experts and involve them in partaking actively in monitoring the toilet construction from start to finish, reducing incidence of alleged over-quotation cost in building materials by the contractor and encouraging reuse of left-over’s in other sites.

17. Create and Encourage more learning forums through seminars and workshops to learn from others who are pioneers in similar projects. Possibly from neighboring countries such as Zambia.

18. Strongly recommend that the project should create lists of toilet owners to ease monitoring and keep update of toilet management and activities. Negligence, cleanliness, use of dry materials etc can be recorded and monitored. This will also facilitate evidence for future follow-up and serve as a reference both to the community leaders, visiting project leaders and all the stakeholders as well.

19. In future, toilet beneficiaries should have a voice in decision making and be asked to sign an undertakings of care and full ownership for undertaking cleanliness, caretaking, and complete maintenance. Such undertakings should be witnessed and approved by the community leaders for future reference. Use of penalties, by the community leaders for defaulters could also improve better compliance.

20. In future, the community leaders, sanitation experts together with the Salvation Army and the City council should be actively involved in raising community awareness programs through active mobilization approach like drama, singing and dancing contexts etc.

21. To enforce sustained hygienic behavior, the evaluator strongly recommends continued training and education of the sanitation experts in basic hygiene education. Risk associated with Practical gardening and composting using both urine and composted excreta from the toilets should be well addressed.

22. Community leaders should create forum for sharing ideas, discussions and provide support for self-development during regular community meetings. A clear line between benefit and responsibilities should be drawn before toilets are giving to beneficiaries. Use of posters to present all the needed information about the dry sanitation project should also be encouraged, so that the community people would better understand the project cycle, objectives and processes.

23. Stakeholders and the sanitation experts should live by examples by having their own toilets as well.

24. To promote behavioral change, the dry sanitation project should re-examine its present strategy and promote the use of better participatory techniques. Women should be included more in promoting activities of the project. More-so, in order to facilitate capacity building of the project, present excessive dependence on external support and technical assistance from Finland, should be gradually dissuaded. Instead, more hands should be on deck in training and teaching local skills in building / construction the dry sanitation toilet using local materials.

25. This evaluation report together with the report of the previous evaluation should be disseminated widely e.g., in the public library and in the waste recycling center.

28

11. Concluding remark The majority of the toilets inspected during the evaluation visit, did not have any kind of hand washing device or soap in them. Hand washing should be promoted along side with toilet construction to prevent possible health-related diseases like diarrhea, pneumonia etc. Better hand-washing device should be adopted. Over-emphasis on toilet infrastructure should be minimal. Improvement of toilet infrastructures alone will not be sufficient for ensuring the adoption of safe hygienic practices among the people of Msunduza. To promote the adaptation of a safe hygienic practice among the toilet beneficiaries, an integrated, holistic and inclusive program should be implemented. Such program should incorporate the social and economic well being of the people together with the collaboration and cooperation of the Salvation Army and the City Council. Above all, the entire community should also be actively involved. Inadequate information and proper sanitation awareness were also seen as a major issue to toilet use in some homesteads and community meeting point toilets. The evaluator believes that this shortcoming was, as a result of the criterion used in selecting beneficiaries by the community leaders. Most toilet owners view the issue of ownership as a testing ground for the project supervisors. On this ground, some toilet beneficiaries believed that the sanitation experts should also be made responsible for maintaining the toilet. The evaluator believes that improved coordination and communication between the Salvation Army and the City council could optimize toilet usage, which could therefore lead to a better sanitation promotion and consequently to adaptation of a better safe hygienic practices among the people. Over-emphasis of toilets as individual rights and benefits should be shifted to that of a community right and responsibility. Bold TOILET inscriptions should be printed on all the walls of the community meeting point’s and sport ground´s toilets so that the public would know and recognize the purpose of the facilities. In order to make the project more sustainable in the future, the evaluator recommends that the project should be more community led and not committee led. The people of Msunduza should be actively involved and be the players. The community leaders should be encouraged to have direct access also to the City council and the MP´s when need-be. With the current high cost of building the dry sanitation toilet, most interviewed people feared that the project will not be sustainable after completion. The evaluator suggest therefore that, the people of the community should also, be given adequate technological training. Research and development on local materials use, should be promoted. The capacity building phase of the project should encourage Private entrepreneurs in partaking in the dry sanitation toilets venture. The institutional structure and division of task among the decision makers of the project still remains ambiguously unclear. Reform is needed in the way the local offices are organized. The task of setting out clear roles and divisions between the functions of stakeholders, with mechanisms for coordination and information-sharing between them, should be an essential basis for re-energizing the project in the future. For the Dry sanitation project to be more efficient, the evaluator strongly believes that it must be adequately institutionalized at all level of the project management. All the key players must understand the working principles, objectives and benefit of the project and the importance of their roles to achieving these objectives. Work load of the sanitation experts, in toilet management, supervision, and maintenance would be less, if a better participatory method of toilet owners is employed. Most of the toilet owners do not care enough about managing their toilets. Community leaders and the sanitation experts should establish a form of protocol to determine and identify who should be given the toilet. Strict compliance indicators like penalties for failures caused by toilet mismanagement should be put in place by the community leaders, to address negligence and therefore measure success and deviations among toilet owners. Although the local people respect the position of the community leaders, more time and efforts, should be geared and directed at gaining local community people´s trust and building common vision of overall goals. Organizing a few community meetings without active involvement and dialogue of the people is not sufficient. Institutionalizing participatory project management at local level,

