DOCSLIB.ORG

Disaster Sanitation When There’S No Place to Go

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Disaster Sanitation When There’S No Place to Go Disaster Sanitation When There’s No Place to Go Laura Hall, RDPO - [email protected] Laura Hall, Communications Coordinator, Regional Disaster Preparedness Organization, which is housed in the Portland Bureau of Emergency Management Where will we go? We’re here today to talk about where people are going to poop after a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake. Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake ● Nearly 700 mile fault off the coast ● Magnitude 8.0-9.0 earthquakes ● Several minutes of shaking ● Damage to water and sewer lines Here’s a quick primer for those of you who don’t already know. The Cascadia “megathrust” fault stretches from Northern California to Vancouver, British Columbia. ● It produces magnitude 8-9.0 earthquakes that last 2-9 minutes. ● On average, this fault ruptures every 250 years. The last rupture was 319 years ago, in the year 1700, back before all this lovely modern infrastructure at that we’ve all grown so fond of. ● When Cascadia ruptures next, we’ll see significant destruction throughout the region, including catastrophic and unprecedented impacts to our water and wastewater systems. The Pacific Northwest will face a major sanitation crisis. ● The 2013 Oregon Resilience Plan estimates it will take 6 months - 1 year for wastewater systems to become 80-90% operational in the Willamette Valley (3 years to return to current operational state). Hepatitis A Leptospirosis E-coli Methaemoglobinaemia Cholera Poliomyelitis Cryptosporidiosis Schistomsomiasis Encephalitis Campylobacteriosis Gastroenteritis Shigellosis Giardiasis Paratyphoid Fever Dysentery Typhoid Fever Salmonellosis Norovirus Yersiniosis (Diarrhea) As you well know, the ability to treat water and wastewater is a fundamental part of the modern public health system. Without it, a lot of nasty diseases spread quickly and lethally. Every day, throughout the world, there is unfortunate evidence of this. But here’s where we lack evidence - what happens to a place like this, the Pacific Northwest, when a major earthquake hits. There are other industrialized nations in geologically active areas, such as Japan and Mexico, but they have more frequent earthquakes and have a head start in hardening their systems. What happens when an earthquake hits a region full of people who are used to flushing a toilet and a vast underground infrastructure that was built before the region’s risk of major earthquakes was well known. Christchurch, New Zealand (2011) The best comparison we can make is Christchurch, New Zealand, which has similar geology, building inventory, and age of infrastructure. ● In September 2010, Christchurch experienced a magnitude 7.1 earthquake that lasted 40 seconds. A few months later, in February 2011, another earthquake hit. ● The second quake was a magnitude 6.3 and lasted only 10 seconds, but it produced much more extensive damage than the first quake due to: ● Liquefaction - when water-saturated soils soften and lose strength. ● Lateral spreading - when surface-level soils permanently move laterally. ● As you can imagine, underground pipes don’t like this type of movement. ● 100% of the Christchurch sewer system was affected either by liquefaction, breakage of pipes, damage to treatment ponds, or power outage. There was discharge of untreated sewage into waterways, and most of their water system was severely damaged. ● Many were without working toilets for weeks. Some parts of the system didn’t come back online for well over a year. Thousands of portable toilets and chemical toilets were brought in from around the globe. They nearly tapped the world’s supply. ● They averted a major public health crisis because of the relatively small scale of the disaster, but also because they got creative and found ways to protect public health. ● But the population of Christchurch is only about 400,000, and the roads and waterways outside the earthquake zone were perfectly usable. When Cascadia hits, millions of people will be impacted, roads and bridges will be impassable, and recovery will be a much longer, slower process, hampered by many logistical challenges. Regional Disaster Preparedness Organization Portland Metropolitan Region (Clackamas, Clark, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington counties) Collaborating to increase the region’s resilience to disasters The Regional Disaster Preparedness Organization is a partnership of government agencies, non-governmental organizations, and private-sector stakeholders in the Portland Metropolitan Region, which includes Clackamas, Columbia, Multnomah, and Washington counties in Oregon and Clark County in Washington. ● These stakeholders are collaborating to increase the region’s resilience to disasters, as the name implies. ● Partner agencies include counties, cities, Metro regional government, Port of Portland, TriMet, utility companies, hospitals, public works department, the Red Cross, Intel… you get the picture. Disaster Sanitation Task Force Representatives from: • Public Health • Planning & Environmental Multi-Jurisdictional Sustainability • Public Works Multi-Disciplinary • Oregon Department of • Solid Waste & Recycling Environmental Quality • Emergency Management ...with input from PHLUSH In 2016, the RDPO formed a multi-jurisdictional, multi-disciplinary Task Force to address the issue of sanitation in the Portland Metro Region following a catastrophic, pipe-breaking earthquake (or other event that disables sewer systems, blocks roads, limits fuel, etc.). ● The goal was to provide the public with recommendations for handling human waste in the absence of a functional wastewater system. ○ Not meant to address hand hygiene or industrial or other waste ○ Not