Author:
Omwami Duncan O.,Kurauka Joseph K.,Ochola Samuel O.
Abstract
As a result of poor hygiene in schools, public health and the status of public schools are adversely affected. There have been limited programs addressing sanitation issues in Kisumu East schools. This study therefore aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of the WASH program and teachers' contributions to improving the quality of latrines in Kisumu East and investigating the environmental factors that have had an impact on the quality of latrines. A total of 20 schools participated in the study interviews, of which 16 schools were involved in the WASH program, and 4 were not involved in the WASH program, with a target population of 384 students and 40 teachers. A descriptive research design was used to guide the investigation. The data was processed and analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences Version 25.0 software package, and data was presented in the form of means and variance. Tables were also used to display the data. Students and teachers in non-WASH schools agreed that the latrines were filthy. For instance, 62.5 percent of teachers and 62.3 percent of students from schools implementing the WASH program reported that latrines were dirty. Still, only 37.7 percent of teachers and 37.5 percent of students reported that they were very dirty. The study found an association between teachers' contributions and cleanliness, with a correlation coefficient (r) of -3.18 and a significance level of (p0.05). There was also a correlation between the implementation of WASH and the number of cases of diarrheal disease among students, with a significance value of 0.001*. It was concluded that the WASH program had a significant impact on the state of public health in public schools. Therefore, the study recommends that more effort should be put into addressing the challenges facing toilet cleanliness and hygiene practices.
Publisher
Sciencedomain International
Reference24 articles.
1. Du Monde M. The K.A.P. survey model (knowledge, attitudes, & practices). USAID: Washington, DC, U.S.A; 2011.
2. Laitala K, Klepp IG. Wool wash: Technical performance and consumer habits. Tenside Surfactants Detergents. 2016;53(5):458-469.
3. Christian J, Bartram J. Water and Sanitation in Schools: A Systematic Review of the Health and Educational Outcomes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2012;29-32.
4. Borja-Vega C. What makes rural water systems sustainable? Meta-analysis, determinants, and the empirical impacts of a large-scale WASH program in Nicaragua (Doctoral dissertation, University of Leeds); 2020.
5. Daniel D, Djohan D, Nastiti A. Interaction of factors influencing the sustainability of water, sanitation, and hygiene (Wash) services in rural Indonesia: Evidence from small surveys of wash-related stakeholders in Indonesia. Water. 2021; 13(3):314.