29 would require that the people of Msunduza will need to be trusted and empowered. To do this effectively, the current top-down decision-making method should be reversed. A more flexible, horizontal flow of information method should be employed instead. This will require the institutionalization of participatory methods of the city council, the community leaders, the Salvation Army and the sanitation experts in a multi-stakeholder approach platform. Communication need to be improved between the key players in Msunduza and partners in Finland. Creating a project assistant position, to act as an information receiving and dissipation channel between all parties involved in the project will be an advantage. Friction from top to bottom among the decision makers will also be reduced to the barest minimum. The dry sanitation toilet will be highly sustainable if the cost of the present ever increasing demand of the dry sanitation toilet by the community people is subsidized in future by the district City council and not solely by the sponsors from Finland.

30

12. Tables Table 1

MAQOBOLWANE ZONE (MAQ)

TYPE OF TOILET

TOILET OWNER

NO. OF USERS STATE OF TOILET REC. FOR REPAIRS PICTURAL VIEW

Dry Dlamlendze Not in use Clean, No smell, No flies

Change concrete slab to metal slab. Place direction for toilet use

MAQ.3; MAQ.4, MAQ.5

Dry Mabuza 4 Relatively clean no smell. Improvised

Hand washing device present

Fix the edge between the collection chamber and the main toilet building to prevent seepage of rain water into the collection chamber, Fix crack on the wall.

Place direction for toilet use, Fill hand washing device with water always

MAQ.6: MAQ.7: MAQ.8

Dry Magongo 7 Clean, no smell. Difficult to ascertain

cleanliness and management of the

collection chamber due to unopened heavy

concrete slab covers

Fix ventilator, replace concrete slab with easy to open-type of cover, replace hand washing device, construct urine collection device / chamber. Place direction for

toilet use

-

Dry Meeting Point Not Known yet Newly Built, Clean inscribe outside wall with “TOILET” sign, Place Andy-handy, Place direction for toilet use, replace

stolen door handle, connect urine separator with hose and place a urine collection can.

-

Dry Kumente 10 Clean, no smell or flies Install the other toilet seater, place hand-washing device and a direction of how to use the toilet

Dry Gama “12” but not in use Clean, no smell and flies, no direction for

use

Fix water seepage through the walls of the collecting chamber, check and reconnect the municipal water pipe

close to the toilet. Place direction for toilet use

MAQ.1: MAQ.2

Dry Spot Ground Not available Clean exterior, but stae of interior could not be

determined

Caretaker to be present at all times especially during game activities

-

31

Table 1 continues

MNCITSINI ZONE (MCT)

TYPE OF TOILET TOILET OWNER NO. OF USERS STATE OF TOILET REC. FOR REPAIRS PICTURAL VIEW Dry Gogo Mncina New, yet to be

assertained New, clean Fix damaged stairs, place urine collection can and

instruction of how to use the toilet., construct a by-pass channel to redirect erosion water in advent of rain.

