Humanitarianresponse Logo

Dadaab WASH emergency Response - End term evaluation report FY 2011-12 : January 2013

Sujet/Objectif: 

This is an end of project evaluation aimed at finding out what has been achieved over the 15 months (August 2011 to October 2012) the project has been in existence and to come up with suggestions on how design and implementation of future projects can be improved. Additionally, the exercise is intended to identify challenges and constrains that was faced during implementation for learning and improvement. The evaluation objectives will include but will not be limited to finding out the following aspects;

Méthodologie: 

Primary data collection methodologies such as HH survey, FGD and KII and Secondary Data collection methods such document review.

Principales constatations: 

The water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) survey took place in Dadaab refugee camp, Northern Kenya. It covered 428 households from six geographical locations Welmerer (28.8%), Galmagala (12.3%), Nanighi – Guyo (6.9%), Alikune (14.4%), Gurufa (9.2%) and Dagahaley (28.4%). The respondents were sampled from three Geo-political regions of Dadaab refugee camp (18%), Fafi district (50%) and Lagdera district (32.5%) in North Eastern Kenya. However, at the end of the process, the survey covered 23% refugee HHs and 77% non- refugee (Host) HHs residing in Lagdera and Fafi districts.

Of the survey respondents, 138 (32.4%) were males while the rest (288 or 67.6%) were females. Of the 424 respondents, the mean age was 37.89 +0.55 years. The 428 households surveyed had a total of 2583 people of whom 1294 (50.1%) were males and 1289 (49.9%) were females. There are 1294 males and 1289 females in 425 HHs, giving a mean HH size of 6.08. Of these, a HH had a mean of 3.04+0.08 males and 3.03+0.09 females. Of the households, (300) 70.6% were male headed while (125) 29.4% were female headed. About 2% of the HHs had no males at all, while 1.4% had no females at all.

Among those not in school, the reasons cited are: too young (22%); parent can’t afford fee (15%); work for food / money – i.e. child labour (13%); no teachers (7%); child refused (5%); failed exams (3%).
The survey covered 23% refugee HHs and 77% non- refugee (Host) HHs residing in lagdera and Fafi districts. Under 5% of the refuges had been in camp for less than 1 year as follows: less than 1 month (1%); 1-6 months (1%); 7-12 months (2.2%). Over 95% had stayed for more than 1 year. The HH heads were largely pastoralists (32%), or housewives (16%). Some 10% were unemployed, 10% engaged in casual work; 7.5% were engaged in business.

The HHs earn a monthly income of between Kshs 0 and 30,000, with a mean of Kshs 7188+442.07. The mean daily per capita income is Kshs 39.42+2.42 (US$ 0.47). The threshold monthly income for living at poverty line is Kshs 15,296. This would mean that 398 HHs, or 93.4% live below poverty line. For refugees, their main source of income is casual labor (37%), and 32% do shop keeping. The meals taken by HHs are as follows: children take 2.39+.08 (i.e. 2.31-2.47 meals per day) while adults take 2.45+.03(i.e. 2.42 – 2.48 meals per day).

The water sources are as follows: borehole (61.4%); public tap / water kiosk (20.6%); and unprotected surface water (6.1%) being the top three, and constitute over 88% of all sources. About 87% of the sources are potable / improved. About 12% of all water sources were constructed in 2012, indicating that 88% existed before the WASH emergency project began. The water sources were largely constructed by government (63.7%), other NGOs (19%), World Vision (4.4%). About 78% of these have year round water supply, with 8.7% usable for less than 6 months in a year. The water sources are largely committee managed (78%). At least 83% HHs were accessing water within 1 hour of round trip, with 46.2% accessing it within 30 minutes. The water sources were therefore relatively close to HHs, enabling them to have a mean water use of 30.94 litres per capita per day (lcd). The % queuing for water reduced from 42% to 35% within the implementation period, meaning there has been an overall change in those queuing by 7% of the HHs. Among those queuing, they took 13.7 minutes in the past, compared with 14.3 minutes now, indicating they take an extra 0.6 minutes (i.e. 36 seconds more on the queue).

Currently, only 26.9% never queue at all to get water (from 14.9% before 2012), while 40.3% always queue (up from 27.3% before 2012). Another 18.6% sometimes queue. About 26.5% are comfortable with the time currently spent fetching water. At least 22% of HHs has saved some time as a result of improved access to water. The time saved has been used to: take care of children (48%); taking care of farm (19.5%); business (11.8%); attend group meetings (3.2%) and clean the house (3.2%).

For 37.3% HHs, livestock water source is different from HH source. The livestock water source was constructed by: Government (37.6%), World Vision (13.6%); other NGOs (15.2%), and other unknown (36.4%). About 65.5% HHs pay to access water. Amount paid for 20-litre water for HH use is Kshs 3.73, or Kshs 5.78 per person per day. This represents a ridiculous 14.7% of the daily per capita income, which renders the residents to be spending too much on water for HH use. Ideally, the maximum they should be spending is only 1-2% of their daily income on water- i.e. Kshs 0.3942-0.7884 (or 40-80 cents per parson per day, equivalent to Kshs 2.40 – 4.80 per household per day). About 65% of all HHs surveyed (largely non-refugees) pay for water for livestock, spending a mean of Kshs12.97. Of this, the payment is per livestock as follows: donkeys (Kshs 7.04); camels (Kshs 7.69); goats (Kshs 3.04); sheep (Kshs 2.68); cattle (3.69). Only 12.2% consider the price of watering livestock affordable. Whereas over 77% walk a return trip not exceeding 1km to access water, about one in three access water within 500m. This looks reasonable, indicating there is good progress towards meeting the MDG goal on access to potable water. For 10% of HHs, distance to livestock water source has been reduced. They attribute this to the following: Government (11.8% of whole population, or 42.1% who benefited); World Vision (6.8% of whole population, or 24.3% of those who benefited). Currently, there are 32.5% quarrels (down from 38.5% before 2012), 47.8% no quarrels (from 56.8% before 2012) and 19.5% currently don’t know about any quarrels over water sources (up from 4.7% before 2012). This would imply about 66% no quarrels from 61.5% before 2012. It has improved albeit marginally- by about 5%.

