Water, Sanitation & Hygiene Related KABP Assessment in West Bengal

1

KABP Study of SPADE

Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related KABP Assessment of Kandi Blockof Murshidabad in West Bengal

Designed,Conducted & Reported by

Anubrata Datta

SPADE52, Garfa Main Road, KolkataPh : 033-24186171, Fax : 033 24185452email : [email protected]

KABP Study of SPADE

2

3

KABP Study of SPADE

Calcutta Society for Professional Action in Development or in short, SPADE was established in 1994 initially, as a Techno – Managerial Support Unit that would provide support services to other agencies like NGOs and Government Departments. During 1994 to 2000, SPADE had conducted a large number of Studies and Research for clients like Oxfam, Action Aid, UNICEF – Kolkata, UNDP, CARITAS - Germany, NABARD Regional Office – Kolkata, CARE - West Bengal, Irrigation and Waterways Department - Government of West Bengal, Panchayat & Rural Development Department – Government of West Bengal, Women Development Undertaking - Government of West Bengal, Gana Unnayan Parishad – Kolkata, etc. to name a few. Gradually, SPADE has shifted its focus on Women Empowerment and Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction and overtime emerged as a leading Capacity Building Institution. SPADE’s intervention in the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related issues is relatively new. Since July, 2010 SPADE has initiated these activities in association with Water For People – India and has already adopted some innovative strategies to promote Water and Sanitation infrastructure in Kandi Block of Murshidabad district of West Bengal. The present KABP Report is also a part of that Project.

KABP Studies are usually conducted to have a better understanding about the target community and the same is true in case of the present study also. Murshidabad is one of the backward-most districts of West Bengal and lack of sources for pure drinking water, open space defecation, unhygienic habits, etc. are rampant in the area. Thus, the present study has been conducted with the objective of assessing and summarizing the present status of WASH related awareness among the community members within the project area and also to conduct a comparison among the different Gram Panchayats and a Municipal Area so as to formulate some area-specific strategies for implementing the WASH Project. The KABP Study, basically being a pilot one, had been conducted using KABP Scales which were constructed on the basis of interactions with the community members.

On behalf of the KABP Research Team of SPADE, I would like to express our profound gratitude in black and white to Water For People – India for providing the opportunity to conduct such an important study. Particularly, Niladri Chakraborti and Swagato Mitra had provided the necessary technical inputs whenever we asked for. We are grateful to them. The Self Help Group members of Kandi Jibdharpara Mahila Unnyan Samity had conducted the field level survey and we are thankful to them. Also, we are thankful to those who have participated in the study and shared information with the Research Team. Finally, Anubrata Datta, Madhabi Hazra, Suraj Datta, Sandip Mukhopadhyay, Uddalak Bhattacharya and Dr. Dipak Bara Panda worked very hard to complete this report and I am appreciating their contributions.

Baidyanath PaulGeneral Secretary

Acknowledgement

KABP Study of SPADE

4

Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related KABP Assessment of Kandi Block of Murshidabad in West Bengal

Kandi Block in Murshidabad District

Murshidabad District in West Bengal

5

KABP Study of SPADE

AcknowledgementIntroduction 9 (a) KABP Study on Water and Sanitation (b) Objectives of the Present KABP StudyChapter – 1 : Research Methodology 11 (a) Review of Literature and Expert Opinion (i) Literature review (ii) Expert opinion (b) Partnership (c) Team Structure (d) Capacity Building of the KABP Study Team (i) Training for the Surveyors (ii) Training for the Facilitators (e) Sample Size: Basis of Sample Selection (f) Allocation of households per Ward or Village (g) Selection of Households within a Village or Ward (h) Sources of Secondary Data (i) Reliability of Estimates (j) Research Design and Approach (i) KABP Assessment Scale for individuals (ii) Household level Questionnaire (k) Field Survey (l) Monitoring Quality of Data (m) Time LineChapter – II : Scale Development Methodology 18 (a) Introduction. (b) Operational Definitions (c) Method adopted for Measuring KABP (d) Scale Development (i) Knowledge (ii) Attitude (iii) Behavior (iv) Practice

Contents

KABP Study of SPADE

6

(e) Reliability of the Measures (f) A Comparison of the Scale CharacteristicsChapter – III : Gram Panchayat – wise Findings 25Chapter – IV : Inter Region Comparison 101Chapter – V : KABP Analysis and Interpretation 115 (a) Gender-wise comparison KABP Scores (b) Economic Status–wise comparison of KABP Scores (c) Age category–wise comparison of KABP Scores (d) Caste category–wise comparison of KABP Scores (e) Educational level–wise comparison of KABP Scores (f) Family size–wise comparison of KABP Scores (g) Head of the Family–wise comparison of KABP Scores (h) Occupation – wise comparison of KABP Score (i) Type of Home – wise comparison of KABP Score (j) A comparison of KABP Scores between those who have Cell Phones and who don’t (k) A comparison of KABP Scores between respondents from households having electricity connections and those who don’t have (l) A comparison of KABP Scores between respondents who have toilet at their home and those who don’t (m) A comparison of those who have bathroom at their home and those who don’t have Source of Drinking Water – wise comparison of KABP Scores (n) A comparison of KABP Scores among households having drainage systems and those who don’t (o) A comparison of KABP Scores among those who suffered from WBD and those who don’t (p) A comparison of KABP Scores among those who purify water and those who don’t. (q) A comparison of KABP Scores among those who are satisfied with the quality of water they get and who are not (r) Geographical area-wise comparison of KABP Scores (s) KABP Score-wise Distribution of Villages or WardsBibliography 124Annexure : 1 Village or Ward-wise Breakup of KABP Scores 129Annexure : 2 KABP Questionnaire 125

7

KABP Study of SPADE

KABP Study of SPADE

8

KABP Study of SPADE

9

Introduction KABP Study or survey, according to West Bengal State AIDS Prevention and Control Society, is at the heart of knowing the target audience. It stands for knowledge or skills that the target audience have about program specific topics, attitudes i.e. what does the target audience feel about, beliefs i.e. what does the target audience believe about a program activity such as - condoms, practices i.e. what are the behavioral display of the target audience. (www.wbhealth.gov.in /wbsapcs/inner1.asp?). KABP Studies are widely used to gather information

for planning public health programs, particularly in the field of HIV/AIDS, Malaria, etc. in many countries.

There is increasing recognition within the international aid community that improving the health of poor people across the world depends upon adequate understanding of the socio-cultural and economic aspects of the context in which public health programs are being implemented. Such information has typically been gathered through various types of cross-sectional surveys, the most popular and widely used method being the knowledge, attitude, behavior and practice (KABP) survey (Green 2001, Hausmann-Muela et al. 2003, Manderson and Aaby 1992, Nichter

2008:6-7). The KABP methodology was first used in the field of family planning and population studies in the 1950s. KABP surveys were designed to measure the extent to which an obvious hostility to the idea and organization of family planning existed among different populations, and to provide information on the knowledge, attitudes, behavior and practices in family planning that could be used for programme purposes around the world (Cleland 1973, Ratcliffe 1976). In the 1960s and 1970s, KABP surveys began to be utilized for understanding family planning perspectives in Africa (Schopper et al. 1993). Around the same time, the amount of studies on community perspectives and human behavior grew rapidly in response to the needs of the primary health care approach adopted by international aid organizations. Hence KABP surveys established their place among the methodologies used to investigate health behavior, and today they continue to be widely used to gain information on health-seeking practices (Hausmann-Muela et al. 2003, Manderson and Aaby 1992). In a study of Disability, locus of control and HIV and AIDS prevention and control, Calvin Gwandure used the WHO AIDS KABP Questionnaire to measure HIV and AIDS risk behaviors of the participants. The KABP methodology is widely used in Africa and elsewhere to measure risk HIV and AIDS behaviors (International Organization for Migration, 2004; Peltzer, 2005; Peltzer, Nzewi, & Mohan, 2004; Pettifor, Rees, & Hlongwa, 2004; Simbayi, Chauveau, & Shisana, 2004; Shisana & Simbayi, 2002).

The attractiveness of KABP surveys is attributable to characteristics such as an easy design, quantifiable data, ease of interpretation and concise presentation of results, generalizability of small sample results to a wider population, cross-cultural comparability, speed of implementation, and the ease with which one can train numerators (Bhattacharyya 1997, Stone and Campbell 1984).

KABP Study of SPADE

10

(a) KABP Study on Water and Sanitation KABP Studies a valid and reliable method of knowing more about the target community. It stands for knowledge, i. e., what the target audience knows about Water and Sanitation related issues, attitudes i.e. what does the target audience feel about the Water and Sanitation related issues, beliefs i.e. what does the target audience believe to be true in relation to Water and Sanitation and practices i.e. what are the exhibited or displayed behavior of the target audience in relation to Water and widely used method of data collection since they provide credible information on the general population, their knowledge, attitude, beliefs and practices. These population-based surveys are also important advocacy tool as valid evidences can be produced through KABP studies.

The present KABP study shall seek to explore the Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior and

Practices of the community in relation to Water use and Sanitation practices. The study shall cover 2.5% of the population in and around the project area. The study shall be conducted using a structured and pre-tested questionnaire that shall be developed through consulting experts of the WASH Sector. The questionnaire shall be administered through personal interview with the respondents. The study shall not only spell out the present state of Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior and Practices but shall also contribute a lot in designing context-specific IECs and strategies for implementation of the project in a more effective manner.

(b) Objectives of the Present KABP Study The objectives of the KABP assessment shall be as follows:

• To identify, critically assess and summarize the present status of WASH related awareness among the community members within the project area.

• To conduct a comparison among the different Gram Panchayats and Villages so as to formulate area-specific strategies for implementing the WASH Project.

• To identify the informational gaps and needs in the area of WASH related awareness amongst the rural women so as to design an effective promotional campaign.

• To formulate the communication matrix fixing the exact message to be conveyed by the project staff considering the socio-economic and cultural situation prevailing in the project area.

• To identify the misconceptions regarding WASH related issues of the village community. • To suggest an evaluative and analytical research framework needed to determine the impact of WASH

related interventions and to explore alternative and effective ways for: o message design, packaging, dissemination and feedback. o the identification of issues/research needs. o the suggested framework based on the finding. o identification of potential research partners. o recommendations for the development of local level research initiative.

KABP Study of SPADE

11

Chapter – 1 : Research Methodology This study shall basically be a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methodologies and this approach shall be adopted for exploring the appropriate activities and programs for the literate or just-literate community members. A questionnaire shall be constructed for collecting information directly from the households. Also, for collecting Village and Gram Panchayat level information, two different sets of questionnaires shall be designed. The KABP Scale shall be constructed in Bengali using very simple languages so that the target community could understand it clearly. The KABP Scale shall have four components or factors, Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior and Practice relating to WASH.

(a) Review of Literature and Expert Opinion

Before initiating the present KABP Study, the research team of SPADE had reviewed the available literature relating to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene issues. The team also consulted with few seasoned professionals associated with Water For People – India who have both - a lengthy field-level experience as well as knowledge in the field of water, sanitation and hygiene. They have prescribed some invaluable suggestion and advice which had been incorporated in the study.

(i) Literature Review

The literature review in the context of the present study encompasses review of the past KABP Surveys, Research Methods for KABP, Water – Sanitation and Hygiene related issues, etc. The review reveals that surveys conducted by the UN Agencies, Research Scholars, Government Departments or NGOs have different goals and adopted a variety of approaches. While studies conducted by the research scholars or special interest groups tend to be elaborate, critical and method-sensitive, surveys conducted by non-profit organizations such as Pratham's Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) and People's Audit on Health, Education and Livelihood (PAHELI) tend to be people-centric efforts with limited themes, simple tools and few questions. The ASHWAS team conducted a similar study through consulting experts from government agencies like the Rajiv Gandhi Drinking Water Mission (RGDWM), the Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), and the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (RDPR) Department of the Government of Karnataka to gain a deeper understanding about water, sanitation and related issues. They have conducted a three-tire survey of the Households, GPs and Villages. Also, they have used Water Quality Tests, PRA Tools like Village Transect and Village Map. But the Questionnaire they have used for Household Survey is too elaborate to be administered in a semi-literate rural community of Murshidabad district of West Bengal within a short span of time. Besides, the study has not measured KABP components is precise terms. On the other hand, Public Affairs Centre (PAC) follows a more traditional, rigorous survey method, which includes household questionnaires, interviews with Gram Panchayat (GP) members and focused group discussions. They rate public services against benchmarks and have pioneered the 'report card' concept for public services by terming their outputs 'Citizen Report Cards'.

The Government or UN Agencies like the World Bank have conducted surveys aimed at understanding practical realities such as 'willingness to pay' or the success rate of specific schemes. In these cases, research design was more detailed and covered many households (HH) as well as the local service providers. Most were not people-centric or activity-based.

(ii) Expert Opinion

As an organization, SPADE has the hands on experience of conducting KABP Studies as earlier it had implemented an HIV/AIDS Awareness Promotion Program sponsored by West Bengal State AIDS Prevention and Control Society, Government of West Bengal. Still, the SPADE team has consulted experts from UNICEF, Government Agencies like the Sanitation Cell of SIPRD, the Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), Ministry of Self Help Group and Self Employment, Government of West Bengal, to gain a deeper understanding about water, sanitation and hygiene related issues, involvement of Self Help Groups and related issues. The team also consulted NGOs such as Sabuj Sangha, Bithari Disha, who are also implementing similar projects.

(b) Partnership

SPADE is implementing the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Project as a partner of Water For People – India and the project, at the grassroots level, is being implemented by a Federation of Self Help Groups, viz., Kandi Jibdharpara Mohila Unnyan Samity (KJMUS). As a matured and benevolent partner, Water For People – India provides all kinds of technical support on the basis of their vast experience in conducting similar studies. On the other hand, as an implementing agency, SPADE has adopted a people-centric approach and as such, engaged the

KABP Study of SPADE

12

Field Facilitators of KJMUS for conducting the surveys at the grassroots level. The Field Facilitators of KJMUS have access to the local community and are more or less familiar with the prospective respondents. Hence, it shall be easier for them to conduct the survey and also assure on spot verification of the information provided by the prospective respondents.

(c) Team Structure

One of SPADE's major objectives is to capacitate the people at the grassroots. Hence, SPADE has decided to involve the Field Facilitators of KJMUS and the local SHG members in each GP / Municipal area as surveyors. The survey team of each GP / Municipal area shall comprise 2 - 3 Facilitators from KJMUS and 8 – 10 Surveyors

who are basically SHG members from the same locality. The 3 Supervisors of KJMUS shall supervise the Field Facilitators while the Facilitators shall get the surveys conducted by the SHG members. The entire activities of KABP Survey shall be headed by the Program Implementation Manager who shall be assisted by 3 Coordinators who shall be hired for the purpose of conducting the survey. The organogram for the proposed KABP study shall be as under :

Program Implementation Manager

Coordinator

Supervisors

Facilitators

Surveyors – SHG Members

KABP Study of SPADE

13

(d) Capacity Building of the KABP Study Team

Kandi

Municipal Area

Andulia Jashahari Anukha-I

Jashahari Anukha-II Purandarpur Total

SHG Members 12 10 8 9 10 49 Facilitators (Federation) 3 2 2 2 2 11 Facilitators (WASH Program) 2 Supervisors (Federation) 4 Supervisors (WASH Program) 2 KABP Study Coordinator 1 PIM 1

Total 70

Altogether 70 persons shall be involved in the proposed KABP Study. While the surveyors, viz., SHG members shall be capacitated in collecting data using a structured format, the Facilitators shall be capacitated in checking and reviewing the filled in questionnaires. One of the important aspects of the KABP Study is that all the items of a questionnaire need to be answered. Thus, for assuring accuracy of the results, it is mandatory to capacitate the surveyors and reviewers so that they can collect and record the complete responses.

(i) Training for the Surveyors : This shall include the following :

(a) Basics of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related issues (b) The purpose of the study and brief idea about the methodology adopted for the study (c) Method of selecting samples or choosing respondents (d) Various items of the questionnaire and the possible answer options (e) Collection and coding of filled in questionnaires

(ii) Training for the Facilitators : This shall include the following

(a) Basics of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related issues (b) The purpose of the study and brief idea about the methodology adopted for the study (c) Verification of filled in questionnaires and identification of missing items, if any (d) Method of conducting PRA and recording the responses of the community (e) Basics of tabulation and coding

Each training event shall be of three days and preferably be intensive and residential. This shall facilitate improving the team's understanding of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene issues. Experts are to be invited from Water For People – India and some other implementing agencies. Extensive discussions on questionnaires, PRA Tools like Village Transect, Water Resource Mapping shall be conducted and Household Sample Selection and Field Survey Tips are to be provided so that the KABP Study Team could conduct the study efficiently.

(e) Sample Size: Basis of Sample Selection

The KABP survey shall cover Andulia, Jashahari Anukha-I & II and Purandarpur Gram Panchayats and Ward No 4, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15 of Kandi Municipal Area which are the operational areas of KJMUS and also the coverage area under the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Program. Thus, the proposed KABP Study shall cover the entire area under focus. Based on the advice of the experts and the requirement of the Project, it has been decided that the survey shall cover

KABP Study of SPADE

14

500 households which approximately constitutes slightly more than 2.5% of the total number of Households (19,720) within the operational area. The broad Sampling Plan is shown in the table below :

No of Wards / Villages

Total Households

Total Population

Sample Size @ 2.5%

Kandi Municipal Area 6 5000* 24800* 125 Andulia 12 4134 19894 103 Jashahari Anukha-I 12 2741 13802 69 Jashahari Anukha-II 9 3618 18162 90 Purandarpur 12 3937 19716 98

Total 51 19430 96374 485 Proposed Sample size for the KABP Study 500

Source: P & RDD, Govt of WB as per 2001 Census. * Estimated

(f) Allocation of Households per Ward or Village

It has already been mentioned that the proposed study shall cover all the Wards and villages within the operational area of KJMUS. Now, within a Ward or village, 2.5% of the total number of households shall be selected as sample. Since the number of households or population size among Wards or Villages vary widely, it shall wiser to select samples proportionate to the respective number of households of the area as this shall assure true representation of the population in the selected samples. Also, this shall automatically distribute households across villages or Wards based on the size of each village's / ward’s population and how much it contributed to the total population covered under the present Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Project. The proposed distribution of samples is shown below :

Area Village Name Total Households Total Population Sample @ 2.5%

Andulia Gobindapur 467 2261 12 Chandanagar 288 1576 7 Santoshpur 190 851 5 Jitpur 77 401 2 Rajarampur 173 756 4 Gopalpur 243 1094 6 Manoharpur 184 1020 5 Sashpara 855 4051 21 Mahadia 632 3021 16 Durgapur 213 1031 5 Lakshmikantapur 317 1486 8 Andulia 495 2346 12 Andulia Total 4134 19894 103 Purandarpur Ranagram 375 1753 9 Dakshin Lakshminarayanpur 112 606 3 Parbbatipur 531 2852 13 Indrahata 342 1777 9 Chator 72 320 2 Chandra Prasadpur 432 2148 11 Bundai 378 1918 9 Purandarpur 786 3888 20 Gandhorbbapur 383 1897 10 Rayabati 53 282 1 Bati 107 508 3 Boltali 366 1767 9 Purandarpur Total 3937 19716 98 JA - I Munigram 624 3133 16 Raghupur 33 190 1 Laharpara 261 1395 7 Anukha 236 1170 6 Ratuni 82 427 2 Mahadevbati 212 979 5

KABP Study of SPADE

15

Singedda 115 618 3 Molla 118 718 3 Kaya 149 719 4 Kayemba 38 213 1 Brahmanpara 303 1637 8 Bahara 570 2603 14 Jashahari Anukha- I Total 2741 13802 69 JA -II Kalyanpur 304 1304 8 Sadpur (P) 466 2214 12 Bamandasbati 64 309 2 Jasohari 1262 6901 32 Rudrabati 286 1483 7 Bhandira 357 1826 9 Bajedohalia 169 864 4 Dohalia 550 2549 14 Rasora (P) 160 712 4 Jashahari Anukha- II Total 3618 18162 90 KMA Kandi Municipal Area Total 5000* 24800* 125 Grand Total 19430 96374 485

Source: P & RDD, Govt of WB as per 2001 Census.*Estimated

(g) Selection of Households within a Village or Ward

Following the footprints of the ASHWAS Study, households within a particular Village or Ward shall be selected by following the process of Village Transect. This exercise facilitates identification of households in a village or Ward based on locality. Households shall then be selected from all major localities to ensure representation of all the sections of the society. The number of households per locality shall be proportional to the total number of households within the locality. The interval shall be determined on the basis of the total number of households to be covered within a village or Ward and the Right Hand Rule shall be used to select individual houses. In case a selected household is unoccupied, the neighboring household on either side shall be selected.