MTC.1; MTC.2; MTC.3A, MTC.3B;

Enviro-Loo Jenny DLamini 4-5 Clean Cut-off obstructing tree branches. MTC.4; MTC.5 Meeting Point Not Available Clean but bushy

surroundings inscribe outside wall with “TOILET” sign, Place Andy-handy, place handwashing device, cut the surrounding bushes, place and connect the urine separator to a collection can, give spare key to the sanitation expert

MTC.6; MTC.7

Enviro-Loo Granny Mnisi 4-5 Dirty, Untidy, smell Repair winding Hatch delivery system, replace broken cover of the collection chamber

MTC.8; MTC.9

MNCOZINI ZONE (MNC)

TYPE OF TOILET TOILET OWNER

NO. OF USERS STATE OF TOILET REC. FOR REPAIRS PICTURAL VIEW

Enviro-Loo Samuel Dupe 6 Clean, no flies, no smell. Well kept

Secure collection lid with better screws to prevent rain water entering the chamber and also prevent children

assess.

MNC.1, MNC.2

Enviro-Loo Phumzile 8 Clean, well kept and dry materials well

used. Toilet is almost full.

Secure collection lid with better screws to prevent rain water entering the chamber and also prevent children

assess. Possibly replace broken latch cover.

MNC.3, MNC.4

Enviro-Loo Josephine Ngubeni

6 Clean and well kept, No flies and smell

- MNC.5, MNC.6

Dry Meeting Point Not available Clean, NOT IN USE! Inscribe outside wall with “TOILET” sign, Place Andy-handy, check Door Hinges or possibly replace.

MNC.7

32

Table 1 continues

MNTULWINI ZONE (MNT)

TYPE OF TOILET TOILET OWNER

NO. OF USERS STATE OF TOILET REC. FOR REPAIRS PICTURAL VIEW

Dry Meeting Point Not accertained Relatively clean inscribe outside wall with “TOILET” sign, Place Andy-handy, replace missing urine connecting hose,

cover urine collector with cap, clear and maintain surrounding weeds around the toilet

MNT.1, MNT.2

Dry Recycling center Not acertained Very Clean inscribe outside wall with “TOILET” sign, Place Andy-handy device for hand washing.

-

GHOBOLO ZONE (GH)

TYPE OF TOILET TOILET OWNER

NO. OF USERS STATE OF TOILET REC. FOR REPAIRS PICTURAL VIEW

Dry David Ghinidza 6 New toilet, clean, no smell or flies, some

water inside toilet floor - from rain / wind

place Andy-handy, cover toilet ventilator on wall with plastic to prevent rain from coming into the toilet

GH.2

Dry Dumi Sani 6 New toilet, Clean , no smell or flies

Place andy handy GH.3

Dry Nicholas Dlamini 9 New toilet, Clean no smell or flies

place andy handy GH.1

Dry Community toilet Unknown Clean, wooden door in good condition, lock

broken, No urine collector, Lots of

rubbish dumped around toilet, No toilet

instruction

clear surroundings of rubbish, replace lock, place toilet instruction for direction on usage, paint and inscribe

outside wall with “TOILET” sign, Place Andy-handy, Installation of pedestals would be a plus

GH.4

33

Table 1 continues

CORPORATION ZONE (COP)

