DATA ANALYSIS

1.1 Discussion and Analysis of Demographic Data

The distribution of participants per village is indicated in table 1 below.

Table 1. Distribution of Participants per Village

Village Frequency Percentage
Furaha 20 13.3%
Gachurio 17 11.3%
Gathara 21 14.0%
Kiawaroga 20 13.3%
Mugumo 23 15.3%
Riara 19 12.7%
Sukuma 20 13.35%
Total 140 100%
As shown Table 1 Mobraukie estate had most of the study participants with 97 individuals
representing 69.3% of the total participants while Limuru had estate had 43 individuals
representing only 30.7% of the total participants. Basing on villages, Mugumo had the highest
participants with 23 (15.3%) individuals and Gachurio had the lowest with 17 individuals
representing 11.3% of the total participants.

Table 2. Age and Monthly Savings

Variable Mean Std. Dev
Age 35.76 6.518
Monthly Savings 3540.288 2857.046
All the participants (100%) indicated to have tea garden work as their source of income. As
shown in Table 2, most of the participants aged around 36 years (the mean age). (139) 99% of
the participants cited to be earning on a monthly basis with 1 participant indicating to be earning
on a yearly basis. 98 participants (73.1%) cited to be formal workers while 36 participants
(26.9%) cited to be informal workers. The standard deviation of age was 6.518 years. The mean
monthly savings was KShs. 3540.288 with a standard deviation of 2857.046 shillings. This is
indicated in table 2 below.

1
 Table 3. Descriptive Statistics for Lateness and Average Weight
Variable Mean Std. Error Maximum Minimum Std. Dev
No of Late Times 0.40 0.123 12 0 1.458
Lateness Time (Minutes) 3.540 0.922 60 60 10.903
Average Tea Weight (Kgs) 67.296 1.624 150.0 39.0 19.215
Average Weight on a Sick day 36.949 3.373 90 0 27.833

Table 3 shows the mean number of times a worker arrived arrived late at work was 0.4 – 1
(3.540 minutes) time, with a standard error of 0.123 (0.922 minutes) and a standard deviation of
1.458 (10.903 minutes). The most frequently late worker arrived late at work 12 times-
maximum (60 minutes) times in the last three months. The standard error indicates the deviation
of sample mean from the true population mean. Table 3 indicates the results.

The mean weight of tea plucked on a normal day was 67.296 Kgs with a standard error of 1.624
and a standard deviation of 19.215 Kgs. The most hardworking/productive worker plucked 150
Kgs/day (maximum) and the least productive worker plucked 39 Kgs/day. The average weight of
tea plucked on a sick day was 36.949 Kgs with standard error of 3.373 Kgs and a standard
deviation of 27.833 Kgs. The most productive sick worker plucked 90Kgs in a day.

Table 4. Frequency of Lateness at Work

No of Times of Late at Work Frequency Percentage
0 122 87.1%
1 6 4.3%
2 6 4.3%
3 1 0.7%
4 2 1.4%
5 1 0.7%
6 1 0.7%
7 1 0.7%
Total 140 100%
Table 4 shows that 87.1% (122) workers were never late at work. The most frequent number of
days workers arrived late at work were 1 day and 2 days with each having 6 individuals (4.3%).
At least a worker was late for 5 days, 6 days and even 7 days.

2
 Table 5. Absenteeism Frequency
No of Days of Absenteeism Frequency Percentage
0 108 85.0%
1 8 6.3%
2 4 3.1%
10 2 1.6%
14 2 1.6%
16 1 0.8%
21 1 0.8%
25 1 0.8%
Total 150 100%
As shown in Table 5, 108 workers (85%) workers were never absent. The highest number of
absenteeism was 8 workers (6.3%) and were only absent for 1 day. 4 workers (3.1%) absented
themselves for 2 days. Others were absent for even 10 days.

Table 6. Absenteeism due to Sickness

Days of Absenteeism due to Sickness Frequency Percentage
0 135 96.4%
1 1 0.7%
2 1 0.7%
3 2 1.4%
7 1 0.7%
Total 140 100%

In Table 6 out of 140 workers, 135 (96.4%) were never absent due to sickness. The most
frequent number of absenteeism due to sickness for 2 workers (1.4%) for 2 days each.

Table 7. Descriptive Statistics for absenteeism in the last 3 months and November 2019 to
January 2020

N Minimum Maximum Mean

Missed last 3 months with self- 127 0 25 .99

illness
Missed in the same time as last 3 140 0 7 .011
months last year (November
2019/January 2020) with self-
illness

3
As shown in Table 7, mean (0.99) and maximum number of times a workers missed in the last
three months is higher than the mean (0.011) and maximum (7) number of times a worker missed
with self-illness last year (November 2019 to January 2020). This suggests that the cases of
workers illness have increased.

Table 8. Lateness times in the last 3 months

Days Frequency Percent
0 122 87.1
1 6 4.3
2 6 4.3
3 1 .7
5 2 1.4
6 1 .7
7 1 .7
12 1 .7
Total 140 100.0
From table 8, highest absenteeism frequency was 6 (4.3%) of the total workers which appears
twice. The highest number of days missed was 12.