(h) Sources of Secondary Data

Secondary data required for the study shall mostly be collected from the Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Government of West Bengal. Since the P & RD Department still uses data from the Census of 2001, the same data shall be used in the present study also. In fact, there is no other reliable source of data regarding the Village-wise population, Number of Households, etc. that can be used in the study. Attempts shall be made to refer the source of data so that one could establish a link with other places.

(i) Reliability of Estimates

The sample size has been determined considering the resource requirements and the duration of the KABP Study. Since the time limit is about 3 months, 2.5% of the total households have been set as the target sample size which signifies that average sample size per Gram Panchayat / Municipal area is 100 households. Even in case of the ASHWAS Study, the sample size per Gram Panchayat was also 100 households. Thus, the sample size targeted in the present study seems to be adequate at the GP level. Besides, the KABP Study Team shall be careful to ensure that the samples to be chosen in the field shall be a good representative of the population and the data could be extrapolated for the entire district, if not for the State. In fact, comparisons with other places or districts shall be difficult since Murshidabad is the third backward-most district in West Bengal. The district has lot many features that are unique and hence, the findings may not be comparable with other places.

(j) Research Design and Approach

It has already been mentioned that the present KABP Study shall basically be a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methodologies and this approach shall be adopted for exploring the appropriate activities and programs for the literate or just-literate community members. The quantitative survey shall capture information through a combination of psychometric scales and structured questionnaires instead of merely using the traditional questionnaire. For obtaining qualitative data, PRA Tools shall be used. For generating comprehensive information, the present study shall use the following research tools:

KABP Study of SPADE

16

(i) KABP Assessment Scale for individuals

WHO AIDS KABP Questionnaire has been used in HIV and AIDS risk surveys (Shisana, Rehle, Simbayi, Parker, Zuma, Bhana, Connoly, Jooste, & Pillay, 2005) as well as to monitor the level of HIV and AIDS awareness among the target population before an intervention or behavior change training programme is introduced. The items of the questionnaire asked participants about HIV and AIDS knowledge, attitude, beliefs and risk practices. The responses were put on a 4-point Likert-type scale. Risk scores ranged from 14 to 28 points on the scale. The reliability of this instrument for this sample was .86 (Cronbach Alpha) Brian Mathew, 2003-04 had adopted a similar methodology but a three-point scale in his Ph. D. thesis entitled Ensuring Sustained Beneficial Outcomes for Water and Sanitation Programs in the Developing World. The present study shall use a combination of dichotomous and multiple choice questions and for attitude measurement, a 4-point Likert-type scale shall be used. Factor-wise distribution of items in the KABP Scale shall be as under :

Factor No of Items Knowledge 10 Attitude 20 Behavior 15 Practice 15

Total 60

(ii) Household level Questionnaire

The Household level Questionnaire has been designed to cover most aspects of water, sanitation, health, hygiene of a particular household. Considering the level of familial engagement and time constraints, attempts have been made to restrict the size of this questionnaire.

Each questionnaire begins with an introductory section on demographic details of the individual and household. All interviews shall be conducted in Bengali and questionnaires are to be filled in Bengali.

(k) Field Survey

The field survey has been scheduled to be conducted between September – October, 2011. The distribution of manpower shall be as under :

Kandi

Municipal Area

Andulia Jashahari Anukha-I

Jashahari Anukha-II Purandarpur Total

Sample Size 125 103 69 90 98 485 No of Wards / Villages 6 12 12 9 12 51 SHG Members 12 10 8 9 10 49 Facilitators 3 3 2 2 3 13 Supervisors 2 1 1 1 1 6 KABP Coordinator 1 PIM 1

Altogether 70 individuals shall be involved in the present KABP Study including the Program Implementation Manager and a KABP Coordinator.

KABP Study of SPADE

17

SHG Members of the local Wards or villages Facilitators Supervisors

Reporting to Facilitator Supervisor KABP Coordinator

KABP and Household level Survey

(a) Conduct the household and individual level surveys through direct face to face contact with the respondents

(a) Identification of Respondents and allocation of households to the SHG members on the basis of sampling procedure described earlier

(a) Help the Facilitators to identify the sample respondents

(b) Submit the filled in questionnaires to the Facilitators

(a) Preliminary review of the filled in questionnaires so as prevent errors and seek reasons or any space left blank

(b) Collect the filled in questionnaires from the Facilitators

(c) Review the filled in questionnaires as there should not be any blank space left.

The entire process shall be managed by the KABP Study Coordinator who shall report to the Program Implementation Manager.

(l) Monitoring Quality of Data

The KABP Study shall adopt rigorous quality monitoring mechanisms to ensure that data collected is accurate and inclusive. This calls for mechanisms to ensure that the SHG members shall conduct the surveys seriously without any bias and the sampling process for household selection is followed strictly. Involvement of the Facilitators and Supervisors and random field visits might be helpful in keeping the SHG members alert and watchful. Also, the KABP Coordinator and other Project staff of SPADE shall remain present in the PRA exercises so as to assure an ethically neutral allocation of households to the SHG members following the procedure described earlier.

Also, verification of the filled in questionnaire is a major issue and this shall be done at two levels. After collecting the responses from the community, the SHG members shall submit the questionnaires to the Facilitators and the Facilitators shall conduct a preliminary review of the responses and seek explanations from the surveyors, if necessary. Also, the questionnaires shall again be reviewed by the Supervisors before they are sent for Data Entry by the KABP Coordinator.

Quality assurance shall be easier in case of Village and GP level information since the Organization is working in the same area since the last year. The field level staff of the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Project has already developed good rapport with the GP and Block level Officials and are well - acquainted with the local WATSAN issues.

(m) Time Line

Activity July August September October November Finalization of Research Proposal Questionnaire Construction and Field Testing

Staff Training Data Collection Data Analysis & Report Preparation Report Dissemination & Advocacy

KABP Study of SPADE

18

Chapter – II : Scale Development Methodology (a) Introduction

It has already been mentioned that KABP Study or Survey is at the heart of knowing the target audience. KABP Studies are thus widely used to gather information for planning public health programs, particularly in the field of HIV/AIDS, Malaria, etc. in many countries. There is increasing recognition within the international aid community that improving the health of poor people across the world depends upon adequate understanding of the socio-cultural and economic aspects of the context in which public health programs are being implemented. Such information has typically been gathered through various types of cross-sectional surveys, the most popular and widely used method being the knowledge, attitude, behavior and practice (KABP) survey (Green 2001, Hausmann-Muela et al. 2003, Manderson and Aaby 1992, Nichter 2008:6-7).

The present study assumes that each individual has her or his own Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior and Practices regarding issues related to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene issues. Thus, each individual is unique though many of them are living within homogeneous external environment. The underlying logic behind this assumption is that each individual has her or his own heredity and environmental factors which vitally determines their personality pattern and value system that ultimately shapes their attitudes, behavior and practices. Hence, each individual is unique and is significantly different from the others. Thus, in the present study, KABP has been considered as an individual characteristic. Also, equally important is the context viz., the geographical area the community is living in, the climate, level of environmental vulnerabilities, socio-economic characteristics of the community and so on. In fact, contextual issues are so heterogeneous that the assessment methodologies vary substantially from community to community. Thus, while framing the items in the KABP scale, a clear understanding of the culture of the community becomes a major consideration.

(b) Operational Definitions

Each one of the components of KABP, i.e., knowledge, attitude, behavior and practice are widely used expressions in both – social and behavioral sciences and consequently, their connotations vary widely from context to context. To assure clarity and avoid confusion, the study had used the following interpretations of the expressions :

Expression Meaning Explanation Example

K Knowledge

Information that the target audience have about the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues

• Arsenic is a poison that pollutes drinking water

• Every household should have a toilet

A Attitudes

Attitude is the way a person views something or tends to behave towards it. In the context of the present study, attitude refers to what the target audience feels or believes about the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues

• Open space defecation is a problem – particularly for the women and old-aged

• We should wash our hands with soap and tube-well water before we sit to eat

B Behavior The way people act and react on different Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues

• Before fetching drinking water, I used to wash the pot every time

• I used to keep our house and the premises clean

P Practice

Usually and repeatedly displayed activities or habits relating to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues

• I cannot sleep at night without hanging the mosquito net

• I used to cut my nails at least once in a week

(C) Method adopted for Measuring KABP

The present study has relied mainly upon perceptual criteria for assessing KABP. A four-point rating scale was provided and the respondents were requested to use the scale to rate the applicability of each item to her or his situation. This rating scale enabled the respondents to indicate their strength of agreement or disagreement with a particular item. Rather than using the conventional five-point or seven-point Likert type scales, a four-point scale

KABP Study of SPADE

19

was used to minimize response biases like preferring the average rating and to prevent the respondents to remain neutral to a particular item. Anonymity was assured for the respondents so as to encourage open-hearted, frank and sincere response in a straight forward agree-disagree form. The main reason behind using the rating scale was that the responses can easily be summed or averaged up to have a combined score reflecting the strength of the response about a particular item or an attribute as a whole. Again, rating scale also facilitated statistical analysis like averages, standard deviations, correlation, etc. for intra and inter-geographical area comparisons.

Both - positive and negative statements were used as items so as to reduce the bias of conformity of the respondents. Some of the respondents have a tendency to always agree or disagree with the items and this tendency may result into serious measurement error if proper precautionary measures are not taken. To counter this possible error, positive and negative statements were blended together while framing the final questionnaire. Also, short and simple sentences in Bengali were used and technical jargons were avoided as far as possible to reduce the communication gap.

From each of the 4 Gram Panchayats and 1 Municipal area, a number of individuals were selected as respondents. The distribution of sample surveyed was as under :

GP or Municipality Village / Ward Sample Size Male Female

Andulia

Andulia 13 6 7 Chandnagar 3 0 3 Chandpara 4 1 3 Durgapur 5 1 4 Gobindopur 12 3 9 Gopalpur 6 2 4 Jeetpur 2 0 2 Laxmikantapur 8 1 7 Mahadiya 16 4 12 Manoharpur 5 2 3 Rajarampur 4 0 4 Santospur 5 3 2 Sashpara 23 2 21 Total 106 25 81

Jashohari Anukha 1

Aanukha 6 4 2 Bahara 14 3 11 Bhramhanpara 8 2 6 Kaya 4 4 0 Koyemba 1 1 0 Laharpara 7 3 4 Mahadebbati 5 3 2 Molla 3 3 0 Munigram 16 12 4 Nampara 2 2 0 Raghupur 2 2 0 Santipur 1 0 1 Sigadda 3 2 1 Total 72 41 31

Jashohari Anukha 2

Bhandera 9 3 6 Dadpur 2 0 2 Dohalia 8 7 1 Jashohari 61 21 40 Kalyanpur 5 2 3 Kandi 1 0 1 Madhunia 1 0 1 Rudrabati 7 2 5 Total 94 35 59

Purandarpur

Boltuli 9 7 2 Bunday 9 5 4 Chandraprosadpur 11 6 5 Chator 2 0 2 Gandhabpur 10 3 7 Indrahata 9 4 5 Naranpur 3 0 3

KABP Study of SPADE

20

Parbatipur 13 12 1 Purandarpur 20 16 4 Ranagram 9 4 5 Raybati 4 4 0 Total 99 61 38

Kandi Municipality

Ward No. - 4 17 8 9 Ward No. - 8 29 25 4 Ward No. - 9 21 4 17 Ward No. - 10 22 18 4 Ward No. - 14 21 11 10 Ward No. - 15 22 6 16 Total 132 72 60 Grand Total 503 234 269

(d) Scale Development

The present study has made an attempt to measure KABP and the sources of information were the residents of the concerned Gram Panchayats and Municipal area. Knowledge, attitude, behavior and practice are the typical components of a KABP survey and thus, an ideal scale for KABP measurement should contain these four major factors. For measuring each one of these four factors, one sub-scale was required containing a number of questionable items. Since there is no precedence of measuring KABP using perceptual criteria, framing the items was a major challenge. The items were generated adopting an inductive approach and different Stakeholders were involved directly or indirectly in the process.

Before generating the items for constructing the KABP scale, a rigorous observation and survey of the issues related to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene were conducted and few experienced personalities from Water For People – India were consulted. After the key attributes or items under each sub-scale of KABP relating to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene issues were listed, a draft scale was framed. The draft was circulated among few WASH Specialists who have considerable experience in working on these issues and who were more or less familiar with the operational definitions of the present study and as such, they were in a position to assess the content validity as well as relevance as a research tool. A brief description of the scale used is given below :

(1) Knowledge

Earlier, it has been mentioned that here Knowledge refers to Information that the target respondents have about the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues. Thus, this sub-scale actually measures how much correct information the respondent have about WASH related issues. The items used to measure knowledge was as under :

K1 L−ml Sm phpju ¢el¡fc* Water from tube well is always safe K2 j¡e¤−ol b¤a¥ - Lg −b−L −L¡−e¡ −l¡N Rs¡u e¡* Human spit does not spread any infection K3 ¢gmV¡l Ll¡ Sm ¢höÜ* Filtered water is always safe K4 Sm −cM−a f¢lú¡l q−mC a¡ f¡−el −k¡NÉ* If the water looks clean, it is safe to drink

K5 h¡μQ¡−cl −fμR¡f-f¡CM¡e¡ −b−L −L¡−e¡ −l¡N Rs¡u e¡* Feces and urine of the children does not spread any infection

K6 h¡¢sl pL−ml N¡jR¡ Bm¡c¡ Bm¡c¡ qJu¡ E¢Qa Each one in a household should use separate towels

K7 −Lhmj¡œ emL¨−fl Sm ¢c−u q¡a d¤−mC q¡a S£h¡Z¤ j¤š² qu*

Washing hands using tube well water can only assure that the hands are germ free

K8 Sm g¥V¡−m ¢höÜ qu* Water can be purified through boiling

K9 ¢nö−L f¡uM¡e¡ Ll¡h¡l f−l p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c−u q¡a −d¡Ju¡ E¢Qa

After assisting a child to defecate, one should use soap or ash to clean hands

K10 −l¡S pÀ¡e e¡ Ll−mJ Q−m* Bathing everyday is not essential K11 q¡a-j¤M −j¡R¡l N¡jR¡ fË¢a¢ce L¡Q¡l clL¡l qu e¡* We need not clean our towels everyday

K12 Nªqf¡¢ma föl −fμR¡f-f¡CM¡e¡ −aje r¢aL¡lL eu* Feces and urine of the domestic animals are not very much harmful

K13 f¤L¥−ll S−m ¢gV¢L¢l J Q¥e ¢c−m a¡ f¡−el −k¡NÉ qu* Adding alum and Calcium chloride in pond water can make the water fit for drinking

K14 B−pÑ¢eL HLdl−el ¢ho k¡ f¡e£u Sm c§¢oa L−l Arsenic is a poison that pollutes drinking water K15 fË¢a h¡¢s−a −n±Q¡N¡l b¡L¡ clL¡l Every household should have a toilet

K16 −n±Q¡N¡l öd¤j¡œ h¡¢sl pÇj¡e h¡s¡u* Toilets only enhance the social status of the household

KABP Study of SPADE

21

2. Attitude

Attitude is the way a person views something or tends to behave towards it. In the context of the present study, attitude refers to what the target audience feels or believes about the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues. The items used to measure attitude was as under :

A1 fË¢a¢V h¡¢s−a −n±Q¡N¡l b¡L¡ E¢Qa Every house should have a toilet A2 −M¡m¡ S¡uN¡u f¡CM¡e¡ Ll−a i¡−m¡ m¡−N* We actually enjoy open space defecation

A3 Bjl¡ j¡−W O¡−V f¡CM¡e¡ Ll−a AiÉÙ¹z H−a Bj¡−cl −L¡−e¡ r¢a qu e¡*

Open space defecation is not harmful as we are habituated to it

A4 j¡−W O¡−V f¡CM¡e¡ Ll−a k¡Ju¡V¡ huú J j¢qm¡−cl f−r HLV¡ hs pjpÉ¡

Open space defecation is a problem – particularly for the women and old-aged

A5 phpju M¡h¡l B−N q¡a −d¡h¡l −L¡−e¡ clL¡l −eC* We need not wash our hands every time before we eat

A6 −n±Q¡N¡l öd¤ hª¢ø-h¡cm¡l pj−uC clL¡l qu, L¡lZ aMe j¡−WO¡−V p¡−fl Efâh qu*

Toilets are needed during the monsoon only since during those days snakes move around

A7 −l¡S −n±Q¡N¡l hÉhq¡l Ll−m L¥−u¡V¡ i−l k¡uz a¡C −l¡S hÉhqÉl Ll¡ E¢Qa eu*

We should not use the toilet everyday since that will fill the pit very soon

A8 −n±Q¡N¡l h— −R¡−V¡z Hhw c¤NÑ−å il¡, a¡C hÉhq¡l Ll¡ Ap¤¤¢hd¡SeL*

Using toilet is not convenient as it is too small and full of filthy odor

A9 −n±Q¡N¡l hÉhq¡l Ll¡l Q¡C−aJ h¡¢s−a b¡L−m B¢iS¡aÉ h¡−s*

Whether you use it or not – toilets enhance the social status of the family

A10 hs −m¡−L−cl h¡¢s−aC −n±Q¡N¡−l b¡−L Bl N¢lhl¡ j¡−WO¡−V k¡u*

Only the rich people construct toilets at their homes – the poor defecate at open spaces

A11 −R−ml¡ j¡−W-O¡−V f¡CM¡e¡ Ll−a Q¡u L¡lZ −pM¡−e A−e−Ll p¡−b −cM¡ qu - Lb¡h¡aÑ¡ qu*

The male members prefer open spaces for defecation since there they meet with others and get the opportunity to have a talk or discussion

A12 −N¡hl f¢hœ a¡C, −N¡hl O¡yV¡l fl p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c−u q¡a e¡ d¤−mJ Q−m*

Cow dung is sacred – hence, after handling cow dung one need not wash his or her hands with soap or ash

A13 −e¡wl¡ Oy¡V¡l f−l p¡h¡e / R¡C ¢c−u q¡a −d¡h¡l clL¡l After handling garbage or dirt, one should wash his or her hands with soap or ash

A14 M¡h¡l B−N p¡h¡e Hhw emL¨−fl Sm ¢c−u q¡a −d¡h¡l clL¡l

We should wash our hands with soap and tube-well water before we sit to eat

A15 h¡pefœ −d¡h¡l SeÉ f¤L¥−ll Sm hÉhq¡l Ll¡C i¡−m¡* Pond water is ideal for cleaning household utensils

3. Behavior

Behavior, in the context of the present study refers to the way people act and react on different Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues. The items used to measure behavior was as under :

B1 B¢j L¡V¡l fl ph n¡L-p¢ê d¤−u ¢eC After chopping the vegetables, I used to wash them

B2 B¢j l¡æ¡ Ll¡ M¡h¡l phpju −Y−L l¡¢M I always keep the cooked foods under cover

B3 B¢j f¡e£u Sm −eJu¡l f−l f¡œ¢V −Y−L l¡¢M I always keep the water pot covered after dispensing water from it

B4 Bjl¡ h¡¢p M¡h¡l M¡Ju¡l B−N Nlj L¢l e¡* Before consuming foods cooked the day before, we never boil them

B5 B¢j mr l¡¢M h¡¢sl B−nf¡−nl −L¡−e¡ N−aÑ −e¡wl¡ Sm −ke S−j e¡ b¡−L

I used to keep a strict vigil to assure that waste water could not get stagnated in any ditch in and around my house

B6 B¢j Bj¡−cl h¡¢s Hhw EW¡e f¢lμRæ l¡¢M I used to keep our house and the premises clean

B7 B¢j NË¡j Hhw l¡Ù¹¡ f¢l×L¡l l¡M−a AwnNËqZ L¢l I used to participate in all initiatives to keep the village and roads clean

B8 B¢j −N¡hl −gm¡l fl q¡a f¢l×L¡l L−l d¤−u ¢eC After removing cow dung - I used to clean my hands

B9 Bj¡−cl h¡¢sl h¡μQ¡l¡ l¡æ¡O−ll B−nf¡−n −fμR¡f - f¡CM¡e¡ L−l*

Children of our family used to defecate or urinate near the kitchen

B10 B¢j fË¢ah¡l Sm ilh¡l B−N f¡œ d¤−u ¢eC Before fetching drinking water, I used to wash the pot every time