TYPE OF TOILET TOILET OWNER

NO. OF USERS STATE OF TOILET REC. FOR REPAIRS PICTURAL VIEW

Enviro-Loo Diana 9 Clean, quite full, need to use more dry

materials, no smell or flies

Cut some surrounding trees in sunlight direction, clear air inlets to collection chamber to allow oxygen to

chamber, Mix waste in the collection chamber, place Andy-handy

COP.1, COP.2, COP.3, COP.4

Enviro-Loo Jabulile Maphalala

13 Some smell / flies. Clean but need regular pushing of excreta to

chamber

Channel flood water to by-pass toilet, secure chamber with better screws to prevent rain accessibility to

chamber and children playing with the cover. Place Andy-handy

COP.5, COP.6

Enviro-Loo Spot´s Ground unknown Clean, door missing, chamber quite empty (As a result of usage

delayed by community leaders), Bucket inside toilet! (not sure why its there), Ventilator cover

too open, No flies or smell

Replace toilet door, reduce the opening of ventilator cover, and clear the toilet surroundings. inscribe

outside wall with “TOILET” sign, Place Andy-handy

COP.7, COP.8

Enviro-Loo Zionist Church unknown Messy, smelly, dirty and filthy

Replace key, clear surrounding grass for easy accessibility, teach more on the use of sawdust / dry

material after toilet use

-

Enviro-Loo Matambo 4-5 Clean, no smell or flies Place Andy-handy -

Other toilets Unvisited: Community primary school (2 toilets)

34 Table 2

SANITATION EXPERTS

NAME AND YEAR. APPOINTED

ZONE TOTAL NO. OF TOILETS

MR. NLODVU (2005) MR. FREEDOM (2009)

CORPORATION 5

MR. MOHAMMED (2007)

MAQOBOLWANE 7

MS. GEORGINA (2008) MS. PHINDILE (2005)

MNCOZINI 5

MS. PHINDILE (2005) MNTULWINI 1 MRS FUTHI (2004) MNTULWINI 1

(RECYCLING CENTER) MRS. FUTHI (2004)

MR. SIBUSISO (2007) MNCITSINI 4

MR. MLUNGISI (2010) GHOBOLO 4

27

35

13. References:

1. Robert Neuwirth: Shadow Cities, New York, 2006, Routledge

2. Task Force on Water and Sanitation (2005) Health, Dignity and

Development: What will it take? Stockholm International Water Institutre

and UN Millenium project, New York.

3. Mike Davis: Planet of Slums, London, New York 2006

4. World Mortality Report, 2005

5. www.un.org/millenniumgoals

6. www.unhabitat.org

7. Swaziland Business year book / commercial guide 2011

8. http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/evaluation/methodology/egeval/index_en.htm

9. Msunduza Dry Sanitation project evaluation plan 2009-2011

10. Dry Sanitation Application document submitted to the Ministry of Foreign

Affairs (MFA) Finland

11. www.ecosan.at

12. Fritsch, Al; Gallimore, Paul. Healing Appalachia : Sustainable Living through Appropriate Technology. Lexington, KY, USA: University Press of Kentucky, 2007. p 340.

13. Leena Akatama 2008: http://julkaisut.turkuamk.fi/isbn9789522160782.pdf; p 30

36

Annex 1

FINAL EVALUATION FOR THE PHASE TWO OF MSUNDUZA DRY SANITATION PROJECT

Preliminary programme , 1st of December until 14th of December 2011.

Date

Programme/meeting

Thu, the 1st Arrival and checking in Meeting Tuomas, Anniina and Jonna Preparation for the evaluation

Fri, the 2nd A visit to the City Council to meet Ellen (Senior Health Inspector) 10 am Community walk: Gobholo GLM Swaziland’s fund raising at the Msunduza Community Hall

Sat, the 3rd Community walk: Maqobolwane and Sports ground

Sun, the 4th Meeting the Central Committee and the MP, visiting the toilet in Mntulwini Community walk: Mncitsini and the Mncitsini Youth’s garden

Mon, the 5th Workshop in Matambo’s garden Community walk: Corporation

Tue, the 6th Workshop with the Sanitation Experts

Wed, the 7th Visit to the University? Touring the toilets with the Cpt Waste Information Center Reuse group at the WRC

Thu, the 8th Community walk: Msunduza Primary and the Community Recycling Center

Fri, the 9th Meeting Ellen at the City Council Meeting Cpt Nhlanhla at the Salvation Army

Sat, the 10th Interviewing people of the Community or Community walk: Mncozini Writing the report

Sun, the 11th Community walk: Mncozini Writing the report

Mon, the 12th Interviewing people of the Community/City Council

Tue, the 13th Visiting Salvation Army Farewell at the Sanitation Experts’ meeting

Wed, the 14th Farewell at the City Council Departure for Finland

37

Annex 2

Msunduza Dry Sanitation project Evaluation 2011 Salvation Army

1. What is your position with the Salvation Army 2. How did your office become involved with the dry sanitation project?

- what was your understanding of the goals of the project - In your own opinion, how has the project leaders approach aligned with

these goals? 3. Has your office had any role in the dry sanitation experts training programs?