Table 9. Lateness times last year (November 2019 to January 2020)

Days Frequency Percent
0 129 92.1
1 5 3.6
2 1 .7
4 1 .7
5 2 1.4
10 1 .7
12 1 .7
Total 140 100.0
As shown in table 9, the highest lateness frequency was 5 (3.6%) of the total workers. The
highest number of days missed was 12.

In comparing lateness due to self-illness in last three months and last year (November 2019 to
January 2020), the situation of lateness has worsened since the number of lateness cases have
increased in the last 3 months.

4
 Table 10. Diseases that caused leave in the last 3 months
Disease Frequency Percent
Pneumonia 1 .7
Abdominal pain 2 1.4
Intestinal worms 1 .7
Typhoid 1 .7
TB 1 .7
Malaria 1 .7
Covid-19 3 2.2
Others 6 4.3
Don't Know 1 .7
NA 122 87.8
Total 139 100.0
Missing 1
Total 140
As shown in Table 10, the common diseases causing leave for workers in the last 3 months are
Covid-19 (2.2%) and abdominal pain (1.4%). Pneumonia (0.7%), intestinal worms (0.7%),
malaria (0.7%), among others, have also been reported.

Table 11. Diseases that caused leave (November 2019 to January 2020)
Frequency Valid Percent
Diarrhoea 1 .7
Malaria 1 .7
Others 3 2.1
NA 135 96.4
Total 140 100.0
Table 11 has shown diarrhoea and malaria with 0.7% each as the diseases causing leaves
between November 2019 to January 2020. Other diseases (2.1%) have also been reported.
In the last 3 months, the number of reported diseases is high as compared to last year (November
2019 to January 2020), with Covid-19 having the most cases 2.2%. This shows an increment in
disease risk among workers in the last 3 months.

5
 Table 12. Descriptive Statistics for average productivity in the last 3 months
N Minimum Maximum Mean
Average weight/day 2020/2021 140 39.0 150.0 67.296
Average weight/day last year 140 .0 150.0 59.432
(2019/2020)
N 140
From Table 12 above, mean (67.296 kgs) weight of tea leaves plucked per day in the last 3
months is higher than the mean (59.432 kgs) of tea leaves plucked per day last year (November
2019 to January 2020). This suggests an improvement in productivity.

Table 13. Descriptive Statistics for mistakes done in plucking tea leaves
N Minimum Maximum Mean
Tea weight (kgs) of mistakes done 66 .20 20.00 1.5091
Tea weight (kgs) of mistakes done 84 .00 77.00 1.9351
(November 2019-January 2020)
N 61
As shown in Table 13, the mean and maximum weight of tea leaves plucked by mistake in the
last 3 months were 1.5091 kgs and 20kgs while the mean and maximum weight of tea leaves
plucked by mistake last year (November 2019 to January 2020) were 1.9351 kgs and 77kgs,
respectively. The last year’s mean and maximum weight is higher than in the last 3 months.

6
1.2 Discussion and Analysis of Wash Indicators
Knowledge and Reported Practice of Handwashing
Table 14. Monthly Expenses on Water and Cleaning Agents (In Kenya Shillings)
Expense Type Mean Maximum Minimum Std. Dev
Handwashing 52.66 800 0 143.928
Drinking Water 16.43 800 0 84.701
Other uses of Water 10 500 0 57.901
Toilet Cleaning Agent 3.21 250 0 26.963
Soap 425.20 1500 40 298.605
Utensils Cleaning Agent 88.43 1000 0 137.031
Hand Sanitizers 116.79 700 0 147.473
As shown in Table 7, the mean monthly expenditure for handwashing practices was Ksh. 52.66
with a maximum of Ksh. 800, minimum of 0, and a standard deviation of Ksh. 143.928. The
minimum of 0 shows that either the participants never washed their hands or accessed
handwashing requirements for free. The mean monthly expenditure on water was Ksh. 16.43
with a maximum of Ksh. 800, a minimum of 0 and a standard deviation of Ksh. 84.701. Other
water uses had a mean of Ksh. 10, a minimum of Ksh. 500, a minimum of 0 and a standard
deviation of Ksh. 57.901. Toilet cleaning agent had a mean of Ksh. 3.21, a maximum of Ksh.
250, a minimum of 0, and a standard deviation of Ksh. 26.963. Soap proved to be the highest
expenditure with a mean of Ksh. 425.20, a maximum of Ksh. 1500, a minimum of 40, and a
standard deviation of Ksh. 298.605. The monthly expenditure on utensils cleaning agent showed
a mean of Ksh. 88.43, a minimum of Ksh. 1000, a minimum of 0, and a standard Ksh. 137.031.
The mean monthly expenditure hand sanitizers were Ksh. 116.79 with a maximum of Ksh. 700, a
minimum of 0 and a standard deviation of Ksh. 147.473.

Table 14. Last Year’s Monthly Expenditure on Water and Cleaning Agents (In Kenya Shillings)
Expense Type Mean Std. Error Maximum Minimum Std. Dev
Handwashing 17.21 6.631 500 0 78.457
Drinking Water 8.21 4.378 500 0 51.806
Other uses of Water 10.71 5.139 500 0 60.806
Toilet Cleaning Agent 0 0 0 0 0
Soap 372.86 21.821 1200 0 258.189
Utensils Cleaning Agent 79.64 9.078 500 0 107.412
Hand Sanitizers 9.35 2.133 77 0 25.240
As shown in Table 8, the previous year’s expenditure, each and every item of expenditure
showed a minimum of 0 and a maximum of Ksh. 500 except soap and hand sanitizers which had

7
a maximum of Ksh. 1200 and Ksh. 77 respectively. Soap is clearly the most used item. Hand
sanitizers were rarely used since they were never popular and only became popular with the
outbreak of Covid 19. No participant indicated to spend on toilet cleaning agent.

