Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakovs Scheherazade Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakovs Scheherazade - Essay Example Of course, the orientalism of the symphonic poem makes a significant impact on the images the listener may have in his / her mind; however, the way they are represented depends on the listener’s experience only. Personally, I like the first part the most. For me, it is the most bright and memorable when it comes to visual imagery. This part of Scheherazade is definitely about the sea. With the first sound of the woodwinds after the main theme, I see the sunlight that goes through the calm and glassy water so it shines and even become hard to look at. After the entrance of the second main theme, when the orchestra plays tutti, it is the time for the ship to appear. It is a massive, powerful ship with huge sails; it seems that no wind and no storm can destroy it. Music renders the feeling of greatness and stability. Also, it reflects the movements in the see, namely, how waves roll back and forth calmly and steadily. Suddenly, a blast of wind destroys quietness at sea; the waves become larger and larger, calmness turns into a heavy storm with the ship being its victim which is thrown to and fro. All the themes interweave, and the string party become more restless. The image of the storm is com pleted with despairing exclamations in the wind instruments. But the storm blows over, and the see is calm and peaceful again. The second part of the symphonic poem starts with the theme from the first part followed by a rich ornamented theme in bassoons which is developed in variations in parties of other instruments. The theme is so smooth and melodious that it reminds of a human voice, like someone is telling a story. Further, tense surges up and becomes more uneasy, emotional and enthralling. The exclamations in the group of brass instruments reminds of fanfares, and it creates an image of a blistering battle, a struggle to the last breath. In fact, the entire march-like episode based on these

Violation Early Childhood Code of Ethics Research Paper

Violation Early Childhood Code of Ethics - Research Paper Example Secondly, it also discusses some of the appropriate ways that could be taken to avoid such a violation. One of the most challenging ethical issues while dealing with children is food. Ms. Devan, an early childhood development teacher was implicated in an ethical case whereby the parents argued that she went beyond her ethical boundaries by allowing children to used food as playing tools. Precisely, Ms. Devan was using pudding as finger paint while teaching children how to paint. According to her, they preferred using edible pudding as finger paint since they discovered that the children were putting it on their mouth. Although there are ethical codes demanding that the health of the children should be given the first priority, she preferred using food pudding since it was safer than finger paint (Swim & Freeman, 2008). Although her actions were well intentioned, so many ethical questions are raised from such an action. For instance, the children developed a habit of licking the puddi ng paint directly from the table. This is certainly not hygienic. However, it is better compared to swallowing the regular finger paint that is sold commercially. The ethical case came into the limelight when one of the child’s mothers scolded her child for licking sandwich jelly that had spilled on the table at home. When she asked the child, the child affirmed that their teacher let them do it at school. Certainly, the child had learned a different thing from what was initially intended. The parent was worried that the teacher was not exercising the children code of ethics. The teacher also failed to realize that children could have learned that playing materials are good for consumption. This is certainly a violation of early childhood code of ethics, which demands that children be taught the right code of behavior especially during this important stage of cognitive development. Actually, the parent was even more worried that the teacher was wasting food while there were t housands of other children all over the world dying of hunger. Some of the ethical concerns raised from the situation demand a critical thought and consideration. Was the teacher acting safe by allowing children to play with food? Was it safe for the children after all? Did the teacher think about other lessons learned in the process? So many questions of ethical concern can be raised from this case. Undeniably, there is no clear cut difference between what should be done or what should not be done. This is even made more complicated because of the differences in ethical values between different stakeholders. Early childhood codes of ethics may not suffice enough to handle such ethically complicated issues. According to National Association for the Education of Young Children, it is necessary â€Å"To create and maintain safe and healthy settings that foster children’s social, emotional, intellectual, and physical development and that respect their dignity and their contribu tions† (2012). It is evident from the ethical principle that the teacher failed to maintain healthy settings, failed to consider the overall social development of the children’s behavior, as well as intellectual development. Needless to say, there are several measures that can be taken to avoid similar ethical violations. Firstly, the teachers need to expand their knowledge on childhood cognitive development. This would enable the teacher to make better decisions when choosing

Social Work Roles And Criminal Justice Settings Social Work Essay

Social Work Roles And Criminal Justice Settings Social Work Essay There are many competing pressures to direct the service in ways that may not be consistent with Social Work principles towards greater penal and correctional models. It is therefore essential to have a clear understanding of the policy and legal framework that creates the remit and legitimacy for the operation of Social Work in the Criminal Justice process (Whyte, 2001, p.7). Statute law is created by Acts of the UK and Scottish Parliaments and relies upon rulings made in Court Hearings to set precedents that define and interpret key terms i.e. Case Law. Understanding the law is fundamental to practice in Criminal Justice settings. Criminal Law is a powerful instrument of social control and sanctions and the Criminal Courts have the potential to impose restrictions of liberty of individuals. Social Workers have a responsibility towards the general public and the courts to protect the public and ensure their wellbeing however, there is also obligation towards those who are in the Criminal Justice process who may be vulnerable and in need of services provided by Social Work. It is therefore essential that all workers have an understanding of the legal frameworks that govern Criminal Justice Social Work and are aware of the scope and limitations of their mandate (Whyte, 2001). However, law is subject to change and criminal justice policy is more liable to su dden, politically motivated changes of direction than is social policy in other fields (Smith, 2002, p.309) The law defines what a crime is, rules of evidence and criminal procedure. However, discretion is given to those involved and therefore, the criminal justice process is not systematic. The judiciary, police and social work have differing roles, agendas, values and beliefs which are shaped by training and cultures which can make working within the system difficult due to lack of shared understanding of common aims and individual roles. Social Work involves working with the marginalised and disadvantaged and can be both vulnerable to crime and susceptible to criminalisation and practice involves work with victims or offenders. Local Authorities have statutory responsibility to provide Criminal Justice Social Work Services to support the Criminal Justice Process through assessment of individuals, information to the Courts and supervision of offenders. Scotland differs from the rest of the UK in that there is a unique cultural and political heritage and a separate legal system. Social Work therefore, has a central role within the Criminal Justice process in Scotland which is in contrast to England and Wales where probation work is commissioned by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) which is separate from Local Authority control and Social Work functions and shows a difference in their approaches in responding to crime. As McAra (2005) suggests a more welfare orientated approach has been adopted due to its legal culture and political history. The legal framework outlining powers and duties of Criminal Justice Social Work is the Social Work Scotland Act 1968 (as amended). Section 27 of this Act outlines the duty by Local Authorities to provide specific Criminal Justice services (e.g. social background reports, supervision of offenders on an Order or Licence) in respect of central government funding however, it does not explain the objectives of these services or provide guidance on their exercise. Section 12 gives Local Authorities (LAs) discretion to provide additional services (e.g. victims) as part of the general responsibility to promote social welfare. Probation or offender services became the responsibility of the Local Authority Social Work Departments in 1968 and had a general duty to promote social welfare in their locality (S12, Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968). This was due to the Kilbrandon Committee (Kilbrandon, 1964) being appointed to investigate increasing juvenile crime. The Kilbrandon Report recommended a new approach to childrens services based on the needs of children and families and those who offend should be treated the same as those children requiring care and protection. Kilbrandon also suggested diversion and early voluntary intervention as crime prevention and one department for children and adults. This merge of work with adult offenders was pivotal in recognising work with offenders as having a welfare component admittedly with a level of control. Although the Kilbrandon philosophy followed trends of the time which advocated rehabilitation and treatment of offenders and an