DOCSLIB.ORG

ZAP GUATEMALA END of YEAR REPORT JANUARY 1, 2018 – DECEMBER 31, 2018 Recommended Citation: Zika AIRS Project (ZAP)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ZAP GUATEMALA END of YEAR REPORT JANUARY 1, 2018 – DECEMBER 31, 2018 Recommended Citation: Zika AIRS Project (ZAP) The Zika AIRS (ZAP) Project Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS 2) Task Order Six ZAP GUATEMALA END OF YEAR REPORT JANUARY 1, 2018 – DECEMBER 31, 2018 Recommended Citation: Zika AIRS Project (ZAP). February 2019. ZAP Guatemala End of Year Report 2018. Rockville, MD. Abt Associates Inc. Contract No.: GHN-I-00-09-00013-00 Task Order: AID-OAA-TO-14-00035 Submitted to: United States Agency for International Development Submitted: February 14, 2019 Abt Associates Inc. 1 6130 Executive Boulevard 1 Rockville, Maryland 20852 1 T. 301.347.5000 1 F. 301.913.9061 1 www.abtassociates.com ZAP GUATEMALA END OF YEAR REPORT JANUARY 1, 2018 – DECEMBER 31, 2018 The views expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. 3 CONTENTS Contents Acronyms ii 1. Executive Summary ...............................................................................................................1 2. Progress and Outcomes.........................................................................................................2 2.1 Community Mobilization, Social and Behavior Change Communication .................. 2 2.2 Vector Control .............................................................................................................. 3 2.2.1 Larviciding and Source Reduction...................................................................................................3 2.2.2 IRS………… ......................................................................................................................................5 2.3 Entomological Monitoring ............................................................................................ 6 2.3.1 Entomological Monitoring for Larviciding and Source Reduction .............................................6 2.3.2 Entomological surveillance for IRS............................................................................................... 11 2.4 Environmental Compliance and Safety...................................................................... 14 2.4.1 IRS Campaign .................................................................................................................................. 14 2.4.2 Larvicide Campaign ........................................................................................................................ 14 2.4.3 Security…….................................................................................................................................... 14 2.5 Monitoring and Evaluation.......................................................................................... 15 3. Improving Zika Response ....................................................................................................17 3.1 Training and Institutional Capacity Building ........................................................................ 17 3.2 Government Engagement................................................................................................. 17 3.3 Innovations.. ................................................................……………………………………..17 3.4 Integration of Cross-cutting Issues .................................................................................... 18 3.4.1 Gender Equality and Female Empowerment.............................................................................. 18 4. Learning.................................................................................................................................19 4.1 Challenges and Lessons Learned ....................................................................................... 19 5. Sustainability and Exit Strategy ..........................................................................................20 Annex 1A. Monitoring and Evaluation: Zika Framework........................................................21 Annex 1B. Monitoring and Evaluation: ZAP M&E PLAN (MEP) ............................................22 Annex 2. Environmental Mitigation and Management Report ...............................................32 Annex 3. Selected Environmental Compliance Resources......................................................52 Annex 4. ZAP Security Resources .............................................................................................53 Annex 5. Training Report ...........................................................................................................57 Annex 6. BCC interventions in 2018..........................................................................................59 Annex 7. Collaboration ...............................................................................................................63 Annex 8. Aedes Indices from larviciding