meant to make infrastructure or mitigation recommendations ○ It was just - what should people do with their poo As the project progressed, a new goal emerged: ● We need to provide jurisdictions with information so they can start disaster sanitation planning now (before the disaster). We’re creating that framework now, and we’ll talk about that a bit today. Assumptions ● Systems partially or fully out of service for many months ● Simple, cheap, effective, hyper-local, and limit exposure ● No single method ● Portable toilets aren’t an option ● Further messaging within 30 days The task force started with several assumptions. ● Sewage collection and treatment systems will be partially or fully out of service for many months following a large earthquake. ● Methods for handling poo must be simple, cheap, and hyper local. And they must effectively protect public health by limiting exposure to the waste. ● No single sanitation method is right for every situation – there must be several options to handle a variety of situations. ● While portable toilets work well in small events, the number required for this scenario far outreaches the initial availability. Additionally, they require frequent servicing (cleaning and emptying), which would be very challenging. ● Within 30 days of the initial disaster, local governments should be in a position to provide further messaging and instructions regarding human waste. Sue Mohnkern Retired Public Health Program Supervisor Washington County Scott Johnson Emergency Manager Clark Regional Emergency Services Agency Erin O’Connell Environmental Services Specialist Columbia County Wastewater Today we’re going to hear from three extraordinary members of the Disaster Sanitation Task Force. We’ve all been given very charming nicknames. ● Sue Mohnkern, Movement Mentor ○ Retired Public Health Program Supervisor, Washington County ● Scott Johnson, Fecal Factfinder ○ Emergency Manager, Clark Regional Emergency Services Agency ● Erin O’Connell, Poop Processing Professional ○ Environmental Services Specialist, Columbia County ● Laura Hall, Dookey Diva and Poop Project Coordinator ○ Communications Coordinator, RDPO Sue Mohnkern Developing recommendations Scott Johnson Creating public messaging campaign Erin O’Connell Developing a cleanup plan No Best Practices Available ● Reviewed literature for guidance and previous works ○ No clear guidance that matched the scenario at hand ○ Found plenty addressing developing nations and US hurricane/flood scenarios Clackamas County Disaster Nancy Bush City of Clatskanie Ray DiPasquale Management City of Portland, Bureau of Planning Clackamas County Public Health Julie Hamilton Pete Chism-Winfield & Sustainability Clackamas and Columbia County Portland Bureau of Environmental Sarah Present Steve Behrndt Health Officer Services Clark County (drinking water Tigard Public Works and Emergency protection, on-site wastewater Chuck Harman Theresa Reynolds Management protection) Columbia County (on-site water Tigard Public Works and Emergency Erin O’Connell Mike Lueck management) Management Columbia County Public Health Anne Parrott Metro Daniel Nibouar Multnomah County Emergency Stevie Bullock Metro Roy Brower Management Multnomah County Emergency Alice Busch Metro Bruce Philbrick Management Washington County Emergency Multnomah County Public Health Uei Lei Ken Schlegel Management Multnomah County (Septic/COP), Clark Regional Emergency Services City of Portland, Bureau of Erin Mick Scott Johnson Agency Developmental Services Washington County Emergency Scott Porter Oregon DEQ Heather Kuoppamaki Management Washington County Emergency Chris Walsh Oregon Refuse and Recycling Assn. Dave White Management Washington County Public Health Sue Mohnkern RDPO Emma Stocker Washington County Solid Waste and Thomas Egleston RDPO Laura Hanson Recycling ● Established task force of willing partners ○ 27 participants from 21 agencies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Water Supply and Sanitation & Integrated Water Resources
    Water Supply and Sanitation & Integrated Water Resources Management: why seek better integration? John Butterworth1 and John Soussan2 1Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, UK 2Centre for Water Policy and Development, University of Leeds, UK WHIRL Project Working Paper 2 Preliminary results of research for discussion and comment Prepared for WHIRL project workshop on ‘Water Supply & Sanitation and Watershed Development: positive and negative interactions’, Andhra Pradesh, India, 5-14 May 2001 This project is supported by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) through the Infrastructure and Urban Development Division’s Knowledge and Research programme. Project R7804 ‘Integrating drinking water needs in watershed projects’ 1 INTRODUCTION This working paper was prepared as a contribution to a joint Indian, South African and UK research project on Water, Households and Rural Livelihoods (WHIRL). The objectives of the paper are to identify approaches to improve access of the poor to secure, safe and sustainable water supplies in areas of water scarcity, and to identify some of the key challenges to the more effective management of water resources in these areas. It is targeted at organisations responsible for the delivery of water supply and sanitation (WSS) services and management of land and water resources in developing countries. It aims to promote discussion and dialogue between the research partners and these organisations. The paper is produced at a time of major changes to approaches to the management of water resources in general and the delivery of WSS services in particular, throughout the developing world. The limitations of traditional approaches based on supply provision have been recognised in many places, and the principles of integrated water resources management developed (IWRM).