awareness of the social causes of c rime, this is still highly relevant to todays practice. From the 1980s onwards Criminal Justice in Scotland has undergone major legislative and policy change due to successive governments. As there was concern for public protection and community disposal effectiveness in 1991, 100 per cent central government funding was introduced and the National Objectives and Standards were published which set out core objectives, service provision and guidance on their delivery (Social Work Group, 1991). This resulted in the government committing to Social Work delivering this role. This policy arrangement outlined by Rifkind in 1989 has survived changes in political administration although, it has been suggested that devolution has caused a sudden and dramatic politicisation of Criminal Justice issues and could undermine the welfare tradition (McNeill and Batchelor, 2004: Croal, 2005). Social Work with offenders should aim to address and reduce offending behaviour. Whilst the law provides a framework for practice, effective work with offenders requires Social Work skills such as communication, therapeutic relationships in supervision, assessment and risk management. The task is therefore, varied and complex as Social Workers have the power to control the individuals who are referred via the Courts and enforce any Court Orders but must also work with an offender in a holistic, inclusive way to have a positive impact on their offending behaviour and this can be through support and assistance in relation to personal and social problems but also the individual taking responsibility for their actions. Effective and ethical practice is therefore, about considering and managing the needs and rights of the Courts, the general public, victims and offenders. Although Social Workers have statutory duties and powers to interfere in peoples lives this is not always welcome but is necessary in promoting public safety. Under the Scottish Social Work Services Council (SSSC) Code of Practice Social Workers have an obligation to uphold public trust and confidence and the Criminal Justice Authorities (CJAs) are required by Scottish Executive guidance to develop a strategy to address this (Scottish Executive, 2006b). This strategy includes both offenders and their families and Social Workers should engage these individuals and recognise their views in the development of services. Both Criminal Law and Social Work recognise the autonomy of individuals choices on how they lead their lives and with this capacity is criminal responsibility. Those of which who lack capacity (e.g. children and the mentally disordered) are not culpable in the eyes of the law and may be treated differently. It is therefore recognised that criminal behaviour is not just a choice but may be about social circumstances to which they have minimal control. Social Workers should assist in allowing individuals to improve their capacity for making choices together with consequences to their actions (ADSW, 1996a). Although Social Workers are obliged to protect the rights and interests of service users there is a belief amongst the general public that they have forfeited these rights when they have offended. All Criminal Justice agencies must comply with the Human Rights Act 1988 which incorporates into domestic law the fundamental rights set out in the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Public Authorities are required to respect all of the provisions however, the two articles with particular relevance to Criminal Law and Social Work are the right to liberty and security (Article 5. ECHR) and the right to a fair trial (Article 6, ECHR). However, the state can impose restrictions on those who breach criminal law or are a threat to public safety as long as the detention is authorised by law and there is a balance between the individual, their victims and the general public. The Social Worker must assess this balance through rigorous assessment and analysis of risk. The Social Work role r equires respect to offenders as individuals and ensure that the offenders ability and right to function as a member of society is not impaired to a greater extent than is necessary in the interests of justice (ADSW, 1996a). Criminal Justice Social Work services are delivered in partnership with various statutory and non-statutory agencies and this can present challenges due to conflicting professional values and aims. The Management of Offenders etc. (Scotland) Act 2005 was introduced to improve joint working and co-ordinate the management of offenders especially in the transition from custody to community supervision and places a duty on Criminal Justice Authorities (CJAs) to have an information sharing process in order that relevant information is shared between agencies (s.3 (5)(g)) for improving offender and risk management. However, sensitive personal information must be handled carefully and be under the principles of the Data Protection Act 1988 and local agency protocols. Practitioners within Social Work must ensure that any information sharing decisions are fully explained and understood by the offender even when their consent to disclosure is not required. Organisations who deliver public services have general duties to eliminate unlawful discrimination and promote equality of opportunity on the grounds of race (Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000), sex (Equality Act 2006), and disability (Disability Discrimination Act 2005). Individuals who are involved with Criminal Justice organisations are entitled to the protection of discrimination laws which relate to sex, race, disability, religious beliefs and sexual orientation, with exception to exercising judicial functions or carrying out Court orders. In these circumstances it may be within Article 14 of the ECHR which prevents to the right to liberty and security of the individual or the right to a fair trial being interfered with on a wide range of discriminatory grounds. Criminal Justice is still influenced by prejudicial and discriminatory views. Research has been carried out by both the Social Work and Prisons Inspectorate for Scotland (1998) which highlighted concerns about the treatment of female offenders in the Criminal Justice process. In addition to this, several inquiries in England and Wales in relation to racial discrimination by the police and prison services has subsequently raised public awareness (Macpherson, 1999; Keith, 2006). The Scottish Government has a duty to publish information of discrimination of any unlawful grounds (s.306 (1)(b) Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995) and therefore, all workers need to practice in an anti-discriminatory way. The law outlines the limits of Social Work intervention and knowledge of the law is essential to anti-oppressive practice. The only legitimacy for intervening in the life of the individual within the criminal justice process is the individuals offending behaviour†¦if individuals have social needs which require to be met but are not crime related or crime producing, or if the offence is not sufficiently serious to fall within the criteria of the twin-track approach, services should be offered, as far as possible, through voluntary provision†¦No-one should be drawn into the criminal justice processes in order to receive social work help (Moore and Whyte, 1998, p.24). Rehabilitative intervention is not just about helping; it imposes limitations on the rights of the individual who is subject to the intervention. Risk assessment and offence based practice is an ethical approach. It aims to ensure that the most intensive and potentially most intrusive services are focused on those service users who pose the greatest risk of causing harm to others (ADSW, 2003) and to prevent socially disadvantaged individuals being taken further into criminal justice control which can result in further social exclusion. Criminal Justice Social Workers must take note that the role involves work with disadvantaged social groups. Certain types of crimes and offenders often criminalise the young, deprived, unemployed and undereducated male with an experience of the care system and this is clear from Social Work and prison statistics (Croall, 2005; McAra and McVie, 2005). There is often a complex relationship between social exclusion and offending behaviour and often the Criminal Justice process displays existing injustices within society. It is important that issues in relation to class, age and social context should be recognised together with vulnerability to discrimination. The Social Workers role should be to address issues of social exclusion and empower individuals to lead law abiding lives by addressing their offending behaviour. Social Work can help offenders develop capacity to make informed choices by actively encouraging their participation in the supervision/change process and their engagement with improving their current social situation (McCulloch, 2005; McNeill, 2004). Assisting offenders to focus on their strengths as opposed to their risk and needs can have a positive impact as they learn to recognise the value in their own lives and respecting the value of others. The sentencing stage in the criminal justice process generates the majority of Criminal Justice Social Work through provision of information to the Court in the form of Social Enquiry Reports (SERs) and the administration of community disposals, with the exception of liberty orders (tagging). SERs have no legal basis but there is a statutory duty on criminal justice social work to provide reports to the Court for disposal of a case (s.27(1)(a) SWSA 1968. Reports provide the court with the information and advice they need in deciding on the most appropriate way to deal with offenders. They include information and advice about the feasibility of community based disposals, particularly those involving local authority supervision. In the case of every offender under 21 and any offender facing custody for the first time, the court must obtain information and advice about whether a community based disposal is available and appropriate. In the event of custody, the court requires advice abo ut the possible need for a Supervised Release order or Extended Sentence Supervision on release. (Scottish Executive, 