campaign in 2018 ....................................................65 i ACRONYMS AIRS Africa Indoor Residual Spraying BCC Behavior Change Communications BI Breteau index BMP Best Management Practices Bti Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CI Container Index COCODES Community Development Council EMMP Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan EW Epidemiological Week HH Household HI House Index IRS Indoor Residual Spraying M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOH Ministry of Health ODK Open Data Kit PAHO Pan American Health Organization PI Pupae Index PPE Personal Protective Equipment PROEDUSA Departamento de Promoción y Educación para la Salud (Department of Health Promotion and Education) USAID United States Agency for International Development VC Vector Control USAID United States Agency for International Development WHO World Health Organization ZAP Zika AIRS Project ii 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document is a compilation of the Zika AIRS Project (ZAP) in Guatemala’s key activities, progress, and lessons learned in 2018. Funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), ZAP Guatemala aims to reduce the burden of vector-borne diseases by enhancing the capacity and supporting the efforts of the Ministry of Health (MOH) to control the country’s Zika outbreak. Table 1 lists the overall project objectives and highlights of 2018 results. Table 1. ZAP Guatemala Objectives and Highlights 2018 Project Objectives 2018 Highlights/Results Implement vector control activities, including larviciding with 87,369 households visited through Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti), environmental clean-up, and a total of 678,641 monthly visits reduction of breeding sites, as well as behavior change communication (BCC) for the elimination of mosquito breeding sites, through monthly visits in 70,000 targeted households. Conduct an indoor residual spray (IRS) pilot in one of the 5,500 structures sprayed in 2018 priority departments as recommended by USAID and the MOH In close coordination with the MOH, implement 3 sentinel sites with ongoing data entomological surveillance best practices and conduct vector collection and monitoring bionomic studies, routine monitoring, and data reporting to inform optimal cost-effective vector control interventions. In coordination with other USAID implementing agencies, contribute to strengthening the capacity and skills of the government of Guatemala at the national and sub-national levels and of other local counterparts to plan and manage vector control and entomological activities aimed to reduce transmission of Zika and other arboviruses. The geographical locations served by ZAP expanded from 11 municipalities in 2017 to 22 in 2018. The new municipalities are located in the same three departments (Chiquimula, El Progreso, and Zacapa) as the original 11; ZAP Guatemala selected these departments in coordination with the MOH and USAID Mission. This expansion involved training approximately 330 new seasonal workers for vector control and entomology work as well as the opening of two new entomological sentinel sites and entomology laboratories. Overall, in 2018, ZAP-supported larviciding and IRS reached 273,281 beneficiaries. Its community-level BCC interventions reached 34,488 women and 24,432 men. Significant effort went into implementing BCC interventions at the household level as well as strengthening the coordination with community leaders and MOH authorities in all three targeted departments. 1 2. PROGRESS AND OUTCOMES In 2018, in coordination with the Ministry of Health (MOH), the Zika AIRS Project (ZAP) in Guatemala continued implementation of vector control and entomological interventions initiated in 2017 and expanded key activities into an additional 15 municipalities. As of December 2018, ZAP Guatemala is implementing vector control intervention in 22 municipalities in three departments, Chiquimula, El Progreso, and Zacapa, entomological surveillance through sentinel sites in three municipalities, and community outreach and behavior change communication (BCC) interventions in 220 communities. 2.1 COMMUNITY MOBILIZATION, SOCIAL AND BEHAVIOR CHANGE COMMUNICATION Taking into account lessons learned from 2017, in 2018 ZAP Guatemala expanded its strategy to reach targeted beneficiaries and overcome the challenges posed by the low risk perception and awareness about Zika that the beneficiary population shows. In coordination with the MOH Department of Health Promotion and Education (Departamento de Promoción y Educación para la Salud, PROEDUSA), ZAP placed priority on minimizing the use of printed materials; instead, it increased the use of education- entertainment efforts to promote the change of behaviors
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guatemala: Zacapa
