DECLARATION

I, Djopo Michael Kwame and Okechukwu Joseph hereby declare that the project work
entitled “Assessing the Functionality, Accessibility and Conditions of WASH
Facilities in Basic Schools in Ho Municipality” submitted towards partial fulfillment
of requirements for the award of HIGHER NATIONAL DIPLOMA is our work
original work and the dissertation has not been accepted for award of any other
degree, or any similar title to the best of our knowledge.

Signed……………………… Date…………………………

Djopo Michael Kwame

(0319040010)

Signed……………………... Date……………………….

Okechukwu Joseph

(0319042029)

Signed……………………. Date………………………….

Ing. Mrs.Patricia Asantewaa- Tannor

(SUPERVISOR)

Signed……………………… Date………………………..

Ing. Dr. Albert Aidoo Isaac

(HEAD OF DEPARTMENT)

i
 ACKNOWLEDMENT
We want to offer this endeavor to our GOD Almighty for the wisdom he has bestowed
upon us, the strength, peace of mind and good health in order to finish this research.

We also express our sincere gratitude to Ing. Dr. Isaac Albert Aidoo and the entire
lecturers of the Civil Engineering Department, we acknowledge their love and
encouragement.

We would like to express our special gratitude and thanks to our supervisor, Ing. Mrs.
Patricia Asantewaa-Tannor for imparting her knowledge and expertise in this study.

We thank all those who in diverse ways assisted us greatly for the success and
eventual completion of this work most especially Bruce Julien Dagogo.

ii
 DEDICATION

First and foremost, we dedicate this report to the Almighty God who has been there
right from the beginning to this very point. Special dedication also to our ever
supportive parents, for their relentless support.

We would like to dedicate this work to all the Civil Engineering final year students of
Ho Technical University.

To God be the glory.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENT

DECLARATION.............................................................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDMENT...................................................................................................ii
DEDICATION...............................................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENT................................................................................................iii
LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURE.........................................................................................................vi
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................vii
CHAPTER ONE.............................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1
1.1 Background of the Study..........................................................................................1
1.2 Problem Statement....................................................................................................2
1.3 Main aim of the Study..............................................................................................2
1.3.1 Specific Objectives................................................................................................2
1.4 Organisation of Study...............................................................................................3
CHAPTER TWO............................................................................................................4
LITERATURE REVIEW...............................................................................................4
2.1 Overview of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene............................................................4
2.3 WASH and pupils’ performance..............................................................................6
2.4 Challenges of access to wash in schools..................................................................8
2.5 Types of WASH facilities.........................................................................................8
2.5.1 Toilet facilities.......................................................................................................8
2.5.2 Hygiene facilities.................................................................................................10
2.5.3 Water storage facilities........................................................................................11
CHAPTER THREE......................................................................................................12
METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................12
3.1 Introduction............................................................................................................12
3.2 Profile and Location of Study Area........................................................................12
3.3 Study Population.....................................................................................................13
3.4 Sample Size Determination....................................................................................13
3.5 Sources of Data.......................................................................................................14
3.6 Data Collection.......................................................................................................14
3.7 Data Analysis..........................................................................................................15

iv
3.8 Research Ethical Consideration..............................................................................15
CHAPTER FOUR........................................................................................................15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS................................................................................15
4.1 Introduction............................................................................................................15
4.2 Demographic Information......................................................................................16
4.3 Availability of toilet facility...................................................................................18
4.4 Accessibility of the toilet facility............................................................................19
4.5 Functionality of toilet facility and hygiene practices.............................................20
4.6 Sources of water in the basic schools.....................................................................21
CHAPTER FIVE..........................................................................................................23
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................23
5.1 Conclusion..............................................................................................................23
5.2 Recommendations..................................................................................................23
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................24
APPENDIX 1...............................................................................................................27
APPENDIX 2...............................................................................................................32

v
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1: Gender of Respondents…………………………....……..…….17

Table 4.2: Age of Respondents……………………………….………...….18

Table 4.3: Level of Education……………………………….……………..19

Table 4.4: Number of Years in School…………………………………….19

vi
 LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 2.1: Pit Latrine………………………………………………………………………9

Figure 2.2: KVIP Toilet…………………………………………………………………….9

Figure 2.3: Flush Toilet……………………………………………………………………10

Figure 2.4: Veronica Bucket……………………………………………………………….10

Figure 3.1: Map of Ho Municipality…………………………………………….….12

Figure 4.1 Teachers and Pupils………………………………………………….......18

Figure 4.2: Availability of WASH Facilities in schools ……….…………………...18

Figure 4.3: Accessibility of WASH Facilities….…………………………………...20

Figure 4.4: Functionality of WASH Facilities ……………….………………….…21

Figure 4.5: Sources of Water Basic Schools……………………………………......22

vii
 ABSTRACT

WASH in schools has become a major concern to the global world. Many schools in
low income countries lack access to WASH facilities. This study sought to assess the
functionality, accessibility and conditions of WASH facilities in basic schools in Ho
municipality. Primary data was collected through questionnaires and direct
observation. 150 questionnaires were administered to 37 schools in the Ho
municipality representing the total number of basic schools in the municipality (110
basic schools) of which we had 137 responses. The result indicate that 31 schools had
toilet facilities and 6 schools had no toilet facilities. The study further revealed that the
state and condition of WASH facilities in some of the basic schools in Ho
municipality were not functional, 9.5% lack privacy, 12.4% were bad and smelly and
30.7% lack maintenance and repair. The result also showed that there is hygiene
facility (66.5%) but no evidence of soap and handwashing facility (veronica bucket)
was empty as at the time of the survey. The result indicates that there are five main
sources of water supply in the basic schools, namely-: piped water, rainwater, well,
borehole and underground water. The study concludes that almost all the basic schools
had access to toilets and handwashing facilities. However, these facilities lack
maintenance and repairs. Government in collaboration with GES should make
provisions for repairs and maintenance, build and provide WASH facilities in basic
schools that do not have access, to prevent open defecation, and also, intensify
education on WASH to ensure usage of the facilities.