- In your own opinion, did the trainees, i.e. dry sanitation experts have the right background?

- Would you have liked to have trainees with different background? 4. Has your office helped develop criteria’s for selecting beneficiaries, site

selection, monitoring, construction and supervision of the dry sanitation project? - if so, please describe your role in the planning - if not, would you have liked to be more involved in the planning, site

location, choice of beneficiaries etc? 5. Has your office organized or participated in any training workshop / seminars?

- If yes, for what group, please explain the purpose? - If no, why was it not necessary?

6. Do you think the Sanitation experts are now better informed about sanitation concept. How would you evaluate their performance now as against 2008?

7. As an NGO and a humanitarian organization, what, do you think is the role of the Salvation Army in improving toilet sanitation in Msunduza? - How in your opinion has the dry sanitation project help in this role? - What in your opinion is the most useful role of your office in the dry

sanitation project in Msunduza? - What, do you think is missing from the dry sanitation implementation

project and how would you correct such if you will. 8. How has participating in the dry sanitation project changed your approach to

toilet sanitation? Please explain. 9. How has the conflicting role of the sanitation experts supervision between the

salvation Army and that of the visiting students from Finland been settled? 10. Has the Salvation Army`s ideas / concepts/advices been incorporated into the

project? please give examples 11. What else would you suggest that could improve the dry sanitation project? 12. What in your opinion was the most significant contribution of the dry toilet

sanitation to Msunduza 13. From your perspective, what will be the most difficult challenge(s) and limiting

factor of the dry sanitation project to overcome after completion? 14. What changes would you make to the dry toilet sanitation project if it is to continue?

Thank you for your attention.

38 Annex 3 Msunduza Dry Sanitation project Evaluation 2011

City Council

1. What is your position with the city council 2. How did your office become involved with the dry sanitation project?

- what was your understanding of the goals of the project - In your own opinion, how has the project leaders approach aligned with these

goals? 3. Has your office had any role in the dry sanitation experts training programs?

- In your own opinion, did the trainees, i.e. dry sanitation experts have the right background?

- Would you have liked to have trainees with different background? 4. Has your office helped develop criteria’s for site selection, construction and

supervision of the dry sanitation project? - if so, please describe your role in the planning - if not, would you have liked to be more involved in the planning, and site

location? 5. Has your office organized or participated in any training workshop / seminars?

- If yes, please explain the purpose? - If no, why was it not necessary?

6. In view of the complaint made in 2008 regarding the city council been left out of the dry project organization, do you think much has changed in terms of involving your office in project implementation?

7. What is the role of the city council in improving toilet sanitation in Msunduza? - How in your opinion has the dry sanitation project help in this role? - What in your opinion is the most useful role of the dry sanitation project in

Msunduza? - What, do you think is missing from the dry sanitation implementation project

and how would you correct such if you will. 8. With reference to the toilet built in Magobolwane in 2008 that was not officially

approved by the dept., of Environmental Health of the city council due to some conflicting issues with the toilet plan, the 2008 evaluation team suggested a lack of communication btw the city council and the Salvation Army. Do you think the issue of communication has been improved? please explain

9. Has the city council ideas / concepts/advices been incorporated into the project? please give examples

10. What else would you suggest that could improve the dry sanitation project? 11. What in your opinion was the most significant contribution of the dry toilet

sanitation to Msunduza 12. From your perspective, what will be the most difficult challenge(s) and limiting

factor of the dry sanitation project to overcome after completion? 13. What changes would you make to the dry toilet sanitation project if it is to

continue?