B11 pç¡−q A¿¹a HLh¡l Bj¡−cl h¡¢sl h¡bl¦j f¡uM¡e¡ f¢lú¡l Ll¡ qu

We used to clean our bathroom and toilet at least once in a week

B12 Bjl¡ ph¡C Bm¡c¡ Bm¡c¡ h¡¢V−a M¡h¡l M¡C All of us consume foods from separate pots

KABP Study of SPADE

22

B13 B¢j −e¡wl¡ ¢e¢cÑø N−aÑ −g¢m I used to throw away garbage in a particular pit

B14 Bj¡−cl Hy−V¡ h¡pefœ −kM¡−e −pM¡−e f−s b¡−L - L¥L¥l ¢hs¡−m Q¡−V*

Our used utensils lay here and there - dogs and cats used to lick them

B15 f¢lh¡−ll ph¡C −e¡wl¡ Oy¡V¡l fl p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c−u q¡a −d¡u

Everyone in my family used to wash their hands with soap or ash after handling garbage or dirt

B16 Sm Be¡l pju −Y−L B¢e While fetching water we use covered containers

B17 S−m q¡a X¥¢h−u Sm a¥¢m* I used to dip my palm while collecting water from the pot

4. Practice

Practice in the context of the present study refers usually and repeatedly displayed activities or habits relating to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene-related issues. The items used to measure practice was as under :

P1 l¡−œ jn¡¢l e¡ V¡P¡−m Bj¡l O¤j B−p e¡ I cannot sleep at night without hanging the mosquito net

P2 B¢j Q¢V f−l f¡uM¡e¡u k¡C I use a slipper while going to toilet

P3 Bj¡−cl h¡¢sl A−e−LC −kM¡−e-−pM¡−e b¤a¥-Lg −g−m* Many of my family members spit here and there

P4 B¢j M¡h¡l M¡Ju¡l B−N p¡h¡e ¢c−u q¡a d¤−u ¢eC Before having my meal, I used to wash my hands with soap

P5 Bjl¡ ¢eu¢ja S¡j¡ L¡fs f¢l×L¡l L¢l We used to clean our cloths regularly

P6 B¢j mrÉ l¡¢M −ke −R−m −j−ul¡ ¢eu¢ja eM L¡−V I used to keep a strict vigil to assure that the children of our house cut their nails in regular intervals

P7 B¢j −l¡S cy¡a j¡S¡l pju f¡C e¡* I could not clean my teeth everyday because of lack of time

P8 Bj¡l f¢lh¡−ll ph¡C M¡Ju¡l fl j¤M-q¡a −d¡u e¡* Not everyone of my family wash their hands and mouth after consuming food

P9 B¢j pç¡−q A¿¹a HLh¡l eM L¡¢V I used to cut my nails at least once in a week

P10 B¢j l¡æ¡ h¡ f¢l−hne Ll¡l B−N phpju q¡a d¤−u ¢e

I used to wash my hands before serving or cooking food

P11 B¢j M¡h¡l S−ml f¡−œ q¡a −X¡h¡C e¡ I never dip my hands in the drinking water pot

P12 h¡μQ¡l¡ h¡C−l −b−L h¡¢s H−m B¢j J−cl q¡a-f¡ d¤−u −cC

Soon after our children return home – I used to wash their hands and feet

P13 B¢j −e¡wl¡ Oy¡V¡l fl p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c−u q¡a d¤−u ¢eC

After handling garbage or dirt, I used to clean my hands with soap or ash

P14 Bjl¡ Sm l¡M¡l Lm¢p-q¡y¢s f¢lú¡l L¢l e¡* We do not keep our water

P15 B¢j −n±−Ql f−l p¡h¡e ¢c−u q¡a d¤C I used to clean my hands with soap and water after returning from toilet

*Negative items – Score reversed Sub-scale No. of Items

Knowledge 16Attitude 15Behavior 17Practice 15

Total 63

From the above table, it is evident that the scale initially developed for KABP measurement and used for data collection was containing sixty three different items distributed among four sub-scales.

(e) Reliability of the Measures

After obtaining some invaluable suggestions from the WASH Specialists, the draft have been modified substantially and the second draft was circulated among some methodology experts for further modifications and elimination of jargons, double-barrel or leading questions. They were asked to evaluate the questionnaire on the basis of the following criteria :

KABP Study of SPADE

23

Consistency To check whether the items were consistent with the operational definitions.

Clarity To check whether the items were simple enough to be understood by the semi-literate respondents.

Precision To prevent overlapping of items.

Relevance To check whether the items were actually measuring what they were supposed to measure.

Most of the modifications suggested by the experts have been incorporated to arrive at the final questionnaire. Again, after the survey was conducted and responses were obtained, the collected data was tabulated in Microsoft Excel. A statistical package SPSS – STATISTICA - 7 was used to determine internal consistency of the scales. Cronbach’s Alpha was calculated for the overall KABP Scale and also for each sub-scale separately and the alpha was modified many a times eliminating items which were found to be relatively less consistent with the sub-scales used. Items for final calculation were selected only after alpha was found satisfactory. The table below shows how alpha had been improved gradually from 0.75 to 0.91 through reducing items from 63 to 52 at the 7th stage.

Description Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6 Stage 7 Cronbach’s α 0.75 0.83 0.86 0.90 0.91 0.91 0.91 Number of items in scale 63 62 60 58 55 54 52 Number of valid cases 503 503 503 503 503 503 503 Scale Mean 203.97 199.70 195.61 189.90 180.50 176.81 170.88 Scale σ 20.13 19.43 20.51 19.61 18.89 18.98 18.66 Variance 405.29 377.36 420.66 384.59 356.87 360.25 348.11 Minimum 150.00 147.00 140.00 133.00 125.00 123.00 118.00 Maximum 304.00 300.00 298.00 229.00 218.00 216.00 208.00 Average Inter-Item Correlation

0.11 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.17 0.17

Items deleted A1 K1, K7 P11, K3 B4, P4, P7 B1 A8, A4

From the table below, it is evident that the number of items within a sub-scale, in most cases, helps improving Alpha. The more the number of items are, the greater will be the possibility of improving the internal consistency. However, the present scale was used along with other Formats for collecting Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related information. Increase in the number of questions in a scale always create inconvenience for the respondents as it takes more time to read, understand and respond. Hence, considering the inconvenience of the respondents, the number of items was kept lower in the present study.

The table below also shows that the Cronbach alpha for the overall scale was 0.91 which signifies that the scale constructed was highly internally consistent and as such, reliable.

(f) A Comparison of the Scale Characteristics

Scale Characteristics

Scale Measuring Knowledge

Scale Measuring Attitude

Scale Measuring Behavior

Scale Measuring Practice

Overall KABP Scale

Cronbach’s α 0.73 0.87 0.77 0.73 0.91 Number of items in scale 13 12 15 12 52 Scale Mean 43.2 38.8 49.7 39.21 171 Scale σ 5.11 6.13 5.95 5.66 18.7 No of valid cases 503 503 503 503 503 Variance 26.1 37.6 35.4 32.02 348 Minimum 30 20 36 21 118 Maximum 52 48 60 48 208 Average Inter-Item Correlation 0.19 0.37 0.19 0.19 0.17

KABP Study of SPADE

24

25

KABP Study of SPADE

Andulia

Chapter – III : Gram Panchayat – wise Findings

KABP Study of SPADE

26

Economic Status – wise Distribution of the Respondent

25%

75%

APL BPL

General Information

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

18 - 20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80

Age – wise Distribution of the Respondent

Gender – wise Distribution of the Respondent

76%

24%

Male Female

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00%

Illiterate

Could sign only

Literate but never went school

Primary

up to 8th

Matriculate

HS

Graduate

Post-Graduate

Educational Qualification – wise Distribution of the Respondent

Gender – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Economic Status – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Age – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Caste or Race – wise Distribution of the Respondents

3%0%

7%

48%

42%

SC ST OBC MINOR GEN

3%0%

7%

48%

42%

SC ST OBC MINOR GEN

Educational Qualification – wise Distribution of the Respondents

27

KABP Study of SPADE

Land Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents

41%

59%

Land Owner Land Less

Family size – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Head of the Family– wise Distribution ofthe Respondents

Head of the Family– wise Distribution of the Respondent

33%39%

8%19%

1%

Father

Mother

Grand Mother

Himself

Other

Major Occupation – wise Distribution of the RespondentsMajor Occupation – wise Distribution of the Respondent

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00%

Day-labor

Van-puller

House-wife

Other profession

Rickshaw-puller

Teacher

Business

Agriculture



55%

17%8%

20%

2 to 34 to 67 to 910+

Head of the Family– wise Distribution of the Respondents

1%

33%39%

8%19%

Father

Mother

GrandMother Himself/Herself Other


41%

59%


KABP Study of SPADE

28

Cell Phone – wise Distribution of the Respondent

51%

20%29%

Don't HaveHave 1>1

Cell Phone Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Electricity at Home – wise Distribution of the Respondents

House Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents

6%

94%

Rented Home Own Home

Quantity of Land – wise Distribution of the Respondent

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

1-20K 21-40K 41-60K 61-80K 81-100K 100K &above

Quantity of Land – wise Distribution of the Respondents

39%

61%

Mud Pucca

Type of House – wise Distribution of the Respondents


39%

61%

Mud Pucca

Cell Phone ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents

29%20%

51%

Don't HaveHave 1>1


56%44% Don't Have

HaveElectricity at Home – wise Distribution of the Respondents

56%44% Don't Have

Have


6%

94%

Rented House Own House

29

KABP Study of SPADE

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

Cow

Buffalo

Bull

Goat

Hen

Duck

Description of the Animals of the Households

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%

Cycle TV MotorBike

HuskingMachine

Van Pump VCD

Description of Assets of the Family

4%

1%

7%

63%

11%14%

Coal Cow Dung CakeGas Kerosene Rice Straw Wood


Description of Fuel used in the Family

4%

1%

7%

63%

11%14%



KABP Study of SPADE

30

SanitationToilet Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Toilet Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents

34%

66%

Have toilet at home Do not toilet at home

3%

31%

11%

55%

<1 yr 1 to 5 Yr 6 to 10 Yr >11 Yr:

Year of Toilet Construction – wiseDistribution of the Respondents

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

Self Self + Loan fromKandi Federation

Sources of Fund for Toilet Construction – wise Distribution of the Respondents

3%

31%

11%

55%

<1 yr 1 to 5 Yr6 to 10 Yr >11 Yr:

Bathroom at Home – wise Distribution of the Respondents

70%

30%

Have toilet at homeDo not have toilet at home

31

KABP Study of SPADE

Drainage System at Home – wise Distribution of the Respondents

97%

3%

Have Drainage system at homeDo not Drainage system at home

Drainage Cleaning Frequency

33%

67%

Monthly Biannually


70%

30%

Have toilet at home Have not toilet at home

Bathroom at Home – wise Distributionof the Respondents

Drainage System at Home – wise Distribution of the Respondents Drainage Cleaning FrequencyDrainage Cleaning Frequency

33%

67%

Monthly Biannually

Who cleans the Drain ?

33%

67%

GP StaffCBWMCVOSelfOthers

33%

67%

GP StaffCBWMCVOSelfOthers


97%

3%

Have Drainage system at homeNo Drainage system at home


70%

30%

Have Bathroom at homeHave no Bathroom at home

KABP Study of SPADE

32

After Washing Cloths After Washing Cloths

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Soak Pit

Garden

Cesspool

Drain

Fields

Road

Pond

River

Don't Know

Waste Water Flows from Home to

Bath Water Flows from Home to

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Soak Pit

Garden

Cesspool

Drain

Fields

Road

Pond

River

Don't Know


Kitchen Waste Water Flows from Home to

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Soak Pit

Garden

Cesspool

Drain

Fields

Road

Pond

River

Don't Know

33

KABP Study of SPADE

Toilet Waste Water Flows from Home to

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%

Soak Pit

Garden

Cesspool

Drain

Fields

Road

Pond

River

Don't Know


Place of Defection if no Toilet at Home ?

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

100.00%

Field Pond side River side Garden ofthe Road

side

Others

Place of Defection in case of Diarrhea if no Toilet at Home?

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Field

Pond side

River side

Garden of the Road side

Others:

KABP Study of SPADE

34

Source of Drinking Water at Home – wise Distribution of Respondents

83%

17%

Yes No

Water-born Disease

13%17%

68%

0%2%

Cikungunya Amebiasis JaundiceDiarrhea Dysentery

WaterSource of Drinking Water at Home – wise Distribution of Respondents Water-born Disease

Water-born Disease

13%17%

68%

0%2%

Cikungunya AmebiasisJaundice DiarrheaDysentery

What are the primary water sources?

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%

Govt. Tube well

Home Sub motor

Home Tube well

Neighbor's Tube well

Road Tube well

School Tube well

What are the Primary Water Sources?

Reasons for Use of this Source of Drinking Water

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00%

It is near the house

The taste is good

There is no alternative

The water smells good

Cooking is fast & good

Government supplies this water

The water is clear

Other



83%

17%

Yes No

35

KABP Study of SPADE

0.00%

50.00%

100.00%

Yes No

S1

Water Store at Home – wise Distributionof Respondents

Water Store at Home – wise Distributionof Respondents

56%

44%

Water source is too far awaySupply is irregular

56%

44%


How Long Water is being Stored?

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00%

One Day

Tw o Days


Where Water is being Stored?

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Buckets/pots/Bindige

Outdoor tank

Tank/Drum insidethe house

KABP Study of SPADE

36

Supply for Water through out the Year

15%

85%

YesNo


15%

85%

YesNo

Supply of Water throughout the Year Availability of Water for using Other Purposes throughout the Year

59%35%6%

Enough Water is supplied Enough Water is not suppliedWater supply stopped in summer

Frequency of Cleaning of the Water Pot

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00%

Daily

Once in two Days

Thrice in a week

Once in a week

Once in a while

Never


97%

2%1%

ManWomanBoy

Who brings Water?

59%35%6%

Enough Water is suppliedEnough Water is not suppliedWater supply stopped in Summer

97%

2%1%

ManWomanBoy

37

KABP Study of SPADE

Time Required for Bringing WaterTime Required for bringing Water

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%

1 to 10 minutes

11 to 20 minutes

21 to 30 minutes

How long Respondents did Manage without Enough Water this Year?

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

Less than 1month

1 to 3months

3 to 5months

More than 6months

That situationdid not arise


If there is a Severe Water Scarcity What Steps Do You Take?

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Migrate from the village

Try to get water fromother sources

Depend on the watersupplied by the govt.

through tankers

Shall have to use un-potable wate:

KABP Study of SPADE

38

If there is a Severe Water Scarcity WhatOther Steps Do You Take?

0%9%

47%

44%

Collect subscription tomaintain Road tube well Inform to GP

Going to another tubewellDon't know

0%9%

47%

44%

Collect subscription tomaintain Road tube well Inform to GP

Going to another tubewellDon't know

Do You Purify Water?Do You Purify Water?

53% 47%

Yes No

Do You Purify Water?

53% 47%

Yes No

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Filteringthrough a

cloth

Using waterfilter

Method of Purification of Drinking Water?

During the Last One Year, Respondents have Encountered the Problem Regarding Fetching WaterDuring the Last One Year, Respondents have Encountered the

Problem Regarding Fetching Water2%

1%

0%

1%

2%

0%

43%

28%

23%

Bad odor from waterDirty water from tube wellSometimes tube well is out of workOften tube well is out of workWater level is down in summerWater mixed with Sand & IronDon't have own tube wellWater collection is disturbed due to load shadingNo problem

During the Last One Year, Respondents have Encountered the Problem Regarding Fetching Water

2%1%

0%

1%

2%

0%

43%

28%

23%

Bad odor from water

Dirty water from tube well

Sometimes tube well is outof workOften tube well is out of work

Water level is down insummerWater mixed with Sand &IronDon't have own tube well

Water collection is disturbeddue to load shadingNo problem

39

KABP Study of SPADE

To Whom Respondents have Contacted Regarding the Problem they have UncountedTo Whom Respondents have Contacted Regarding the Problem

they have Uncounted

24%

76%GP NONE

To Whom Respondents have Contacted Regarding the Problem they have Uncounted

24%

76%GP NONE

Is Problem Solved or Not


38%

62%

Yes No


38%

62%YesNo

Whether the Respondents are Satisfiedwith the Water Supply and its Quantity?

54%46%

YesNo

54%46%

YesNo

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

Water contains Soil /Sand

Water Testes Salty

Contains excessive Iron

Water has odor

Water is Dirty

Reasons of Dissatisfaction on the Quantity of Water

12%88%

Safe Bacteria affected

Water Testing Report(Test Period: 22.8.2009 – 11.5.11)


12%88%


KABP Study of SPADE

40

Water Testing Report (Test Period: September 2011)

13%

87%



13%

87%


Water Testing Report(Test Period: September 2011)

41

KABP Study of SPADE

Purandarpur

KABP Study of SPADE

42

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

18 - 20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70


62%

38%

Male Female

Gender – wise Distributionof theRespondents

General InformationEconomic Status – wise Distribution of the RespondentsEconomic Status – wise Distribution of the

Respondents

75%

25%

APL BPL

Economic Status – wise Distribution of the Respondents

75%

25%

APL BPL



62%

38%

Male Female


1%8%6%

49%

36%

SC ST OBC MINORITY GEN

6%8%

1%36% 49%


SC ST OBC MINORITY GEN

43

KABP Study of SPADE


0 5 10 15 20 25

Illiterate

Could singe only

Literate but never went to school

Primary

up to 8th

Matriculate

HS

Graduate

Post-Graduate

22%7%13%

58%

2 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10+

Educational Qualification – wiseDistribution of the Respondents


22%7%13%

58%

2 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10+

Major Occupation – wise Distribution of the Respondents

4%

1%

2%

3%3%

2%

3%

5%

21%

39%

17%

AgricultureBusinessDay-laborLaborClarkMaid ServantVan puller Govt. Job MassonTeacher Other profession

38%

27% 30%

4%1% Father

Mother Grand Mother Himself / HerselfOther38%

27% 30%

4%1% Father

Mother Grand Mother Himself / HerselfOther


4%

1%

2%

3%3%

2%

3%

5%

21%

39%

17%

AgricultureBusinessDay-laborLaborClarkMaid ServantVan puller Govt. Job MassonTeacher Other profession


KABP Study of SPADE

44

37%

63%


3%

97%

Rented House Own House

71%

29%

Mud Pucca


37%

63%



0.00% 5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%

1-20K

21-40K

41-60K

61-80K

81-100K

100K & above


97%

3%

Rented HouseOwn House


71%

29%

MudPucca

45

KABP Study of SPADE


0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

Have Have not

Electricity at Home – wiseDistribution of the Respondents

61%

39%

Don’t have Have

61%

39%

Don’t have Have


0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

Cycle

Van

TV

VCD

Motor Bike

PUMP

Description of the Animals of theHouseholds

Cow Buffalo Bull Goat Hen Duck

S1

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%

KABP Study of SPADE

46

2%

13%

27%58%

<1 Yr 1 to 5 Yr 6 to 10 Yr >11 Yr

53%

47%

Have toilet at home Do Not Have toilet at home

Toilet Ownership – wiseDistribution of the Respondents

53%

47%

Have toilet athomeDo Not Havetoilet at home

Year of Toilet Construction – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Sanitation

2%

13%

27% 58%

<1 Yr1 to 5 Yr6 to 10 Yr>11 Yr


0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

100.00%

Self Govt.Project Self + Loan FromKandi Federation

50% 50%

Have bathroom at homeHave no bathroom at home

50% 50%


Toilet Ownership – wiseDistribution of the Respondents


24%

76%

Have Drainage system at homeHave no Drainage system at home

2 4 %

7 6 %

Have Drainage system at homeHave no Drainage system at home

47

KABP Study of SPADE


100%

Yearly 100%


100%

After Washing Cloths



0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

Soak Pit

Garden

Cesspool

Drain

Fields

Road

Pond

River

Don't Know


100%

Self

66%

18% 6%

3%2%0%

0% 0%5%

Soak Pit Garden CesspoolDrain Fields RoadPond River Don't Know

5%0%0%

0% 2%3%

6%18%

66%

Soak PitGardenCesspoolDrainFieldsRoadPondRiverDon't Know

KABP Study of SPADE

48

Kitchen Waste Water Flows from Home to

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

Soak Pit Garden Cesspool Drain Fields Road Pond River Don'tKnow


2% 0%

0%0%

0%

4%0%

31%

63%


63%

31%

0%

4%

0%0%

0%

0%2%

Soak Pit GardenCesspool DrainFields RoadPond RiverDon't Know

49

KABP Study of SPADE

Place of Defection if no toilet at home?