viii
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

According to the World Health Organization sanitation refers to the provision of
facilities and services for the safe management of human excreta from the toilet to
containment and storage and treatment onsite or conveyance, treatment and
eventual safe end use or disposal.
Good health and environmental sanitation in schools could only be achieved if
schools have adequate toilet facilities and drinkable water.
Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) are beneficial component of public health.
Children have a right to basic facilities such as school toilets, safe drinking water,
clean surroundings and basic information on hygiene (Osher, Kelly, Tolani-
Brown, Shors&Chen,2009, UNICEF, 2013)
The important of hygiene conditions of sanitation in the development of any
nation cannot be overemphasized. In spite of the important of good sanitation and
hygiene in improving the health status of the people, sanitation services delivery in
the country has not been given the needed attention it deserves (USAID, 2008,
Dujister, 2017). As a result of this a lot of children suffer from sanitation related
diseases due to poor water, sanitation and hygiene practices.
Providing schools with safe drinking water, improved sanitation facilities and
hygiene education, by and large would encourage children to develop healthy
behavior for life (UNICEF,2012). Ensuring hygienic condition of sanitation in
basic schools can generate towards the accomplishing of the sustainable
development goal 3 (SDG 3), which aims at ensuring healthy life and promote
well- being for all at all ages.
Access to basic sanitation is considered a fundamental human right by United
Nation General Assembly Resolution 64/292(UNGA,2010; JMP,2014). This right
has been highlighted in the sustainable development goal (SDG 6 target 2) which
state that by 2030, all nations should eliminate open defecation through provision
of basic sanitations facilities to all.
According to WHO and UNICEF, JMP (2017), Ghana ranked 7 th worst in the
world for access to improved basic sanitation with only 14% of its population
having access to basic sanitation. Recent report by Education Management

1
 Information System (EMIS, 2017) in Ghana revealed that about 21,438 out of the
74,000 public basic schools in the country lack toilet facilities suggesting that over
two million Ghanaian children in those schools alone are compelled to resort to
open defecation mostly within the immediate surrounding of their schools.
The absence of WASH facilities in basic schools leads to diseases such as diarrhea
and cholera mostly among the children, Inadequate sanitation facilities in schools
has limits school attendance, and negatively affect pupils’ ability to concentrate
and learn. The main aim of this study is to assess the functionality, accessibility
and hygienic conditions of WASH facilities in basic schools in Ho Municipality.

1.2 Problem Statement

WASH in schools has become a major concern to the global world. Meanwhile, to
basic sanitation. About 943 million people defecate in the open and the case is not
different from Ghana. Traces of open defecation is found in all the 16 regions of
which Volta region is placed 5 th. In a region where open defecation is rampant, one
may ask do the children in basic schools have access to basic sanitation and hygiene
facilities? If they have, are they functional and accessible to all? Also, there is always
rationing of water within the municipality such that some part can be without water for
weeks. In this era of Covid- 19 where water is needed for frequent handwashing, what
is the water situation in basic schools within the municipality. This study sought to
find answers to these questions.

1.3 Main aim of the Study

The main aim of this study is to assess the functionality, accessibility and conditions
of WASH facilities in basic schools in the Ho Municipality.

1.3.1 Specific Objectives

The study specifically seeks to;

1. To identify the types of water, sanitation and hygiene facilities use in the
various basic schools.
2. To assess the functionality, accessibility and utilization of WASH facilities
within basic schools in Ho municipality.
3. To examine problems associated to WASH within the basic schools in Ho
municipality.

2
1.4 Organisation of Study
This study is organized into chapters. The chapter one highlighted on the background
of study, the research problem statement, the objectives of the study. The chapter two
provides the literature review of the study. This chapter dealt with the overview of
WASH, importance of WASH facilities, WASH and pupils performance, types of
WASH facilities and challenges of WASH in schools. Chapter three explained the
methodological approach used for the study. Chapter four focused on the results and
discussions of the study. It includes mainly the analysis and thorough discussion of
data collected from the respondents. Finally, chapter five dealt with the conclusion and
recommendations.