Thank you for your attention.

39

Annex 4

Homestead and community toilet caretaker´s questionnaire

1. Do you use the toilet?

2. How often do you use the toilet?

3. How many people live in the homestead?

4. How many people use the toilet on the average?

5. Who does the cleaning of the toilet and the fetching of dry materials?

6. How often does the Sanitation expert visit?

7. How much do you know about the importance of cleanliness, proper toilet usage and other hygienic matters?

8. How do you receive health –related information about hygiene?

9. How much do you know about composting?

10. What plans do you have for using the compost from your toilet?

11. Do you have a land / farm where the compost can be used?

12. Are you happy and satisfied with the toilet?

13. What would you like improved on the toilet, should the project continues?

40 Annex 5

SWOT

Strength Weakness • The Sanitation Experts • Diverse possibilities of dry

sanitation (water, hygiene, food, phosphorus source.)

• Good network (e.g. university, city council, community leaders, the people)

• Gained experiences • Skillful and experienced Cooperator,

Huussi • Students education and capacity

building of not only the locals, but all stakeholders

• Positive attitude to anything from Finland

• Sanitation experts are eager and willing to learn

• Project has given chance for citizen participation

• Sanitation experts campaign has brought certain amount of awareness regarding sanitation

• Good partnership • Strong supervision and monitoring • Local manpower used in project • Local skill transfer • Community points toilets serves the

needs of floating population in the community

• Salvation Army working for the course of health promotion for the community

• Bureaucracy • Temporary settlement of Msunduza-

> commitment challenges • Lack of space in Msunduza for

toilets and gardens • High expenses of the toilets • Too little practical involvement of

municipal authorities • Experts work has been concentrating

too much on toilet owners • Communication between community

members, community leaders, city council, Salvation Army, Finland, experts

• Roles and responsibilities unclear • Absence of criteria to identify

priority actions to be carried out in each zone

• Coordinating committees are not performing well and need to improve

• No standard indicator in place to measure behavioral change

• Poor involvement of the University in project

• Absence of criteria to identify priority actions to be conducted in each of the 6 zones

• Key stakeholders are not attending coordination meetings and workshops

• Stakeholders work in isolation • Poor community participation in

decision making process and in the selection of toilet beneficiaries

• Limited budget for toilet construction

• lack of resources for all • Lack of technical working tools • lack of space is a constrain to

compost usage • A large number of community toilets

are either unused or not used at all

41

Opportunities Threat

• Decreased stigma • Improved communication • New, more committed local

coordinator • Field Assistant for the Third phase-

> improved communication, quicker implementation of practical matters, available for the Experts more

• Lots of space in corporation for farming

• Matambo´s enthusiasm and knowledge

• Rehabilitation of existing meeting point toilets

• Increase number of toilets would bring down the instance of open defecation among non-toilet owners

• Behavioral change campaigns can bring change in attitude s of some present toilet owners

• Sanitation experts are more willing to participate in any sort of campaign to address awareness and attitude change

• Capacity of partners • Opportunity of humanitarian work

for the poor

• Commitment after funding ends • Personal conflicts • Hierarchy • Lack of time resources for effective

results • Project (and toilet)ownership • Vandalism • Other short-term priorities of the

locals (poverty, school fees, food, diseases..)

• Western lifestyle more appreciated e.g. flushing toilets

• People are not sure where the money goes

• people are unsure if they will be allowed to have outdoor toilet after some years

• Cultural and social stigma connected with compost use

• High expectation from community • mistrust of Salvation Army if the

toilet model does not completely cater for the toilet needs of the community

42

Annex 6

43

Annex 7 Corporation Zone (COP)

Cop.1 Diana´s toilet showing tidiness and dry sawdust material bag

Cop. 2 Diana´s toilet showing instructional materials for toilet usage on toilet wall