Table 15. Handwashing Statistics

Washing Hands Mean Std. Error Maximum Minimum Std. Dev
No of Times 5.256 0.2876 20 1 3.403
No of Minutes 4.065 0.428 30 0.33 5.069
As indicated in Table 9, the mean number of handwashing times was 5. The mean hand washing
time was 4 minutes.

Table 16. Reasons for not Washing Hands at Work

Reason Frequency Percentage
Pressure to complete target 9 17.05%
Not enough breaks 2 3.8%
Handwashing facility is far 2 3.8%
No sufficient water 9 17.0%
Long queue 7 13.2%
No water 11 20.8%
No soap 1 1.9%
Total 53 100%
Table 10 shows that the most prominent reason for not washing hands was lack or insufficient
water and pressure to complete the target. Both Lack of water and insufficient water both
combined had 20 individuals representing 37.8%. Pressure to complete target had 9 individuals
representing 17.05%.

Table 17. Benefits of Handwashing

Benefit Frequency Percentage
Kills germs 24 17.3%
Keeps clean 53 38.1%
Prevents diseases 53 38.1%
Cleans dirt 7 5.0%
Makes people pure 1 0.7%
DK 1 0.7%
Total 139 100%
As shown in Table 11, the highest number of participants stated that handwashing keeps clean 53
(38.1%) and it prevents diseases 53 (38.1%). 24 individuals (17.3%) believed that washing hands
kills germs, 7 (5%) believed that it cleans dirt.

8
 Table 18. Diseases Prevented by Handwashing
Disease Prevented by Handwashing Percentage
Diarrhoea 18
Diarrhoea, Cholera 6.1
Diarrhoea, Abdominal Pain 0.7
Diarrhoea, Abdominal Pain, typhoid, Covid 19 0.7
Diarrhoea, Malaria 0.7
Diarrhoea, Covid 19 4.7
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Covid 19 1.4
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Pneumonia 0.7
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Pneumonia, hepatitis A 4.0
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Pneumonia, hepatitis A, Abdominal Pain 4.7
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Pneumonia, hepatitis A, Abdominal Pain, Intestinal warms 1.3
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Pneumonia, hepatitis A, Typhoid 0.7
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Pneumonia, hepatitis A, Abdominal Pain, eye infection 0.7
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Abdominal pain 1.4
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Abdominal, Intestinal worms 1.3
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Abdominal, Intestinal worms, typhoid 1.3
Diarrhoea, Cholera, typhoid, Covid 19 0.7
Diarrhoea, Cholera, eye infection 0.7
Diarrhoea, Abdominal Pain, Covid 19 0.7
Diarrhoea, intestinal worms 0.7
Common cold 2.0
Malaria 0.7
Covid 19 5.3
Diarrhoea, cholera, Abdominal Pain, Covid 19, Malaria 0.7
Diarrhoea, cholera, covid-19, typhoid 0.7
Diarrhoea, cholera, covid-19, Hepatitis A 0.7
Don’t Know 1.3
Cholera 10
Diarrhoea, Cholera, malaria, typhoid 0.7
Cholera, common cold 0.7
Cholera, Covid 19, Malaria 0.7
Cholera, Oral thrush 0.7
Cholera, Covid-19 0.7
Diarrhoea, Cholera, Pneumonia, abdominal pain, Covid-19 0.7
Cholera, Pneumonia 0.7
Cholera, Abdominal Pain, Covid-19 1.3
Abdominal pain 8.0
Abdominal pain, cholera, diarrhea, intestinal worm 0.7
Typhoid 2.0
Typhoid, diarrhea 0.7
Not Applicable 2.0

9
As shown in Table in Table 18, majority of the respondents believed that handwashing prevented
diarrhea, cholera and covid 19.

Table 19. Attending Training

Training participation Frequency Percentage
Yes 46 32.9%
No 94 67.1%
Table 19 shows that majority of the study participants 94(67.1%) indicated to have not attended
any training session on hygiene in the last 10 months while 46 (32.9%) stated that they have
attended training sessions on hygiene. For those who attended training sessions, the mean
number of training sessions attended was indicated to be approximately 3 times with a standard
deviation of 2.535.

Figure 1. Preferable Cleaning Agents at a Station

As shown in Figure 1, approximately almost all the participants 99.29% indicated detergents,
soap, liquid and disinfectant to be the preferable agents.

10
 Figure 3. Handwashing at Work

Figure 3 shows that 85.7% indicated that they do while 14.29% indicated that they do not.
Figure 4. Frequency of Handwashing Times

11
As shown in figure 4 when participants were asked on the number of times they wash hands, the
highest number (39) indicated to wash hands 6 times a day, followed by 25 (4 times a day),
followed by 18 (3 times a day), 17 (once a day), 14 (11 times a day). Others went to an extent of
16 and 21 times a day.