3
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Overview of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

Safe and adequate water supply and sanitation in schools are pre-requisites for the
right to basic education for school children (Mooijman, 2012). The provision of
adequate water, sanitation and hygiene(WASH) facilities in schools has been linked to
the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on universal primary
education, gender equality and child mortality, and more recently to the achievement
of the Sustainable Development Goals, and in particular Goal 6 on clean water and
sanitation by 2030(UN General Assembly, 2015). The availability, accessibility and
usage of WASH facilities are associated with the lower levels of morbidity, mortality
and expenditure on treatment of WASH related diseases, particularly, among children
under five years of age (Joshi & Amadi, 2013). Ensuring access to water and
sanitation services in schools promote the retention of children in school (UNICEF,
2013). In Ghana, reliable data on the types, conditions and functionality of WASH
facilities in schools are scarce (GES, 2014a). As much as the benefits of WASH in
schools are countless for the child, failure to provide WASH services, poor state of
WASH facilities, water scarcity, inferior water quality and inappropriate hygiene
behavior contribute significantly to the current rises in child morbidity and mortality
especially, those under five years (UNICEF, 2012; Brown, Cairncross & Ensink,
2013). It is further established that the lack of appropriate water facilities,
handwashing and hygiene practices often lead to diarrhea, worm infestations and
dehydration, which are associated with growth and cognitive impairment (Joshi &
Amadi, 2013). The school WASH facilities include sanitation facility (toilets); water
facilities (water source and storage containers) and hygiene facilities (handwashing).
To reduce the incidence of WASH related diseases among pupils, school must be
child-friendly and ensure an adequate number of WASH facilities are accessible to
school children of all ages including children with disabilities.

4
2.2 Importance of WASH in basic schools

Access to clean water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) is essential for children in
schools, particularly for girls as well as children with disabilities. WASH (Water,
Sanitation, and Hygiene) in Schools is part of UNICEF's Child-Friendly, Equitable,
and Quality Basic Education program. WASH in Schools enhances access to and
maintenance of clean, gender-friendly, and inclusive sanitation facilities, as well as
promoting hygienic behaviors and lifelong good health. The presence of WASH
services creates an environment for effective hygiene practices which creates the right
atmosphere for increased access to quality education and supports national and local
interventions to establish equitable, sustainable access to safe water and basic
sanitation services in schools (Temu, 2015). An evaluation by UNICEF found that in
schools in low-income countries, only 51% of schools had access to adequate water
sources and only 45% had adequate sanitation.
Globally, school-based WASH interventions variously aim to: (i) reduce the incidence
of diarrhea and other hygiene related diseases; (ii) improve school enrolment, school
performance, and attendance. WASH in schools has been one of the priorities in
international development. When the Focusing Resources on Effective School Health
(FRESH) approach, which is an interagency initiative by the World Health
Organization (WHO), United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), United Nations
Educational, Scientific, Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the World Bank, was
first launched in 2000, provision of safe water and sanitation at schools was one of its
four original components. It was considered “the essential first steps towards a healthy
physical, learning environment. WASH in schools is also included in the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) target 4.a, as a component of a “safe, non-violent,
inclusive, and effective learning environment,” and targets 6.1 and 6.2 as part of
“universal” WASH access (UNICEF & WHO, 2020).
To achieve the general school WASH objectives, a school with adequate WASH
should have a functional and reliable water system that provides sufficient water for
all school needs especially hand washing. The school must also have a sufficient
number of toilet facilities for pupils and teachers that are private, safe, and clean.
Facilities should cater for small children, and children with disabilities.

5
2.3 WASH and pupils’ performance
The lack of sanitation and hygiene facilities in the basics schools has a stronger
negative impact on girls than boys. Girls need safe, clean, separate and private
sanitation facilities in their schools. Creating these conditions in schools have a
stimulating effect on the pupil’s life. The major negative consequences of this is that
children who attend schools without toilet use that as an excuse to go home without
coming back. The girls also absent themselves from school during their menstrual
period; so, every month female students miss classes for at least a week and this
affects their performance.

In the school system, the major barriers identified to be preventing toilet use among
school children include poor maintenance of school toilets, smelly and dirty latrines
(Vernom, 2003), lack of adequate toilet facilities, higher pupil’s toilet ratio or
overcrowding (Lundblad, 2005) and lack of privacy in toilets. These factors play a
significant role especially on the younger children, they felt uncomfortable and unsafe
in using the school toilets in such unappealing conditions. According to UNICEF, it
was revealed that there was 11% increase in girls’ enrolment mainly due to provision
of sanitary latrines.

Sanitation is a crucial driver of public health. The availability, accessibility and usage
of sanitation facilities are associated with lower levels of morbidity, mortality and
expenditure on the treatment of WASH related diseases, particularly among children
under five years of age (Joshi & Amadi, 2013). Providing schools with improved
sanitation facilities by and large, would encourage children to develop healthy
behavior for life (UNICEF, 2012). These findings have brought in an interesting
perspective in the provision of sanitation facilities in schools i.e., the facilities should
be located in safe, secure and friendly environment as this is important so that the
pupils are feeling safe and psychologically at peace enough to concentrate in their
studies; this may contribute to reduced absenteeism and thus better performance.

Access to safe drinking water is essential to health, a basic human right and a
component of effective policy for health protection for both the school and
community. The literature indicate that it is very important to provide safe water to
pupils as way of reducing sanitation related diseases and hence improved health,
retention, performance and transition of all learners. However, the provision of safe
water to schools is still a gap in rural schools (Montgomery, 2012). The provision of
clean water remains a serious problem, especially in developing countries. Globally,
6
2.1 billion people (11% of the world population) lack safe water at the premises
(WHO&UNICEF, 2017). A large and growing body of literature has reported on the
association between clean water provision and diarrhea morbidity and mortality
(Wolf, 2014; Komarulzaman , 2017) as well as the impact of water and sanitation
improvement on school attendance (Dreibelbis, 2013; Nauges & Strand, 2013; Hunter,
2014).