    BetterNDPBA solutions. Guatemala Final Report: Authors Fewer disasters. Safer world. Guatemala: Zacapa Image: Google 1 National Disaster Preparedness Baseline Assessment – Department Profile NDPBA Guatemala Report: Department Profile Department: Zacapa Department Capital: Zacapa Area: 2,691 km2 Zacapa is in eastern Guatemala and borders Honduras to the southeast. Excluding the highlands, the majority of the department’s climate is semi- arid, often going two months without rain. Crops include tomatoes, cantaloupe, tobacco, and sugar cane. 244,881 55.9% 2.8% 84.9% Population Population in Illiterate Adult Access to (2017) Poverty Population Improved Water Municipality Population Zacapa 77,092 Gualán 42,130 La Unión 34,345 Teculután 19,376 Rio Hondo 18,768 Estanzuela 12,444 Usumatlán 12,248 Cabañas 11,635 Huité 10,660 San Diego 6,183 Multi-Hazard Risk Rank: Very Low (22 of 22) Lack of Resilience Rank: Very Low (20 of 22) RVA Component Scores Table 1. Department scores and ranks (compared across departments) for each index Multi-Hazard Multi-Hazard Risk Lack of Resilience Vulnerability Coping Capacity Exposure Very Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Very High Score Rank (of 22) Score Rank (of 22) Score Rank (of 22) Score Rank (of 22) Score Rank (of 22) 0.293 22 0.395 20 0.089 21 0.396 20 0.607 3 2 NDPBA Guatemala Report: Department Profile Multi-Hazard Exposure (MHE) Multi-Hazard Exposure1 Rank: 21 of 22 Departments (Score: 0.089) Table 2. Estimated ambient population2 exposed to each hazard 0% 100% 0 People 259,306 People 0% 18% 0 People 46,040 People 1% 1,648 People MHE The Dry Corridor Located in Guatemala’s “Dry Corridor,” Raw MHE Zacapa department experiences extreme Relative MHE dry seasons, often going months without rain.
    [Show full text]
  • 0201 PPM Guastatoya El Progreso
    105 1 2 ÍNDICE INTRODUCCION ...................................................................................................................... 5 CAPITULO I .............................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Marco Legal e Institucional ........................................................................................... 7 1.2 Marco Institucional ....................................................................................................... 9 CAPITULO II ............................................................................................................................. 9 2.1. Marco de Referencia .................................................................................................... 9 2.1.1. Ubicación Geográfica ........................................................................................... 9 2.1.2. Educación ............................................................................................................ 11 2.1.3 Proyección Poblacional ....................................................................................... 16 2.1.4 Sistema de Salud.................................................................................................. 17 2.1.5 Pobreza General y Pobreza Extrema .................................................................. 19 2.1.6 Seguridad y Justicia ............................................................................................. 21 CAPITULO III .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Africa • Afrique America • Amérique Asia «Asie Africa «Afrique
    WEEKLY EPIDEMIOLOGICAL RECORD, No. 7,1 4 FEBRUARY 1992 • RELEVE EPIDEMIOLOGIQUE HEBDOMADAIRE, N" 7 ,14 FEVRIER 1992 the west with 660 cases per 100 000 population in the week Hans l'ouest, avec 660 cas pour 100 000 habitants au cours de la ending 26 January has reported a decrease to 560 cases. All semaine qui s'est achevée le 26 janvier, a rapporté une diminution influenza viruses isolated this season have been influenza A à 560 cas. Tous les virus grippaux isolés cette saison ont été des and all those further studied have been identified as in­ virus A, et tous ceux qui ont été étudiés ultérieurement étaient des fluenza A(H3N2). Influenza B has been diagnosed by direct virus grippaux A(H3N2). La grippe B a été diagnostiquée par detection of the virus antigen in a few cases. détection directe de l'antigène du virus chez quelques cas. United Kingdom (7 February 1992).' Influenza activity Royaume-Uni (7 février 1992).1 L'activité grippale a continué à continued on a low level throughout January. However, out­ un bas niveau en janvier. Cependant, des flambées ont été rappor­ breaks were repotted among the elderly in residential tées Hans des résidences pour personnes âgées et dans plusieurs settings and in several schools during the second half of the écoles dînant la seconde quinzaine du mois. Les écoles fournissant month. Schools providing data an influenza reported an des données sur la grippe ont signalé un accroissement de 9,2 à 29,4 increase from 9.2 to 29.4 cases per 1000 children during cas pour 1 000 enfants en janvier — bien au-dessus du taux moyen January — well above the mean rate of 5.2 for the season de 5,2 cas observé au cours des saisons précédentes; Sur 267 isole­ in previous years.