    [Show full text]
  • WHO Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health: Facts and Figures
    Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES - *updated March 2004 "Water and Sanitation is one of the primary drivers of public health. I often refer to it as “Health 101”, which means that once we can secure access to clean water and to adequate sanitation facilities for all people, irrespective of the difference in their living conditions, a huge battle against all kinds of diseases will be won." Dr LEE Jong-wook, Director-General, World Health Organization. Diarrhoea - 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal Intestinal helminths (Ascariasis, Trichuriasis, diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, Hookworm disease) mostly in developing countries. - 133 million people suffer from high intensity - 88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe intestinal helminth infections, which often leads to water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. severe consequences such as cognitive impairment, - Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity massive dysentery, or anaemia. by 21%. - These diseases cause around 9400 deaths every year. - Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by - Access to safe water and sanitation facilities and 37.5%. better hygiene practice can reduce morbidity from - The simple act of washing hands at critical times can ascariasis by 29% and hookworm by 4%. reduce the number of diarrhoeal cases by up to 35%. - Additional improvement of drinking-water quality, Japanese encephalitis such as point of use disinfection, would lead to a - 20% of clinical cases of Japanese encephalitis die, reduction of diarrhoea episodes of 45%. and 35% suffer permanent brain damage. - Improved management for irrigation of water Malaria resources reduces transmission of disease, in South, - 1.2 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of South East, and East Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Zambia's Community-Led Total Sanitation Program
    CLA CASE ANALYSIS: DEEP DIVE Zambia’s Community-Led Total Sanitation Program Disclaimer: This report was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). It was prepared by the LEARN mechanism out of the USAID Office of Learning, Evaluation and Research (LER) in the Bureau for Policy, Planning and Learning (PPL). LEARN is managed by Dexis Consulting Group. COVER PHOTO: Zambian girl leaves latrine. (Source: Akros) Photo credit: Andrew Prinsen DEEP DIVE SUMMARY INFORMATION Sector WASH Type of Intervention Community-Led Total Sanitation Program (CLTS), supplemented by a Mobile-to-Web (M2W) application and close collaboration with traditional leaders Country/Region Zambia / Southern Africa Size & Scope Akros, funded by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) and in partnership with UNICEF and the Government of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ), implemented the M2W monitoring component of a Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) program in Zambia as part of the Zambian Sanitation and Health Program (ZSHP), beginning with a few pilot districts, then expanding to all rural counties. Funded Activities In partnership with UNICEF and the Zambian government, Akros developed a Mobile-to-Web (M2W) application using the open-source District Health Information System 2 (DHIS2) software that allowed real-time monitoring of latrine construction and sanitation improvements at the community level across 68 rural districts in Zambia. Akros subsequently also developed a “Chief App,” an Android-based widget that enabled key visualizations to be shared with traditional leaders. The app allowed chiefs and their headmen/women to have access to the data from the wards in their chiefdom as well as the surrounding chiefdoms to help traditional leaders track sanitation progress in their areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)
    July 2018 About Water, Sanitation and UNICEF The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Hygiene (WASH) works in more than 190 countries and territories to put children first. UNICEF WASH and Children has helped save more Globally, 2.3 billion people lack access to basic children’s lives than sanitation services and 844 million people lack any other humanitarian organization, by providing access to clean drinking water. The lack of health care and immuni­ these basic necessities isn’t just inconvenient zations, safe water and — it’s lethal. sanitation, nutrition, education, emergency relief Over 800 children die every day — about 1 and more. UNICEF USA supports UNICEF’s work every 2 minutes — from diarrhea due to unsafe through fundraising, drinking water, poor sanitation, or poor advocacy and education in hygiene. Suffering and death from diseases the United States. Together, like pneumonia, trachoma, scabies, skin we are working toward the and eye infections, cholera and dysentery day when no children die from preventable causes could be prevented by scaling up access and every child has a safe to adequate water supply and sanitation and healthy childhood. facilities and eliminating open defecation. For more information, visit unicefusa.org. Ensuring access to water and sanitation in UNICEF has helped schools can also help reduce the number of increase school children who miss out on their education — enrollment in Malawi through the provision especially girls. Scaling up access to WASH of safe drinking water. also supports efforts to protect vulnerable © UNICEF/UN040976/RICH children from violence, exploitation and abuse, since women and girls bear the heaviest Today, UNICEF has WASH programs in 113 burden in water collection, often undertaking countries to promote the survival, protection long, unsafe journeys to collect water.