Diarrhea which rarely leads to deaths in developed world countries is a leading cause
of death among children under age five leading to 1.5 million deaths a year in the
developing world countries (UNICEF/WHO, 2013). Practicing appropriate
handwashing with optimum frequency is a fundamental skill for leading a healthy life.
According to Al-Bashtawy in 2015, many students in developing countries have
shown a lack of handwashing skills. With regards to this it has led to a progressive
increase in risks associated with a wide range of diseases directly correlated with
handwashing, for example, contagious diseases, cholera, meningitis (Lee, 2015).
Children diarrhea was found to be significantly correlated with handwashing without
soap (Soboksa, 2020). Generally, contaminated hands can be a source of infectious
diseases, and this happens after using the toilet facilities and dealing with garbage
(Majorin, 2014). Schools are one of the most important places for promoting health
education and programs (Sarkar, 2013). Unfortunately, handwashing after visiting the
restroom is ill-practiced in many schools, notwithstanding its significant effect on
human health (Freeman, 2014).

Fundamental rights concerning access to water, sanitation, and hygiene education are
not affordable to a lot of children around the world. As a result of inadequate WASH,
the transmission of disease proliferates causing high morbidity and mortality rates.
Schools are in a critical position to promote health and hygiene for their students.
Children in the school are at risk for the broaden of infectious disease (Besha, 2016).
From 1990 to 2012, WHO revealed that mortality rate in children under the 5 years of
age has decrease by 47%, from an expected rate of 90 deaths per 1000 live births.
Every day, 17000 children were dying in 2012 than in 1990 (WHO &UNICEF, 2015).
Health education about hand washing is efficient to enhance the awareness and skills
of primary school children about appropriate performance of hand washing in rural
primary school.

A major problem of health issues in most of the basic schools in Ghana is unhygienic
environment particularly lack of hand washing that leads thorough health hazard.
7
Children at the school level have no knowledge and importance of hand washing. It is
essential to imposes importance of proper health teaching intervention through
appropriate structure to the country (Biran, 2014).

2.4 Challenges of access to WASH in schools

Safe water and sanitation, which empower appropriate hygiene, are essential
determinants of well- being, quality of life, and human morbidity (Maes, 2019).
Thereby, the lack of reliable access to a secure and sustainable WASH infrastructure
combined with the behavior of hygiene remains a significant health problem (Wolf,
2014). Besides, in 2015, the global community set a measurable target in the form of
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3, which aimed to ensure healthier lives and
encouraging well- being at all ages to achieve sustainable growth. Additionally, SDG
4 seeks to improve the proportion of education facilities with access to an appropriate
learning environment, including essential drinking water, sanitation, and hygiene
(Johnson, 2016). Moreover, SDG 6 points out the value of cohesive WASH systems
as a whole (Tussupova, 2016). it seeks to ensure complete coverage and sustainable
water and sanitation management by 2030.

Provision of appropriate and adequate WASH to basic schools has been faced with
many challenges in Ghana. This situation has resulted in pupil’s engaging in open
defecation though they have toilet facilities. Some communities also have no toilet
facilities and therefore share toilet with the schools and this also has led to undue
pressure on the existing toilet facilities in the basic schools. This situation compelled
some of the pupils to resort to open defecation practices in catchment areas of their
schools. Inadequacies in water and sanitation in the school environment impact
children’s health and school (Jasper, 2012). After all, pupils spend a long time at
school, hence, schools have a valuable and vital role in shaping children’s health
knowledge, attitudes, behaviors and health outcomes. Therefore, one of a school’s
primary functions is providing educational functions and providing children with life
skills and capacities that promote their well- being (Huang, 2013). Thus, the lack of
data on WASH coverage in schools is an obstacle in protecting children’s rights.

2.5 Types of WASH facilities

WASH facilities refers to an infrastructure that supports water, sanitation, hygiene

practices which help to prevent the spread of diseases. The WASH facilities includes
toilet facilities, hygiene facilities and water storage facilities.

8
2.5.1 Toilet facilities

Toilet facility is one of the most fundamental human needs. Wide-ranging effects on
physical and psychological health can result from inadequate facilities, limited access,
and inadequate understanding. Its users will suffer if there aren't enough clean,
pleasant restrooms available. Examples of toilet facilities:

Pit latrine: A pit latrine, also known as pit toilet, is a type of toilet that collects human
feces in a hole in the ground. Urine and feces enter the pit through a drop hole in the
floor, which might be connected to a toilet seat or squatting pan for user comfort. A pit
latrine generally consists of three major parts: a hole in the ground, a concrete slab or
floor with a small hole, and a shelter. The shelter is also called an outhouse. The pit is
typically at least three meters (10 ft) deep and one meter (3 ft) across. The hole in the
slab should not be larger than 25 cm (10 in) to prevent children falling in.

Figure 2.1: Pit Latrine

KVIP toilet: According to Thrift (2007), the Kumasi Ventilated Improved Pit Latrine
(KVIP) was developed by Albert Wright at the Kumasi University of Science and
Technology (now the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology) in the
early 1970s. The KVIP is a twin-pit VIP latrine which allows the contents of one pit to
compost while the other pit is in use.