Only 52.5% surveyed HHs own latrines (70% of non-refugees). Of the host community with latrines, majority (51%) were constructed after 2011- within the project period. The latrines were largely built by WV (40.3%), or HHs supported by WV (12.6%). Overall, WV directly or indirectly helped construct about 50% of all latrines constructed within the period. The majority (74%) of the latrines were constructed safely away from water sources, thereby posing no sanitary risk. However, 26% are at a distance less than 10 from a water source, rendering them as sources of sanitary risk to water users. The maintenance of the latrines is at 47.5%. On the average, 89.9% of HHs always wash hands at critical times (up from 86.3%); 7.2% don’t wash at all (down from 9.4%), while those who only wash occasionally reduced from 4.4% to 3.8%. With only 70.1% HHs currently washing hands appropriately with water and soap up from 58.6% in 2011, it implies only 63% practice good hand-washing practice up from 50.5% in 2011. Currently, 82.8% consider the water they have a potable, up from 75.9% one year ago. However 40.4% treat drinking water, up from 33% one year ago. Those who never treat water have reduced from 60.8% to 55.9% currently. Those who treat water do so by boiling (13%); using chlorine-based disinfectants (26.8%), while 57% think their water is potable and requires no treatment. Prevalence of under five diarrhea decreased to 9.3% in 2011 to 7.2% in 2012. They attribute the decrease to safe water and exclusive breastfeeding.

Some 77.3% are aware of what child abuse means. All these abuses exist in the community as follows: denied basic rights (29.3%); exposure to harmful practices (20.7%); physical abuse (16.8%); emotional abuse (8.2%); exploitative work (5.8%); sexual abuse (6.7%); neglect (3.2%); fetch water at school time (9.1%). Child abuse in the community is rated as common (10%, down from 12.9% in 2011); rare (12.7% up from 7.8% in 2011); none (3.8%, unchanged over the period). Of the respondents, 29.9% are aware of what child protection means. In 2012, child protection is practices by 23.8% (up from 5.7%) in 2011, while the rest don’t. Whereas 8.9% HHs have benefited from child protection services, only 1.7%HHs respondent HHs have had their children benefiting as follows: 1.4% boys and 0.3% girls.

Households know what disaster means. Various disaster had been experienced in the past by a little over 80% HHs as follows: 18.7% rainfall extremes; 19.2% human diseases; 20.3% extreme temperature; 29% livestock disease. However, in the last 1 year, the HHs were largely affected as follows: rainfall (10.3%); crop failure (6.1%); drought (63.3%). Of the disaster affected HHs, 53.5% got support, largely from Red cross (40%); WFP (18%); Government (14%); UNHCR (7.3%), among others. Here WV contributed was cited to have contributed less than 1% of the support, even though all other systems which support disaster preparedness such as water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) were largely its own initiative, contributing 52-56% in each component of WASH, as has been mentioned earlier in the report.

Of the 60% HHs with under-fives, 9.1% had diarrhea. Of the children under 5 who 2.1% had blood diarrhea. The diarrhea was treated in 4.4% of all HHs (67% of all HHs with diarrhea) using the following methods: ORS (61%); no treatment (19%); and sugar-salt solution (8%). When sick, 62% more water. Only 4.7% were attended to by trained health provider; 7.7% were exclusively breastfed; 6.8% were dewormed in the last 6 months while 33.8% sleep under ITN.

Capacity building was one of the components of the WASH emergency project. Overall, 60.3% were not aware if training helped them improve in any way, with 40% indicating the training impacted them. However, of those trained, 40% were applying the knowledge with confidence. Results indicate that 4.7%, 10% and 4.7% had a dish rack, garbage dumping pit and a leaky tin respectively. New projects had been initiated in the survey area in the last 1 year, and 56 of the respondents were aware of at least a new project. These projects were in water (41%); sanitation (33%); education (12%), health (8%) and nutrition (5%). These projects were sponsored by: water (52% world Vision); sanitation (56% WV). Some 9.9% of the respondents (or 26% of those who were aware of new projects) participated in WV projects, with most gender participating as follows: men (40%); women 32%; girls (2.2%); boys (2.2%) and all 23%. It has improved lives of 13-15% of the HHs (or 77% of those who have participated in them). The benefits from these projects included: improved access to latrines, availability of latrines, improved access to water, better quality water, fewer water related diseases, improved hygiene, and improved livelihoods.

Taille de l’échantillon : 
cluster sampling probability proportional to size (PPS) technique was adopted for the six project intervention locations of Welmerer (28.8%), Galmagala (12.3%), Nanighi – Guyo (6.9%), Alikune (14.4%), Gurufa (9.2%) and Dagahaley (28.4%)
Rapport d'évaluation: 
Questionnaire d'évaluation: 
Publicly Available
Données d'évaluation: 
Publicly Available
Espace(s): 
Date(s) de l'évaluation: 
26 nov 2012 - 15 déc 2012
Fréquence: 
État de l'évaluation: 
Report completed
Unité de Mesure: 
Méthode de collecte: 
Type de population: 
Communautés hôtes
Cluster / Secteurs: 
Agence(s) chef de file: 
World Vision International
Lieux: 
Dadaab
Autres lieux: 
Thèmes: 
Suivi et Evaluation