2004d, para. 1.5) The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 sets out when the court can or must obtain an SER. Failure to request a report, where required by law, can result in a sentence being quashed on appeal. The Court is not obliged to follow recommendations or opinions in the SER however, Social workers can have a direct influence on the sentence passed. Preparing SERs demands a high standard of professional practice. It requires skilled interviewing, the ability to collect and assess information from different sources, and the art of writing a report which is dependable, constructive, impartial and brief (Social Work Services Inspectorate (SWSI), 1996, Foreword). The law imposes time limits in compiling reports. The Courts require a report within three weeks (s.201(3) (a) if an offender is remanded in custody and within four weeks if the offender is on bail (s.21(3)(b) of the 1995 Act). This means in practice that there are increased demands on a workers time that places increased pressure in the preparation of SERs especially if there are high numbers of worker absence due to leave or whether the worker knows the offender and their individual circumstances. Whilst conducting interviews the worker must ensure that the offender understands the purpose of the report, the relevance of questions (health, addiction issues, and personal relationships) and the limits to confidentiality of this information. Social workers must balance between an informed recommendation and an awareness of the severity of the offence. The report author should be impartial and not minimise the seriousness of the offence and its impact (NOS, Scottish Executive, 2004d, p ara 5.5) and phrases that imply moral judgements, label or stereotype offenders should not be used (para. 5.1). When compiling an SER workers are required to consider the suitability of disposals in relation to the risk posed by an offender and to target appropriate resources which are most appropriate and successful in addressing offending behaviour. Guidelines for the assessment and management of risk are outlined in the Management and Assessment of Risk in Social Work Services (SWSI, 2000) and there are also additional risk assessment frameworks which specifically relate to serious violent and sex offenders. In Criminal Justice the focus has moved from risk of custody to risk of reoffending and risk of harm. Risk assessment is complex and there has been a shift from concern for the offender and their needs to concern about public safety and the offender being a potential source of risk to others. Although the legislation is not explicit about offending behaviour, National Standards state that SERs should provide information and advice which will help the Court decide the available sentencin g options†¦by assessing the risk of reoffending, and†¦the possible harm to others. This requires an investigation of offending behaviour and of the offenders circumstances, attitudes and motivation to change (Scottish Executive, 2004d, 1.6). Risk is defined by Kemshall (1996) as the probability of a future negative or harmful event and assessment of risk includes: the likliehood of an event occurring, who is likely to be at risk, the nature of the harm which they might be exposed and the impact and consequences of the harmful event. Risk assessment has changed over the years and prior to the introduction of risk assessment tools workers relied on clinical methods or professional judgement which was based on an offenders history. These methods were criticised for being too subjective, inaccurate, open to worker bias and dependent on information given by the offender. In the 1990s workers moved towards objective and empirically based risk assessment tools (actuarial) to support their assessment. Actuarial risk assessment tools rely on static (historical) risk factors together with dynamic (criminogenic) risk factors and to assess the risk of reoffending. The static factors (which cannot change) take into account gender, age at first conviction, number of previous offences and custodial experiences, school progress, previous employment and personal history. The criminogenic factors (focus on current areas) include current employment, personal relationships, peer associates, use of time, substance use, mental health and attitudes and behaviour. All of these factors impact on the risk of reoffending (Bonta, 1996). The most widely used assessment tool, The Level of Service Inventory Revised (LSI-R) devised by Andrews and Bonta (1995) incorporates both static and dynamic factors. However, it does not assess risk of harm and this shows that both actuarial and clinical risk assessments are crucial for an effective and comprehensive risk assessment. Clinical methods combine knowledge of the offenders personality, habits lifestyle and an analysis of the circumstances of the offending behaviour and are therefore, the most appropriate assessme nt tool at identifying those who are likely to cause serious harm. Although more time consuming and require more in-depth analysis of both the offender and the offence risk is assessed on predispositions, motivation towards certain behaviours and triggers that may contribute to harmful behaviour. Actuarial tools are not totally accurate (Kemshall, 1996) and although this is improved upon through use of clinical methods in decision making, professional judgement is also crucial. Social workers must be aware that social disadvantage plays a part and this can contribute to a higher assessment of risk and need and to be cautious about the total reliability of these factors when making recommendations that may affect an offenders liberty. Risk assessment and intervention or supervision should be informed by valid, reliable and ongoing assessment and Social Workers should familiarise themselves with research emerging in this area and the many assessment tools and change programmes available (Levy et.al., 2002). To support change Social Workers have to not just think about what work is done with the offender but how that work is done. Offenders under supervision have very high levels of need. Moreover, although most offenders have many needs in common, there are also significant variations that necessitate the thoughtful tailoring of individual interventions if the effectiveness of practice is to be maximised. In delivering effective practice, the accumulated weight of evidence†¦drives us towards recognition that practice skills in general and relationship skills in particular are at least as critical in reducing re-offending as programme content (McNeill et al., 2005, p.5). This recent review of core skills required for effective Criminal Justice Social Work practice raises challenges in practising ethically and effectively but when applied critically and reflectively this could achieve positive outcomes that are in the interest of the public, victims and offenders. Although the law is crucial in framing Social Work practice in the Criminal Justice process it is equally important that Social Work skills and values are central to effective interventions as the role is both demanding and rewarding. Crime has become increasingly prominent both in the public and political agenda and therefore, Social Work has become more prominent and complex. Social Workers have a professional responsibility towards victims, the Court, community and offenders. To fulfil this role effectively, Social Workers must have a clear, confident understanding of their role, the legislative and policy context and a commitment to increasing and developing knowledge, skills and values required for effective and ethical practice.

Rips Character and Symbolism in Washington Irvings Rip Van Winkle Ess

Rip's Character and Symbolism in Washington Irving's Rip Van Winkle "Rip Van Winkle" has been a well-known story told throughout time. There is not a doubt that as a child, many of you heard the words of Washington Irving's famous tale of the man who slept for twenty years. Nor can one forget the "elves" that Rip Van Winkle spent the night with in the amphitheater. Like many stories, Irving's "Rip Van Winkle" has been told so many times throughout American history that it has lost its original purpose. The story is now remembered for its fairy tale like quality and its appeal to the children and the young at heart. However, when given the chance to delve into the depths of what Irving was trying to portray, one may see the symbolism that played a hand in Irving's development of Rip's character throughout the tale. In writing this tale, Irving compares the character of Van Winkle and his wife to that of Great Britain and the Colonies. Rip Van Winkle was Irving's portrayal of the American colonies. Rip's character was described by Irving as a "simple, good-natured fellow; he was, moreover, a kind neighbor, and an obedient, hen-pecked husband." This description fit the ideal of what American colonist wanted to be. The colonist came over to the colonies to gain freedom from the crown of Great Britain, and in doing so, sought the life full of peaceful things. However, still being under the rule of Great Britain many of the colonists felt that they were still being pecked away by the hand of the crown. Although in a new country, they were expected to follow the rules and the ways of their countrymen over seas. However, by coming to the Colonies, these individuals as portrayed in Rip's character, although... ...ence a freedom that their parents only knew for the last part of their life. Irving does state that Rip had a flaw within the composition of his character. He defines Rip's character as easily distracted and averted from any sort of profitable labor. However, Irving does mention that it was not from want or perseverance. In other words, Great Britain would love to believe that because the colonists want to diverge from the rule of Great Britain that they are lazy and undisciplined. Unfortunately for the Great Britains this was not the case for the colonists. Since the American colonies were such a new entity profitable work was hard to come by. Therefore, many of the colonists found it beneficial to help others along he way. This unselfish attitude aided one's neighbor in getting one step closer to a goal of independence from the rule of the crown.