9
 Figure 2.2: KVIP Toilet

Flush toilet: A flush toilet (also known as a flushing toilet, water closet (WC) is a
toilet that disposes of human waste (principally urine and feces) by using the force of
water to flush it through a drainpipe to another location for treatment, either nearby or
at a communal facility, thus maintaining a separation between humans and their waste.
Flush toilets can be designed for sitting or for squatting.

Figure 2.3: Flush toilet (Water closet)

2.5.2 Hygiene facilities

Hygiene Facility means a structure or part of a structure that contains toilet, shower,
hand wash station, and dressing capabilities serving bathers and patrons at an aquatic
facility.

10
 Figure 2.4: Veronica Bucket

2.5.3 Water storage facilities

Water storage is a broad term referring to storage of both potable water for
consumption, and non-potable water for use in agriculture. In both developing
countries and some developed countries found in tropical climates, there is a need to
store potable drinking water during the dry season( refer to Appendix).

11
 CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction
This section of the study examined the approaches that were used in the conduct of
the study. This section is made up of study area, research population and sample size,
sources of data, data collection, data analysis. The section also touched on the research
ethical considerations that were observed during data collection and analysis.

3.2 Profile and Location of Study Area

The Ho Municipal is one of the 261 Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies
(MMDAs) in Ghana, and forms part of the 18 of Municipalities and Districts in the
Volta Region. The Municipality lies between the latitudes 6 207N and 6 55 N and
longitude 0 127 E and 0 53 E. Ho is the capital city of the Ho Municipal District and
the Volta Region of Ghana. The city lies between Mount Adaklu and Mount
Galenukui or Togo Atakora Range, and is home to the Volta Regional Museum, a
cathedral, and a prison. The Municipality shares boundaries with the republic of Togo
to the east, to the west with Ho West District, to the north with Hohoe Municipality
and to the south with Agotime- Ziope District. Its total land area is 2,361 square
kilometers

The traditional festival in Ho is the Asogli Yam Festival, which is celebrated around
September of every year.Ho has a lively and huge open market that attracts people
from all over the Volta Region and migrants from Togo. The people of Ho are well
known of farming. The population of the Municipality according to 2021 population
and housing census stands at 114,472 with 54,893 males and 59,579 females. There
are 110 basic schools within the municipality.

12
 Figure 3.1 Map of Ho Municipality

3.3 Study Population

The population for this study is made up of Pupils and Teachers in some selected basic
schools in the Ho Municipality serving as key primary respondents of the study. These
participants are persons who are directly involved in the use of WASH facilities in the
basic schools and therefore had the required knowledge and information on the subject
matter under investigation. The study population comprised 37 basic schools within
the Ho Municipality which is a representation of the basic schools within the
municipality.

3.4 Sample Size Determination

This study used the Cochran formula to determine the sample size. The sample size
was determined using 95% confidence interval and a desired level of precision set at
8%.

13
Where,

𝑛𝑜= the sample size

𝑍 = standard normal deviate which is 1.96 at 95% confidence interval

P= the proportion of the population estimated to be at risk

(0.5) Q =the proportion of the population not at risk (0.5)

e=desired level of precision set at 8% (0.08)

This implies that

𝑛𝑜 = 150

This study therefore used a sample size of one hundred and fifty (150). The number of
schools were determined using the sample size calculated of which the questionnaires
were administered to the various basic schools.

3.5 Sources of Data

Primary data was used in completing this research so as to improve the reliability of
the study. The primary data was used in this study to get an authentic and reliable
response from the people. The primary source of data is the responses the participants
gave concerning questions raised about WASH facilities. This was through the
administration of questionnaires, there were also direct observations of the state of
WASH facilities on the school compound.

3.6 Data Collection

The research instruments employed for the study includes questionnaires and direct
observations. Questionnaires were used in this study because they offer a fast, efficient
and inexpensive means of gathering large amounts of information and protect the
privacy of the respondents. Questionnaires were administered to the participant to get
their responses (refer to appendix 1). The questionnaires were used for both the Pupils
and Teachers since it reduces the amount of thinking that a respondent need to
undertake to complete the task and generally leads to higher response and more
accurate data. The data was collected using 10 working days. The observation was
14
done by taking a critical look at the types, state and conditions of WASH facilities in
the schools (Guide for the observation refer to appendix 2).

3.7 Data Analysis

Statistical Pack for Social Scientist (SPSS) was employed for coding, entering
processing of data gathered (refer to results in the appendices). The study employed
descriptive statistics in the analysis of data. Data analyzed were displayed in tables
and charts (see section).

3.8 Research Ethical Consideration

To maintain the ethical standard of the University, the researcher provided an
assurance of confidentiality to all respondents that participated in the research. This
was done by assuring all respondents that information provided for the study would be
used for academic purposes only.

15
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the main findings of the research. The results are presented using
tables and charts which summarize the responses from the respondents to whom the
questionnaires were administered to. The SPSS was used to analyze the data and was
drafted using MS- Excel.

4.2 Demographic Information

4.2.1 Gender of Respondents

Table 4.1 represents the total number of respondents sampled for the sampled
questionnaire constituting of 69 males with a percentage of 50.4% and the remaining
68 were also females with a percentage of 49.6%. This indicates a fair distribution of
response.