100%

100%

Field

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%

Field Pond side River side Garden ofthe Road

side

Others

Place of Defection in the Day Time if no toilet at home?

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Field Pondside

Riverside

Gardenof theRoadside

Others

Place of Defection in case of diarrhea if no toilet at home?

KABP Study of SPADE

50

73%

27%

Yes No


Water

Water-born Disease

23%

31%46%

0% 0%

Cikungunya Amebiasis JaundiceDiarrhea Dysentery

23%

31%46%

0% 0%

Cikungunya AmebiasisJaundice DiarrheaDysentery

73%

27%

Yes No


2% 0%0% 0%

27%

71%

Govt. TubewellHome SubmotorHome TubewellNeibour'sTube wellRoad TubewellSchool Tubewell

What are the primary water sources?What are the primary water sources?

71%

27%

0%0%

0%2%Govt. TubewellHome SubmotorHome TubewellNeibour'sTube wellRoad TubewellSchool Tubewell

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00%


The taste is good





The water is clear

Other


Water Store at home – wise Distribution of Respondents

25%

75%Yes No

25%

75%Yes No

51

KABP Study of SPADE


100%

Yes No

100%

Reasons for Storing Water

39%61%


39%61%



0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%


Outdoor tank

Tank/Drum inside thehouse

Supply for Water through out the Year?


100%


100%One Day

45%55%

0%

EnoughWater issuppliedEnoughWater is notsuppliedWater supplystopped inSummer

45%55%

0%EnoughWater issupplied

EnoughWater isnotsuppliedWatersupplystoppedin

Availability of Water for using Other Purposes throughout the Year

KABP Study of SPADE

52

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

100.00%

MAN WOMAN BOY


0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Daily

Once in two Days

Thrice in a week

Once in a week

Once in a while

Never


Who brings Water?

Time Required for bringing Water

1 to 10minutes 11 to 20

minutes 21 to 30minutes

S10.00%

10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%

53

KABP Study of SPADE


0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Less than 1 month

1 to 3 months

3 to 5 months

More than 6 months

That situation did not arise


0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00%

Collect subscription tomaintain Road tube well

Inform to GP

Going to another tube well

Don't know

If there is a Severe Water Scarcity What Other Steps Do You Take?

0%

93%0%

7%

Migrate f rom the village

Try to get water f rom other sources

Depend on the water supplied by the govt. through tankers

Shall have to use un-potable water

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KABP Study of SPADE

54

84%

16%

YesNo

84%

16%

Yes No

Do You Purify Water? Method of Purification of Drinking Water?

44%

56%

Filteringthrough aclothUsing waterfilter

AddingChlorinetabletsAdding Alumtablets

AddingCalciumChlorideBoiling water

44%

56%

Filteringthrough aclothUsing waterfilter

AddingChlorinetabletsAdding Alumtablets

AddingCalciumChlorideBoiling water


0%0%

0%23%

20%56% 0%

0%

1%

Bad odor from water


Sometimes tube well is outof work

Often tube well is out ofwork

Water level is down insummer

Water mixed with Sand &Iron

Don't have own tube wel

Water collection isdisturbed due to loadshadingNo problem


1%0%

0%56% 20%23%

0%

0%0%

Bad odor from waterDirty water from tube wellSometimes tube well is out of workOften tube well is out of workWater level is down in summerWater mixed with Sand & IronDon't have own tube welWater collection is disturbed due to load shadingNo problem



2%

0%7%

25%

66%

To Whom Respondents have Contacted Regarding the Problem they haveUncounted

0%

2 %

6 6 %

2 5 %

7 %

GPVSKJMUSPRADHAN/ ELECTED REPRESENTATIVENONE

55

KABP Study of SPADE

Is Problem Solved or Not ?

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Yes

No

Whether the Respondents are Satisfied with the Water Supply and its Quantity?

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Yes

No

Reasons of Dissatisfaction onthe Quantity of Water

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Water containsSoil /Sand

Water TestesSalty

Containsexcessive Iron

Water has odor

Water is Dirty

KABP Study of SPADE

56

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


Water Testing Report (Test Period: 22.8.2009 – 11.5.11)

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Safe

Bacteriaaffected


57

KABP Study of SPADE

KandiMunicipal Area

KABP Study of SPADE

58

55%45%

Male Female

General Information


55%45%

MaleFemale

Economic Status – wiseDistribution of the Respondents

54%46%

APLBPL

54%46%

APLBPL


8%

16% 27%

35%

5%1% 8%18-20

21-30

31-4041-5051-6061-70

71-80

8%

16% 27%

35%

5%1% 8%18-20

21-30

31-4041-5051-6061-70

71-80


4%

8%

11%

14%

63%

SC ST OBC MINOR CEN

4%

8%

11%

14%

63%

SC ST OBC MINOR CEN


0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00%

Illiterate


Up to 8th

HS

Post-Graduate

59

KABP Study of SPADE



23%4%12%

61%

2 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10+

3%

31% 16%

20%30%

Father MotherGrand Mother Himself / HerselfOthers

3%

30%20%

16%31%

1%3%

1%

3%4%

10%

8%7% 4% 8%

22%

15%14%

Agriculture BusinessLabor Maid ServantClark Van-pullerGovt. Services MassonTeacher House wifeRickshaw Puller Tailorother

1%3%

1%

3%

4%

10%

8%7% 4% 8%

22%

15%14%

AgricultureBusinessLaborMaid ServantClarkVan-pullerGovt. ServicesMassonTeacherHouse wifeRickshaw PullerTailorother


Land Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondets

74%

26%


74%

26%Land OwnerLand Less


0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

1-20K 21-40K

41-60K

61-80K

81-100K

100K&

above

23%

4%

12%

61%

KABP Study of SPADE

60

6%

94%

RentedHouseOwn House


6%

94%

RentedHouseOwnHouse


27%

73%Mud Pucca

27%

73%MudPucca

Cell Phone – wise Distributionof the Respondents

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

Have Don’t Have


0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

Have Don’t Have


0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Cycle

VAN

TV

VCD

Motor Bike

Pump

61

KABP Study of SPADE


0.00%2.00%4.00%6.00%8.00%

10.00%12.00%14.00%16.00%18.00%



Description of Fuel used by the Family

0%0%

30%3%

33%34%

Coal

CowDungCakeGas

Kerosene

RiceStraw

Wood

0%0%

30%3%

33%34%


KABP Study of SPADE

62

3 0%

7 0%


SanitationToilet Ownership – wiseDistribution of the Respondents


0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

Have toilet at home Do not Have toilet athome

1%

44%20%

35%

<1 Yr 1 to 5 Yr 6 to 10 Yr >11 Yr

1%

44%20%

35%

<1 Yr 1 to 5 Yr6 to 10 Yr >11 Yr



0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Self

Govt.Project

Self + Loan fromKandi Federation

30%

70%

63

KABP Study of SPADE


33%

67%

HaveHave not

33%

67%

HaveHave not


5% 2%

25%

68%EverMontBiannYearl

6 8 %

2 5 %

2 %5 %

Everyday MonthlyBiannually Yearly


0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Municipality Staff

CBWMC

Self

Others


0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%

Soak Pit

Cesspool

Fields

Pond

Don't Know

A f t e r Wa s h i n g C l o t h s

Bath Water Flow from Home to

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

Soak Pit Garden Cesspool Drain Fields Road Pond River Don'tKnow

KABP Study of SPADE

64

2%

1% 1%

5%

7% 14%

16%20%

34%


Kitchen Refuses Water Flow from Home to

Toilet WasteWater Flow from Home to

0%

0%1%

6%0%

0%

0%

2%

91%


34%20% 16%

14%7%

5%

1%1%

2%

Soak Pit GardenCesspool DrainFields RoadPond RiverDon't Know

0%

0%1%

6%

0%0%

0%

2%

91% Soak Pit GardenCesspool DrainFields RoadPond RiverDon't Know

Place of Defection if no Toilet at Home?

0%0%0%

4%

96%

Field

PondsiRiversiGardenOthers

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Field

Pond side

River side


Others

Place of Defection in the Day Time ifno Toilet at Home?


96%4%0% 0%

0%

Field Pond sideRiver side Garden of the Road sideOthers

96%4%0% 0%

0%

Field Pond sideRiver side Garden of the Road sideOthers

9 1%

0 %0 %

0 %9 %

FieldPond sideRiver sideGarden of the Road sideOthers

91%

0%0%

0%9%

65

KABP Study of SPADE

WaterSource of Drinking Water at Home – wise Distribution of Respondents

Water-born Disease

24%

76%Yes No

24%

76%Yes No


0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%

Govt. Tube well

Home Sub motor

Home Tube well


Road Tube well

School Tube well

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00%

Cikungunya

Amebiasis

Jaundice

Diarrhea

Dysentery

KABP Study of SPADE

66

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00%


The test is good


The water smells goodCooking is fast & good


The water is clear

Other



0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%

Yes No


29%

71%

Water source is too far away

Supply is irregular

29%

71%

Water source istoo far awaySupply is irregular


74%

25%

1%

One Day

TwoDays

Morethan twoDays


74%

25%

1%

One Day

Two Days

More thantwo Days

97%

0% 3%


Outdoor tank

Tank/Drum inside thehouse

97%

0% 3%

Buckets/pots/BindigeOutdoor tankTank/Drum inside the house

67

KABP Study of SPADE

Supply of Water throughout the Year

6%

94%

Yes No

6%

94%

Yes No

Availability of Water for using Other Purposes throughout the Year


27%

68%

5%


1%

25%

74%

MAN

WOMANDOMESTIC HELP

1%

25%

74%

MAN

WOMANDOMESTIC HELP

27%

68%

5%


0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

Daily Once intwo

Days

Thrice ina week

Once ina week

Once ina while

Never

Who brings Water?

KABP Study of SPADE

68


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

1 to 10 minutes

11 to 20 minutes

21 to 30 minutes

31 to 40 minutes

51 to 60 minutes

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%

Less than1 month

1 to 3months

3 to 5months

More than6 months

Thatsituationdid notarise



72%12%16%

0%

Migrate from the villageTry to get water from other sourcesDepend on the water supplied by the govt. through tankersShall have to use un-potable water

72 %12 %16 %

0 %


Try to get water from other sources

Depend on the water supplied by the govt.through tankersShall have to use un-potable water

0%

16%

12%

72%

Collectsubscription toInform toMunicipalityGoing toanothertubeDon'tknow

If there is a Severe Water Scarcity What other Steps Do You Take?

0%

72%

12%16%

Collect subscription to maintain Road tube wellInform to MunicipalityGoing to another tube wellDon't know

69

KABP Study of SPADE

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00% 50.00%

Bad odor from water


Sometimes tube well is out of work

Often tube well is out of work

Water level is down in summer

Water mixed with Sand & Iron

Don't have own tube well

Water collection is disturbed due to load shading

No problem

Do You Purify Water? Method of Purification of Drinking Water?



68%

32%

Do you Purify Water?

Yes No68%

32%

Do you Purify Water?

Yes No 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

Filtering through a cloth

Using water filter

Adding Chlorine tablets

Adding Alum tablets

Adding Calcium Chloride

Boiling water

Method of Purification of Drinking Water

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Municipality

KJMUS

COUNCILOR/ ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE

NONE

KABP Study of SPADE

70

Is Problem Solved or Not ?Whether the Respondents are Satisfied with the Water Supply and its Quantity?


63%

37%


Yes No63%

37%


Yes No

52%48%Yes

No

52%48%Yes

No


Water Testes Salty


Water has odor

Water is Dirty

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%


71

KABP Study of SPADE

Jashohari Anukha‑I

KABP Study of SPADE

72

General Information






0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

18 - 20

21-30

31-40

41-50

51-60

61-70

71-80

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Illiterate

Could sign only

Literate but never went to …

Primary

Up to 8th

Matriculate

HS

Graduate

Post-Graduate

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

SC ST OBC MINOR GEN

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

Male Female0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

APL BPL

73

KABP Study of SPADE






0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

2 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10+

31%

1%1%8%

51%

6% 2%Day-labor

Van-puller

Other profession

Business

Agriculture

Clark

Govt. Job

31%

1%1%8%

51%

6% 2%

Day-laborVan-pullerOther professionBusinessAgricultureClarkGovt. Job

64%

36%


64%

36%


0.00%5.00%

10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%45.00%

Father Mother Grand Mother

Himself / Herself

Other

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00%

1-20K

21-40K

41-60K

61-80K

81-100K

100K & above

KABP Study of SPADE

74

1%

99%







1%

99%


57%43%

Mud Pucca

57%43%

MudPucca

81%

19%0.00%

10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

Have Don't Have

Have Don't Have

24%

76%

Don't Have Have

24%

76%

Don't Have Have

0 5 10 15 20 25

Cycle

TV

Van

Pump

Husking Machine

75

KABP Study of SPADE



0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%


CoalCow Dung Cake

GasKerosene Rice Straw

Wood

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

KABP Study of SPADE

76





40%

60%

Have toilet at homeDo not Have toilet at home

40%

60%Have toilet at homeDo not Have toilet at home <1 Yr 1 to 5 Yr 6 to 10 Yr >11 Yr

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

Self

Govt.Project

0.00% 50.00% 100.00% 150.00%

37%

63%


37%

63%



3%

97%

Have Drainage system at homeDo not Have Drainage system at home

3%

97%Have Drainage system at homeDo not Have Drainage system at home

77

KABP Study of SPADE

Drainage Cleaning Frequency Who cleans the Drain ?


Bath Water Flow from Home to

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

Everyday

Monthly

Biannually

Yearly

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

GP Staff

CBWMC

VO

Self

Others


Soak PitGarden

CesspoolDrainFieldsRoadPondRiverDon't …

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00%

Soak Pit

Garden

Cesspool

Drain

Fields

Road

Pond

River

Don't Know

KABP Study of SPADE

78

Kitchen Refuses Water Flow from Home to Toilet Waste Water Flow from Home to




0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

Soak PitGarden

CesspoolDrainFieldsRoadPondRiver

Don't Know

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00%

Soak PitGarden


Don't Know

0.00%20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%

100.00%120.00%

Field Pond side River side Garden of the Road

side

Others

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%

Field Pond side River side Garden of the Road

side

Others

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

100.00%

Field Pond side

River side


Others

79

KABP Study of SPADE


Water-born Disease


26%

74% Yes

No

26%

74% Yes

No0.00%5.00%

10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%

Cikungunya Amebiasis Jaundice Diarrhea Dysentery

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00%

Govt. Tube well

Home Sub motor

Home Tube well


Road Tube well

School Tube well

KABP Study of SPADE

80

32%

60%

8%


Other




How Long Water is being Stored? Where Water is being Stored?

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00%

It is near the houseThe taste is good

There is no alternativeThe water smells goodCooking is fast & good

Government supplies this waterThe water is clear

Other

86%

14%

YesNo

86%

14%

YesNo 32%

60%8% Water source is too far away

Supply is irregularOther

82%

18%One Day

Two Days

82%

18%One DayTwo Days

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%

Buckets/pots/Bindige Tank/Drum inside the house

81

KABP Study of SPADE

Yes No

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%



Who brings Water?

Enough Water is supplied

Enough Water is not supplied

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00%

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

100.00%

Daily Once in two

Days

Thrice in a

week

Once in a week

Once in a while

Never

Man

Woman

Girl

Domestic Help

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00%

KABP Study of SPADE

82




0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%

1 to 10 minutes

11 to 20 minutes

21 to 30 minutes

31 to 40 minutes

41 to 50 minutes

51 to 60 minutes

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00%

Less than 1 month

1 to 3 months

3 to 5 months

More than 6 months


0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%



Depend on the water supplied

by the govt. through tankers

Shall have to use un-potable

water

83

KABP Study of SPADE

22%

1%

64%

13%

Collect subscription to maintain Road tube well Inform to GP

If there is a Severe Water Scarcity What other Steps Do You Take?22% 1%

64%

13%

Collect subscription to maintain Road tube well Inform to GPGoing to another tube wellDon't know

Do You Purify Water?

21%

79%

Yes No

21%

79%

Yes No




Using water filter


Boiling water

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Bad odor from water







Water collection is disturbed due to load …

No problem

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

KABP Study of SPADE

84



84%

16%

Yes No


84%

16%

Yes No

82%

18%

YesNo

82%

18%

YesNo

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%

GP

VS

PRADHAN

NONE

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%


Water Testes Salty


Water has odor

Water is Dirty

85

KABP Study of SPADE

Water Testing Report (Test Period: 27.1.2010 – 30.7.2011


93%

7%

Safe

Bacteria affected

93%7%

Safe

Bacteria affected

Safe

KABP Study of SPADE

86

JashohariAnukha‑II

87

KABP Study of SPADE

69%

31%

APL BPL

General Information






37%

63%

Male Female

37%

63%

Male Female

69%

31%

APL BPL

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00%

18 -…21-3031-4041-5051-6061-7071-80

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

SC ST OBC MINOR GEN

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

Illiterate Could sign only


Primary Up to 8th Matriculate HS Graduate Post-Graduate

KABP Study of SPADE

88






24%

53%

19%

4%

2 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10+

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

Father

Mother

Grand Mother

Himself / Herself

Other

24%

53%

19%

4%

2 to 34 to 67 to 910+

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00%

Labor

Day-labor

Van-puller

Other profession

Business

Agriculture

Clark

Govt. Job

49%51%


0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

1-20K 21-40K 41-60K 61-80K 81-100K

100K & above

89

KABP Study of SPADE






3%

97%


3%

97%


46%54%

MudPucca

46%54%

MudPucca

20%

80%

Don't Have Have

20%

80%

Don't Have Have

30%

70%

Don't Have Have

30%

70%

Don't Have Have

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

Cycle TV Van Pump Husking Machine

Motor Bike

VCD Van

KABP Study of SPADE

90



0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

Cow

Buffalo

Bull

Goat

Hen

Duck

Coal

Cow Dung Cake

Gas

Kerosene

Rice Straw

Wood

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

91

KABP Study of SPADE

52%48%







52%48%


<1 Yr 1 to 5 Yr 6 to 10 Yr >11 Yr0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%

Self

Govt.Project

Self + Loan From Kandi Federation

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

44%

56% Have bathroom at homeHave no bathroom at home44%

56% Have bathroom at homeHave no bathroom at home

15%

85%


15%

85%


KABP Study of SPADE

92

Drainage Cleaning Frequency Who cleans the Drain ?




0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

Everyday Monthly Biannually Yearly0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

GP Staff

CBWMC

VO

Self

Others

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

Soak Pit Garden Cesspool Drain Fields Road Pond River Don't Know

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00%

Soak PitGarden


Don't Know

93

KABP Study of SPADE

Kitchen Refuses Water Flow from Home to Toilet Waste Water Flow from Home to



0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

Soak PitGarden


Don't Know

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Soak PitGarden


Don't Know


Field

Pond side

River side


Others

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Field

Pond side

River side


Others

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Field

Pond side

River side


Others

KABP Study of SPADE

94

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

Govt. Tube well

Home Sub motor

Home Tube well


Road Tube well

School Tube well


Water-born Disease


27%

73%Yes No

27%

73%Yes No

Cikungunya

Amebiasis

Jaundice

Diarrhea

Dysentery

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

95

KABP Study of SPADE

86%

14%

Yes No


How Long Water is being Stored? Where Water is being Stored?

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%


The taste is good




Government supplies this

water

The water is clear

Other



86%

14%

Yes No

38%

62%


86%

14%

Yes No

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%

One Day Two Days More than two Days

0.00% 50.00% 100.00% 150.00%


Tank/Drum inside the house

Outdoor tank

KABP Study of SPADE

96



Who brings Water?

9%

91%

Yes

No9%

91%

YesNo

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

Enough Water is supplied

Enough Water is

not supplied

Water supply

stopped in summer

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00%

Daily

Once in two Days

Thrice in a week

Once in a week

Once in a while

Never

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

100.00%

Man Woman Girl Domestic Help

97

KABP Study of SPADE




1 to 10 minutes

11 to 20 minutes

21 to 30 minutes

31 to 40 minutes

41 to 50 minutes

51 to 60 minutes

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00%

Less than 1 month

1 to 3 months

3 to 5 months

More than 6 months


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Depend on the water supplied by the govt. through tankers

Shall have to use un-potable water

KABP Study of SPADE

98

If there is a Severe Water Scarcity What other Steps Do You Take? Do You Purify Water?