Social Responsibility

Sole proprietorship This business is an individual owned organization. This business is the most attractive because of its simplicity and control over the business. * Liability-. This business has unlimited liability. The owner is responsible for everything. If the business begins to fail personal assets and business assets can be sought after to pay off debts. There is no distinction between the two assets. * Income taxes- Business owners in a sole proprietorship file a 1040 as well as a schedule C (â€Å"profit or loss from a business or profession†). The Proprietor’s personal income is supplemented by all profits of his business. This form of taxation is known as pass-through taxation, meaning there is no separate federal income tax reporting for the proprietorship. * Longevity/continuity: In the event the sole proprietor dies and planned steps were not properly carried out the business will cease. Sadly the family’s source of income is no longer available. Life insurance is an important need to the proprietor, it may be the family’s only source of income. Secondly a will is a must have with precise details on to whom and how the business should be carries out. It’s also important to pre-plan with his chosen representative, teaching them how the business is managed. Control: The sole Proprietor may choose to directly run his business or hire others to manage for him. Being in total control of the business the proprietor is solely responsible for the major functions of his business. Leaving him with the responsibility of guiding his business down the path of success. * Profit retention: Al l profits belong to the owner. There is sole gain, no partners or stockholders to share proceeds with. * Location: One of the best things about a sole proprietorship is there are no limitations on the business. If the owner wishes he can expand, down size, move locations, or sell his business at will. Convenience/Burden: A sole proprietorship has the convenience of absolute freedom of action. A downfall to the Proprietor is the responsibility of running a business that â€Å"pays the bills†. In the event he were to die become ill or injured the business could no longer run. General Partnership This form of business consists of two or more partners. The partners are the founders of the organization. * Liability: Being co- owners, the partners have equal rights to the possession of the partnership assets. They can’t sell, assign, or transfer their individual shares of the ownership. Each partner is unlimited liable for the firms obligations. Partners are responsible for the debts. Any debt not covered could be made up from personal assets. Partners are responsible for one another. * Income taxes: There is no federal income tax imposed on the partnership. Individuals must file an informational tax return. Each partner must include his share of the profits. Partners can take advantage of the partnerships losses to offset their personal income. * Longevity/Continuity: If a partner were to die, sell, or retire his or her part of the partnership would be dissolved. Exception would be the â€Å"buy sell† agreement. Meaning the surviving partner must buy the deceased partners’ interest from the heirs. Personal ownership dies but the deceased interest possess to the decedent’s personal representative. * Control: Each partner has equal authority. In partnerships with more than two members the majority will rule. Each partner becomes an agent of the other. A partner may not assign or sell partnership property, admit another to the firm without the consent of all associates, or sell their interest to another without consent of the partners. Profit: All profits and losses are distributed evenly throughout the partnership. * Location: The rules and regulations vary from state to state . General partnership should use Schedule R to apportion income between the states. * Convenience/Burden: The main advantage of this form of buisness is low volume of paperwork needed for registration and its cheapness. Limited Partnership This busine ss has two or more partners much like the general partners. There is a few key differences though. * Liability: There is a partner that carries full liability and the others are limited liability. Income Tax: Income taxes are paid after the partners have received their share. There is four characteristics that would make a limited partnership have to pay corporate taxation. They only need two of the four to qualify. * Longevity/Continuity: In the case of a death the partnership would most likely end. * Control: The general partner would control the daily business for the partnership and the limited partners just have control over the investments. * Profit Retention: All profits are distributed evenly through the partnership. * Location: Partners should pay taxes according to the amount made in each state. Convenience/Burden: The ability to have funds from the limited partners and not having control. On a negative side there would be a risk if a partner dies or leaves the partnership . C-Corporation This corporation is also known as the regular organization. They have an unlimited amount of stockholders, allowing both residents and non-residents in. * Liability: Owners are limited to the amount of his or her investment. All personal assets are safe. * Income taxation: The C- Corporation is taxed as a corporation. Net income is paid to shareholders for dividends. They also pay personal income tax, thus meaning they are double taxed. Longevity/Continuity: The life period is unlimited, as long as they have the money to back up the debts they will not be affected by the death of a stockholder. * Control: Shareholders do not directly manage the business they elect the board of members that will manage the business. * Profit Retention: Profit can be used in two ways. One it can be invested in the business or can be paid out in dividends to shareholders. * Location: Corporate taxes are equal in all states. * Convenience/Burden: The ability to raise money for funds is a n advantage. It also benefits from the ability to continue if a shareholder leaves the business. And obviously the double taxation is a big negative. S-Corporation This corporation has all the advantages of the previous businesses but also has its own disadvantages. * Liability: Shareholders liability is limited to the amount of investment. * Taxation: Company doesn’t get taxed itself, only shareholders pay taxes. * Longevity/Continuity: Company is unlimited same as an S-Corporation. The shareholders will not affect the organization. * Control: The company is ran by the board of directors. Stockholders have corporate meetings. * Profit Retention: Same as the C-Corporations, pass through tax. Location: Must be domestic in any state. * Convenience/Burden: Business that are starting up usually pick this type of business because of the losses endured. There is a lot of paper work and the meetings are very inconvenient. Liability Limited Company Each member owns his or hers amount of shares according to their contributions. * Liability: An LLC functions much like a corporation . It’s members are unlimited liable. * Taxation: An LLC has a pass through taxation and only the shareholders are taxed individually. * Continuity/Longevity: There is a 50% rule in a LLC . If a member owning more than 50% of the business leaves or dies the LLC will end. But if a member owning less than 50% of the business the business will continue. * Control: There is two types , member –managed and managed – managed . * Profit Retention: Profits are distributed among members according to their stake. * Location: Most states allow an LLC . Different paperwork is required in different states. * Convenience: A LLC may federally be classified as a sole-proprietorship, partnership, or corporation for tax purposes. Classification can be selected or a default may apply.