Table 4.1 Gender of Respondents

Frequency Percent
Female 68 49.6
Male 69 50.4
Total 137 100

4.2.2 Age of Respondents

Table 4.2 looks at the age category of the respondents where 24.8% of them falls
within the age bracket of 21-30 years with majority of 47.4% within the category of
11-20 years while the rest 4.4% and 0.7% falls within the age of 5-10 and 41 and
above respectively.

Table 4.2 Age of Respondents

Frequency Percent
5 -10 1 0.7
11 - 20 65 47.4
21 - 30 34 24.8
31 - 40 31 22.7
Above 41 6 4.4
Total 137 100

16
4.2.3 Level of Education
Table 4.3 represent the level of education of the respondents indicating that 5 (3.6%)
were in lower primary, upper primary were 61(44.5%), Junior high were 46(33.6%) all
the above were 25 (18.2%). All the above were teachers who teaches upper primary
and junior high.

Table 4.3 Level of Education

Frequency Percent
Lower Primary 5 3.6
Upper Primary 61 44.5
Junior High 46 33.6
All 25 18.2
Total 137 100

4.2.4 Number of Years in School

Table 4.4 below shows that some of the respondents have been in the school for some
number of years. The number of years spent in the schools show the respondents
potentially had enough say to be able to know adequately the state of WASH facilities
in the school and to be able to provide appropriate response.

Table 4.4 Number of Years in School

Frequency Percent

1 year 9 6.6
8 years 10 7.3
5 years 28 20.4
5 months 2 1.5
3 years 12 8.8
6 years 28 20.4
2 years 14 10.2
4 years 21 15.3
9 years 3 2.2

17
 49% 51%

Teachers
Pupil

Figure 4.1 Teachers and Pupils

4.3 Availability of toilet facility

figure 4.2, represents the number of schools with toilet facilities and schools without
toilet facilities. Per observation done critically, the type of toilet provided varied
between the private and the government schools and most of the non-water carriage
toilets (pit latrine and KVIP toilets) were those sited in the government schools. Some
of the respondents stated that they defecate in the bush due to the unavailability of
toilet facility in the school. Refer to chapter 2 for types of toilet facilities.

31

Schools with toilet facilities Schools without toilet facilities

Figure 4.2 Availability of toilet facility in schools

18
4.4 Accessibility of the toilet facility

4.4.1 Distance to toilet facility

The figure 4.3(appendix 1, section B) represent that 57(41.6%) of the respondents
disagree the toilet facility is far, 25(18.2%) agreed that the toilet facility is far,
24(17.5%) of the respondents were neutral that the toilet facility is far, 18(13.1%)
highly disagree that the toilet facility is far and 2(1.5%) highly agree that the toilet
facility is far. From our result the 41.6% of the respondents had easy access to the
toilet all the time because is very convenience for them which make things very easy
for them. 18.2 % of the respondents that agreed that the toilet was far find it very
difficult to use the toilet facility.

4.4.2 Availability of toilet facilities

The figure 4.3(appendix 1, section B) indicate that 32(23.4%) agreed that the squat
holes are enough with 25(18.2) disagreeing that the squat holes are not enough,
29(21.2%) were neutral, 13(9.5%) highly disagreed that the squat holes are enough.
Also 9(6.6%) highly agreed that the squat holes are enough. It was observed that the
squat holes are not enough in some of the schools. From our observations majority of
the schools had 10 squat holes for both males and females which according to some of
the respondents stated that they always queue every time they want to use the toilet.

4.4.3 Cubicle Convenience

The figure 4.3 below (appendix 1, section B) 37 (27%) of the respondents were neutral
that toilet facility cubicle is spacious whiles 36(26.3%) agreed that the cubicle is
spacious. Also 22(16.1%) disagreed that the cubicle is spacious whiles 11(8%) of the
respondents highly agreed that the cubicle is spacious, 2(1.5%) highly disagreed that
cubicle is spacious. From our observation it was observe that most of the facilities
within the schools are poorly designed with little consideration of the needs of boys
and girls of different ages which make it unfriendly for disabled pupils and kids.

4.4.4 Privacy
The figure below indicates 22.6% of the respondents enjoy their privacy when using
the toilet facility, 34.3% strongly agree that they enjoy their privacy when using the
toilet,

19
19% were neutral, this indicate that they sometimes enjoy privacy and sometimes
don’t enjoy privacy when using the toilet .8% disagree and 1.5% strongly disagree that
they enjoy privacy.

45.00%
40.00%
Response in %
35.00%
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Distance Squat holes Cubicle Privacy
convenience
Factors

Agree Highly Agree Disagree Highly Disagree Neutral

Figure 4.3 Accessibility of the toilet facility

4.5 Functionality of toilet facility and hygiene practices

4.5.1: Maintenance and repair of toilet facilities

Figure 4.4(appendix 1, section C) shows that 43(31.4%) of the respondents disagreed
that the toilet facilities lack maintenance and repairs, 38(27.7%) of the respondents
were neutral of whether the toilet facility lack maintenance and repairs, and also
22(16.1%) of the respondents highly agreed that the toilet facility lack maintenance,
20(14.6%) agreed and 10(7.3%) highly disagreed. Per observation the state of toilet
facilities in some of the schools was very smelly and bad which attract a lot of flies
and reptiles in the toilet. This implies that the toilet in schools lack maintenance and
repairs.