Figure 5. Reason for not Washing Hands

Figure 5 shows the results for reasons for not washing hands. Individuals were asked on reason
for not washing hands. 20.75% gave lack of water as the reason, 16.98% indicated pressure to
complete target, 16.98% also said water insufficiency, 13.21% talked of long queue. Some said
no enough breaks and 1.89% said lack of soap.

Figure 6. Time of Washing Hands

12
Figure 6 shows the results on time of washing hands. The highest number (34.29%) said before
eating 16.43% said both before eating and after using toilet; 10.71% said before eating, after
using toilet, after cleaning child’s bottom and others, some few individuals gave more multiple
combinations. The results are shown in figure 6 above.

Figure 7. Ways of Washing Hands

Figure 8 shows that 74.10% said rinsing thoroughly for few minutes, 23.74% rinsing and
washing immediately, 1.44% said rinsing and keeping soap for few hours and 0.72% said others.
The results are shown in figure 7.

13
 Figure 8. What should be used for handwashing

The participants were asked what should be used in handwashing. 97.86% stated
soap/surf/liquid/handwash and water. 1.43% stated water only. Other’s responses were
negligible. Results are indicated in figure 8 above.

Figure 9. Where handwashing facilities are to be kept.

14
Figure 9 shows that 51.43% stated in the kitchen/tea garden, 12.14% stated in the kitchen/snack
area/closer to the toilet, and anywhere in the house/key locations in the tea garden, 8.57% stated
in the kitchen or snack areas.

Table 20. A Crosstabulation of Attending Training Against Attending Clinic

Attended Training Attended Clinic Total
0 Times 2 Times
No 34 12 46
Percentage 73.9% 26.1% 100%
Yes 83 11 94
Percentage 88.3% 11.7% 100%
Total 117 23 140
83.6% 16.4% 100%
As indicated by table 13 above, the percentage of those who attended clinic and never attended
training (26.1%) was higher than the percentage of those who attended clinic despite having been
attending training (11.7%).

Table 21. A Crosstab of passing knowledge and change in handwashing behavior

Behavior Change
Passed Knowledge No Yes Total
No 1 0 1
Yes 0 95 95
Total 1 95 96
An assessment was conducted to establish whether passing knowledge acquired from hygiene
training sessions had an influence on hygienic behaviors. The results indicated that all the
participants (95) who passed training knowledge observed change in the handwashing behavior
of their dependents.

15
 Figure 10. Hygiene training attendance against village

An examination on whether attending hygiene training had association with the participants’
region showed a significant association. The results indicated that most of the participants in
Furaha (13.57%), Gachurio (11.43%), Gathara (13.57%), Kiawaroga (11.43%) and Gachurio
(11.43%) attended hygienic trainings while a majority of living in Mugumo (14.29%) and Riara
never attended these trainings. The results are shown in figure 13. This shows that there may be a
need for efforts to mobilize the residents Mugumo and Riara on the importance of these
trainings.

Figure 11. Sex against hygiene training attendance

16
As shown in Figure 11 more males 35% attended training than females 32.14%. Also, the
number of males 19.29% who never attended was higher than that of females’ 13.57%. Figure 11
shows the results.

17
1.3 Knowledge and Reported Practice on Water Treatment
Figure 12. Water Treatment Practice

Out of 140 participants, 83.57% indicated that they treat water while 16.43% individuals
indicated not to treat water. The results are shown in figure 12 above.

Table 22. Ways of Water Purification

No Yes DK
90A_how_boiling Count 63 (45%) 77 (55%) 0
90B_howchlorine Count 76 (54%) 64 (46%) 0
90C_howSODIS Count 138 (96%) 2 (4%) 0
90D_howFiltering Count 94(67%) 46(33%) 0

The participants were asked how they purify water. As indicated in table 22, 77 out of 140
agreed that they boil water while 66 did not. 66 respondents stated that they use Chlorine while
76 indicated “No”. 2 participants said they use SODIS while 138 did not. 46 participants agreed
that they use filtering while 92 said that they did not. Table 14 shows the results.

18
 Figure 13. Method of Water Treatment

Water treatment (%)

DK 0
Filtering

Yes 32.9
No 67.1
DK 0
SODIS

Yes 1.4
No 98.6
DK 0
Chlorine

Yes 45.7
No 54.3
DK 0
Boiling

Yes 55
No 45

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Similar to the table 14 results above, the graphical approach revealed the exact results. This is
shown in Figure 16 above. 55% said they boil water and 45% said they don’t. 45.7% said they
use chlorine and 54.35 said they don’t. 98.6% said they don’t and 1.4% said they use SODIS.
32.9% said they filter water and 67.1% said they don’t.

19
 Figure 14. Method of Storing Treated Water

Water storage (%)

NA 3.6
storage in
safeplace

DK 0
Yes 91.4
No 5
storage in clean

NA 3.6
utensils

DK 6.4
Yes 82.9
No 7.1
NA 3.6
storage with
clean lid

DK 0
Yes 90.7
No 5.7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Individuals were asked how they store treated water. As shown in Figure 14 90.7% individuals
said that they cover it with clean lid while 5.7% said they do not. 82.9% said that they keep it in
clean utensils, 7.1% said that they do not keep in clean utensils, 6.4% said they don’t know and
3.6% said NA. 91.4% said that they keep it in safe place and 5% said they don’t. 3.6% of the
individuals provided no answer in each of the three categories. The results are shown in figure
14.