    [Show full text]
  • Hurricanes Eta and Iota on the Updated December 15Th, 2020 Segunda/Postrera Cropping Season in Central America
    SPECIALSPECIAL REPORT REPORT www.cropmonitor.orgwww.cropmonitor.org Impact of November Hurricanes Eta and Iota on the Updated December 15th, 2020 Segunda/Postrera Cropping Season in Central America Highlights • The start of the Segunda/Postrera agricultural season in Central America was generally favourable from August through October with above-average rainfall resulting in good crop development. • Crop conditions quickly deteriorated in November across parts of the region impacted by the passing of two Category 4 hurricanes, Hurricanes Eta and Iota. • The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season has been the most active ever recorded with 30 named storms, more than twice the long-term yearly average of 12, and the only season with two major hurricanes in November. This has resulted in one of the wettest October to November periods since 1981 across parts of Central America. • In early November, Hurricane Eta crossed Central America and affected an estimated 4 million people across the region as persistent rains and heavy winds resulted in flooding, landslides, and crop damage across Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, and Figure 1. Crop conditions over Central America and the Caribbean as of November 28th, 2020. Source: GEOGLAM Crop Monitor for Early Warning December Bulletin Guatemala. th • Two weeks later on November 17 , Hurricane Iota made landfall over northern Nicaragua as a Category 4 hurricane, the strongest Atlantic hurricane this year, and extended along virtually the same path as Hurricane Eta (Figure 2). While Iota quickly degraded to a tropical depression, persistent rains and high winds exacerbated previous damage from Eta across Nicaragua, Honduras, and Guatemala. • Excessive flooding and considerable damage to standing crops and agricultural infrastructure have significantly decreased yield prospects for the Segunda/Postrera season crops (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Para Las Naciones Unidas, Guatemala Es Uno De Los Países Con Mayores Niveles De Desigualdad En El Mundo. Las Causas Están
    Para las Naciones Unidas, Guatemala es uno de los países con mayores niveles de desigualdad en el mundo. Las causas están relacionadas con toda una herencia histórica que ha determinado la configuración estructural de la sociedad guatemalteca durante cinco siglos. La pobreza es un flagelo que golpea a grandes segmentos de población en todo el país: indígenas, no indígenas, habitantes de áreas urbanas y no urbanas viven en condiciones mínimas de sobrevivencia. Guatemala es una sociedad tradicionalmente agraria donde sus habitantes se dedican a la agricultura o actividades relacionadas con ella. Existen problemas graves en la tenencia y distribución de la tierra. El patrón latifundio-minifundio sigue vigente y determina el desarrollo de las relaciones productivas en el campo y en la ciudad. Según el Informe de las Naciones Unidas sobre Desarrollo Humano para el año 2.002, el ingreso promedio de los pobres por mes en Guatemala, asciende a Q 212,00 (US $ 23,56), lo que refleja los estándares de vida y las condiciones paupérrimas en las que vive la mayoría de la población. En los siguientes dos cuadros se presentan las necesidades básicas insatisfechas de cada municipio del departamento de El Progreso: Tabla No. 6.47 Necesidades Básicas Insatisfechas Necesidades Básicas Insatisfechas 1994 (%) No. Municipio Sin Hogares Sin Agua Sin Insuficiencia de Hacinamiento Servicio Potable Escolaridad Ingreso Familiar Sanitario El Progreso 2,969 26 6 16 5 14 Morazán 1,876 34 12 34 11 20 San Agustín 5,352 46 13 22 16 19 Acasaguastlán San Cristóbal 1,015 38 9 11 11 13 Acasaguastlán El Jicaro 2,013 35 2 20 8 17 Sansare 1,764 35 12 39 8 17 Sanarate 5,113 28 7 28 8 13 San Antonio La Paz 2,274 32 14 24 14 16 Fuente: INE.