Kap Report Endline September 2012

KNOWLEDGE ATTITUDES AND PRACTICES (KAP) END-LINE ASSESSMENT On Water, Sanitation and Hygiene LOLKUACH Village, IDPs of Akobo September-2012 DRC-Gambella WASH Team Conducted in the frame of an ECHO funded project â€Å"Improving access to short-term food security, safe drinking water, hygiene and basic household items in Ethiopia† Wanthowa Worda, Gambella, Ethiopia September 30, 2012 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 3 3. 1 INTRODUCTION SUMMARY OF FINDINGS METHODOLOGY Objectives of the Survey 1 2 3 3 4 4. 1 FINDINGS General Background Information 4 4 5 5. 1 5. 2 5. 3 WATER RELATED INFORMATIONWater Sources Water collection and storage Household Water Treatment 5 5 9 11 6 6. 1 6. 2 HEALTH AND HYGIENE Diseases Washing Hands and Good Hygienic Practices 12 12 15 7 7. 1 7. 2 SANITATION Defecation Waste and Waste Management 18 18 20 8 9 CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATIONS 23 24 25 10 REFERENCES i 1 Introduction The 2012 report states that as of end of 2010: Over 780 million people are still without acce ss to improved sources of drinking water and 2. 5 billion lack improved sanitation. If current trends continue, these numbers will remain unacceptably high in 2015: 605 million people will be without an improved drinking water source and 2. billion people will lack access to improved sanitation facilities. An estimated 801,000 children younger than 5 years of age perish from diarrhea each year, mostly in developing countries. This amounts to 11% of the 7. 6 million deaths of children under the age of five and means that about 2,200 children are dying every day as a result of diarrheal diseases. Unsafe drinking water, inadequate availability of water for hygiene, and lack of access to sanitation together contribute to about 88% of deaths from diarrheal diseases (UNICEF, WHO, 2012: 2; Center of Disease Control and Prevention, 2012).As to Andrea Naylor: although worldwide there have been thousands of projects to address water and sanitation issues as they relate to public health with c ontinued improvements since the 1980’s, research has shown that due to lack of evaluation surveys on the effectiveness and success of these interventions, many are not sustainable . To this end, the essence of conducting end-line survey is very critical to gauge the effectiveness and success of the interventions of DRC-Gambella. The Gambella Region has an approximately population of 332,600 people, with 49,457 living in Akobo and Wantawo Woredas.These populations are subjected to water shortage and floods. Moreover the population is prevalently pastoralist and follows seasonal migration patterns for cattle grazing and protection of livestock from drought and floods. The perennial attacks by the Murle tribe, coupled with intra-clan conflicts among the Nuer tribes of Ethiopia and South Sudan, aggravates a situation of chronic displacement, making populations of bordering areas, especially Akobo, susceptible of massive and prolonged internal displacements.Conflicts, drought and floods are the key challenges to the populations in Akobo and in Wantawo. The consequent perennial movement makes the community vulnerable to food insecurity, disease and water shortage. It is in view of this that Danish Refugee Council seeks to address in the short term the basic needs of these populations by providing access to clean drinking water, and tools to improve hygiene and to build the capacity of the community to respond to these challenges. From the period of July 2011 to June 2012, DRC implemented a Water, Sanitation and Hygiene project, funded by ECHO, with the goal of rehabilitating 7 hand pumps (and subsequently chlorinating the water), distributing NFI kits, hygiene kits, and implementing hygiene promotions. DRC decided to conduct two in-depth KAP surveys (as a baseline and endline) to evaluate the impact brought by the implementation of the project in the targeted area.The baseline survey was conducted in the month of May 2012 and the end line survey was conducted in the second week of September 2012. In the period between the two surveys, a number of activities covering water, sanitation and hygiene were implemented in the frame of the project. 2 Summary of Findings Project outputs and behaviour and knowledge change (as indicated by the pre and post implementation KAP surveys) indicate the following key findings: o o o o o o Seven hand pumps were rehabilitated/ disinfected Hygiene promotion targets were surpassed. planned: 5,490 beneficiaries; 10,950 reached) Hygiene kit distributions were surpassed (planned: 2,250 beneficiaries; 8,870 reached) NFI kit distributions were surpassed (planned 6,300 beneficiaries; 7,470 reached) The number of respondents who use hand pumps as source of water increased from 4% to 75% Knowledge and practice of feasible water purification practices such as boiling, filtration or adding tablet/sachet has been greatly improved Instance of diarrhoea has decreased from 60% to 24% of respondents stating that they had h ad diarrhea in during the 3 weeks prior to the survey Knowledge that rain water is a safe drinking water source has improved from 24% to 62% of respondents, however, the use of rain water remains limited.Knowledge of the causes of unsafe drinking water (including germs, visible particles and bad taste) increased from 40% to 81%. The practice of open defecation has reduced from 100% to 15% of respondents. Hand washing at critical times has increased from 34% to 85% of respondents. 2 o o o o o o o Appropriate waste disposal mechanisms improved from 39. 2% in baseline to 75% of respondents.. Although there has been an improvement in the knowledge of respiratory and eye infection transmission/protection, there is still room for improvement 3 Methodology A cross sectional, qualitative study was conducted through house to house interviews, taking 150 respondents randomly as study subjects. The sample represents nearly 10% of the total targeted household 1 n Lolkuach village (1,500 househo ld). The questionnaire (See Annex I) was employed to collect data on general background information, knowledge, attitude and practices of the IDPs of Lolkuach village. However the results can also be considered pertinent for the host communities if considering the cultural and environmental homogeneity. Verbal consent from the respondents was obtained after explaining the purpose of the study. Data was collected from 13 to 14 September 2012. The data from the questionnaires was entered into SPSS software (version 13) by the principal investigators for further analysis. Data reliability was assured using different techniques such as: ?Properly designed questionnaires were prepared and pretested. ? Data collectors were hired locally and tested during the training on the contents of the questionnaire. Constant supervision was done by DRC WASH Team Leader, and problems encountered at the time of data collection were reported immediately and appropriate actions taken. 3. 1 Objectives of the Survey ? To identify gaps in knowledge regarding health and hygiene practices and existing practices leading to negative impact on health. ? ? To describe the socio demographic, cultural information of respondents and villages. To find out the information on incidence of communicable disease due to unhygienic practice. 1It is estimated, on the base of IOM Akobo IDPs database, that the number of households currently living in Lolkuach is 1500 and average family size is 5. 3 ? To assess the effectiveness and impact of the DRC water, sanitation and hygiene promotion activities. 4 Findings 4. 1 General Background Information The beneficiaries of the programme, and KAP survey respondents are all part of the displaced NuerGajok population from Akobo Woreda now living in Wantawo. Among the KAP survey respondents, the majority (about 65 %) were female, whereas 35% were male. Females were particularly targeted for the KAP survey, as they were the primary recipients/participants in the DR C project, and are traditionally responsible for child care and household WASH issues.This survey was conducted near the end of the rainy season, in Lolkuach IDP settlement. Respondents reported moving between the river banks temporary camps and dry land permanent villages according to seasonal variations. During the dry season, the majority of the respondents live in Dimbierow village (79%), and Nyawich village (17%), while only 4 % of the respondents indicated that they live in Lolkuach village throughout all the year. However there are frequent movements among the settlements throughout all the year. Most of the respondents (86. 2%) indicated that they arrived at Lolkuach between February and June 2009 following a recurrence of conflict with Lou Nuer in Akobo woreda.Minority of the respondents arrived during the same period of 2008 (12. 8%) or 2010 (1 %). Most of the respondents therefore have been displaced since 2009. When respondents were asked if they plan to return to their villages of origin, a pronounced number (55%) indicated that they don’t have any plans to return due to security problems (expressed as ‘war’, ‘conflict’, ‘insecurity’). The remaining 45% of the respondents indicated that they plan to return back in the future if the security situation is restored and the construction of the road from Mathar to Akobo is finalized. In this regard, as it can be observed from the baseline survey, no significant difference noted in the end line survey.However looking in detail at the positive answers (from the 45% of respondents), 21% expressed a plan to go back within six months and the remaining 34% indicated a time longer than six months. Moreover even the respondents who indicated that they have a plan to return back to 4 Kebele of origin also mentioned their fear about the security situation (expressed as ‘if peace come back’, ‘if cattle raiding ends’, if the construction of th e road to Akobo is completed and similar). 