20
 Figure 15. Not Purifying Water Causes Diseases

Respondents were asked whether impure water causes diseases, 82.11% said it causes diseases,
15.45% said it does not, 0.81% indicated that they don’t know and 1 gave no valid answer (Not
Applicable).

21
 Figure 16. Diseases Caused by Impure Water

Diseases of untreated water (%)

NA 5
HepatitisAJ
aundice

DK 37.1
Yes 26.4
No 31.4
NA 5
Typhoid

DK 0.7
Yes 75
No 19.3
NA 5
Abdominalp Intestinal
worm

DK 1.4
Yes 68.3
No 25.2
NA 5
DK 0.7
ain

Yes 75.7
No 18.6
NA
Pneumonia

5
DK 7.1
Yes 30
No 57.9
NA 5
Cholera

DK 0.7
Yes 79.3
No 15
NA 5
Diarhaoea

DK 0.7
Yes 84.3
No 10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Participants were asked on what diseases impure water causes. 84.3% agreed that is causes
diarrhea, 10% said it does not, 0.7% said they don’t know and 7 never gave answers (NA).
79.3% said it causes cholera, 15% said it does not and 0.7% never knew. 30% said it causes
pneumonia, 57.9% said it does not, 7.1% said they don’t know. 75.7% said it causes abdominal
pains, 18.6% said it does not and 0.7% never knew. 68.3% said it causes intestinal worms, 25.2%
said it does not and 1.4% said they don’t know. 75% said it causes typhoid, 19.3% disagreed,
0.75 participant said they don’t know and 5% gave no valid answer (NA). Out of 140
participants, 26.4% agreed that impure water causes Hepatitis A/Jaundice, 31.4% participants
disagreed, 37.1% said they don’t know and 5% gave no valid answers. Figure 16 shows the
results.
22
Figure 17. Treating Water and Diarrhea

On examining the possibility of association between treating water and avoidance of diarrhea,
treating water was associated with the avoidance of diarrhea. Those who treated water (78.43%)
believed that untreated water causes diarrhea. However, some individuals never treated water
(74.29%) since they believed that untreated water can’t cause diarrhea. Figure 17 confirms the
results.

Figure 18. Treating Water and Cholera

23
An assessment was done to establish association between treating water and the prevalence
cholera Those who treated water believed that untreated water causes cholera and those who
never believed that it does no cause cholera. The association is further cemented in Figure 18
above. 72.14% of those who treated water agreed that untreated water causes cholera while 5%
individuals who never treated water believed it does not.

Figure 19. Treating Water and Typhoid

An assessment was conducted to establish possible association between treating water and the
notion that untreated water causes typhoid. As indicated by figure 22, most of the individuals
treated water (69.29%) since they believed that untreated water causes typhoid. Also, those who
never treated water (6.43%) believed that it does not cause typhoid. Most of those who treated
water believed that it causes typhoid.

24
Toilet Cleaning Practices
Figure 20. Usage of Toilet

Respondents were asked whether they use toilet. 97.14% indicated that they used toilets and
2.86% indicated that they don’t.

Figure 21. Toilet Cleaning

Participants were asked on their toilet cleaning habits, 46.04% said they clean toilet 2 times
25
every day, 41.73% said 1 time every day, 11.51% said each time after using toilet and 0.72%
said 1 time in 2-3 days.

Figure 22. Toilet cleaning agent

Participants were asked what cleaning agents they use for their toilets. Out of 140, 85.71% said
they use detergent/liquid/soap/disinfectant, 5% said they use Harpic and 9.29% said they use
other bleaching agents. The results are highlighted on figure 22.

26
 Figure 21. Diseases caused by open defecation

Diseases from faeces (%)

Skindiseas Oralthrus

DK 29.3
Yes 16.4
h

No 54.3
DK 15
Yes 39.3
e

No 45.7
DK 15.7
TB

Yes 21.4
No 62.9
HepatitisA Eyeinfecti

DK 17.1
on

Yes 8.6
No 74.3
DK 41.7
worm Typhoid Jaundice

Yes 13.7
No 44.6
DK 0.7
Yes 73.6
No 25.7
Pneumoni Abdomina Intestinal

DK 3.6
Yes 77.1
No 19.3
DK 2.1
lpain

Yes 81.4
No 16.4
DK 8.6
Yes 20
a

No 71.4
DK 3.6
Diarrhoea Cholera

Yes 91.4
No 5
DK 4.3
Yes 90
No 5.7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Participants were asked what diseases are caused by open defecation. 90% of 140 stated that it
causes diarrhea, 5.7% said it doesn’t and 4.3% said they don’t know. 91.4% agreed that open
defecation causes cholera, 5% disagreed and 3.6% said they don’t know. 20% agreed it causes
pneumonia, 71.4% disagreed and 8.6% said they don’t know. 81.4% agreed it causes abdominal

27
pain, 16.4% disagreed and 2.1% never knew. 77.1% agreed that open defecation causes intestinal
worms, 19.3% disagreed and 3.6% said they don’t know. 73.6% agreed it causes typhoid, 25.7%
disagreed and 0.7% said they don’t know. 13.7% agreed it causes Hepatitis A/Jaundice, 44.6%
disagreed and 41.7% said they don’t know. 8.6% of participants agreed that open defecation
causes eye infections, 74.3% disagreed and 17.1% participants said that they don’t know. 21.4%
participants agreed that open defecation causes TB, 62.95 of the participants disagreed and
15.7% of the participants said they don’t know. 39.3% agreed it causes skin disease and 16.4%
agreed that it causes oral thrush. Figure 22 indicates the graphical results.