    [Show full text]
  • Facility Sanitation
    DESCHUTES COUNTY ADULT JAIL CD-4-1 L. Shane Nelson, Sheriff Jail Operations Approved by: February 16, 2016 FACILITY SANITATION POLICY. It is the policy of the Deschutes County Adult Jail (DCAJ) and Work Center (WC) to maintain a safe, professional, clean, sanitary, and pest-free work and living environment. PURPOSE. The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines which outline general sanitation requirements and set forth the provisions for facility cleaning and a sanitation plan. It also describes inmate responsibilities for helping to maintain a clean and sanitary facility. OREGON JAIL STANDARDS. A-206 Maintaining Inspection Reports from Outside Entities B-306 Shower and Clothing Exchange H-108 Vermin Infested or Washable Biohazards H-109 Equipping Living Areas H-110 Hot and Cold Running Water H-201 Sanitation Plan H-202 Inmates Sanitation Responsibilities H-206 Internal Inspections H-207 Documentation of Sanitation and Maintenance REFERENCES. ORS 169.076, Standards for Local Correctional Facilities ORS 654, Oregon Safe Employment Act Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 437, Division 2, (29 CFR 1910), Subdivision J: General Environmental Controls, §1910.141 Sanitation DEFINITIONS. Direct Supervision. When an inmate is within sight and sound of a corrections deputy who is responsible for overseeing the inmate. PROCEDURES. SECTION A: GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING A-1. DCAJ and WC will have a cleaning schedule for all areas. However, corrections staff must respond to and act on immediate needs for cleaning or sanitation. Supersedes: October 24, 2012 Review date: February 2018 Total number of pages: 6 1 DCAJ CD-4-1 February 16, 2016 A-2. The programs deputy assigned to facility sanitation will supervise cleaning and sanitation each shift.
    [Show full text]
  • Sanitation Implementation Brief
    Sanitation WATER AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Implementation Brief July 2016 GOAL OF USAID WATER AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 2013-2018: To save lives and advance development through improvements in water, sanitation, and hygiene; and through the sound management and use of water for food security. I. Introduction Improving sanitation can have a significant impact on health, the economy, personal security, and dignity, especially for women and girls. Investments in sanitation reduce health care costs and boost productivity, as time available for work and school increases. Global Sanitation: Key Facts Despite these compelling benefits, significant progress in improving sanitation has not occurred. The Millennium • 2.4 Billion – People still lacking access to basic sanitation, globally. Development Goal (MDG) 7c of halving the number of people without access to improved sanitation was not met.1 The slow • 1 Billion – People still lacking any progress in sanitation is related to some daunting challenges. sanitation facility, and instead practice open Sanitation is expensive, often overlooked, requires complex defecation. systems and infrastructure, and in many cultures is considered taboo. Sanitation suffers from a lack of political prioritization, • $5 – Estimated economic gain for every particularly when compared with drinking water. $1 spent on improved sanitation. Sources: UNICEF/WHO; World Bank – Water and Sanitation Women and girls are disproportionately burdened by the lack Programme of access to sanitation. They face risks of sexual and physical violence when they have to travel long distances to sanitation facilities. Girls’ full engagement at school and work is at risk when proper facilities are lacking. Despite having primary responsibility for caring for children and the elderly, women rarely have a voice in sanitation decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Planning and Management at Community Level
    Training manual Water resource management: Integrated planning and management at community level This training manual is intended to help to WaterAid in Nepal ’s partners and stakeholders train community leaders in developing integrated plans for managing water resource at community level. The production of this manual was led by Kabir Das Rajbhandari from WaterAid in Nepal with support from WaterAid in Nepal ’s partners. Consultant Dinesh Raj Manandhar assisted in the preparation of this manual by organising a series of workshops at community level and with practitioners. Colleagues from the Advocacy team in Nepal reviewed the document, providing valuable input. This document should be cited as WaterAid in Nepal (2011) Training manual - Water resource