From the results (refer to appendix 1, section C) 53(38.7%) agree that there is regular
cleaning of the toilet facilities, whiles 33(24.1%) strongly agree. This is a clear
indication that the schools that have toilet facilities are maintaining it in terms of
cleanliness.

20
4.5.2 Availability of hand washing facility and practices
From the figure below (appendix 1, section C), 49(35.8%) agreed that there is water
and soap available for washing of hands after using the toilet,42(30.7%) highly agreed
that there is water and soap available for washing of hands after using the toilet,
23(16.8%) were neutral, 7(5.1%) disagreed that there is water and soap available for
washing of hands after using the toilet which clearly indicate they don’t practice
hygiene, few of the respondents state they use personal sanitizers. The hand washing
facilities in some of the schools was the veronica bucket. Our observation reveals that
some of the schools had washing bowl with water of which they use in washing their
hands after using the toilet.

45.00%
40.00%
35.00%
30.00%
Response in %

25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Agree Highly Agree Disagree Highly Neutral
Disagree

Factors

Maintenance Regular cleaning Handwashing

Figure 4.4 Functionality of toilet facilities

4.6 Sources of water in the basic schools

The study further revealed that there were five main sources of water for schools in the
Ho municipality, namely: piped water, mechanized boreholes, rainwater, well and
underground water. 51(37.2%) uses piped water supply which according to them is
very appropriate,40(29.2%) gets their main source of water from piped water supply
and rainwater which they gave reason that the piped water supply does not flow
always, 21(15.3%) uses piped water and borehole, 14(10.2%) get their main source of
water from rainwater which according to them was a great challenge when they face
dry season, 9(6.6%) get water from well, rainwater and piped water supply and
2(1.5%) get water from piped water supply and underground water.
21
40.00%

35.00%

30.00%

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%
Piped water Rainwater Piped and Piped and Piped and Piped,Well and
Underground Borehole Rainwater Rainwater
water

Figure 4.5 Sources of water in the basic schools

22
 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusion
The study concludes that the types of WASH facilities in some of the basic
schools in Ho municipality were broken down and were not functioning such that
some cubicle, toilets bowls, seats as well as squat holes are broken down. The
toilet facilities used are water closet, KVIP with a few pit latrines mostly found in
Government schools. Most of the schools within the municipality lack
accessibility and utilization of WASH facilities due to the bad state of the
facilities. Almost all the basic schools have hand washing facilities and there were
no evidence of soap and water. The source of water supply in the basic schools
does not flow frequently and those that depend on rainwater always face challenge
in the dry season.

5.2 Recommendations
 Government in collaboration with GES should make provisions for repairs
and maintenance, build and provide WASH facilities in basic schools.
 Government should intensify education on WASH to ensure usage of the
facilities.

23
 REFERENCES

Al Bashawy, M. (2015). Personal hygiene in school children aged 6–12 years in

Jordan. British Journal of School Nursing, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 395–398, 2015.

Binka, E., Vermund, S. H. & Armah, G. E. (2011). Rotavirus as a cause of diarrhea

among children under 5 years of age in urban Ghana: prevalence and

serotypes/genotypes. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal 30 (8).

Besha, B., Guche ,H.,Chare D.,Amare, A., Kassahun, A. (2016). Assessment of

Hand Washing Practice and its Associated Factors among First Cycle Primary

School Children in Arba Minch Town, Ethiopia: Epidemiology (Sunnyvale)

6:247. Doi: 10.4172/2161-1165.1000247

Brown, J., Cairncross, S., & Ensink, J. H. (2013). Water, sanitation, hygiene

and enteric infections in children. Archives of disease in childhood 98(8):

629-634.

Biran, A., Schmidt, W. P., Varadharajan, K. S., Rajaraman, D., Kumar, R.,

Greenland, K. & Curtis, V. (2014). Effect of a behaviour-change intervention

on handwashing with soap in India: a cluster-randomised trial.

Bekturganov, Z., Tussupova, K., Berndtsson, R.., Sharapatova, N., Aryngazin, K.,

Zhanasova, M. (2016). Water related health problems in Central Asia.

Dreibelbis R., Winch PJ., Leontsini E., Hulland KR., Ram PK., Unicomb L., et al.

(2013). The Integrated Behavioral Model for Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene:

a systematic review of behavioural models and a framework for designing and

evaluating behaviour change interventions in infrastructure-restricted settings

Freeman, M. C., Stocks, M. E., & Cumming, O. (2014). Hygiene and health:

systematic review of hand-washing practices worldwide and update of health

24
 effects. Tropical Medicine & International Health, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 906–916,

2014.

GES. (2014a). Ghana Education Service - WASH in Schools Facilities

Planning and Management Guide. Accra: GES.

Huang, K.Y., Cheng, S., Theise, R. (2013). School contexts as social determinants of

child health: Current practices and implications for future public health

practice. Public Health Rep. 2013, 128, 21–28.

Hunter, P. R., Risebro, H., Yen, M., Lefebvre, H., Lo, C., Hartemann, P., Longuet,

C. & Jaquenoud, F. (2014). Impact of the provision of safe drinking water on

school absence rates in Cambodia: a quasi-experimental study.

Komarulzaman, A., Smits, J. & de Jong, E. (2017). Clean water, sanitation and

Diarrhoea in Indonesia: effects of household and community factors. Global

Public Health 12, 1141–1155.

Joshi, A. & Amadi, C. (2013). Impact of water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions

on improving health outcomes among school children. Journal of

environmental and Public Health, 2013.