Figure 22. Toilet Cleaning Frequency Against Cleaning Agent

An examination was done to establish the association of how often participants clean their toilet
and the cleaning agent used. 39.57% who cleaned their toilets once a day used detergents, soap,
liquid and disinfectant, 0.72% used Harpic and 1.44% used other bleaching agents. For those
who cleaned toilets twice a day, 39.57% used detergents, soap, liquid and disinfectant, 0.72%
used Harpic and 5.76% used other bleaching agents. For those who cleaned toilet after using,
6.47% used detergents, soap, liquid and disinfectant, 2.88% used Harpic and 2.16% used other
bleaching agents. Only 0.72% cleaned toilet once in every 3 days and used detergents, soap,
liquid and disinfectant. Evidently, most of the participants from all categories used detergents,
soap, liquid and disinfectant.

28
Child Faeces Disposal Practices
Figure 23. Where Child’s Faeces Should be Disposed

Opinion on child's faece disposal (%)

DK 0
Bury

Yes 0
No 100
DK 0.7
into the toilet In to the ditch In garbage

Yes 7.9
No 91.4
DK 6.4
Yes 0
No 93.6
DK 0
Yes 97.1
No 2.9
Baby faeces in

DK 0
toilet

Yes 85
No 15

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Participants were asked on where children faeces are supposed to be disposed. Out of 140
participants, 85% agreed that child faeces should be disposed into the toilet and 15% of the
participants disagreed. 97.1% of the participants agreed that it should be put into a drain or ditch
and 6.4% said they don’t know. 7.9% of the participants agreed that it should be thrown into
garbage, 91.4% participants disagreed and 0.7% said he doesn’t know. All the 140 (100%)
participants disagreed that children’s faeces should be buried. Figure 23 shows the results.

29
 Figure 24. Where Child’s Faeces are Disposed

Faeces disposal (%)

DK
Anywhere

0
Yes 0
No 100%
DK 0
Buried

Yes 0
No 100
Left as it is

DK 0
Yes 0
No 100
DK 1.5
Dumping
site

Yes 12.4
No 86.1
DK 0
Into the
toilet

Yes 98.6
No 1.4

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00

Respondents were asked where they dispose their children’s faeces. Out of 140, 98.6% of the
respondents agreed that they pick and dispose in the toilet and 1.4% of the participants disagreed.
12.4% participants agreed that they dispose it in dumping site, 86.1% disagreed and 1.5% said
they don’t know. All the 140 participants disagreed that they left the faeces as it is. All the
participants disagreed with the ideas of burying and disposing children’s faeces anywhere.

30
 Figure 25. A child’s faeces cause harm.

Participants were asked whether children’s faeces are harmful. 89.29% agreed that the faeces are
harmful while 9.29% said that children’s faeces are not harmful. 1.43% of the participants
indicated that they don’t know.

31
 Figure 26. Harms of children faeces

Harms of child's faeces

child faeces cause Child faeces cause Child faeces water Child faeces food

NA 5%
contamination

DK 5.80%
Yes 69.10%
No 20.10%
NA 5%
polution

DK 9.40%
Yes 66.90%
No 18.70%
NA 5%
air polution

DK 2.20%
Yes 82.70%
No 10.10%
NA 5%
disease

DK 0
Yes 86.40%
No 8.60%

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00%

Participants were asked what harm children faeces cause. Out of 140 participants, 86.4% agreed
that child faeces cause diseases, 8.6% disagreed and 5% gave NA. 82.7% participants agreed that
children’s faeces cause air pollution, 10.1% disagreed and 2.2% said they don’t know. 66.9% of
the participants agreed that the faeces cause water pollution, 18.7% disagreed and 9.4% said they
don’t know. Out of 140, 69.1% of the participants agreed that children’s faeces cause food
contamination, 20.1% disagreed and 5.8% participants said they don’t know. Figure 26 indicates
the results.