5 Water Related Information 5. 1 Water Sources Before the project interventions, the baseline data indicated that almost 100% of the respondents were accessing unsafe drinking water from the river, which is contaminated from the presence of livestock and open defecation. At the end of the project implementation, the hand pump aintenance/rehabilitation/water chlorination, coupled with pure sachet distributions, bucket distributions, and hygiene promotions resulted in a significant positive change. As you can observe from the Figure 1, the majority of the respondents are now using water from newly maintained/rehabilitated hand pumps. Due to seasonal movement however, the proportion of respondents using hand pumps during the dry season reduces, as many of the beneficiaries move to areas without hand pumps. The following graph outlines both the shift in hand pump use (pre and post intervention), and also the relation of this use in terms of sea sons. There are still not sufficient hand pumps in Lolkuach area to support the population however, which explains why 100% of the respondents are not using these protected sources.Considering that the 7500 inhabitants of Lolkuach, Thore and Lolmokoney have only 7 hand-pumps (hand dug wells), this is insufficient as per SPHERE standards)2 , highlighting the need to construct new hand pumps. 2 Considering the maximum number of users for 1 hand pump should be 500, at least 15 hand pumps would be needed in Lolkuach 5 Seasonal Use of Protected Water Sources – Pre and Post Intervention 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Dry Season Rainy Season % of Respondents Seasons Baseline Endline Figure 1: Shift in Use of Protected Water Sources (KAP baseline an d end-line) Seven hand pumps in Lolkuach and surrounding villages were disinfected and beneficiaries received pure sachet as well bucket and filter.From the findings, the graph below states that it is only 27% of the respondents indicat ed that the main problems with their water source are water is dirty and it tastes bad. Whereas 40. 7% of the respondents also signified that the water source is far. Problems Related to Water Supply 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Dirty Water Bad Taste Irregular FlowSource is Dried Distance to No problems Up Source % Respondents Baseline Endline Water Source Issues Figure 2: Main problems related to water supply. 6 Consequently 63% of the respondents consider the water they are using is safe for drinking, and 33% consider it is unsafe instead (Figure 3).This represents a reduction in the proportion of respondents who stated that they were using unsafe water from 77% in the baseline to 33% in the end-line survey. Of these 33% of respondents who noted that they were drinking unsafe water, 8% of the respondents were using hand dug wells (Which were rehabilitated by DRC) as source of water for drinking. Figure 3: consideration of water safety Figure 4: reasons why 33% declared water i s unsafe In relation to the safety of water, the reason why 33% of respondents declared that they are using unsafe water is mainly because the water contains germs, is not filtered and not cleaned. This shows that their understanding about the causes of unsafe water has improved since the baseline (Figure 4).When it comes to use of rainwater as source, though improvement is registered, much needs to be done to bring about significant change. Considering the shortage of safe water sources in the area observed by DRC, and the abundant rain-fall in Gambella region3, reasons for not using the rainwater (which is almost distilled4) were assessed more closely. Although the number of respondents who believe that 3 The annual rain falls in Gambella region ranges between 800 and 1200mm, but about 85% of rains are concentrated between May-October (Woube, 1999). 4 In this regards, Dev Sehgal, indicated that rainwater harvesting is an easy method to collect drinking water, and the quality of th e water is almost distilled.First when the water touches the catchment surface it usually gets contaminated (Dev Sehgal, 2005). 7 rainwater is unsafe has reduced from 76% to 38% of respondents, more can be done to raise awareness on this water collection method. Of the 38% of respondents who would not collect rain water given the choice, the principal reasons were given as follows: Figure 5: Investigation about unused rain water When questioned on their knowledge of safe drinking water and water pollution causes, respondents were given the option of providing more than one answer. The number of respondents who indicated that drinking water shouldn’t have germs, visible particles and/or bad taste, increased from 40% at the baseline to 81. 3% at the end-line.The respondents who indicated that the proximity of a latrine to water sources can cause water contamination increased from 7. 2% in the baseline to 15% in the end-line survey. In this regards, water quality and health coun cil indicated that especially the proximity of latrine to water sources can cause Removing the first harvested water, so-called first flush, can prevent this. When the rain starts to fall the first water cleans the catchment surface and fills up the first flush diverter, by the time it is full a ball closes the opening and leads the water to the main tank. The downside of rainwater harvesting is that it requires double storage, as it is hard to purify water at the same speed as it rains (Gould, J. & Nissen-Petersen, E. , 2005). 8 contamination .The majority of the respondents (85%) also indicated that garbage disposal or animals feces containers near a water source, or unprotected source can cause water contamination (Figure7). 5 Knowledge of Causes of Water Source Pollution 100 90 80 % Respondents 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Defecation Nearby Garbage Nearby Dirty Container Causes of Pollution Figure 7: Knowledge of Water Source Pollutants Baseline Endline Although only a small proportio n of respondents acknowledge that water can be contaminated through the ground from a latrine constructed too close to a water source, 95% of respondents are now aware that defecation near a water source is a pollutant, resulting in a change of behavior in which open defecation has reduced from 100% in the baseline to 15% in the end-line survey. 5. 2 Water collection and storageFrom the Figure 8, it can be observed that nearly 50% of respondents less than 50 minutes to fetch water during dry seasons6, meaning that SPHERE standards for these respondents are met for watersource distance because of the rehabilitations of the hand pump in the vicinity of the village. Concerning rainy season, it can be observed that respondents spend more time getting water. As it is observed, respondents need to travel some distance to fetch water and during the dry season respondents also move to river banks. Hence, this can make the access to hand pump difficult. So besides constructing 5 The causes o f water pollution vary and may be both natural and anthropogenic.However, the most common causes of domestic water pollutions includes : garbage disposal and defecation near water sources, animals feces, sharing the same sources with animals, use of dirty or open water container can affect the safety of our water . Use (Water Quality and Health Councils, 2010; CAWST, 2009; Laurent, P. , 2005). 6 According to SPHERE key indicators, the maximum distance from any household to the nearest water point is 500 metres 9 new hand pumps, encouraging the community for rain water catchment strategy is very essential at household at household level. 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0-50 50-100 Min 100-250 Min More than 250 Dry Season Rainy SeasonFigure 8: Average time spent to collect water Given that water collection requires women and girls to walk distances to find water sources, there may be heightened protection issues for these family members, although protection was not assessed in the KAP. Questio n posed to respondents on what devices that they are using to store and collect water indicated that 55% of the respondents are using plastic jerry cans to collect water and 34% of the respondents use plastic bucket for water collection. For storing water, nearly 33% of the respondents use traditional clay pot and plastic jerry cans; the rest 36% of the respondents indicated plastic jerry cans or buckets with lid.DRC distributed NFI (Contains 2 Jerry cans each 20 litters among others) and Hygiene kits (Contains 2 Buckets each 10 litters among other) to 302 and 283 households respectively living in Lolkuach areas. To this end, most of the respondents own more than one container. But still those who didn’t receive water storage and collection device also were among the respondents who took part in the survey, we can 10 observe that 70% of respondents meet the minimum SPHERE7 requirement for water collection container, and 74% meet the requirement8 for water storage. Whereas in the baseline, it was noted that only 50% of the respondents met the requirement for water storage and collection devices. 5. 3 Household Water TreatmentThe knowledge of practical purification methods like boiling, filtration or adding tablet/sachet was assessed. As it can be observed from Figure 12, there is great leap in knowledge of the basic methods of household water treatment. For instance, use of purifying sachet/tablet increased from 8% at baseline to 85% at the end-line survey. The findings also suggested that the majority of the respondents (more than 75%) know the use of feasible practices like boiling, filtration or adding tablets/sachet for water treatments9. This figure was only 25% in the baseline survey. After the baseline survey, it is worth to note that DRC-Gambella has been distributing purifying sachet and providing demonstrations for those villages with no access to hand pumps. 