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of Territorial Groups in Central America
    The importance of territorial groups in Central America UNODC’s first global transnational organized crime threat These two types of groups are completely different in assessment (TOCTA) (The Globalization of Crime: A trans- character. Territorial groups are focused on controlling national organized crime threat assessment, published in territory and taxing activity within this domain. Trafficking 2010) spoke of two ways of looking at organized crime. The groups are hardly groups at all, but rather networks of first, and more common, is to focus on the groups involved. suppliers, transporters, and receivers, as would be encountered in any licit supply chain. In the region, they The global TOCTA found, however, that most transna- are often referred to as “transportistas”. Much of the violence tional organized crime is rather systemic, or market-based. in the region today is about the growing control of territorial As long as supply and demand exist, removing particular groups over transnational trafficking. This produces intermediaries is not sufficient to destroy the market. This conflicts between territorial groups and the transportistas, as is especially true in a globalized world. well as conflict between territorial groups. For example, hundreds of thousands of people are illegally smuggled into the United States each year, a flow far beyond Within these two broad headings, there are many distinct the capacity of any organized group to manage. Instead, variations. Some territorial groups focus almost exclusively thousands of smugglers ply the trade in an open market on preying on cocaine traffickers, and are known as with low barriers to entry. The same is true of the illegal tumbadores in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Better Solutions. Fewer Disasters. Safer World
    BetterNDPBA solutions. Guatemala Final Report: Authors Fewer disasters. Safer world. Guatemala 1 National Disaster Preparedness Baseline Assessment - Final Report 2 NDPBA Guatemala Final Report: Authors Authors Erin Hughey, PhD Scott Kuykendall, MS Director of Disaster Services Disaster Management Specialist Pacific Disaster Center Pacific Disaster Center [email protected] [email protected] Joseph Green, PhD Paulo Fernandes, Jr. Epidemiologist and Health Risk Disaster Services Analyst Specialist Pacific Disaster Center Pacific Disaster Center [email protected] [email protected] Dan Morath, MS, GISP Rachel Leuck, MS Senior Disaster Risk Analyst Disaster Services Analyst Pacific Disaster Center Pacific Disaster Center [email protected] [email protected] Doug Mayne, MaOL, CEM® Cassie Stelow, MS Disaster Management Advisor Senior Disaster Services Analyst Pacific Disaster Center Pacific Disaster Center [email protected] [email protected] © 2018 Pacific Disaster Center Table 1. Record of Changes Date Description Version 1/2/2018 Technical edit of NDBPA Guatemala report Mark Shwartz 2/6/2018 Final Review V9 3 4 NDPBA Guatemala Final Report: Acknowledgements Acknowledgements A special mahalo to Guatemala’s Coordinadora Nacional para la Reducción de Desastres (CONRED) for providing coordination and insight throughout the National Disaster Preparedness Baseline Assessment (NDPBA) project. Additional thanks to the Secretaría de Planificación y Programación (SEGEPLAN) for their support in project coordination and data gathering. CONRED and its partners have
    [Show full text]
  • The Bees of the Genus Centris Fabricius, 1804
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: European Journal of Taxonomy Jahr/Year: 2020 Band/Volume: 0618 Autor(en)/Author(s): Vivallo Felipe Artikel/Article: The bees of the genus Centris Fabricius, 1804 described by Theodore Dru Alison Cockerell (Hymenoptera: Apidae) 1-47 European Journal of Taxonomy 618: 1–47 ISSN 2118-9773 https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2020.618 www.europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu 2020 · Vivallo F. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0). Research article urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:FB1B58E6-7E40-4C16-9DFF-2EA5D43BC0B3 The bees of the genus Centris Fabricius, 1804 described by Theodore Dru Alison Cockerell (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Felipe VIVALLO HYMN Laboratório de Hymenoptera, Departamento de Entomologia, Museu Nacional, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Quinta da Boa Vista, São Cristóvão 20940‒040 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. Email: [email protected] urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:AC109712-1474-4B5D-897B-1EE51459E792 Abstract. In this paper the primary types of Centris bees described by the British entomologist Theodore Dru Alison Cockerell deposited in the Natural History Museum (London) and the Oxford University Museum of Natural History (Oxford) in the United Kingdom, as well as in the United States National Museum (Washington), American Museum of Natural History (New York), the Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University (Philadelphia), and in the California Academy of Sciences (San Francisco) in the United States were studied. To stabilize the application of the name C. lepeletieri (= C. haemorrhoidalis (Fabricius)), a lectotype is designated. The study of the primary types allow proposing the revalidation of C.
