By Ann Thomas, UNICEF ESARO and Jane Bevan, UNICEF WCARO. Prepared for the Monitoring sustainable WASH service delivery symposium, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 9-11 April 2013.

1. Developing and Monitoring Protocol for the Elimination
of Open Defecation in Sub-Saharan Africa
Ann Thomas, UNICEF ESARO Jane Bevan UNICEF WCARO
IRC WASH Symposium, April 2013

2. Objectives of this presentation:
• Review variation in ODF
programming and monitoring
frameworks across SSA.
• What is a protocol and why
develop one?
• Key considerations
• Best practice from SSA
3/16

3. Total Sanitation - CLTS
6
ODF Population in WCAR
– mid 2012 5.3
CLTS is the key model for scaling up sanitation 5
in SSA
4
Results at Scale: the number of people who 3.8
Population - Millions
have achieved ODF status has increased
almost exponentially since CLTS was 3
introduced
2 2
CATS/CLTS is now recognised as a ‘Headline
Corporate Priority’
1
in UNICEF 0.7
0.9
0.3
0
Jul-09 Jan-10 Aug-10 Feb-11 Sep-11 Apr-12 Oct-1

4. ODF programming and protocol across SSA
22% practice OD
~40% use
Ethiopia
unimproved or ODF Popn
shared latrines 2,042,735
Somalia
Newly established
Over 10 million ODF programming
and protocol
ODF in SSA
Nigeria
ODF Population Kenya 2013
1,944,144 ODF Popn 950,000
Newly ODF Population
Zambia 2015
1 – 100,000 ODF Popn 512,300
100,001 –500,000 Malawi 2014
500,001 – 1000000 ODF Popn 450,000
1,000,000 + Madagascar 2018
Namibia
ODF 2017 ODF Popn 227,507
Countries with ODF Protocol
ODF village
here
Zimbabwe 2017

5. Why ODF Protocol?
• “an accepted or established code of procedure”…
usually a national level document
• Validation of the national CLTS strategy as part of
the larger sector strategy.
• Harmonizing approaches nationally-streamline
processes , agree on key programming principles
and philosophy across the sector i.e.
subsidies, rewards, recognition, definition, etc.
• Step toward improved sanitation and other
outcomes - as part of a broader sector strategy.
• Opportunity to link monitoring to sustainability at
various steps.

6. What is an ODF Protocol?
Which indicators will Who is responsible Monitoring
be monitored: Feces in What are the key for verifying the schedule, indicat
the behavior change claim and how ors of
environment, HWWS, d activities/are (paper relapse, etc.
isposal of children’s they working? audit, visit,etc.) ? Links to
feces SanMark/
enhanced ODF
Facilitator status
quality
Definition Post ODF
Baseline Triggering Reporting Verification Certification Monitoring
of ODF
Which Who reports initial Reward or Who certifies?
Recognition
communities, what is ODF Recognition?
the baseline achievement, how and
behavior, usage? to who?

7. Key considerations
Step Key Questions
1. Defining Open Defecation - Is open defecation simply safe disposal of feces or
should it include HWWS and/or more? What about
latrine quality and features?
2. Reporting & Verification What roles should community/local leaders/NGOs
play (i.e. peer reviews, audits)?
What type of delay can be programmed between
the steps (i.e. between verification and
recognition/celebration of ODF?)
2. Rewards and recognition Providing a monetary award to a community that
achieves ODF vs. Recognizing district officials who’s
districts are ODF.
4. Post ODF Monitoring What kind of ongoing support and monitoring is
Schedule or Links to needed in the community?
upgrading/SanMark Who can provide this over the long term?
programming Second tier ODF Status ++
5. Coordination & data At the national and state level, what kind of
coordination and information management system
15/16 is needed?