44

Cop.3. Diana´s toilet showing collection chamber almost full and ready for secondary

composting

COP.4 Diana´s toilet showing drums to be used for secondary composting

45

COP.5 Jabulle Maphalalla´s toilet showing high application of sawdust material to

control wetness as a result of influx of rain water

46

COP.6 Jabulle Maphalalla´s toilet showing excreta been pushed down from the WC

seater to the collection chamber

47

COP.7 Spots ground toilet at corporation showing missing door and unmanaged

surroundings full of grasses

48

COP.8 Spot´s ground toilet at corporation showing loose ventilator holder from

wall

49

Ghobolo Zone (GH)

GH.1 Mr. Nicholas Dlamini and his toilet

50

GH.2 Mr. David Ghinidza and his toilet

51

GH.3 Dumi Sani´s toilet

GH.4 Community meeting point toilet at Ghobolo. No pedestals, No hand washing

device, urine separator and collector not connected

52

MNCOTZINI ZONE (MNC)

MNC.1 Dube´s toilet showing signs of erosion and laminated direction for toilet use

MNC.2 Dube´s homestead showing large parcel of land been prepared for farming.

53

MNC.3 Phumzile´s toilet showing unsecured collection chamber lid

54

MNC.4 Phumzile´s toilet showing proper usage of dry saw dust material

55

MNC.5 Josephina Ngubeni´s toilet (Clean and well kept)

MNC.6 Josephina Ngubeni´s toilet (Collection Chamber with Direct access to sunlight)

56

MNC.7 Newly completed Community meeting point toilet at Mncotzini

57

MAQOBOLWANE ZONE (MAQ)

MAQ.1 Gama´s toilet (old type, dry sanitation toilet)

MAQ.2 Gama´s toilet showing poor urine hose link etc.

58

MAQ.3 Dlamledze toilet (Old type dry sanitation toilet)

MAQ.4 Dlamledze toilet (Some gardening)

59

MAQ.5 Dlamledze toilet (old collection chamber type with heavy concrete slabs)

MAQ.6 Mabuza toilet (Toilet showing signs of failure on the wall)

60

MAQ.7 Mabuza toilet (Toilet showing wooding slab covered with slim metal sheet)

MAQ.8 Mabuza toilet (Toilet showing hand washing device)

61

MNCITSINI ZONE (MCT)

MTC.1 Gogo Macina´s toilet (Erosion channel from adjacent uphill)

62

MTC.2 Gogo Macina´s toilet (yet to be fitted with urine collection hose and container)

MTC.3A Gogo Macina´s toilet (Broken stairways)

63

MTC.3B Gogo Macina´s toilet (Collection chamber´s doors yet to be installed)

MTC.4 Dlamini´s toilet and her toilet (Well kept and clean)

64

MTC.5 Dlamini´s toilet (Sanitation expert cleaning the air inlet of the collection chamber)

65

MTC.6 Meeting point toilet Mncitsini (Dry sanitation toilet on high stairways without

pedestals)

66

MTC.7 Meeting point toilet Mncitsini (No urine collection container, urine hose not

connected and high presence of grass)

67

MTC.8 Granny Mnis toilet (Winding lever mechanism, Highly littered and unhygienic, No

keys)

68

MTC.9 Granny Mnis toilet (Broken chamber cover. Access to rain water during rain fall)

69

MNTULWINI ZONE (MNT)

MNT.1 Meeting point toilet Mntulwini (Wall plastering wearing away)

MNT.2 Meeting point toilet Mntulwini (Urine Collection hose and container cover missing)

70

YOUTH GARDEN (YG)

YG.1 Youth Farm Mncitsinii ( Disused and abandoned)

YG.2 Youth Farm Mncitsinii ( Poor location downhill prone to high flooding during rainfall)

71

WORKSHOP 1 (MATAMBO´S GARDEN MG)

MG.1 Matambo´s farm located in the corporation zone of Msunduza showing varieties

of crops

MG.2 Mr. Matambo giving tutorials to the Sanitation experts during the farm walk

72

MG.3 Mr. Matambo´s giving lecture on composting to the Sanitation experts

73

WORKSHOP 2. TOKHOZA RESORT (TK)

TK.1 Sanitation experts during a lecture section

TK.2 Sanitation experts after a long day!