    [Show full text]
  • Guatemala Annual Country Report 2020 Country Strategic Plan 2018 - 2020 Table of Contents
    SAVING LIVES CHANGING LIVES Guatemala Annual Country Report 2020 Country Strategic Plan 2018 - 2020 Table of contents 2020 Overview 3 Context and operations & COVID-19 response 6 Risk Management 8 Partnerships 9 CSP Financial Overview 10 Programme Performance 12 Strategic outcome 01 12 Strategic outcome 02 14 Strategic outcome 03 17 Strategic outcome 04 19 Strategic outcome 05 21 Strategic outcome 06 23 Cross-cutting Results 25 Progress towards gender equality 25 Protection and accountability to affected populations 26 Environment 27 Data Notes 27 Figures and Indicators 29 WFP contribution to SDGs 29 Beneficiaries by Sex and Age Group 29 Beneficiaries by Residence Status 30 Beneficiaries by Programme Area 30 Annual Food Transfer 30 Annual Cash Based Transfer and Commodity Voucher 31 Strategic Outcome and Output Results 32 Cross-cutting Indicators 38 Guatemala | Annual Country Report 2020 2 2020 Overview In 2020, WFP Guatemala contributed to addressing malnutrition and food insecurity deepened by the COVID-19. WFP’s Country Strategic Plan contributed to the priorities established by the Government of Guatemala and the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and to the COVID-19 National Response Plan. Activities focused on improved food security and enhanced nutrition for early childhood and school-aged children and on resilience building. These efforts ultimately contributed to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2 and 17, directly benefiting about 200,000 people in the country and an estimated 750,000 people indirectly through capacity strengthening support to national institutions. In line with the Government's efforts to curb the economic and social impacts of the COVID-19 on food security and nutrition, WFP scaled-up its emergency response operation and provided cash transfers to nearly 30,000 households, for a total of USD 3.4 million.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of the Ch'orti' in Chiquimula
    We were born here, We did not come here Aquí hemos nacido, no hemos venido Machiwar kayopá temeyum Iranon kuxpon tará Indigenous peoples’ rights and hydro-electric projects in Guatemala: The case of the Ch’orti’ in Chiquimula Independent Report prepared by Julian Burger, Monica Feria-Tinta and Claire McGregor June 2015 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 I BACKGROUND 5 A Purpose and scope of the mission 5 B Political context 6 C Economic context 7 D Indigenous peoples of Guatemala 8 II MAIN ACTORS IN THE CH’ORTI’ CONFLICT 11 E The community: the Ch’orti’ of Chiquimula 11 F Nuevo Día 13 G The company: Las 3 niñas 13 H Municipal and national authorities involved 14 III LEGAL FRAMEWORK 16 I The Guatemalan legal system 16 J Collective rights of indigenous peoples 17 K Rights to land, territory and resources 18 L Right to consultation 21 M Right to self-determination and right to development 24 N Obligations of the business sector on human rights 25 IV OBSERVATIONS 28 O Implementation of collective rights of indigenous peoples 28 P Implementation of right to land and territory 29 Q Implementation of right to consultation 32 R The business model 36 S Impacts of the project 36 T Two concepts of ‘development’ 39 U Response of local state actors to unrest: conflict and criminalization of the Ch’orti’ people 40 V Response of national state actors 44 V RECOMMENDATIONS 46 APPENDIX A – MAP OF CH’ORTI’COMMUNITIES 47 The case of the Ch’orti’ in Chiquimula 1 The expert delegation meeting with Ch’orti’ community members The fact-finding team acted pro bono and without remuneration.