7According to SPHERE key indicator: Each household has at least two clean water collec ting containers of 10-20 litres, plus enough clean water storage containers to ensure there is always water in the household. The amount of storage capacity required depends on the size of the household and the consistency of water availability e. g. approximately 4 litres per person would be appropriate for situations where there is a constant daily supply 8 Requirement for storage is calculated according to certain specificities, but considering the minimum of 4lt/person/day, for an average household of 5, should be at least 20 lt. 9 Different researchers suggested some feasible practices like boiling, filtration or adding Figuret/sachet and chlorination for water treatment (CAWST, 2009; Davis & Lambert, 2002). 11Knowledge of Household Water Treatment 140 120 % Respondents 100 80 60 40 20 0 special container Boiling Use of sachet Cleaning Filtering container with cloth Covering sunlight Baseline Endline Figure 12: Knowledge of household water treatment methods 6 Health and Hygiene 6. 1 Diseases Respondents were asked about the diseases their family experienced during the three weeks before the interview. The number of respondents who caught diarrhea in the three weeks prior to the interview reduced from 60% in the baseline to 27. 3% in the end-line survey. Hence, you can see from the end-line survey that hygiene conditions and practices are improving.When it comes to the causes of diarrhoea, more than 85% of the respondents referenced unsafe drinking water, children feces, germs/bacteria, open defecation, poor hygienic practices and flies as causes of diarrhea (Figure 16), indicating that the hygiene promotion has resulted in an increase in knowledge. 12 Figure 16: Knowledge about diarrhea transmission Interviewees were asked to indicate in a multiple choice question, which action to be taken to protect their families from the different diseases that they suffered from. The respondents who indicated that they can be protected from malaria by sleeping under m osquito net increased from 40% to 75%. Keeping the environment clean and good hygienic practices also attributed as a method of prevention of malaria by many respondents (Figure 14). 13 Knowldge of Malaria prevetion measure 120 100 Respondents 80 60 40 20 0 Keeping environment Clean Safe water Good hygienic practice Use mosquitonet Wash cloth Wash hand Baseline Endline Figure 14: knowledge of malaria prevention measures When it comes to skin diseases, most of the respondents indicated that good hygienic practice as way of prevention of skin diseases (Figure 15). 14 Figure 15: Knowledge of skin diseases prevention measur es Nearly 51. 2% of the respondents indicated that good personal hygiene, keeping the environment clean, use of safe water for drinking, washing hands, washing clothes and hanging them in the sun can protect their families from respiratory and eye problems.The above results indicate that the knowledge of the people has improved with regards to respiratory illness and eye infection transmission and protection, however there is still room for improvement. 6. 2 Washing Hands and Good Hygienic Practices General question about hygiene and more specific ones about hand washing were posed. Keeping food away from flies, bathing regularly, keeping compounds clean, protecting food and washing hands are considered as good hygienic practices by the majority of the respondents in the end-line survey. This means that the figure increased from nearly 51% at the baseline to nearly 85% in the endline. 15 Figure 18: Knowledge about keeping good hygieneLikewise, when respondents specifically asked if they wash their hands, 89% of the interviewees gave affirmative answer in the end-line Survey. People who wash hands reported to be doing it in order to eliminate bad smell and prevent diseases. Similarly more details of the hand washing practice can be seen from Figure 20, and it can be concluded that more than three fourth of the population who wash their hands, ar e doing it at the appropriate times. 16 Figure 20: Frequency of hand washing practice While the vast majority of the respondents (95%) stated they would like to bathe once a day, when it comes to practice, 29% of respondents expressed they have problems in taking bath regularly mainly because of lack of container and soap (Figure 21).Hygiene practices were also considered to be a major issue by nearly 40. 6% of the respondents, these respondents indicated that poor practices are due to both a lack of access to hygiene items, and a poor attitude brought on by a lack of knowledge. So the majority of the respondents signified that the distributed hygiene kits solved some of their problems and they were adhering to good hygienic practices. 17 7 Sanitation 7. 1 Defecation Before the DRC intervention, the majority of the adults practiced open defecation. Because changing habits is not easy, the baseline assessment was designed to understand the risk practices that were most widespread and identify those that could be changed.From the point of view of controlling diarrhoea, the priorities for hygiene behavioral change included hand washing at critical times and safe stool disposal. To this end, the efforts of the organization brought significant behavioral change. From the end-line survey it is noted that 85% of the respondents use traditional latrines, which is up from 0%. Similarly, when asked to indicate the best option for defecation, 85% indicated the latrine. On the other hand, privacy, water pollution, presence of bad smell and flies, as well as spread of disease was reported as the main problem related to open defecation practices (Figure 23). Respondents were also asked about post defecation cleansing habits and mostly indicated pieces of paper. Figure 23: Problems related to defecation practice 18Considering the majority of respondents indicated that a latrine is the best option for defecation, and that the main issue with defecation is privacy, disease, wa ter pollution, smell and environmental pollution, it was observed that the traditional latrine which is constructed by the participation of the communities has been welcomed and used by the community. In the baseline survey it was found out that inadequate sanitary conditions and poor hygiene practices played major roles in the increased burden of communicable disease within the village. Similarly, the baseline information stated that beneficiaries had problems with access to safe water and sanitation facilities. To this end, DCR Gambella set a strategy to solve the problems through community participation. DRC- Gambella inculcates the basic principles and approaches Sanitation) of into CLTS the (Community newly Lead Total PHAST designed Participatory hygiene and Sanitation Transformation) training. As both approaches opt for communities’ participations and empowerment and focus on igniting a change in sanitation and hygiene behaviour, a PHAST training manual that encompasses both PHAST methodology and catalysts for change in sanitation behaviour was prepared and distributed. After community based health promotions work, and community conversation establishments at each village, the accessibility to sanitation facilities and sanitation practices improved. 1446 households who completed hand washing points and traditional pit latrine (See the figure on the right side) were awarded NFI to recognize their efforts of behavioral changes.Hand washing after stool contact and safe disposal of stool have been priorities in hygiene and sanitation promotion interventions in Wanthowa Woreda. By understanding that for the quickest and widest adoption of good hygienic practices it is often more cost-effective to rely on social ambitions rather than health arguments to encourage change, DRC linked hygiene promotion works with social and cultural values, norms as well as NFI distributions, such that all hygiene promotions were linked with cultural problems of Nuer socie ty and social values. As a result good improvements in both hand 19 washing and safe stool disposal were registered. This can be confirmed by looking at the end line KAP survey results. 7. Waste and Waste Management The majority of disease measures are related to environmental conditions: appropriate shelter, clean water, good sanitation, and vector control, personal protection such as (insecticide-treated nets, personal hygiene and health promotion). Appropriate waste disposal mechanism is vital to avoid environmental pollution and breading place for vectors and pathogens. In this regards, the majority of the respondents (75%) indicated that they are now burning the household solid wastes on timely bases (Figure 24). The number of respondents who had been disposing solid wastes in open space and river significantly decreased after the interventions.Figure 24: waste disposal practice 20 The problems concerning waste were indicated in flies, bad smell, breeding place for mosquitoes. Majority of the respondents understood that appropriate solid waste disposal plays a vital role in minimizing the breading of vectors and other pathogens (Figure 25). Figure 25: Problems related to waste disposal The majority of respondents indicated that the practice used to dispose household waste is burning. Improvement in waste disposal and keep the villages clean is observed by DRC field staffs. Similarly the views of the majority of the respondents on the attributes of clean and health village is improved.It is noted that availability of safe water, cleanness of the village and availability of latrine considered by more than three fourth of the respondents as the attributes of clean and health village in the end-line survey. But those we stated the same were nearly 50% in the baseline survey. 