Figure 27. Diseases caused by improperly disposed child’s faeces

32
 Diseases from child's faeces (%)

NA 52.9
Dont Know

DK 0
Yes 29.4
No 17.6
NA 1.4
Oralthrush

DK 17.3
Yes 16.5
No 64.7
NA 1.4
Skindisease

DK 16.5
Yes 32.4
No 49.6
NA 1.4
DK 19.4
TB

Yes 31.7
No 47.5
NA 1.4
Eyeinfection

DK 16.4
Yes 22.1
No 60
HepatitisAJau

NA 1.4
DK 29.5
ndice

Yes 29.5
No 39.6
NA 1.4
Typhoid

DK 15
Yes 58.6
No 25
Abdominalpa Intestinalwor

NA 1.4
DK 7.1
m

Yes 65
No 26.4
NA 1.4
DK 8.6
in

Yes 73.6
No 16.4
NA 1.4
Pneumonia

DK 17.1
Yes 15.7
No 65.7
NA 1.4
Cholera

DK 5.7
Yes 82.1
No 10.7
NA 1.4
DK 4.3
Yes 83.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 33
Out of 140 participants, 83.5% agreed that improper child faeces disposal causes diarrhea, 1.4 %
said NA and 4.3% said they don’t know. Out of 140 participants, 82.1% agreed that improper
child’s faeces disposal causes cholera, 10.7% disagreed and 5.7% said they don’t know. 15.7%
of participants agreed that improper child’s faeces cause pneumonia, 65.7% disagreed and 17.1%
said they don’t know. 73.6% agreed that it causes abdominal pains, 16.4% disagreed and 8.6%
said they don’t know. 65% of participants agreed that improper child faeces disposal causes
intestinal worms, 25.4% disagreed and 7.1% said they don’t know. 58.6% participants agreed
that it causes typhoid, 25% disagreed and 15% said they don’t know. 29.5% of participants
agreed that improper disposal of a child’s faeces cause Hepatitis A/Jaundice, 39.6% disagreed
and 29.5% said they don’t know. Out of 140 participants, 22.1% agreed that improper child’s
faeces cause eye infection, 60% of participants disagreed and 16.4% said they don’t know. Out
of 140 participants, 31.7% agreed that improper child’s faeces disposal causes TB, 47.5%
disagreed and 19.4% said they don’t know. 32.4% of participants agreed that improper child’s
faeces disposal causes skin disease, 49.6% disagreed and 16.5% said they don’t know. 16.5% of
participants agreed that improper child’s faeces disposal causes oral thrush, 64.7% of the
participants disagreed and 17.3% said they don’t know. Other participants said they don’t know
while still others totally gave no answers. Figure 27 above shows the results.

34
 Figure 28. Meaning of food hygiene

protect DK 27.1

insects
from
food Yes 28.6
No 44.3
hands DK 17.1
clean temperat clean

Yes 70
No 12.9
DK 11.4
storage
Proper
food

ure

Yes 84.3
No 4.3
DK 10
cloth

Yes 82.1
No 7.9
DK 9.3
wash separatel cleaning
kitchen

Yes 81.4
No 9.3
DK
uncooke

8.6
Keeping
cooked

cleaned Covering reheat Child wash mother d food

and

Yes 85
y

No 6.4
DK 8.6
hands

Yes 81.4
No 10
NA 0.7
eating
with thorough hands

DK 7.9
Yes 84.3
No 7.1
DK 7.9
leftover

Yes 85.7
ly

No 6.4
DK 6.4
cooking soap tight lid

Yes 89.3
No 4.3
DK 7.1
utensils

horough with

Yes 90
No 2.9
DK 6.4
Yes 92.1
No 1.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Food hygiene measures

The participants were asked to what they understood with food hygiene. Out of 140 participants,
92.1% agreed with cooking food thoroughly, 1.4% disagreed and 6.4% said they don’t know.
90% of participants agreed with making serving utensils clean with soap, 2.9% disagreed and

35
7.1% said they don’t know. 89.3% participants agreed with storing food safely using tight lid,
4.3% disagreed and 6.4% said they don’t know. 85.7% agreed with reheating leftover food
thoroughly, 6.4% disagreed and 7.9% said they don’t know. 84.3% participants agreed with
children washing hands before eating, 7.1% disagreed and 7.9% said they don’t know. 81.4% of
participants agreed with washing hands before feeding children by mother, 10% disagreed and
8.6% said they don’t know. 85% said yes for keeping cooked and uncooked food separately,
6.4% said no and 8.6% said they don’t know. 81.4% of participants said yes for keeping kitchen
clean, 9.3% said no and 9.3% said they don’t know. 82.1% of participants said yes for using
clean cloth in kitchen, 7.9% of participants disagreed and 10% said they don’t know. 84.3%
agreed with storing food in appropriate temperature, 4.3% disagreed and 11.4% said they don’t
know. 70% of participants agreed with making hands clean while handling food, 12.9%
disagreed and 17.1% said they don’t know. Out 140 participants, 28.6% agreed with protecting
food from insects/flies, 44.3% disagreed and 27.1% said they don’t know. Table 28 shows the
results.

Figure 29. What should be done to store leftover food

Food hygiene (%)

NA 3.9
Other 2
DK

DK 37.3
Yes 3.9
No 52.9
cover leftover kept_in_cleanut Leftover_kept_i

NA 1.4
n_safeplace

DK 8.6
Yes 81.4
No 8.6
NA 1.4
Leftover

DK 7.1
ensils

Yes 85
No 6.4
NA 1.4
with cleanlid

DK 0
Yes 97.9
No 0.7

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

36
The respondents were asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement with some statements
on food hygiene. Out of 140 participants, 97.9% with covering leftover food with a clean lid,
0.7% disagreed and 1.4% gave no answer (NA). 85% of the participants agreed with storing food
in clean utensils, 6.4% participants disagreed, 7.1% said they don’t know and 2 gave no answer
(NA). Out of 140 participants, 81.4% agreed with keeping leftover food in safe
place/refrigerator, 8.6% of the participants disagreed and 1.4% gave no answer. Out of 140
participants, 3.9% of participants said they don’t know, 52.9% disagreed with not knowing what
should be done to store leftover food, 37.3% said they don’t know and 3.9% gave no or invalid
answers. Figure 29 above indicates the results.