    [Show full text]
  • Guatemala National Disability Survey 2016
    GUATEMALA NATIONAL DISABILITY STUDY (ENDIS 2016) SURVEY REPORT Funders: CBM Conadi Guatemala UNICEF Guatemala Investigators: Dr. Carlos Dionicio, Conadi Dr. Shaun Grech ,Director, The Critical Institute Islay Mactaggart, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Jonathan Naber, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Dr. Ana Rafaela Salazar de Barrios, University of San Carlos, Guatemala Gonna Rota, CBM Sarah Polack, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Project Partners: CONADI (National Council on Disability), Guatemala CBM Latin America Regional Office UNICEF Guatemala CONADI Technical Team: Instituto Nacional de Estadística -INE-, Guatemala Dr. Mario Paúl Melgar Méndez , Investigador Independiente, Guatemala Junta Directiva periodo 2015-2016, CONADI Dra. Ana Leticia Pons Gudiel, CONADI Lic. Sebastián Toledo, CONADI Lic. Rafael Cañas Castillo, CONADI Licda. Indra Molina Muñoz, CONADI Licda. Rosa Mery Mejía, CONADI Acknowledgements We would like to thank the team of field workers for their hard work, commitment and dedication to this project: Romeo Matías (Field Supervisor), Alba Arroyo, Alejandro Tot, Alex Tzib, Carlos Macario, Carlos Ronquillo, Claudia Botzoc, Deivis Gutiérrez, Dinora Cruz, Edgar Chamam, Elvia Isem, Enio Martínez, Henry Maldonado, K’aslen Ronquillo, Nicté Simaj, Norma Moran, Rafael Peña, Rosa Castro, Wilson Tzib We would also like to acknowledge the support of the following agencies, associations and organisations for their extremely supportive roles throughout the planning and fieldwork stages of this survey: Guatemala Instituto National de Estadistica (INE), the National Civil Police, the Academy of Mayan Languages, ASCATED and FUNDAL. ii Thank you to Juan Yanguela, who supported the project in a voluntary capacity, assisting the team in field work, data cleaning and translation.
    [Show full text]
  • Vitazyme on Cantaloupe
    Vital Earth Resources 706 East Broadway, Gladewater, Texas 75647 (903) 845-2163 FAX: (903) 845-2262 22001122 CCrroopp RReessuullttss VViittaazzyymmee oonn CCaannttaalloouuppee Researchers : Robert Garcia and Cristhian Mazariegos, Foragro Development, Guatemala City, Guatemala; Alex Diaz and William Sosa, Heads of Plant Protection, Proingasa Classic, Guatemala Company : Proingasa Classic Location : Site 21, Section 8, Valves 26 to 29, km 132, Senegal, Rio Hondo, Zacapa Department, Guatemala Variety : Honey Dew HQ252 Soil type : silty clay Climate : temperature, 27 to 38°C; relative humidity, 63% Altitude : 230 meters above sea level Planting date : October 22, 2011 Experimental design : A cantaloupe field was selected for a trial to determine the effectiveness of Vitazyme to enhance the yield and quality of the crop. A treated area of 2 manzanas (1.4 ha) was compared to an adja - cent untreated area using three Vitazyme applications. 1. Control 2. Vitazyme Fertilization : unknown Vitazyme applications : (1) Roots of the seedlings were dipped into a drum containing a 1% Vitazyme solu - tion (1 liter in 100 liters of water) for one manzana (0.7 ha), to give 1.4 liters/ha; (2) foliar and soil spray of 1.4 liters/ha at 23 days after planting; (3) foliar and soil spray of 1.4 liters/ha at 43 days after planting (sprayer had 1,100 liter capacity, with purple Albuz nozzles applying 0.49 liter/minute). Growth results : Vitazyme treatments gave a greater leaf area and root mass than the control plots. Yield and quality results : Harvesting was completed December 18, 2011. Melon Brix Treatment Brix Change %% Fruit brix, % Control 10.60 — Vitazyme 12.16 +1.56 (15%) Increase in fruit Brix with Vitazyme: 1.56 points The increase in fruit soluble solids with Vitazyme was most excellent, 1.56 points, which would be very noticeable to the person eating the melons.
    [Show full text]