0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00%

Collect subscription to maintain Road tube well

Inform to GP

Going to another tube well

Don't know

49%51% Yes

No49%

51% YesNo

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%


Using water filter


Boiling water Adding Alum tablets

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%

Bad odor from water







Water collection is disturbed due to load shading

No problem

99

KABP Study of SPADE




GP

VS

PRADHAN

NONE

KJMUS

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%

91%

9%

Yes No

91%

9%

Yes No

43%57%

Yes No

43%57%

Yes No

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%


Water Testes Salty


Water has odor

Water is Dirty

KABP Study of SPADE

100

Water Testing Report (Test Period: 5.10.2009 – 19.4.2011


80%

20%


80%

20%


30%70%

Safe

Bacteria affected

30%70%

Safe

Bacteria affected

KABP Study of SPADE

101

Chapter – IV : Inter Region Comparison

General Information Gender– wise Distribution of the Respondents

Gender Jashahari Anukha-I

Jashahari Anukha-II Andulia Purandarpur Kandi Municipal

Area Total

Male 8.15% 6.95% 4.97% 12.12% 14.31% 46.50%Female 6.16% 11.72% 16.10% 7.60% 11.92% 53.50%

Economic Status – wise Distribution of the Respondents Economic

Status Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

APL 8.15% 12.92% 15.70% 14.71% 14.11% 65.59%BPL 6.16% 5.76% 5.40% 4.97% 12.12% 34.41%

Age Category – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Year Jashahari Anukha-I

Jashahari Anukha- II Andulia Purandarpur Kandi Municipal

Area 18 - 20 2.78% 1.19% 3.18% 0.99% 1.98% 21 -30 6.16% 3.37% 6.16% 4.37% 7.15% 31 -40 2.18% 5.96% 4.17% 6.56% 9.34% 41 -50 1.59% 5.36% 4.37% 5.16% 4.17% 51 -60 0.99% 2.38% 2.38% 1.85% 2.18% 61 -70 0.59% 0.39% 0.59% 0.39% 1.30% 71 -80 0% 0% 0.19% 0.39% 0.19% Total 14.29% 18.65% 21.04% 19.71% 26.31%


Caste Jashahari Anukha-I


Area SC 2.18% 4.17% 1.39% 1.19% 3.57% ST 2.38% 1.98% 0.00% 1.59% 2.18% OBC 0.00% 0.19% 1.09% 0.19% 2.98% Minority 0.19% 3.97% 8.74% 7.15% 0.99% General 9.54% 8.34% 10.33% 9.54% 16.13% Total 14.29% 18.65% 21.55% 19.66% 25.85%


Educational Qualification Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Illiterate 3.58% 2.58% 5.55% 3.97% 2.38%Could sign only 1.59% 2.18% 2.38% 3.78% 3.18%Literate but never went to school 0.19% 3.19% 0.19% 0% 0.19%Primary 1.39% 1.78% 3.18% 2.18% 1.98%Up to 8th standard 2.78% 3.18% 3.37% 3.77% 6.36%Matriculate 2.59% 2.78% 2.18% 3.17% 5.06%Higher Secondary 2.38% 1.78% 1.31% 1.78% 3.97%Graduate 1.39% 0.59% 0.59% 0.99% 2.78%Post-Graduate 0.39% 0% 0.19% 0% 0.39%Others 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.79%Total 16.28% 18.06% 18.94% 19.64% 27.08%

KABP Study of SPADE

102

Family size – wise Distribution of the Respondents Family size

(No of Members)

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

2 to 3 1.38% 2.15% 1.81% 2.35% 3.35% 11.04%4 to 6 8.52% 9.02% 10.64% 10.02% 14.26% 52.46%7 to 9 3.16% 5.55% 6.24% 3.89% 4.85% 23.69%10+ 2.35% 1.77% 3.20% 3.28% 2.21% 12.81%

Head of the Family – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Head of Family Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Father 5.96% 5.76% 6.95% 5.96% 7.95% Mother 0.99% 1.19% 1.59% 0.79% 4.23% Grand Mother 0.19% 0% 0.23% 0.19% 5.16% Himself 3.97% 4.20% 3.97% 7.35% 0.79% Other 3.18% 7.55% 8.34% 5.36% 8.15% Total 14.29% 18.70% 21.08% 19.65% 26.28%


Major Occupation Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Day-labor 4.37% 5.36% 0.19% 4.05% 1.98%Van-puller 0.19% 1.19% 0.19% 0.39% 0.19%Housewife 0.00% 0.19% 0.39% 0.00% 2.58%Other profession 0.39% 1.98% 0.59% 1.78% 10.93%Rickshaw-puller 0.00% 0.00% 0.79% 0.00% 0.79%Teacher 0.00% 0.00% 0.19% 0.59% 0.19%Business 1.19% 2.98% 1.39% 3.37% 5.16%Agriculture 6.35% 5.96% 16.29% 6.55% 4.17%Clark 0.79% 0.99% 0.00% 0.79% 1.78%Government Job 0.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.59% 1.98%Total 13.47% 18.65% 20.02% 18.11% 29.75%

Land Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents Land

Ownership Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Yes 9.14% 9.14% 12.52% 12.32% 6.75% No 5.17% 9.54% 8.59% 7.35% 19.48% Total 14.31% 18.68% 21.11% 19.67% 26.23%

Quantity of Land holding – wise Distribution of the Respondents Quantity of

Land (in Katha) Jashahari Anukha-I


Area 01-20 6.37% 5.17% 7.56% 5.57% 3.58%21-40 3.18% 3.98% 4.38% 9.16% 3.58%41-60 1.59% 2.44% 5.62% 5.57% 1.59%61-80 1.59% 1.59% 2.05% 0.39% 1.19%81-100 1.99% 2.39% 2.78% 2.78% 2.39%100 & above 3.58% 2.78% 2.78% 1.19% 1.19%Total 18.30% 18.35% 25.17% 24.66% 13.52%

KABP Study of SPADE

103


Type of House Ownership

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Rented House 00.19% 00.62% 01.19% 00.59% 01.21% Own House 14.11% 18.09% 19.88% 19.08% 25.04% Total 14.30% 18.71% 21.07% 19.67% 26.25%

Type of House – wise Distribution of the Respondents Type of House

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Mud 8.51% 8.54% 8.51% 5.76% 6.95% 38.27%Pucca 6.13% 10.13% 12.88% 13.31% 19.28% 61.73%


Cell Phone Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 11.53% 14.91% 14.94% 16.30% 23.06% 80.74%Don't have 2.78% 3.77% 6.16% 3.37% 3.18% 19.26%Total 14.31% 18.68% 21.10% 19.67% 26.24%

Electricity at Home– wise Distribution of the Respondents Electricity at

Home Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


Fuel use – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Fuel using Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Coal 4.57% 3.38% 0.99% 8.55% 2.39% 19.88%Cow-Dung Cake 4.17% 3.98% 0.60% 0.80% 13.32% 22.86%Gas 0.80% 1.39% 0.80% 7.95% 0.80% 11.73%Kerosene 1.19% 0.00% 0.20% 0.00% 0.20% 1.59%Rice Straw 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.39% 1.39%Wood 3.58% 9.94% 17.10% 8.95% 2.98% 42.54%Total 14.31% 18.69% 19.68% 26.24% 21.07%

KABP Study of SPADE

104

Ownership of Animals of the Households Cow at Home among the Respondents

No. of Cow(s) Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 1 to 2 Cows 13.83% 13.44% 18.97% 22.53% 6.72% 75.49%Have 3 to 5 Cows 5.93% 5.14% 5.53% 3.56% 2.37% 22.53%Have 6 & above Cows 0.40% 1.19% 0.40% 0.00% 0.00% 1.98%% of Families have Cow 20.16% 19.76% 24.90% 26.09% 9.09%

Buffalos at Home among the Respondents

No. of Buffalo(s) Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 1 to 2 Buffalos 22.22% 0.00% 22.22% 22.22% 11.11% 77.78%Have 3 to 5 Buffalos 0.00% 11.11% 11.11% 0.00% 0.00% 22.22%% of Families have Buffalos 22.22% 11.11% 33.33% 22.22% 11.11%

Bull at Home among the Respondents

No. of Bull(s) Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 1 to 2 Bulls 48.28% 17.24% 3.45% 24.14% 0.00% 93.10%Have 3 to 5 Bulls 6.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.90%% of Families have Bulls 55.17% 17.24% 3.45% 24.14% 0.00%

Goat at Home among the Respondents

No. of Goat(s) Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 1 to 2 Goat 12.20% 18.70% 13.82% 19.51% 8.13% 72.36%Have 3 to 5 Goat 3.25% 8.13% 4.88% 6.50% 2.44% 25.20%Have 6 & above Goat 0.81% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.63% 2.44%% of Families have Goat 16.26% 26.83% 18.70% 26.02% 12.20%

Hen at Home among the Respondents

No. of Hen(s) Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 1 to 2 Hen 2.54% 6.78% 6.78% 6.78% 2.54% 25.42%Have 3 to 5 Hen 11.02% 6.78% 11.02% 18.64% 5.08% 52.54%Have 6 & above Hen 2.54% 5.08% 4.24% 9.32% 0.85% 22.03%% of Families have Hen 16.10% 18.64% 22.03% 34.75% 8.47%

Duck at Home among the Respondents

No. of Duck(s) Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 1 to 2 Duck 6.62% 4.64% 8.61% 17.22% 7.28% 44.37%Have 3 to 5 Duck 9.27% 8.61% 8.61% 14.57% 2.65% 43.71%Have 6 & above Duck 2.65% 3.31% 2.65% 1.99% 1.32% 11.92%% of Families have Duck 18.54% 16.56% 19.87% 33.77% 11.26%

KABP Study of SPADE

105

Description of Assets of the Family Cycle at Home

Cycle at Home

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


TV at Home TV at Home

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


Motor Bike at Home Motor Bike at Home

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


Husking Machine at Home Husking

Machine at Home

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


Pump at Home Pump at Home

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Have 2.58% 1.59% 0.00% 2.39% 3.58% 10.14%Don't have 11.73% 17.10% 21.07% 17.30% 22.66% 89.86%

Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Van at Home Van at Home

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


VCD at Home VCD at Home

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Don't have 14.31% 16.50% 21.07% 17.30% 21.47% 90.66%Have 0.00% 2.19% 0.00% 2.39% 4.77% 9.34%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

KABP Study of SPADE

106

Sanitation Toilet Ownership – wise Distribution of the Respondents

Toilet Ownership Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Within GP 40.28% 52.12% 33.97% 52.52% 82.57% -Have Overall 5.77% 9.74% 7.16% 10.34% 21.67% 54.67%Within GP 59.72% 47.88% 66.03% 47.48% 17.43% -Don’t

Have Overall 8.55% 8.95% 13.92% 9.34% 4.57% 45.33%Overall Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Year of Toilet Construction – wise Distribution of the Respondents having Toilets Years of Toilet Construction

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

<1 Yr 0.73% 0.00% 0.36% 0.36% 0.36% 1.82%1 to 5 Yrs 3.64% 9.82% 7.27% 10.91% 8.00% 39.64%6 to 10 Yrs 3.64% 5.45% 4.00% 5.09% 13.82% 32.00%>11 Yrs 2.55% 2.55% 1.45% 2.55% 17.45% 26.55%Total 10.55% 17.82% 13.09% 18.91% 39.64%

Sources of Fund for Toilet Construction – wise Distribution of the Respondents having Toilets

Sources of Fund Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Self 10.18% 15.27% 12.73% 16.36% 32.73% 87.27%Govt Project 0.36% 1.45% 0.00% 2.55% 6.55% 10.91%Self + Loan From KJMUS 0.00% 1.09% 0.36% 0.00% 0.36% 1.82%Total 10.55% 17.82% 13.09% 18.91% 39.64%


Bathroom at Home Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Within GP 37.50% 43.62% 30.19% 50.50% 70.45% -Have Overall 5.37% 8.15% 6.36% 9.94% 18.49% 48.31%Within GP 62.50% 56.38% 69.81% 49.50% 29.55% -Don't

Have Overall 8.95% 10.54% 14.71% 9.74% 7.75% 51.69%Overall Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Drainage System at Home – wise Distribution of the Respondents Drainage system at

Home Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Within GP 12.50% 14.89% 2.83% 24.24% 33.33% -Have Overall 1.79% 2.78% 0.60% 4.77% 8.75% 18.69%Within GP 87.50% 85.11% 97.17% 75.76% 66.67% -Don't

Have Overall 12.52% 15.90% 20.48% 14.91% 17.50% 81.31% Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Drainage Cleaning Frequency – wise Distribution of the Respondents having Drains Drainage Cleaning

Frequency Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Everyday 4.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.70% 15.96%Monthly 2.13% 10.64% 2.13% 0.00% 31.91% 46.81%Biannually 2.13% 2.13% 1.06% 0.00% 2.13% 7.45%Yearly 1.06% 2.13% 0.00% 25.53% 1.06% 29.79%Total 9.57% 14.89% 3.19% 25.53% 46.81%

KABP Study of SPADE

107

Who cleans the Drain Who cleans the

Drains Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

GP/ Municipality Staff 0.00% 11.70% 0.00% 0.00% 11.70% 23.40%CBWMC 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 31.91% 31.91%VO 3.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.13% 5.32%Self 6.38% 3.19% 2.13% 25.53% 1.06% 38.30%Others 0.00% 0.00% 1.06% 0.00% 0.00% 1.06%Total 9.57% 14.89% 3.19% 25.53% 46.81%

KABP Study of SPADE

108

Flow of Waste Water from Home After Washing Cloths

Where Waste Water Flow

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Soak Pit 0.00% 0.80% 0.00% 0.60% 0.20% 1.59%Garden 0.20% 0.60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.40% 1.19%Cess Pool 0.20% 0.60% 0.40% 0.00% 0.40% 1.59%Drain 0.40% 0.40% 1.39% 0.40% 6.16% 8.75%Fields 0.60% 0.20% 0.20% 1.19% 0.99% 3.18%Road 1.59% 0.00% 0.60% 0.99% 0.60% 3.78%Pond 11.33% 15.31% 17.50% 12.92% 17.10% 74.16%River 0.00% 0.80% 0.80% 3.58% 0.20% 5.37%Don't Know 0.00% 0.00% 0.20% 0.00% 0.20% 0.40%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Bath Water Flows from Home to Where Waste Water Flow

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


Kitchen Waste Water Flows from Home to Where Waste Water Flow

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


KABP Study of SPADE

109

Toilet Waste Water Flows from Home to Where Waste Water Flow

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total


Place of Defection if there is no Toilet at Home

Place of Defection Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Field 17.54% 18.86% 28.07% 20.61% 9.65% 94.74%Pond side 0.44% 0.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.44% 1.75%River side 0.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.88%Road side Garden 0.00% 0.00% 2.19% 0.00% 0.00% 2.19%Others 0.00% 0.00% 0.44% 0.00% 0.00% 0.44%Total 18.86% 19.74% 30.70% 20.61% 10.09%

Place of Defection in case of Day Time if there is no Toilet at Home



Area Total


Place of Defection in case of Diarrhea if there is no Toilet at Home



Area Total


KABP Study of SPADE

110

Water Source of Drinking Water at Home

Source of Drinking Water

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Yes 3.78% 4.97% 3.58% 5.37% 6.36% 24.06%No 10.54% 13.72% 17.50% 14.31% 19.88% 75.94%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Primary Water Sources Primary Water

Sources Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Govt. Tube well 5.17% 4.37% 14.51% 13.92% 17.10% 55.07%Home Sub motor 0.20% 0.80% 3.58% 5.37% 6.36% 16.30%Home Tube well 3.58% 4.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.75%Neighbor's Tube well 0.40% 0.00% 0.00% 0.40% 0.00% 0.80%Road Tube well 4.77% 8.95% 2.98% 0.00% 2.78% 19.48%School Tube well 0.20% 0.40% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.60%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Store Water at Home Store Water

at home Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Yes 12.33% 16.10% 18.69% 14.71% 25.45% 87.28%No 1.99% 2.58% 2.39% 4.97% 0.80% 12.72%

Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%


Reasons for storing Water Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Water source is too far away 4.56% 7.06% 12.07% 6.61% 8.43% 38.72%Supply is irregular 8.43% 11.39% 9.34% 10.25% 20.73% 60.14%Others 1.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.14%Total 14.12% 18.45% 21.41% 16.86% 29.16%

How long water is being stored How long water is

stored Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

One Day 11.62% 13.90% 20.73% 16.86% 21.64% 84.74%Two Days 2.51% 4.33% 0.68% 0.00% 7.29% 14.81%More than two Days 0.00% 0.23% 0.00% 0.00% 0.23% 0.46%Total 14.12% 18.45% 21.41% 16.86% 29.16%

Where water is being stored

Where water is Stored Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Buckets/pots/ Bindige 13.90% 18.00% 20.73% 15.03% 28.25% 95.90%Outdoor tank 0.00% 0.00% 0.23% 1.59% 0.00% 1.82%Tank/Drum inside the house 0.23% 0.46% 0.46% 0.23% 0.91% 2.28%Total 14.12% 18.45% 21.41% 16.86% 29.16%

KABP Study of SPADE

111

Is water supply regular throughout the year Water is supplied throughout Year

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Yes 0.60% 1.59% 3.18% 0.00% 1.59% 6.96%No 13.72% 17.10% 17.89% 19.68% 24.65% 93.04%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Availability of Water to use for other purposes

Availability of Water Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Enough Water is Supplied 7.36% 1.39% 12.52% 8.95% 18.09% 48.31%Enough Water is not Supplied 6.16% 17.30% 7.36% 10.74% 6.76% 48.31%Water supply stops in summer 0.80% 0.00% 1.19% 0.00% 1.39% 3.38%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Frequency of Cleaning of the Water Pot Frequency of

Cleaning Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Daily 12.72% 18.09% 19.28% 18.29% 22.66% 91.05%Once in two Days 1.59% 0.20% 1.19% 0.80% 1.39% 5.17%Thrice in a week 0.00% 0.20% 0.60% 0.20% 0.00% 0.99%Once in a week 0.00% 0.20% 0.00% 0.40% 0.80% 1.39%Once in a while 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.80% 0.80%Never 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.60% 0.60%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Who brings Water at Home Who brings

Water Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Man 2.62% 1.31% 0.52% 1.05% 6.54% 12.04%Woman 10.21% 16.75% 22.25% 17.80% 19.37% 86.39%Boy 0.00% 0.00% 0.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.26%Girl 0.52% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.52%Domestic Help 0.52% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.26% 0.79%Total 13.87% 18.06% 23.04% 18.85% 26.18%

Time required to fetch water for those having no source of water at Home Time

required Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

1 to 10m. 8.12% 14.14% 16.75% 12.83% 14.14% 65.97%11 to 20m. 3.40% 3.40% 4.97% 5.76% 8.90% 26.44%21 to 30m. 1.05% 0.52% 1.31% 0.26% 2.09% 5.24%31 to 40m. 0.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.52% 1.31%41 to 50m. 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%51 to 60m. 0.52% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.52% 1.05%Total 13.87% 18.06% 23.04% 18.85% 26.18%

How long the Respondents did manage without enough water this year

Respondents had managed without Enough Water

Jashahari Anukha-I

Jashahari Anukha- II Andulia Purandarpur

Kandi Municipal

Area Total

Less than 1 month 2.39% 3.38% 10.74% 0.40% 3.58% 20.48%1 to 3 months 2.19% 1.59% 7.95% 0.00% 1.19% 12.92%3 to 5 months 0.40% 0.00% 0.20% 0.00% 0.40% 0.99%More than 6 months 2.39% 0.00% 1.59% 0.20% 0.20% 4.37%That situation did not arise 6.96% 13.72% 0.60% 19.09% 20.87% 61.23%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

KABP Study of SPADE

112

In case of a Severe Water Scarcity what steps does the community take

Steps Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Migrate from the village 0.20% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.20%Try to get water from other sources 8.35% 17.50% 20.48% 18.29% 18.89% 83.50%

Depend on the water supplied by the govt. through tankers 1.99% 1.19% 0.60% 0.00% 3.18% 6.96%

Shall have to use un-potable water 3.78% 0.00% 0.00% 1.39% 4.17% 9.34%

Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

In case of a severe water scarcity, what steps shall the respondents take Steps to be taken in case of