Figure 30. Hearing of food contamination diseases

The respondents were asked whether they had heard about diseases caused by food
contamination. 90.71% said that they had heard of the diseases, 7.14% participants said they had
not and 2.14% said they don’t know. Figure 30 above indicates the results.

37
Figure 31. Diseases Caused by contaminated food

Contaminated food diseases (%)

28.8
Know

DK
Dont

21.2
3
No 47
10
Skindiseas Oralthrus

DK 29
h

16
No 85
7.1
DK 15
e

19.3
No 58.6
7.2
DK 19.4
TB

16.5
No 56.8
7.1
HepatitisA Eyeinfecti

DK 15
on

19.3
No 58.6
7.1
Typhoid Jaundice

DK 34.3
15.7
No 42.9
7.1
DK 15
60.7
No 17.1
7.1
Pneumoni Abdomina Intestinal
worm

DK 8.6
78.6
No 5.7
7.1
l pain

DK 3.6
85
No 4.3
7.1
DK 16.4
a

25
No 51.4
7.1
Diarrhoea Cholera

DK 10
77.9
No 5
7.1
DK 2.9
87.9
No 2.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

38
The participants were asked what diseases are caused by contaminated food. Out of 140
participants, 87.9% agreed agreed that contaminated food causes diarrhoea, 2.1% disagreed,
2.9% said they don’t know and 10 gave no valid answer. 77.9% of the participants agreed that
contaminated food causes cholera, 5% disagreed, 10% said they don’t know and 7.1% gave no
valid answer. 25% agreed that it causes pneumonia, 51.4% disagreed, 16.4% said they don’t
know and 7.1% gave no answer. 85% participants that contaminated food causes abdominal
pains, 4.3% disagreed, 3.6% said they don’t know and 7.1% gave no valid answer. 78.6% of the
participants agreed that contaminated food causes intestinal worms, 5.7% disagreed, 8.6% said
they don’t know and 7.1% gave no valid answer. 60.7% of the participants agreed that
contaminated food causes typhoid, 17.1% disagreed, 15% said they don’t know and 7.1% gave
no valid answer. 15.7% of the participants agreed that contaminated food causes jaundice, 42.9%
disagreed, 34.3% said they don’t know and 7.1% gave no valid answer. 19.3% of the participants
agreed that contaminated food causes eye infection, 58.6% disagreed, 15% participants said they
don’t know and 7.1% gave no valid answer. 16.5% of participants agreed that contaminated food
causes TB, 56.8% participants disagreed, 19.4% said they don’t know and 7.2% gave no valid
answer. 19.3% of participants agreed that contaminated food causes skin disease, 58.6% of the
participants disagreed, 15% said they don’t know and 7.1% gave no valid answers (NA). 16
participants agreed that contaminated food causes oral thrush, 85 participants disagreed, 29 said
they don’t know and 10 gave no valid answer. Out of 140 participants, 3% of the participants
agreed that they don’t know what diseases are caused by contaminated food, 47% of participants
disagreed, 21.2% said they don’t know and 28.8% gave no valid answer. Figure 31 indicates the
results.

39
Figure 32. Preventive measures of contaminated food diseases.

Percentage
leftover temperatur
appropriat

Yes 3.30%
Store in

No 70.70%
e

DK 19.30%
Yes 4.70%
Reheat

food

No 75.30%
DK 13.30%
Yes 1.30%
storage
Safe

No 82.00%
DK 10.00%
preparatio Thourough

Yes 10.00%
cooking

DK 77.30%
No 6.00%
Clean food

Yes 11.30%
n areas

DK 70.70%
No 11.30%
Yes 10.00%
feeding
before
Hand

child

DK 76.00%
No 7.30%
Yes 8.70%
with soap
Washraw_f preparing utensils
clean

DK 82.00%
No 2.70%
handwash

Yes 9.30%
before

food

DK 78.00%
No 6.00%
Yes 11.30%
ood

DK 80.00%
No 2.00%

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00%

The participants were asked on preventive measures of contaminated food diseases. Out of 140
participants, 11.3% agreed with washing food items before cooking, 2% disagreed and 80% said
they don’t know. Out of 140, 9.3% of the participants agreed with handwashing with soap and
water before food preparation, 78% disagreed and 6% said they don’t know. 8.7% of the

40
participants agreed with the use of clean utensils, 2.7% disagreed and 82% said they don’t know.
10% participants agreed with handwashing with soap and water before child feeding, 73%
disagreed and 7.3% participants said they don’t know. Out of 140 participants, 70.7%%
participants agreed with cleaning food preparation areas, 11.3% disagreed and 11.3%
participants agreed. Out of 140 participants, 10% agreed with cooking food thoroughly, 6%
participants disagreed and 77.3% participants said they don’t know. Out of 140 participants,
1.3% agreed with storing food safely, 82% participants disagreed and 10% said they don’t know.
Out of 140 participants, 4.7% agreed on reheating leftover food, 75.3% participants disagreed
and 13.3% said they don’t know. Out of 140 participants, 3.3% agreed with storing food in
appropriate temperature, 70.7% participants disagreed and 19.3% participants said they don’t
know. Figure 32 above outlines these results.

41