management: Integrated planning and management at community level. The document can be found in the documents section of the WaterAid in Nepal country programme website– www.nepal.wateraid.org A WaterAid in Nepal publication September 2011 WaterAid transforms lives by improving access to safe water, hygiene and sanitation in the world’s poorest communities. We work with partners and influence decision makers to maximise our impact. Cover picture: Top: A school girl at Lalit Kalyan School behind recharged well from harvested rain. WaterAid/ Anita Pradhan Middle: Pratima Shakya from Hakha tole in Lalitpur district at the dug well front to her house. Bottom: Krishna Shrestha caretaker, Sunga wastewater treatment plant, Thimee. WaterAid/ Marco Betti Contents Abbreviation iii 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 WaterAid and Water Resource Management (WRM) 2 1.3 CWRM approach and capacity building 4 1.4 About the manual 5 1.5 Target group 6 1.6 Objective of the training 6 1.7 Expected outcomes 6 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Guides to Pollution Prevention Municipal Pretreatment Programs EPA/625/R-93/006 October 1993
    United States Office of Research and EPA/625/R-93/O06 Environmental Protection Development October 1993 Agency Washington, DC 20460 Guides to Pollution Prevention Municipal Pretreatment Programs EPA/625/R-93/006 October 1993 Guides to Pollution Prevention: Municipal Pretreatment Programs U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development Center for Environmental Research Information Cincinnati, Ohio Printed on Recycled Paper Notice The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA). This document has been reviewed in accordance with the Agency’s peer and administrative review policies and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. ii Acknowledgments This guide is the product of the efforts of many individuals. Gratitude goes to each person involved in the preparation and review of this guide. Authors Lynn Knight and David Loughran, Eastern Research Group, Inc., Lexington, MA, and Daniel Murray, U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Center for Environmental Research Information were the principal authors of this guide. Technical Contributors The following individuals provided invaluable technical assistance during the development of this guide: Cathy Allen, U.S. EPA, Region V, Chicago, IL Deborah HanIon, U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC William Fahey, Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, Boston, MA Eric Renda, Massachusetts
    [Show full text]
  • Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Habitat in Prisons ICRC
    Author: Pier Giorgio Nembrini WATER, SANITATION, HYGIENE AND HABITAT PRISONSIN International Committee of the Red Cross 19 Avenue de la Paix, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland T +41 22 734 6001 F +41 22 733 2057 E-mail: [email protected] www.cicr.org © ICRC, August 2005 Author: Pier Giorgio Nembrini Project leader: Riccardo Conti Drawings: François Rueff Pier Giorgio Nembrini Contributions from: Annette Corbaz Pascal Daudin Acknowledgements: Rowena Binz Frank Bouvet Pierre Corthésy Yves Etienne Carmen García Pascal Jansen Patrick Kilchenmann Robert Mardini Alain Mourey Alain Oppliger Alfred Petters† Philippe Rey Hernán Reyes Stefan Spang Jean Vergain Cynthia Wallace Aloys Widmer Renée Zellweger-Monin and all the engineers and technicians who have worked in prisons. Water, sanitation, hygiene and habitat in prisons ICRC Contents Foreword 9 Introduction 10 Dilapidated and unsuitable premises 10 Funding inadequate to meet needs 10 The need for a global approach 11 Subjects covered in this handbook 11 1. Habitat: space and quarters 13 1. 1 Architecture of a prison 14 1. 2 Plans and dimensions of a prison 15 1. 3 Living quarters and capacity 16 Capacity and calculation of occupancy rate 17 Measurement of area to determine occupancy rate 17 Weighting of occupancy rate 18 Total space available for accommodation 19 Floor space per detainee or true occupancy rate 19 1. 4 Bedding 21 Bunk beds 22 1. 5 Ventilation and lighting 23 Ventilation 23 Lighting 25 1. 6 Synoptic table 25 2. Water: water supply and hygiene measures 27 2. 1 Introduction 28 2. 2 Water
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 VACCINATION PROGRAM INTERIM PLAYBOOK for JURISDICTION OPERATIONS – October 29, 2020