Severe Water Scarcity Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Collect subscription to maintain Road tube well 3.18% 0.20% 9.34% 16.30% 9.15% 38.17%

Inform to GP/Municipality 0.20% 0.60% 9.94% 2.19% 9.34% 22.27%Going to another tube well 9.15% 13.52% 0.00% 0.40% 3.78% 26.84%Don't know 1.79% 4.37% 1.79% 0.80% 3.98% 12.72%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Do you purify the Drinking Water Purify Water

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Yes 2.98% 9.15% 9.94% 3.18% 17.89% 43.14%No 11.33% 9.54% 11.13% 16.50% 8.35% 56.86%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Method adopted for Purification of Drinking Water

Method of Purification Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Filtering through a cloth 0.46% 10.14% 20.74% 4.15% 23.04% 58.53%Using water filter 5.53% 11.06% 2.30% 3.23% 14.29% 36.41%Adding Chlorine tablets 0.46% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.46%Adding Alum tablets 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.15% 4.15%Boiling water 0.46% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.46%Total 6.91% 21.20% 23.04% 7.37% 41.47%

During the last one year, have you encountered any problem regarding Fetching Water Problems faced

Regarding Fetching Water

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Bad odor from water 0.60% 0.40% 0.40% 0.00% 0.40% 1.80%Dirty water from tube well 0.20% 0.00% 0.20% 0.20% 4.57% 5.18%

Sometimes tube well is out of order 7.16% 1.59% 5.96% 4.57% 0.99% 20.27%

Often tube well is out of order 1.19% 0.20% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.39%

Level went down during Summer 0.20% 1.19% 0.20% 0.00% 0.40% 1.99%

Water mixed with sand & iron 1.79% 10.34% 9.15% 3.98% 7.55% 32.81%

No problem 3.18% 4.97% 4.77% 10.93% 11.33% 35.18%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

KABP Study of SPADE

113

Whom the Respondents have contacted regarding the problems they have encountered

To whom contacted Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

GP/ Municipality 10.43% 15.03% 6.13% 3.37% 1.84% 36.81%Voluntary Organization / NGO 1.84% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.84%

KJMUS 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.92% 0.00% 0.92%Pradhan / Elected Representative 0.31% 3.07% 0.00% 0.31% 0.00% 3.68%

None 4.60% 3.07% 19.02% 8.90% 21.17% 56.75%Total 17.18% 21.17% 25.15% 13.50% 23.01%

Have the problem solved Have the

problem Solved Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Yes 14.42% 19.33% 9.51% 12.88% 14.42% 70.55%No 2.76% 1.84% 15.64% 0.61% 8.59% 29.45%Total 17.18% 21.17% 25.15% 13.50% 23.01%

Whether the Respondents are satisfied with the Water Supply and its Quantity Are the

Respondents Satisfied

Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Yes 11.73% 7.95% 11.33% 15.51% 13.52% 60.04%No 2.58% 10.74% 9.74% 4.17% 12.72% 39.96%Total 14.31% 18.69% 21.07% 19.68% 26.24%

Reasons of Dissatisfaction regarding the Quantity of Water Reasons of

Dissatisfaction Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Water contains Soil or Sand 0.00% 5.47% 11.94% 0.00% 3.48% 20.90%

Water Tastes Salty 0.00% 0.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.50%Contains excessive Iron 4.48% 20.40% 10.95% 9.95% 15.42% 61.19%Water has odor 1.49% 0.50% 1.00% 0.00% 1.49% 4.48%Water is dirty 0.50% 0.00% 0.50% 0.50% 11.44% 12.94%Total 6.47% 26.87% 24.38% 10.45% 31.84%

Reasons for use of a particular Source of Drinking Water

Reasons for Use Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

It is near the house 3.53% 3.24% 0.74% 4.05% 4.15% 15.72%The taste is good 3.84% 2.89% 6.30% 5.28% 3.91% 22.23%There is no alternative 2.29% 2.97% 0.05% 0.44% 4.85% 10.60%The water smells good 3.04% 1.58% 5.26% 4.93% 3.00% 17.80%Cooking is fast & good 1.50% 0.49% 2.08% 4.17% 1.85% 10.08%Government supplies this water 0.64% 1.10% 0.14% 0.03% 1.87% 3.78%

The water is clear 2.12% 2.53% 5.60% 5.17% 2.94% 18.35%Others 1.36% 0.00% 0.00% 0.07% 0.00% 1.43%Total 18.32% 14.81% 20.17% 24.14% 22.57%

KABP Study of SPADE

114

Water–born Diseases Water–born

Diseases Jashahari Anukha-I


Area Total

Cikungunya 2.02% 2.02% 33.33% 0.00% 1.01% 38.38%Amebiasis 7.07% 0.00% 6.06% 6.06% 4.04% 23.23%Jaundice 4.04% 0.00% 1.01% 3.03% 1.01% 9.09%Diarrhea 8.08% 3.03% 8.08% 4.04% 2.02% 25.25%Dysentery 1.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.03% 4.04%Total 22.22% 5.05% 48.48% 13.13% 11.11%

GP-Wise Water Testing Report (Test Period: September – 2011) Water Testing

Report Jashahari Anukha-I

Jashahari Anukha- II Andulia Purandarpur Total

Safe 12.82% 7.69% 35.90% 17.95% 74.36% Bacteria Affected 0.00% 17.95% 5.13% 2.56% 25.64%

KABP Study of SPADE

115

Chapter –V : KABP Analysis & Interpretation It has already been mentioned earlier that the present KABP Study had been conducted in the district of Murshidabad and 4 Gram Panchayats and 1 Municipality Area had been selected for this purpose. For assessing KABP, 4 different scales had been prepared which altogether constituted the overall KABP Scale. The KABP Scale had been found to be reliable as the overall Cronbach’s Alpha has been found to be reasonably high (α = 0.91). The original scale was containing 63 items which, later on, had been reduced to 52 items. The study had been conducted with 503 respondents. The overall score on KABP is 13.13 (Standard deviation σ = 1.45).

A comparison of Gender-wise KABP Scores shows that significant variations exist between the male and female respondents which are evident from the table below.

Sex N K A B P KABP μ 3.40 3.37 3.37 3.33 13.46

Female 269 σ 0.37 0.52 0.41 0.48 1.45 μ 3.23 3.08 3.25 3.20 12.76

Male 234 σ 0.39 0.45 0.37 0.45 1.34

503 13.13

The reasons behind this might be many :

(a) The women, particularly those who are associated with different Community Based organizations like Self Help Groups, usually attend different Awareness Promotion Programs conducted by NGOs and Government Departments. Naturally, their level of awareness or Knowledge is comparatively higher than the male who seldom get such opportunities.

(b) Also, attitudinally, the female are more in favor of creating household sanitary and water infrastructure since lack of the same affects them more.

(c) The Scales developed for assessing KABP was basically female-focused since the Research Team believes that Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior and Practices of the women are more significant than the male from the perspective of all Health and Hygiene-related issues.

Economic Status – wise comparison of the KABP Scores reveal that there exists no significant variation among the APL and BPL categories. Though the overall KABP Score of the APL (μ = 13.14) is slightly higher than the BPL category, the standard deviation is also higher for the APL – which signifies that the fluctuations in the score is also higher. Hence, it could be concluded that economic status, as has been demarcated by the Government, actually shows no difference in the KABP Score of the respective categories.

Sex N K A B P KABP μ 3.37 3.25 3.27 3.23 13.12

BPL 173 σ 0.37 0.49 0.38 0.46 1.35 μ 3.30 3.22 3.33 3.29 13.14

APL 330 σ 0.43 0.55 0.43 0.49 1.62

503 13.13

Thus, it could be concluded that Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related KABP does not vary widely among APL and BPL categories.

A comparison of the KABP Scores among the different age categories also shows that there exists no significant difference among them. This could be seen from the table below :

KABP Study of SPADE

116

Age Group

Male (N1) μ σ Female

(N2) μ σ N1 + N2 μ σ

18 - 20 24 12.61 1.05 27 13.78 1.26 51 13.23 1.30 21 - 30 44 12.61 1.34 94 13.29 1.43 138 13.08 1.43 31 - 40 67 12.95 1.45 75 13.57 1.51 142 13.28 1.51 41 - 50 53 12.76 1.40 51 13.44 1.49 104 13.10 1.48 51 - 60 32 12.76 1.34 16 13.55 1.39 48 13.03 1.39 61 - 70 12 12.60 1.16 4 12.83 2.31 16 12.66 1.38 71 - 80 2 12.22 1.17 2 14.07 1.94 4 13.14 1.69 Overall 234 12.76 1.34 269 13.46 1.45 503 13.13 1.45

The Coefficient of Correlation between Age and the overall mean KABP Score is also insignificant

Variable 1 Variable 2 Coefficient Remark

Age KABP Score r = -.0292 p = .513 Marked correlations are significant at p < .05, N = 503

Thus, it could be concluded that age of the respondents is not a determinant of their Water, Sanitation and Hygiene – related KABP Score.

The table below shows the KABP Scores among the different caste categories. The average score is highest for the General category followed by the Minorities, OBCs, SCs and STs. The score largely resembles the age-old societal hierarchy. The reasons behind this might be traced back into the overall backwardness of the district. Murshidabad ranks third backward most districts (after Malda and Purulia) in West Bengal in terms of most all human development indicators. It is the 6th most densely populated district in the State (Census 2001) and its areas are predominantly rural (89.57% rural area). Moreover, the decadal growth rate (23.7%) is higher than the State average

(17.6%). General literacy rate in the district during 2001 was about 35 percent, which was much lower than the state average of 69 percent. The district ranks 16th (out of 18 districts) in literacy rates of males and females above 7 years of age (Census, 2001). While 77.9% of children ages 5-14 years of age are attending school, the percentage of children belonging to Scheduled Caste and Tribe is lower (75.2% and 58.1%, respectively) (MICS, 2001).

Thus, the traditional pattern is still pervading which perhaps explains the findings.

Caste N K A B P KABP μ 3.27 3.14 3.14 3.13 12.69

SC 63 σ 0.35 0.36 0.39 0.46 1.24 μ 3.20 2.95 3.20 3.08 12.43

ST 41 σ 0.42 0.60 0.43 0.48 1.79 μ 3.29 3.14 3.27 3.31 13.01

OBC 20 σ 0.34 0.40 0.31 0.34 1.13 μ 3.22 3.29 3.33 3.34 13.19

Minority 106 σ 0.38 0.55 0.44 0.47 1.46 μ 3.39 3.28 3.37 3.30 13.33

General 273 σ 0.40 0.50 0.37 0.47 1.40

503

11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5

ST

SC

OBC

Minority

General

KABP Study of SPADE

117

A comparison of the KABP Scores among the different educational levels reveals that the score is highest among the Graduates followed by the Post Graduates, Matriculates, Higher Secondary, Others, Up to VIII, Primary, Literate, Could Sign only, Literate – but never went to School. By and large, the scores are symmetrical to the educational levels barring few exceptions – which is quiet reasonable.

Education Level N K A B P KABP μ 3.25 3.21 3.24 3.13 12.84

Illiterate 109 σ 0.35 0.53 0.42 0.47 1.42 μ 3.26 3.13 3.19 3.09 12.68

Could sign only 61 σ 0.39 0.55 0.37 0.45 1.45 μ 3.50 3.08 3.05 2.96 12.60

Literate but never went to school 9 σ 0.41 0.34 0.25 0.31 0.49 μ 3.28 3.20 3.32 3.24 13.04

Primary 53 σ 0.42 0.57 0.40 0.45 1.53 μ 3.31 3.21 3.32 3.27 13.10

Up to VIII 93 σ 0.39 0.53 0.43 0.48 1.52 μ 3.40 3.32 3.40 3.43 13.56

Matriculate 82 σ 0.42 0.51 0.39 0.43 1.50 μ 3.40 3.30 3.40 3.34 13.44

Higher Secondary 57 σ 0.39 0.44 0.35 0.49 1.26 μ 3.35 3.36 3.47 3.56 13.75

Graduate 30 σ 0.41 0.38 0.29 0.35 1.08 μ 3.49 3.33 3.31 3.50 13.63

Post-Graduate 5 σ 0.48 0.18 0.46 0.39 1.09 μ 3.42 2.94 3.30 3.58 13.24

Others 4 σ 0.44 0.29 0.13 0.00 0.41 μ 3.32 3.23 3.31 3.27 13.13

Total 503 σ 0.39 0.51 0.40 0.47 1.45

Graduate

Post-Graduate

Matriculate

Higher Secondary

Others

Up to VIIIPrimary

IlliterateCould sign only


KABP Study of SPADE

118

12

13

14

1 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10 +

11

12

13

14

15

GrandMother

Mother Others Father Self

The chart below shows the comparison of mean KABP Scores amongst families with varied number of members. From the diagram, it could be seen that there exists no direct relationship between KABP Score and the number of members in the family. While the mean KABP Score for the families with 1 to 3 members is the highest one, the second in the order are the families with 7 to 9 members. Families with more than 10 members have occupied the third place. Thus, it could be concluded that size of the family has no relationship with Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related KABP Score.

Family Size N K A B P KABP μ 3.35 3.25 3.35 3.32 13.27

1 to 3 107 σ 0.39 0.49 0.40 0.45 1.40 μ 3.30 3.21 3.30 3.25 13.06

4 to 6 289 σ 0.40 0.53 0.39 0.48 1.50 μ 3.36 3.29 3.31 3.28 13.23

7 to 9 78 σ 0.38 0.49 0.42 0.47 1.38 μ 3.33 3.24 3.30 3.23 13.09

10 + 29 σ 0.32 0.48 0.36 0.46 1.28 μ 3.32 3.23 3.31 3.27 13.13

Total 503 σ 0.39 0.51 0.40 0.47 1.45

A comparison of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related KABP Scores across families with different Heads shows that the score is highest where Grand Mother is the Head of the family and it is lowest for families where the respondent is the Head. However, the variation has little significance in the context of the present study.

Head of the Family N K A B P KABP

μ 3.40 3.30 3.30 3.26 13.19 Father 164σ 0.40 0.50 0.40 0.45 1.30 μ 3.60 3.70 3.60 3.49 14.34 Grand Mother 7σ 0.30 0.30 0.50 0.61 1.53 μ 3.40 3.30 3.50 3.44 13.66 Mother 44σ 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 1.36 μ 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.31 13.27 Others 149σ 0.40 0.50 0.40 0.49 1.47 μ 3.20 3.10 3.20 3.17 12.69 Self 139σ 0.40 0.50 0.40 0.48 1.49

503

KABP Study of SPADE

119

One of the interesting observations of the present study is that the KABP Score of the Housewives is significantly higher than all the other occupational categories. The KABP mean score for the Housewives is 15.05 while the same score for the very next category (Government Job) is 13.98. On the other hand, the KABP Score for the Daily Wagers is the lowest one (12.18). From the chart below, it is clearly evident that KABP Score is generally lower for the low-income categories like Domestic Helps, Van or Rickshaw Pullers, Daily Wagers, etc. On the contrary, the score is higher for the high-income categories like Government or Private Sector Job holders. The reason behind the high score among the Housewives is that a majority of the housewives are Self Help Group members and as such, they often participate in Awareness Promotion Camps or many a times, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related issues are being discussed in their meetings. Finally, it could be concluded that Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related messages needs to be disseminated more among the poor.

Occupation N K A B P KABP μ 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.25 13.19 Agriculture 213σ 0.30 0.50 0.40 0.45 1.34 μ 3.40 3.20 3.40 3.37 13.34 Business 80σ 0.40 0.50 0.40 0.47 1.43 μ 3.20 2.90 3.10 3.02 12.18 Daily Wager 95σ 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.46 1.25 μ 3.40 3.10 3.30 3.24 13.10 Domestic Help 8 σ 0.50 0.70 0.50 0.47 2.06 μ 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.57 13.98 Government Job 14σ 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.29 1.23 μ 3.80 3.70 3.80 3.78 15.05 House wife 16σ 0.30 0.40 0.30 0.25 0.98 μ 3.50 3.40 3.50 3.50 13.84 Private Sector Job 35σ 0.40 0.50 0.30 0.39 1.27 μ 3.20 3.20 3.30 3.07 12.81 Profession 6 σ 0.30 0.40 0.20 0.39 0.77 μ 3.10 3.30 3.10 3.07 12.65 Rickshaw / Van Puller 19σ 0.30 0.50 0.20 0.38 0.89 μ 3.30 3.50 3.40 3.39 13.60 Self Employed 13σ 0.50 0.40 0.50 0.49 1.69 μ 3.20 3.20 3.50 3.67 13.56 Retired / Unemployed 4 σ 0.50 0.50 0.30 0.22 1.12

5.00 10.00 15.00

Daily Wager

Rickshaw / Van Puller

Profession

Domestic Help

Agriculture

Business

Retired / Unemployed

Self Employed

Private Sector Job

Government Job

House wife

KABP Study of SPADE

120

The table below shows a comparison of the average KABP Scores between respondents having Mud built home and Pucca home. While the score is 12.63 for the respondents having Mud built home, the score for the Pucca home owners is 13.44. Quality of materials used in house-building is an indicator of the economic status of the household. Thus, it could be concluded that economic status is an important factor in the context of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related KABP and the poor needs more intensive campaign on the related issues.

Type of Home N K A B P KABP μ 3.26 3.13 3.15 3.09 12.63 Mud 187 σ 0.36 0.51 0.37 0.43 1.30 μ 3.35 3.30 3.41 3.38 13.44 Pucca 316 σ 0.41 0.50 0.38 0.46 1.45

503

A comparison of KABP Scores between those who have Cell Phones and who don’t shows that the score is much higher among the Cell Phone users. Though possession or use of cell phones is not a good indicator of economic status of the household, it could not be denied that the users have a better access to information. Here, the point to be noted is that those who are non-users are required to be addressed more so that at least, their awareness could be enhanced.

Cell Phone N K A B P KABP μ 3.34 3.24 3.35 3.31 13.24

Have 408 σ 0.40 0.51 0.39 0.47 1.46 μ 3.22 3.21 3.15 3.10 12.68

Don’t have 95 σ 0.33 0.53 0.38 0.44 1.29

503

From the table below, it is clearly evident that the respondents from households having electricity connections have a higher score on KABP than the respondents from households having no electricity connection. Electricity connection, besides economic status, also indicates level of access to information. Hence, it could be concluded that economic status, coupled with access to information is a determinant of KABP Scores.

Electricity N K A B P KABP μ 3.33 3.24 3.36 3.32 13.25 Yes 335 σ 0.40 0.50 0.38 0.46 1.46 μ 3.30 3.22 3.21 3.17 12.90 No 168 σ 0.38 0.53 0.41 0.48 1.39

503

A comparison of those who have toilet at their home and those who have not shows that the score is higher for those who have toilets at their home. From the table below, it could be seen that the mean score for those who have toilet at their home is 13.52 while those who don’t have toilets have a score of 12.67.

Toilet at Home N K A B P KABP μ 3.37 3.31 3.44 3.40 13.52

Yes 275 σ 0.41 0.48 0.35 0.44 1.39 μ 3.26 3.14 3.16 3.11 12.67

No 228 σ 0.37 0.53 0.40 0.47 1.38

503

A comparison of those who have bathroom at their home and those who have not shows that the score is higher for those who have bathroom at their home. From the table below, it could be seen that the mean score for those who have bathroom at their home is 13.51 while those who don’t have bathroom have a score of 12.79.

KABP Study of SPADE

121

Bathroom at Home N K A B P KABP μ 3.36 3.30 3.43 3.41 13.51 Yes 243 σ 0.41 0.47 0.35 0.43 1.38 μ 3.28 3.17 3.20 3.13 12.79 No 260 σ 0.37 0.54 0.41 0.47 1.42

503

The respondents collect drinking water from various sources. Some have their own tube well at home. Some fetch water from other’s tube wells (Private) while most others fetch water from Government tube wells. A comparison of KABP Scores among respondents fetching water from various sources reveals that the score is highest among those who have their own tube wells at home. Most of the respondents fetch water from Government installed tube wells and they have occupied the second place in terms of KABP Score. Finally, the score is lowest for those who fetch drinking water from nearby school’s tube wells.