8. Ethiopia Somalia Malawi Zambia
Yellow flag: Yellow flag (ODF) ODF 1 No sign of open
50 % of HHs use covered latrines No sign o f OD. Every hh uses a defecation.
50% Institutional latrines (gender) latrine with
All use a latrine (shared privacy. Each household
ok) has/uses a latrine.
Green flag (ODF 1) No evidence of
100% usage of covered latrines Latrine is well located shit in the bush. The latrines have:
100% institutional latrine coverage and covered.
ODF 2 o A superstructure
White flag (ODF 2) Proper disposal of Every hh uses a providing privacy
children’s faeces. latrine with a
100% latrines in use/hwws facilities
cover + hwws o A smooth floor
Safe water handling practices.
Green flag (Post ODF 1): facilities.
Communal latrines + hwws 100% use of latrines. o A cover
facilities Latrines with HWWS All institutions
Water source/s well protected. facilities. have latrines 4. Each household
Schools/Health centres. with covers and latrine has a hand-
Red flag: Relapsed community. Safe storage/handling of hwws facilities. washing device with
water. water and soap/ash
White (Post ODF 2):
San/hygiene committee.
Environmental hygiene
and sanitation.

9. Ethiopia CLTSH Indicators
I. Open Defecation-Free Status
Household (HH),
1 No open defecation practice No observed fresh faeces institutions and transect
walk
Availability of latrines meeting minimum HH, communal areas
2 Availability of latrines standards1 institutions and transect
walk
HH, communal areas and
3 Cover for latrine drop-hole Safe cover on latrine hole institutions
Faeces in pit, visible access, latrine
4 Latrines in use maintained, presence of spider webs HH, communal and
institutions
Separate blocks or rooms for Separate rooms or clearly marked male/female
5 males and females HH, communal and
facilities institutions
II. Safe Handwashing Practice
Handwashing facilities (HWF) Existence and functionality of the facility HH, institutions, communal
1
attached/adjacent to latrines
2 Availability of water in the Availability of at least 3-5 litter water HH, institutions, communal
HWF
Splashed water, no algae or spider webs, no dust
3 Handwashing facility in use on the handle of the unit HH, institutions, communal
Availability of soap or soap Presence near HWF HH, institutions, communal
4 substitute within 3 meters of
handwashing facility

10. Kenya Malawi Somalia (Puntland)
Verification Third party Two stages of ODF. Four month delay between
and certification as part verification and
Certification of the process of certification. Third party
validating ODF verification.
claims (although
expensive).
Recognition Celebration. Recognition via Media attention, certificate
signboards, media, etc. billboard.
Post ODF Linked with Conducted by HSAs. Requirement for
Monitoring SanMark activities. Linked with SanMark communities to develop a
activities. POST ODF Sustainability
plan that includes improved
latrines, training, leadership
etc. Overseen by district
officials, linked to cleaning
days.

11. Process Indicators - Madagascar
Testimonies from the 2: At least one female confirms the Open
Community Women Defecation eradication
testimonials 0: The selected female(s) are unable to confirm the
eradication of open defecation
Testimonies from the 2: Children confirm the eradication of Open
Children Defecation
0: No child is able to confirm the eradication of
open defecation
Testimonies from the 2: Community leaders can confirm the eradication
Community’s Leaders of open defecation
0: Community Leader(s) cannot confirm the
eradication of open defecation
Quality of Natural Natural Leader(s) make 3: At least once per week
Leader facilitation regular latrine inspection 2: Once every two weeks
(question the Natural visits 1: Once per week
Leaders and review 0: Natural Leaders have never visited latrines
their evaluation data)
Community By- By-laws exist deterring Open 2: By-laws exist
laws/Sanctions for Defecation 0: Sanction do not exist
OD

12. Lessons from country
experiences
• Leverage ODF protocol development for outcomes beyond ODF
- hwws, disposal of children’s feces, environment.
• Develop second tier ODF
• Develop one coherent protocol for the national sanitation
sector.
• Include both process and
output indicators
• Focus on recognition not
rewards.

13. Lessons from country experience
• Include deliberate timelags and
outcomes beyond ODF.
• Consider the certification and
sustaining of ODF as the chief
outcome, not initial ODF reporting.
• Consider, include and budget for
follow up visits/continued
monitoring.

14. Thanks!
!
“Pas de defecation ouverte dans la brusse!”
Des enfants à Kailahun devant leur latrine
scolaire ATPC. © UNICEF/MUWODA 2010