    COVID-19 Vaccination Program Interim Operational Guidance InterimJurisdiction Operational Operations Guidance Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) October 29, 2020 Version 2.0 COVID-19 VACCINATION PROGRAM INTERIM PLAYBOOK FOR JURISDICTION OPERATIONS – October 29, 2020 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................5 Section 1: Public Health Preparedness Planning ........................................................................................................6 Improvement Planning .......................................................................................................................................6 COVID-19 Vaccination Program Planning ...........................................................................................................6 Section 2: COVID-19 Organizational Structure and Partner Involvement ..................................................................8 Planning and Coordination Team (Internal) .......................................................................................................8 State-Local Coordination ....................................................................................................................................8 Tribal Nations and Tribal Communities ..............................................................................................................9 COVID-19 Vaccination Program Implementation
    [Show full text]
  • Jirani Sanitation Groups: Sustaining Open Defecation Free Status In
    Jirani sanitation groups: sustaining open defecation U SNV free status in Tanzania Introduction The sustainability of open defecation free (ODF) status in rural areas where toilets frequently collapse is a global concern. In Tanzania, SNV has developed an innovative approach called Jirani sanitation groups (JSGs). 'Jirani' means neighbour and the approach is based on community support; if a toilet collapses another can be built with A group of Jirani sub-village heads revise their registers. Their the help of neighbours. blue t-shirts make them easy to be recognised and gain them respect in the community. Photo: SNV Tanzania Jirani leaders monitor the progress of the 10 households This case study presents the JSGs intervention, closest to their homes and sensitise their neighbours on providing practical information for its implementation the importance of building, taking care of, and and a brief discussion on the challenges and lessons improving sanitation and handwashing facilities. The learned by the SNV Tanzania team and their partners on leaders form committees that monitor sanitation and the ground. hygiene progress on the ground and report monthly to the village government. About SNV Tanzania and the SSH4A programme SNV has been present in Tanzania for over 40 years, The JSGs intervention was designed by SNV Tanzania aiming to achieve inclusive growth and development under the Sustainable Sanitation and Hygiene For All through effective solutions with local impact. (SSH4A) programme. It offers a new and innovative approach for sustaining ODF status in rural areas by The Sustainable Sanitation and Hygiene For All (SSH4A) making people agents of change in their communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion Paper: Climate, Sanitation and Health
    Discussion paper: Climate, Sanitation and Health Draft | July 2019 Discussion Paper: Climate, Sanitation and Health - DRAFT Acknowledgements WHO gratefully acknowledges financial and technical support from the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) for the development of this paper. Lead Authors: Jeremy Kohlitz, Juliet Willetts and Anna Gero (University of Technology Sydney, Australia), Stephanie Lyons (WaterAid, United Kingdom), Sophie Boisson and Kate Medlicott (WHO, Switzerland) External reviewers: Guy Howard (University of Bristol, United Kingdom), Kristie Ebi (University of Washington), Katrina Charles (University of Oxford), Pierre Mukheibir (University of Technology Sydney, Australia), Rory McKeown, Jennifer De France, and Elena Villalobos Prats (WHO, Switzerland). Contributors at expert meetings: Eyob Abebe (Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy, Ethiopia), Wondowossen Anteneh (DFID, Ethiopia), Zewdu Assefa (Ethiopian Public Health Institute, Ethiopia), Hamed Bakir (WHO Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office), Hakima Bendriouich (Direction Assainissement et Environnement à l’ONEE-BO, Morocco), Diarmid Campbell-Lendrum (WHO, Switzerland), Sonia Casmiro-Trigo (WHO Mozambique), Edward Chado (Ministry of Health, Malawi), Zufan Abera Damtew (Health Extension & Primary Health Service Directorate, Ethiopia), Shewanesh Demeke (Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy, Ethiopia), Ramakanta Duwadi (Department of Water Supply and Sewerage Management, Nepal), Mohamed Hammam El-Sakka (WHO Bangladesh), Patrick England
    [Show full text]