Source of Drinking Water N K A B P KABP μ 3.08 2.92 2.98 2.94 11.92

School Tube well 3 σ 0.35 0.63 0.54 0.71 2.04 μ 3.34 3.17 3.24 3.19 12.93

Private Tube well 112 σ 0.36 0.46 0.39 0.45 1.29 μ 3.33 3.28 3.41 3.39 13.40

Home Tube well 117 σ 0.38 0.43 0.35 0.43 1.27 μ 3.31 3.25 3.31 3.25 13.12

Govt. Tube well 271 σ 0.42 0.56 0.41 0.48 1.55

503

A comparison of KABP Scores among the households having drainage systems and those who don’t reveals that the score is higher for such households which have a drainage system than those which don’t have.

Drainage N K A B P KABP μ 3.39 3.28 3.42 3.39 13.48

Yes 94 σ 0.40 0.46 0.36 0.45 1.47 μ 3.30 3.22 3.29 3.24 13.06

No 409 σ 0.39 0.52 0.40 0.47 1.43

503

The Study reveals that 94 respondents out of 503 (18.70%) have suffered from Water Borne Diseases and on an average, have spent Rs. 2359.82 for treatment. A comparison of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related KABP Scores among those who suffered from WBD and those who don’t reveals the following :

Water Borne Diseases N K A B P KABP μ 3.30 3.26 3.18 3.10 12.84

Have suffered from WBD 94 σ 0.35 0.56 0.38 0.44 1.20 μ 3.32 3.23 3.34 3.31 13.20

Have not suffered from WBD 409 σ 0.40 0.50 0.39 0.47 1.49

503

From the table above, it could be seen that KABP Score for those who have not suffered from Water Borne Diseases is higher than those who have suffered.

The table below shows the comparison of KABP Scores among those who purify water before drinking and those who don’t. It is clearly evident from the table that the score is higher among those who purify water before drinking.

KABP Study of SPADE

122

10

11

12

13

14

15

Andulia KMU JA - II Purandarpur JA - I

Purify Water N K A B P KABP μ 3.41 3.44 3.42 3.34 13.61

Yes 216 σ 0.41 0.49 0.40 0.48 1.41 μ 3.26 3.08 3.23 3.21 12.78

No 287 σ 0.36 0.47 0.38 0.46 1.37

503

The present study had asked the respondents whether they are satisfied with the quality of water they are receiving and a 59% of the respondents mentioned that they are satisfied with the quality of water they are getting. A comparison of KABP Scores among those who are satisfied and who are not reveals that the score is higher among those who are dissatisfied with the quality of water.

Water Quality N K A B P KABP μ 3.29 3.12 3.22 3.21 12.85

Satisfied 299 σ 0.38 0.47 0.36 0.46 1.31 μ 3.37 3.40 3.45 3.35 13.56

Dissatisfied 204 σ 0.40 0.53 0.41 0.48 1.53

Finally, a geographical area-wise comparison shows that the overall mean KABP Score is highest at Andulia GP followed by Kandi Municipal area, Jasohari Anukha – II, Purandarpur and Jasohari Anukha – I. While Andulia is purely a rural area, Kandi Municipality is urban and as such, KABP was supposed to be higher at Kandi Municipal area rather than Andulia. Perhaps the reason behind a higher score of Andulia is that SPADE is active in Andulia since 2000 and so far, different variety of Awareness Promotion

programs have been conducted at Andulia and as a consequence, the overall awareness level regarding Water, Sanitation and Hygiene related issues have also gone up. Similarly, Jasohari Anukha – I is the most vulnerable area in terms of disaster and consequent poverty and as such, the score is the lowest.

GP or Municipal Area N K A B P KABP μ 3.50 3.72 3.46 3.37 14.05 Andulia GP 106 σ 0.27 0.34 0.46 0.51 1.02 μ 2.98 2.84 3.17 3.21 12.21 Purandarpur GP 99 σ 0.27 0.25 0.21 0.40 0.92 μ 3.12 2.89 2.98 2.85 11.84 JA - I GP 72 σ 0.22 0.37 0.31 0.44 1.08 μ 3.39 3.13 3.29 3.17 12.98 JA - II GP 94 σ 0.33 0.40 0.36 0.38 1.05 μ 3.49 3.40 3.50 3.52 13.91 Kandi Municipal Area 132 σ 0.46 0.51 0.36 0.37 1.51

KABP Study of SPADE

123

KABP Score-wise Distribution of Villages or Wards

GP or Municipality Village or Ward K A B P KABP NumberKandi Municipality Ward No 15 3.91 3.97 3.72 3.77 15.36 22Kandi Municipality Ward No 9 3.83 3.89 3.82 3.80 15.34 21JA - II GP Madhunia 3.69 4.00 3.80 3.75 15.24 1Andulia GP Durgapur 3.50 3.80 3.90 3.90 15.16 5Kandi Municipality Ward No 4 3.81 3.73 3.77 3.79 15.09 17Andulia GP Chandnagar 3.35 3.96 3.89 3.82 15.02 7JA - II GP Dadpur 3.73 3.83 3.47 3.67 14.70 2Andulia GP Jeetpur 3.70 3.90 3.60 3.50 14.63 2Andulia GP Sashpara 3.50 3.80 3.70 3.60 14.58 23Andulia GP Rajarampur 3.70 3.80 3.40 3.40 14.31 4Purandarpur GP Chator 3.23 3.42 3.70 3.92 14.26 2Andulia GP Gobindopur 3.40 3.80 3.50 3.50 14.19 12JA - II GP Bhandera 3.69 3.37 3.49 3.29 13.84 9Andulia GP Mahadeya 3.50 3.60 3.40 3.30 13.77 16Andulia GP Gopalpur 3.70 3.70 3.30 3.00 13.74 6Andulia GP Manoharpur 3.20 4.00 3.20 3.10 13.49 5Andulia GP Laxmikantapur 3.40 3.90 3.20 2.90 13.43 8JA - II GP Kalyanpur 3.32 3.13 3.51 3.43 13.40 5Andulia GP Andulia 3.60 3.30 3.20 3.20 13.29 13Kandi Municipality Ward No 14 3.44 2.86 3.40 3.57 13.27 21Andulia GP Santospur 3.80 3.50 2.90 3.00 13.19 5Purandarpur GP Raybati 3.21 3.02 3.37 3.56 13.16 4Purandarpur GP Ranagram 3.19 3.10 3.33 3.52 13.13 9Kandi Municipality Ward No 8 3.19 3.10 3.40 3.39 13.09 29JA - II GP Jashohari 3.35 3.12 3.24 3.19 12.90 61JA - 1 GP Santipur 2.46 3.25 3.33 3.58 12.63 1JA - 1 GP Laharpara 3.25 3.27 3.05 2.96 12.54 7JA - II GP Rudrabati 3.42 3.04 3.23 2.79 12.47 7JA - 1 GP Bhramhanpara 3.24 3.02 3.12 3.09 12.47 8Purandarpur GP Boltuli 3.05 2.74 3.26 3.36 12.41 9Purandarpur GP Bunday 2.97 2.94 3.21 3.19 12.31 9JA - 1 GP Kaya 3.17 3.08 3.10 2.94 12.29 4JA - II GP Kandi 3.62 3.08 2.80 2.75 12.25 1Purandarpur GP Purandarpur 2.98 2.81 3.17 3.25 12.21 20JA - II GP Dohalia 3.14 2.72 3.33 2.97 12.16 8JA - 1 GP Sigadda 3.08 2.89 3.22 2.97 12.16 3JA - 1 GP Raghupur 2.96 2.83 3.00 3.25 12.04 2Kandi Municipality Ward No 10 2.95 3.02 2.98 2.94 11.88 22Purandarpur GP Gandhabpur 2.95 2.72 3.11 3.08 11.87 10Purandarpur GP Parbatipur 2.98 2.73 3.17 2.96 11.85 13JA - 1 GP Aanukha 3.13 2.86 3.03 2.79 11.81 6Purandarpur GP Naranpur 2.79 2.72 3.07 3.19 11.78 3Purandarpur GP Chandraprosadpur 2.94 2.85 3.01 2.96 11.76 11JA - 1 GP Bahara 3.12 2.89 2.96 2.76 11.72 14JA - 1 GP Nampara 3.12 3.08 2.77 2.75 11.72 2Purandarpur GP Indrahata 2.72 2.75 2.99 3.20 11.66 9JA - 1 GP Mahadebbati 3.03 2.93 2.85 2.83 11.65 5JA - 1 GP Koyemba 3.23 2.25 3.13 3.00 11.61 1JA - 1 GP Munigram 3.09 2.64 2.90 2.66 11.29 16JA - 1 GP Molla 3.10 2.67 2.69 2.75 11.21 3 503

KABP Study of SPADE

124

Bibliography

1. ASHWAS Process Handbook: Planning and execution guide for participatory surveys on household water and sanitation, Arghyam, Bengaluru, March 2011

2. B. F. Stanton, J. D. Clemens, K. M. A. Aziz, & M. Rahman, Twenty-four-hour recall, knowledge-attitude-practice questionnaires, and direct observations of sanitary practices: a comparative study, Bulletin of the World Health Organization, Vol 65 (2), pp. 217-222, 1987

3. Brian Mathew, Ensuring Sustained Beneficial Outcomes for Water and Sanitation (WATSAN) Programmes in the Developing World, PhD thesis submitted to Institute of Water and Environment, Cranfield University, 2003/04.

4. Health-seeking Behaviour and the health system response, Susanna Hausmann-Muela, Joan Muela Ribera and Isaac Nyamongo, DCPP Working Paper No. 14, 2003

5. HIV/AIDS Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices in India Baseline Survey - Key Findings Report, BBC World Service Trust, India, 2005.

6. http://www.ijdcr.ca/VOL07_01_CAN/articles/gwandure.shtml 7. Hygiene awareness for rural water supply and sanitation projects, Report No. : 819/1/00,

2000. 8. Kidanu A., Timpa E., In-depth Study of the Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior and Practice

(KABP) of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPS) in Ethiopia Toward HIV/AIDS and their Health Status and Medical Care Assessment, under the Auspices of the UN Country Team and with the Support of Netherlands Government, Addis Ababa

9. Knowledge, Attitude, Behaviour and Practices (KABP) Survey of Male Reproductive And Sexual Health Among Truckers and Cleaners/Helpers In Three Cities Of Jharkhand Submitted to: CEDPA/India By: ORG Centre For Social Research - A Division Of Acnielsen Org-Marg Pvt. Ltd. June 2003.

10. Knowledge, Attitude, Behaviour and Practices Study Report, ACP EU Water Facility Project : Addressing the water and sanitation needs of the rural poor in the context of hiv and aids in Zimbabwe, UNICEF – ZIMWASH, 2007

11. Launiala Annika, How much can a KAP survey tell us about people's knowledge, attitudes and practices? Some observations from medical anthropology research on malaria in pregnancy in Malawi, Anthropology Matters, Vol 11, No 1 (2009), University of Tampere and University of Kuopio, Finland

12. Sanitation Promotion, SIDA - SDC - WSSCC - WHO, WSSCC Working Group on Promotion of Sanitation, ed by Mayling Simpson- Hébert and Sara Wood, WHO, 1998.

13. Singh Neeru, Singh M. P., Saxena Ajay, Sharma V. P., Kalra N. L., Knowledge, attitude, beliefs and practices (KABP) study related to malaria and intervention strategies in ethnic tribals of Mandla (Madhya Pradesh), Malaria Research Centre (ICMR), India.

14. Umbutfo Swaziland Defence Force (Usdf) Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices And Behaviour (KAPB) Study, The Flas Research And Evaluation Unit Funded By UNAIDS And UNFPA, August 2005.

KABP Study of SPADE

125

Annexure 1: Village or Ward-wise Breakup of KABP Scores Andulia GP N K A B P KABP

μ 3.60 3.30 3.20 3.20 13.29 Andulia 13 σ 0.40 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.34 μ 3.35 3.96 3.89 3.82 15.02 Chandnagar 7 σ 0.22 0.09 0.05 0.47 0.31 μ 3.50 3.80 3.90 3.90 15.16 Durgapur 5 σ 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.10 0.36 μ 3.40 3.80 3.50 3.50 14.19 Gobindopur 12 σ 0.30 0.30 0.60 0.50 1.05 μ 3.70 3.70 3.30 3.00 13.74 Gopalpur 6 σ 0.10 0.30 0.80 0.80 1.35 μ 3.70 3.90 3.60 3.50 14.63 Jeetpur 2 σ 0.20 0.20 0.60 0.50 1.16 μ 3.40 3.90 3.20 2.90 13.43 Laxmikantapur 8 σ 0.30 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.87 μ 3.50 3.60 3.40 3.30 13.77 Mahadeya 16 σ 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.40 0.77 μ 3.20 4.00 3.20 3.10 13.49 Manoharpur 5 σ 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.29 μ 3.70 3.80 3.40 3.40 14.31 Rajarampur 4 σ 0.10 0.30 0.70 0.50 1.40 μ 3.80 3.50 2.90 3.00 13.19 Santospur 5 σ 0.10 0.10 0.30 0.10 0.53 μ 3.50 3.80 3.70 3.60 14.58 Sashpara 23 σ 0.20 0.40 0.40 0.50 1.03

106

JA - I GP N K A B P KABP μ 3.13 2.86 3.03 2.79 11.81

Anukha 6 σ 0.14 0.30 0.41 0.25 1.03 μ 3.12 2.89 2.96 2.76 11.72

Bahara 14 σ 0.24 0.25 0.29 0.49 1.05 μ 3.24 3.02 3.12 3.09 12.47

Bhramhanpara 8 σ 0.27 0.56 0.34 0.43 1.47 μ 3.17 3.08 3.10 2.94 12.29

Kaya 4 σ 0.07 0.17 0.30 0.29 0.64 μ 3.23 2.25 3.13 3.00 11.61

Koyemba 1 σ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 μ 3.25 3.27 3.05 2.96 12.54

Laharpara 7 σ 0.10 0.08 0.40 0.48 0.92 μ 3.03 2.93 2.85 2.83 11.65

Mahadebbati 5 σ 0.09 0.47 0.29 0.44 1.12 μ 3.10 2.67 2.69 2.75 11.21

Molla 3 σ 0.18 0.51 0.08 0.17 0.58 μ 3.09 2.64 2.90 2.66 11.29

Munigram 16 σ 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.48 1.09 μ 3.12 3.08 2.77 2.75 11.72

Nampara 2 σ 0.16 0.47 0.24 0.35 1.22 μ 2.96 2.83 3.00 3.25 12.04

Raghupur 2 σ 0.16 0.47 0.19 0.47 0.97 μ 2.46 3.25 3.33 3.58 12.63

Santipur 1 σ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 μ 3.08 2.89 3.22 2.97 12.16

Sigadda 3 σ 0.00 0.13 0.04 0.27 0.29

72

KABP Study of SPADE

126

JA - II GP N K A B P KABP μ 3.69 3.37 3.49 3.29 13.84

Bhandera 9 σ 0.15 0.17 0.30 0.35 0.80 μ 3.73 3.83 3.47 3.67 14.70

Dadpur 2 σ 0.27 0.24 0.38 0.24 1.12 μ 3.14 2.72 3.33 2.97 12.16

Dohalia 8 σ 0.32 0.48 0.35 0.20 1.18 μ 3.35 3.12 3.24 3.19 12.90

Jashohari 61 σ 0.32 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.91 μ 3.32 3.13 3.51 3.43 13.40

Kalyanpur 5 σ 0.34 0.54 0.37 0.55 1.15 μ 3.62 3.08 2.80 2.75 12.25

Kandi 1 σ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 μ 3.69 4.00 3.80 3.75 15.24

Madhunia 1 σ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 μ 3.42 3.04 3.23 2.79 12.47

Rudrabati 7 σ 0.31 0.17 0.27 0.21 0.81

94

Kandi Municipal Area N K A B P KABP

μ 3.81 3.73 3.77 3.79 15.09 Ward No - 4 17

σ 0.24 0.39 0.16 0.13 0.72 μ 3.19 3.10 3.40 3.39 13.09

Ward No - 8 29 σ 0.44 0.34 0.24 0.31 0.99 μ 3.83 3.89 3.82 3.80 15.34

Ward No - 9 21 σ 0.28 0.22 0.25 0.21 0.84 μ 2.95 3.02 2.98 2.94 11.88

Ward No - 10 22 σ 0.21 0.13 0.25 0.19 0.55 μ 3.44 2.86 3.40 3.57 13.27

Ward No - 14 21 σ 0.27 0.26 0.19 0.15 0.58 μ 3.91 3.97 3.72 3.77 15.36

Ward No - 15 22 σ 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.17 0.30

132

Purandarpur GP N K A B P KABP Boltuli 9 μ 3.05 2.74 3.26 3.36 12.41 σ 0.29 0.18 0.14 0.33 0.85 Bunday 9 μ 2.97 2.94 3.21 3.19 12.31 σ 0.30 0.24 0.29 0.44 1.14 Chandraprosadpur 11 μ 2.94 2.85 3.01 2.96 11.76 σ 0.31 0.20 0.09 0.39 0.39 Chator 2 μ 3.23 3.42 3.70 3.92 14.26 σ 0.00 0.24 0.33 0.00 0.57 Gandhabpur 10 μ 2.95 2.72 3.11 3.08 11.87 σ 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.27 0.48 Indrahata 9 μ 2.72 2.75 2.99 3.20 11.66 σ 0.18 0.23 0.14 0.37 0.55 Naranpur 3 μ 2.79 2.72 3.07 3.19 11.78 σ 0.09 0.25 0.53 0.17 0.58 Parbatipur 13 μ 2.98 2.73 3.17 2.96 11.85 σ 0.24 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.28 Purandarpur 20 μ 2.98 2.81 3.17 3.25 12.21

KABP Study of SPADE

127

σ 0.26 0.21 0.12 0.40 0.83 Ranagram 9 μ 3.19 3.10 3.33 3.52 13.13 σ 0.27 0.34 0.24 0.49 1.18 Raybati 4 μ 3.21 3.02 3.37 3.56 13.16 σ 0.26 0.39 0.20 0.52 1.33 99

KABP Study of SPADE

128

KABP Assessment Scale designed by Anubrata Datta of SPADE

Annexure I: KABP Questionnairef¡e£uSm, �n±Q¡N¡l J ü¡ÙÛÉ¢h¢d pÇf�LÑ ‘¡e, j¡e¢pLa¡, BQlZ Hhw AiÉ¡p ¢ho�u pj£r¡

f¢lQ¡me¡u: L¡¢¾c S£hdlf¡s¡ j¢qm¡ Eæue p¢j¢a, pq�k¡¢Na¡u: �ØfX, B¢bÑL J L¡¢lN¢l pq�k¡¢Na¡u : Ju¡V¡l gl ¢ffm C¢äu¡

ejú¡l! Bfe¡l S£h�e fËi¡h B�R Hje ¢LR¥ ¢ho�u Bfe¡l ja¡ja S¡e¡l SeÉ B¢j ¢LR¥V¡ pju Q¡C¢R z Bfe¡l ja¡ja Bfe¡l ¢e�Sl J

NË¡�jl Eæ¢a�a A�eLM¡¢e i¨¢jL¡ �e�h z Bfe¡l jaja �Lhmj¡œ N�hoZ¡l L¡�S hÉhq¡l Ll¡ q�h Hhw f¤�l¡f¤¢l �N¡fe l¡M¡ q�h z

�L¡X ew Bfe¡l Ešl ¢Q¢q²a Ll�a Efk¤š² ÙÛ¡�e ¢VL (�) ¢Qq² ¢ce

fhÑ - L : Ešlc¡a¡ pð�å abÉ

Ešlc¡a¡l e¡j : hup (hRl) : ¢m‰ : .f¤l¦o / j¢qm¡ S¡¢a / hZÑ : a:S¡ / a:E:S¡: / A:f:S¡ / p:m: / p¡d¡lZ

¢nr¡Na �k¡NÉa¡ : 1 ¢elrl 6 j¡dÉ¢jL fkÑ¿¹ (9/10)

2 �Lhmj¡œ e¡j pC Ll�a f¡�le 7 E�Qj¡dÉ¢jL fkÑ¿¹

3 ü¡rl ¢L¿¹¥ LM�e¡ ú¤�m k¡e¢e 8 pÀ¡aL

4 fË¡b¢jL 9 pÀ¡a�L¡šl

5 8j �nËZ£ fkÑ¿¹ (5/6/7/8) 10 AeÉ¡eÉ (¢mM¥e)

f¢lh¡�ll pcpÉ LaSe ? f¤l¦o j¢qm¡ f¢lh¡�ll fËd¡e �L ? j¡ /h¡h¡ /W¡L¥j¡ / AeÉ¡eÉ (¢mM¥e)_____f¢lh¡�ll fËd¡e �fn¡ L£ ? f¢lh¡�ll AhÙÛ¡e H ¢f Hm / ¢h ¢f Hm

¢e�S�cl Q¡�ol S¢j B�R ¢L ? qÉ¡y e¡ k¢c b¡�L - a�h La ¢hO¡ / L¡W¡ ?