21 Similarly, the benefits of keeping a village were mainly identified as decrease of diseases occurrence, improved beauty of village, minimized presence of mosquitoes and flies by more t han three fourth of the respondents in the end-line where as this nearly 53% in the baseline. From end-line survey, it can be inferred that majority of respondents indicated that important public health factors such as availability of safe water and atrines, absence of stagnant water and mosquitoes among the attributes of an healthy village. They also noted that this has great impact in reduction of infection disease prevalence. Hence, it can be concluded that the understanding of the majority of the respondents on disease transmission, transmission routes and its preventions tremendously improved after the interventions. 22 8 Conclusion Diarrhoea causes dehydration and kills approximately 2. 2 million people, mostly children, every year. Children are more likely than adults to die from diarrhea because they become dehydrated more quickly. In the past 10 years, diarrhea has killed more children than all of the people lost to armed conflict since World War II.Its occurrence is closel y related to the opportunities that poor people (especially poor mothers) have to improve domestic hygiene10. Diarrhoea does not only cause disease and early death in children, but also affects children’s nutritional status, stunting children’s physical and intellectual growth over time. Skin and eye infections are especially common in arid areas. Both diarrhoea and other infectious diseases have health as well as socio-economic consequences. Washing more often can greatly reduce their spread11 . Similarly, the training manual of Amhara region indicated that improved hygiene, particularly hand washing at critical times can reduce diarrhea by one third and reduce malnutrition12. Soiled hands are an important source of transmitting diarrhoeas.Recent research also suggests that hand washing is an important preventive measure in the incidence of acute respiratory infections, one of the top killer of children under five. 13 This KAP survey was conducted in order to compare its results with the results of the baseline survey, to identify whether the hygiene promotion activities conducted in the frame of the ECHO funded project had been effective. The baseline and end-line survey results revealed that positive results have been achieved in the overall hygiene situation. In the baseline survey the situation was poor i. e. lack of safe water, poor sanitation facilities, poor hygiene practice etc. At the end of the project, an improvement was noted in the overall hygiene and sanitation behaviour.Though improvements were noticed after the implementation of project, it should not be forgotten that it takes time to consolidate behaviour changes, so more follow up is necessary for further improvement. 10 11 12 (Curtis et al. , 2000). Brian Appleton and Christine van Wijk (IRC), 2003. Amhara Regional State Health Bureau, 2011; Isabel Carter, 2005 13 See for instance the study of Ryan et al. published in 2001 23 9 RECOMMENDATIONS Although the WASH project can be en seen as a success, the team noted some recommendations for future interventions. ? ? Construct 15 shell wells in Lolkuach village so that inhabitants meet SPHERE standards Assess whether it is possible to dig wells in the locations where people move to during the dry season ?Introduce rain water harvesting techniques, which are easy sources of potable water and would reduce the distance travelled to access water, thus improving the protection status of the women and girls that are responsible for this task. ? ? Follow up on well water quality in rehabilitated wells Although respondents recognized that animal feces can contaminate water, only 15% in the end-line noted that the proximity of a latrine to a water source can contaminate drinking water. This could be stressed and improved in future hygiene promotion activities. 24 10 References 1. Amhara Regional State Health Bureau (2011). Training Manual on Hygiene and Sanitation Promotion and Community Mobilization for Volunteer Com munity Health Promoters (VCHP)/ Draft for Review. Online Available at: http://pdf. usaid. gov/pdf_docs/PNADP828. pdf 2. Andrea Naylor.Development and Implementation of Sanitation Survey Using a Knowledge Attitudes Practices (KAP) Model. University of South Florida (Tampa): CGN6933 â€Å"Sustainable Development Engineering: Water, Sanitation, Indoor Air, Health† and PHC6301 â€Å"Water Pollution and Treatment†. 3. Brian Appleton and Christine van Wijk (IRC) (2003). Hygiene Promotion Thematic Overview Paper. IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre 4. Boot, Marieke T. and Cairncross, Sandy (1993). Actions speak: The study of hygiene behaviour in water and sanitation project. The Hague: IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre. 5. CAWST (Centre for Affordable Water and Sanitation Technology) (2009) Household water treatment and safe storage factsheet: natural coagulants.Online Available at: http://cawst. org/en/resources/pubs/file/38-hwts-fact-sheets-academic-en glish 6. Davis, J. and Lambert, R (2002) Engineering in emergencies – A practical guide for relief, workers 2nd edition, Rugby: Practical actions publishing 7. Dev Sehgal, J. (2005) A guide to rainwater harvesting in Malaysia. Online Available at: http://www. wasrag. org/downloads/technology/A%20Guide%20to%20Rainwater%20Ha rvesting%20in%20Malaysia. pdf 8. Esrey, S. A. (1994). Complementary strategies for decreasing diarrhea morbidity and mortality: water and sanitation. Paper presented at the Pan American Health Organization, March 2-3. 9. Gould, J. & Nissen-Petersen, E. 2005) Rainwater catchment systems for domestic supply. Rugby: ITDG publishing. 25 10. Green, C. E. (2001). Can qualitative research produce reliable quantitative findings? Field Methods 13(3), 3-19. 11. Isabel Carter (2005). Encouraging good hygiene and sanitation. A PILLARS Guide. Tearfund. A company limited by guarantee. Regd in England No 994339. Registered Charity No 265464. 12. Laurent, P. (2005) Househo ld drinking water systems and their impact on people with weakened immunity. MFS-Holland, Public health department. Online Available at: http://www. who. int/household_water/research/HWTS_impacts_on_weakened_immun ity. pdf 13. McKee, Neill (1992).Social mobilization and social marketing in developing communities: Lessons for communicators. Penang: Southbound. 14. Nichter, M. (1993). Social science lessons from diarrhea research and their application to ARI. Human Organization 52(1), 53-67. 15. Ouagadougou: Ministere de la Sante du Burkina Faso. Curtis, V. A. , Cairncross, S, Yonli, R. (2000) Domestic hygiene and diarrhoea, pinpointing the problem. Tropical Medicine and International Health 5(1):22-32. 16. Pru? ss, A. , Kay, D. , Fewtrell, L. & Bartram, J. (2002). Estimating the global burden of disease from water, sanitation, and hygiene at the global level. Environmental Health Perspectives 110(5), 537–542. 17.Ryan, M. A. K, Christian, R. Wohlrabe, J. (2001). Hand washing an d respiratory illness among young adults in military training. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 21(2):79-83. 18. Saade, Camille, Bateman, Massee, Bendahmane, Diane B. (2001). The story of a successful public-private partnership in Central America: Handwashing for diarrheal disease prevention. Arlington, BASICS, EHP, UNICEF, USAID and World Bank. 19. UNICEF (2000). Learning from experience: Evaluation of UNICE’s water and environmental sanitation programme in India, 1966-1998. New York, UNICEF Evaluation Office, Division of Evaluation, Policy and Planning. 26 20. Verma, B.L. & Srivastava, R. N. (1990). Measurement of the personal cost of illness due to some major water-related diseases in an Indian rural population. International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 19, No. 1: 169-175. 21. Water Quality and Health Councils (2010) Water storage tips to assist in emergency preparedness. Online Available at: http://www. waterandhealth. org/drinkingwater/water_storage. php3 22. WH O (World Health Organization) (2008a) Safer water, better health – Costs, benefits and sustainability of interventions to protect and promote the health. Online Available at: http://whqlibdoc. who. int/publications/2008/9789241596435_eng. pdf 23.WHO (World Health Organization) (2008b) Guidelines for drinking-water quality- Third edition Incorporating the first and second addenda. Online Available at: http://www. who. int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/fulltext. pdf 24. WHO(2002). Water Supply. Environmental Health in Emergency. Online Available at: http://www. who. int/water_sanitation_health/hygiene/emergencies/em2002chap7. pdf 25. WHO/UNICEF (2005). Water for Life: Making it happen. http://www. who. int/water_sanitation_health/waterforlife. pdf . 26. WHO & UNICEF (2006). Meeting the MDG Water and Sanitation Target: The Urban and Rural Challenge of the Decade, WHO, Geneva and UNICEF, New York. 27. WSSCC (2004).The Campaign: WASH Facts and Figures. Online Available at: Online Av ailable at: http://www. wsscc. org/dataweb. cfm? edit_id=292&CFID=13225&CFTOKEN=70205233. 28. Wijk, Christine van (1998). Gender in water resources management, water supply and sanitation: Roles and realities revisited. Technical paper No. 33-E). The Hague: IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre. 29. http://www. unicef. org/media/files/JMPreport2012. pdf: UNICEF, WHO: Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation update 2012 UPDATE. 27 30. http://www. cdc. gov/healthywater/global/wash_statistics. html : Centre of Disease Control and Prevention (2012) Global WASH Fast Facts 28