�k h¡¢s�a hph¡p Ll�Re �p¢V ¢L ¢e�S�cl ? qÉ¡y e¡ h¡¢sl dlZ j¡¢Vl h¡¢s / f¡L¡ h¡¢s /___________

h¡¢sl L¡l¦l �j¡h¡Cm �g¡e B�R ¢L ? qÉ¡y e¡ k¢c b¡�L - a¡q�m �j¡V LaS�el �j¡h¡Cm �g¡e B�R ?

h¡¢s�a ¢hcÉ¨v-pw�k¡N B�R ¢L ? qÉ¡y e¡ f¢lh¡�ll pÇfc (pwMÉ¡) p¡C�Lm iÉ¡e/¢l„¡

¢V¢i ¢i¢p¢X-�fÔu¡l �j¡Vlh¡CL f¡Çf d¡eT¡s¡ �j¢ne AeÉ¡eÉ (¢mM¥e)

f¢lh¡�ll föf¡¢M (pwMÉ¡) Nl¦ ( ), j¢qo ( ), hmc ( ), R¡Nm ( ), j¤lN£ ( ), qy¡p ( ), AeÉ¡eÉ (¢mM¥e) _______( )

f¢lh¡�ll l¡æ¡l SÆ¡m¡e£ L¡W Lum¡ �L�l¡¢pe NÉ¡p AeÉ¡eÉ (¢mM¥e)

Bfe¡l h¡¢s�a f¡uM¡e¡ B�R ¢L ? qÉ¡y e¡ k¢c qyÉ¡ qu, a�h La hRl B�N °a¢l ?

f¡uM¡e¡ h¡e¡�e¡l V¡L¡ �L¡b¡u �f�me? ¢e�Sl V¡L¡ plL¡¢l fËLÒf �b�L (fËL�Òfl e¡j : _________________)

AeÉ¡eÉ (¢mM¥e) :

h¡¢s�a f¡uM¡e¡ h¡¢e�u Bfe¡l p¡j¡¢SL jkÑ¡c¡ ¢L �h�s�R ? qÉ¡y e¡ S¡¢e e¡

k¢c e¡ qu, a�h �L¡b¡u f¡uM¡e¡ L�le ? ¢c�el �hm¡u �L¡b¡u f¡uM¡e¡ L�le ?

�fV M¡l¡f q�m �L¡b¡u f¡uM¡e¡ L�le ? Bfe¡l h¡¢s�a ¢L h¡bl¦j B�R ? qÉ¡y e¡

h¡¢s�a f¡e£u S�ml �L¡�e¡ Evp B�R ¢L ? qÉ¡y e¡ h¡¢sl p¡j�e ¢L �XÊ�el hÉhÙÛ¡ B�R ? qÉ¡y e¡

fË¢a¢ce j¡�p HLh¡l Ruj¡�p HLh¡l hR�l HLh¡l LM�e¡C e¡ h¡¢sl p¡j�el �XÊe La¢ce A¿¹l f¢lú¡l Ll¡ qu ?

Bfe¡l h¡¢sl p¡j�el �XÊe �L f¢lú¡l L�le ?

NË¡j f’¡�u�al LjÑ£/pcpÉ �ü�R¡�ph£ pwNWe AeÉeÉ, E�õM Ll¦e :

NË¡j Sm J Ae¡ju L¢j¢V Bf¢e ¢e�S

Bfe¡l h¡¢sl jum¡ Sm �L¡b¡u k¡u? �n¡oL N�aÑ h¡N¡�e �L¡�Zl N�aÑ �XÊ�e j¡�W l¡Ù¹¡u f¤L¥�l ec£�a ¢WL S¡¢e e¡

1. S¡j¡L¡fs �d¡Ju¡l fl �e¡wl¡ Sm

2. pÀ¡�el Sm

3. l¡æ¡l h¡s¢a Sm

4. f¡uM¡e¡l Sm

Na ¢ae j¡�p Bfe¡l h¡¢s�a ¢L Sm-h¡¢qa �L¡�e¡ Ap¤¤M q�u�R ?

Ap¤¤M e¡ qÉ¡y h¡¢sl �LE j¡l¡ �N�Re ¢Q¢Lvp¡ Ll�a Be¤j¡¢eL La V¡L¡ MlQ q�u�R

¢QL¥e…¢eu¡

Bj¡nu

S¢än

X¡u¢lu¡

¢X�p¾¢VÊ

Annexure 2: KABP Questionnaire


f¡e Ll¡l SeÉ Bf¢e �L¡e Eyv�pl Sm hÉhq¡l L�le ?

�Le Bf¢e HC Sm hÉhq¡l L�le ? (fË¡d¡�eÉl œ²j Ae¤k¡u£ ¢e�Ql ¢edÑ¡¢la Ol…¢m�a 1 �b�L 8 eðl hp¡e)

h¡¢sl L¡�R, a¡C HC S�ml NåV¡ �hn i¡m SmV¡ f¢lú¡l

HC S�ml ü¡c M¥h i¡m a¡s¡a¡¢s Hhw i¡m l¡æ¡ qu

AeÉ �L¡�e¡ ¢hLÒf �eC HC Sm plL¡l plhl¡q L�l

AeÉ¡eÉ L¡lZ (¢mM¥e)

Bf¢e ¢L h¡¢s�a Sm p’u L�le qÉ¡y e¡ k¢c Sm p’u L�le :

�Le Sm d�l l¡�Me ? La ¢ce Sm d�l l¡�Me ?

Sm Be�a A�eL c§l �k�a qu HL¢ce

phpju Sm f¡Ju¡ k¡u e¡ 2 ¢ce

AeÉ¡eÉ (¢mM¥e) : 2 ¢c�el �h¢n

Sm d�l l¡M¡l f¡œ Y¡L¡ b¡�L �a¡ ? qÉ¡y e¡

f¡e£u Sm �L¡b¡u d�l l¡�Me Ly¥�S¡/ h¡m¢a/ Os¡ h¡C�ll �Q±h¡�Q¡ O�ll �ia�ll VÉ¡ˆ/XÊ¡j

fË¢a¢ce c¤C¢c�e HLh¡l pç¡�q ¢aeh¡l pç¡�q HLh¡l kMe pju f¡C LM�e¡ e¡ Bf¢e f¡e£u Sm d�l l¡M¡l f¡œ

La¢ce A¿¹l f¢lú¡l L�le ?

fË¢a¢ce �k Sm f¡e a¡�a Bfe¡l Q¡¢qc¡ �j�V ? qÉ¡y e¡

f¡e£u Sm AeÉ¡eÉ L¡�S hÉhq¡�ll SeÉ

p¡l¡ hRl d�l k�bø f¢lj¡�Z Sm f¡Ju¡ k¡u

S�ml Evp M¡l¡f

q�m �L¡b¡u k¡e ?

p¡l¡ hRl d�l k�bø f¢lj¡�Z Sm f¡Ju¡ k¡u e¡

NËË£�×j Sm f¡Ju¡ k¡u e¡

�L Bfe¡l h¡¢s�a Sm ¢e�u B�p ? f¤l¦�ol¡ j¢qm¡l¡ h¡�Q¡ �R�m h¡�Q¡ �j�u L¡�Sl �m¡L

h¡¢sl hÉhq¡�ll SeÉ Sm Be�a La pju m¡�N ? (h¡¢s �b�L k¡a¡u¡�al ¢qp¡h d�l La ¢j¢eV) ________(Be¤j¡¢eL)

H hRl fË�u¡Sej�a¡ Sm R¡s¡ La ¢ce fkÑ¿¹ h¡¢sl L¡S Q¡¢m�u�Re ? NË¡�j k¢c S�ml a£hË BL¡m qu, a¡q�m L£ Ll�he ?

HL j¡�pl Lj

HL �b�L ¢ae j¡p

¢ae �b�L fy¡Q j¡p

Ru j¡�pl �h¢n

Hje f¢l¢ÙÛ¢a B�p ¢e

NË¡j �R�s Q�m k¡�he

AeÉ �L¡�e¡ p§œ �b�L Sm Be¡l �Qø¡ Ll�he

plL¡¢l VÉ¡�ˆl S�ml Jfl ¢eiÑl Ll�he

c§¢oa Sm f¡e Ll�a h¡dÉ q�he

AeÉ ¢LR¥ (E�õM Ll¦e :________________)

Bf¢e ¢L f¡e£u Sm f¢löÜ L�le ? qyÉ¡ e¡ L£i¡�h Bf¢e f¡e£u Sm f¢löÜ L�le ?

L¡fs ¢c�u Sm �Ry�L ¢e�u ¢gV¢L¢l ¢j¢n�u Sm g¥¢V�u

Ju¡V¡l ¢gÒV¡l hÉhq¡l L�l Q¥e ¢j¢n�u

�LÓ¡¢le VÉ¡h�mV ¢j¢n�u ¢LR¥C L¢l e¡

AeÉ ¢LR¥ (E�õM Ll¦e) :

Na HL hR�l Bfe¡l Sm pwNË�ql pjpÉ¡…¢m L£ Hhw a¡l fË¢aL¡�l Bf¢e L£ L�l�Re :

pjpÉ¡l fËL«¢a Bf¢e L¡l p¡�b �k¡N¡�k¡N L�l�Re pjpÉ¡l pj¡d¡e ¢L q�u�R ?

NË¡j f’¡�ua

NË¡�jl Sm J Ae¡ju L¢j¢V

L¡¢¾c S£hdlf¡s¡ j¢qm¡ Eæue p¢j¢a

qÉ¡y

NË¡�jl fËd¡e/¢ehÑ¡¢Qa fË¢a¢e¢d

AeÉ¡eÉ (E�õM Ll¦e: ____________) e¡

L¡�l¡l p¡�b �k¡N¡�k¡N L�le¢e

�k Sm plhl¡q Ll¡ qu, a¡l …Zj¡�e Bf¢e ¢L p¿¹¥ø ? qÉ¡y / e¡ z k¢c e¡ qe - a�h Bfe¡l Ap�¿¹¡�ol L¡lZ

S�ml p�‰ j¡¢V/ h¡¢m b¡�L h¡�S Nå �hl qu

ü¡�c �e¡ea¡ jum¡ Sm

fËQ¥l BulZ b¡�L AeÉ¡eÉ (E�õM Ll¦e)

A¢el¡fc Sm f¡e Ll�m L£ L£ Ap¤¤M q�a f¡�l h�m Bfe¡l d¡lZ¡ ?

X¡C¢lu¡ lš²¡fÔa¡ S¢än NÉ¡p Aðm Bj¡nu L�ml¡ g¡C�m¢lu¡ V¡Cg�uX L«¢j


fhÑ - M : ¢e�Ql h¡LÉ…¢ml p�‰ Bf¢e LaV¡ HLja - S¡e¡�a Efk¤š² ÙÛ¡�e ¢VL (�) ¢Qq² ¢ce

pÇf¨ZÑ

pqja pqja Apqja

pÇf¨ZÑ

Apqja

hm�a

f¡lh e¡

1 L�ml Sm phpju ¢el¡fc

2 j¡e¤�ol b¤a¥ - Lg �b�L �L¡�e¡ �l¡N Rs¡u e¡

3 ¢gmV¡l Ll¡ Sm ¢höÜ

4 Sm �cM�a f¢lú¡l q�mC a¡ f¡�el �k¡NÉ

5 h¡�Q¡�cl �f�R¡f-f¡CM¡e¡ �b�L �L¡�e¡ �l¡N Rs¡u e¡

6 h¡¢sl pL�ml N¡jR¡ Bm¡c¡ Bm¡c¡ qJu¡ E¢Qa

7 �Lhmj¡œ emL¨�fl Sm ¢c�u q¡a d¤�mC q¡a S£h¡Z¤ j¤š² qu

8 Sm g¥V¡�m ¢höÜ qu

9 ¢nö�L f¡uM¡e¡ Ll¡h¡l f�l p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c�u q¡a �d¡Ju¡ E¢Qa

10 �l¡S pÀ¡e e¡ Ll�mJ Q�m

11 q¡a-j¤M �j¡R¡l N¡jR¡ fË¢a¢ce L¡Q¡l clL¡l qu e¡

12 Nªqf¡¢ma föl �f�R¡f-f¡CM¡e¡ �aje r¢aL¡lL eu

13 f¤L¥�ll S�m ¢gV¢L¢l J Q¥e ¢c�m a¡ f¡�el �k¡NÉ qu

14 B�pÑ¢eL HLdl�el ¢ho k¡ f¡e£u Sm c§¢oa L�l

15 fË¢a h¡¢s�a �n±Q¡N¡l b¡L¡ clL¡l

16 �n±Q¡N¡l öd¤j¡œ h¡¢sl pÇj¡e h¡s¡u

fhÑ - N : ¢e�Ql h¡LÉ…¢ml p�‰ Bf¢e LaV¡ HLja - S¡e¡�a Efk¤š² ÙÛ¡�e ¢VL (�) ¢Qq² ¢ce

pÇf¨ZÑ

pqja pqja Apqja

pÇf¨ZÑ

Apqja

1. fË¢a¢V h¡¢s�a �n±Q¡N¡l b¡L¡ E¢Qa

2. �M¡m¡ S¡uN¡u f¡CM¡e¡ Ll�a i¡�m¡ m¡�N

3. Bjl¡ j¡�W O¡�V f¡CM¡e¡ Ll�a AiÉÙ¹z H�a Bj¡�cl �L¡�e¡ r¢a qu e¡

4. j¡�W O¡�V f¡CM¡e¡ Ll�a k¡Ju¡V¡ huú J j¢qm¡�cl f�r HLV¡ hs pjpÉ¡

5. phpju M¡h¡l B�N q¡a �d¡h¡l �L¡�e¡ clL¡l �eC

6. �n±Q¡N¡l öd¤ hª¢ø-h¡cm¡l pj�uC clL¡l qu, L¡lZ aMe j¡�WO¡�V p¡�fl Efâh qu

7. �l¡S �n±Q¡N¡l hÉhq¡l Ll�m L¥�u¡V¡ i�l k¡uz a¡C �l¡S hÉhqÉl Ll¡ E¢Qa eu

8. �n±Q¡N¡l h— �R¡�V¡z Hhw c¤NÑ�å il¡, a¡C hÉhq¡l Ll¡ Ap¤¤¢hd¡SeL

9. �n±Q¡N¡l hÉhq¡l Ll¡l Q¡C�aJ h¡¢s�a b¡L�m B¢iS¡aÉ h¡�s

10. hs �m¡�L�cl h¡¢s�aC �n±Q¡N¡�l b¡�L Bl N¢lhl¡ j¡�WO¡�V k¡u

11. �R�ml¡ j¡�W-O¡�V f¡CM¡e¡ Ll�a Q¡u L¡lZ �pM¡�e A�e�Ll p¡�b �cM¡ qu - Lb¡h¡aÑ¡ qu

12. �N¡hl f¢hœ a¡C, �N¡hl O¡yV¡l fl p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c�u q¡a e¡ d¤�mJ Q�m

13. �e¡wl¡ Oy¡V¡l f�l p¡h¡e / R¡C ¢c�u q¡a �d¡h¡l clL¡l

14. M¡h¡l B�N p¡h¡e Hhw emL¨�fl Sm ¢c�u q¡a �d¡h¡l clL¡l

15. h¡pefœ �d¡h¡l SeÉ f¤L¥�ll Sm hÉhq¡l Ll¡C i¡�m¡


fhÑ - O : Bfe¡l ¢e�Sl �r�œ ¢e�Ql ¢hou…¢m LaM¡¢e p¢WL a¡ S¡e¡�a Efk¤š² O�l ¢VL (�) ¢Qq² ¢ce

phpju

�h¢nli¡N

pju j¡�Tj¡�T

LMeC

eu

1 B¢j L¡V¡l fl ph n¡L-p¢ê d¤�u ¢eC

2 B¢j l¡æ¡ Ll¡ M¡h¡l phpju �Y�L l¡¢M

3 B¢j f¡e£u Sm �eJu¡l f�l f¡œ¢V �Y�L l¡¢M

4 Bjl¡ h¡¢p M¡h¡l M¡Ju¡l B�N Nlj L¢l e¡

5 B¢j mr l¡¢M h¡¢sl B�nf¡�nl �L¡�e¡ N�aÑ �e¡wl¡ Sm �ke S�j e¡ b¡�L

6 B¢j Bj¡�cl h¡¢s Hhw EW¡e f¢l�Ræ l¡¢M

7 B¢j NË¡j Hhw l¡Ù¹¡ f¢l×L¡l l¡M�a AwnNËqZ L¢l

8 B¢j �N¡hl �gm¡l fl q¡a f¢l×L¡l L�l d¤�u ¢eC

9 Bj¡�cl h¡¢sl h¡�Q¡l¡ l¡æ¡O�ll B�nf¡�n �f�R¡f - f¡CM¡e¡ L�l

10 B¢j fË¢ah¡l Sm ilh¡l B�N f¡œ d¤�u ¢eC

11 pç¡�q A¿¹a HLh¡l Bj¡�cl h¡¢sl h¡bl¦j f¡uM¡e¡ f¢lú¡l Ll¡ qu

12 Bjl¡ ph¡C Bm¡c¡ Bm¡c¡ h¡¢V�a M¡h¡l M¡C

13 B¢j �e¡wl¡ ¢e¢cÑø N�aÑ �g¢m

14 Bj¡�cl Hy�V¡ h¡pefœ �kM¡�e �pM¡�e f�s b¡�L - L¥L¥l ¢hs¡�m Q¡�V

15 f¢lh¡�ll ph¡C �e¡wl¡ Oy¡V¡l fl p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c�u q¡a �d¡u

16 Sm Be¡l pju �Y�L B¢e

17 S�m q¡a X¥¢h�u Sm a¥¢m

fhÑ - P : Bfe¡l ¢e�Sl AiÉ¡p…¢m p¢WLi¡�h S¡e¡�a Efk¤š² O�l ¢VL (�) ¢Qq² ¢ce

phpju �h¢nli¡N pju j¡�Tj¡�T LMeC

eu

1 l¡�œ jn¡¢l e¡ V¡P¡�m Bj¡l O¤j B�p e¡

2 B¢j Q¢V f�l f¡uM¡e¡u k¡C

3 Bj¡�cl h¡¢sl A�e�LC �kM¡�e-�pM¡�e b¤a¥-Lg �g�m

4 B¢j M¡h¡l M¡Ju¡l B�N p¡h¡e ¢c�u q¡a d¤�u ¢eC

5 Bjl¡ ¢eu¢ja S¡j¡ L¡fs f¢l×L¡l L¢l

6 B¢j mrÉ l¡¢M �ke �R�m �j�ul¡ ¢eu¢ja eM L¡�V

7 B¢j �l¡S cy¡a j¡S¡l pju f¡C e¡

8 Bj¡l f¢lh¡�ll ph¡C M¡Ju¡l fl j¤M-q¡a �d¡u e¡

9 B¢j pç¡�q A¿¹a HLh¡l eM L¡¢V

10 B¢j l¡æ¡ h¡ f¢l�hne Ll¡l B�N phpju q¡a d¤�u ¢e

11 B¢j M¡h¡l S�ml f¡�œ q¡a �X¡h¡C e¡

12 h¡�Q¡l¡ h¡C�l �b�L h¡¢s H�m B¢j J�cl q¡a-f¡ d¤�u �cC

13 B¢j �e¡wl¡ Oy¡V¡l fl p¡h¡e h¡ R¡C ¢c�u q¡a d¤�u ¢eC

14 Bjl¡ Sm l¡M¡l Lm¢p-q¡y¢s f¢lú¡l L¢l e¡

15 B¢j �n±�Ql f�l p¡h¡e ¢c�u q¡a d¤C

pj£rL: p¡r¡vL¡�ll pju : öl¦ �no

f¡s¡ / Hm¡L¡ : NË¡j f’¡�ua / ¢jE¢e¢pfÉ¡¢m¢V

NË¡j / Ju¡XÑ: Ešlfœ fl£r�Ll e¡j :

Water, Sanitation & Hygiene Related KABP Assessment in West Bengal

Documents

Transcript of Water, Sanitation & Hygiene Related KABP Assessment in West Bengal