Johnston, R. (2016). Arsenic and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: In

Arsenic Research and Global Sustainability.

Jasper, C., Le, T.T. & Bartram, J. (2012). Water and sanitation in schools: A

systematic review of the health and educational outcomes. Int. J. Environ. Res.

Public Health 2012, 9, 2772–2787.

Lundblad, B. (2005). Perceptions of school toilets as a cause for irregular toilet

habits among schoolchildren aged 6 to 16 years. J Sch Health. 75 (4), 125-

128.
Lee, M. S., Hong, S. J., &. Kim, Y. T. (2015). Hand-washing with soap and national

hand-washing projects in Korea: focus on the national hand-washing survey.

25
 Epidemiology and Health, vol. 37, Article ID e2015039, 2015.

Majorin, F., Freeman, M. C., Barnard, S., Routray, P., Boisson, S., & Clasen, T.

(2014). Child feces disposal practices in rural Orissa: a cross sectional study.

Mooijman,A. (2012).Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in Schools: A

Companion to the Child Friendly Schools Manual. UNICEF

Maes, P. Van den Bergh, R.,Van den Noortgate, J. (2019). Water, sanitation, and

hygiene: In Oxford Handbook of Humanitarian Medicine.

Nauges, C. & Strand, J. (2013). Water Hauling and Girls’ School

Attendance: Some New Evidence from Ghana, Policy Research Working Paper (No.

6443), The World Bank.

Osher, D., Kelly, D. L., Tolani-Brown, N., Shors, L., & Chen, C. S. (2009).

UNICEF child friendly schools programming: Global evaluation final report.

Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

Soboksa, N. E., Gari, S. R., Hailu, A. B., & Alemu, B. M. (2020). Association

between microbial water quality, sanitation and hygiene practices and

childhood diarrhea in Kersa and Omo Nada districts of Jimma Zone, Ethiopia.

Sarkar, M. (2013). Personal hygiene among primary school children living in a slum

of Kolkata, India, Journal of Preventive Medicine and Hygiene, vol. 54, no. 3,

pp. 153–158, 2013.

Temu, C. E. (2015). Assessment of water sanitation and hygiene practices among school

children in Sengerema District council. Mzumbe University.

UNICEF. (2013). Child friendly schools.

UNICEF. (2012). Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) in schools: A companion

to the child friendly schools’ manual. UNICEF.

United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (2010). General Assembly Resolution.

26
 United Nations General Assembly. (2015). Transforming Our World: the 2030

Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations, New York.

Vernon, S., Lundblad, B., & Hellstrom, A. (2003). Children’s Experiences of School

Toilets Vietnam. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Wolf, J., Prüss-Ustün, A., Cumming, O., Bartram, J., Bonjour, S., Cairncross, S.,

Clasen, T., Colford, J.M., Jr. Curtis, V., & De France, J. (2014). Systematic

review: Assessing the impact of drinking water and sanitation on diarrhoeal

disease in low- and middle-income settings: Systematic review and

metaregression. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2014, 19, 928–942.

APPENDIX 1

A. BACKGROUND

1. Name of School……………………………………………………

27
2. Population of school……………………………………………
3. Type of school
Private [ ]
Government [ ]
4. Level of education Lower primary [ ]
Upper Primary [ ]
Junior High [ ]
5. Gender
Female [ ] Male [ ]
6. Tutor [ ] Pupil [ ]
7. Age 5-10 [ ] 11-20 [ ] 21-30 [ ] 31-40 [ ] Above 41 [ ]

8. How long have you been in the school? …………………….

9. Do you have a toilet facility in the school?
Yes [ ] No [ ]
10. If no, why?

There is no toilet facility in the school [ ]

The toilet facility is not functional [ ]

Other ……………………….

11. If there is no toilet facility, where have you been defecating?

In the bush [ ]
In the house [ ]
Do not defecate [ ]
Any other ………..

B. Assessing the Accessibility of the Toilet Facility

28
 Highly Agree Neutral Disagree Highly
agree disagree

1. Distance to toilet facility

is far

2. Distance to toilet facility

is within reach

3. Squat holes are enough

4. Cubicle is spacious
5. Cubicle for kids is
enough

6. Queue every time I want

to use the toilet

7. I enjoy my privacy when

using the facility

8. Toilet facility is user

friendly to pupils in
kindergarten

9. Toilet facility is user

friendly to teachers and
pupils with disability

10. The toilet facility is

modern

11. There is too much odor

12. There are too many
flies
13. There are too many
rodents and reptiles

14. I am not safe when

using the toilet facility

15. They always kill a

snake on the toilet

29
SECTION C: Assessing the Factors enhancing Functionality and Hygienic
practices

Highly Agree Neutral Disagree Highly

agree disagree

1. Toilet facility lack

maintenance and repairs

2. No money for repairs and

maintenance

3. Government should pay for

maintenance and repairs

4. Parents should be made to

pay maintenance

5. The toilet facility is properly

maintained

6. Maintenance and repairs are

done by PTA

7. There is a regular cleaning

of the toilet

8. There is water and soap

available for washing of
hands after using the toilet

9. There are always toiletries

for anal cleansing

10. Anal cleansing materials

are disposed off regularly

11. There is no water on the

school premises

12. Lack of money to buy soap

13. Toilet facility has broken

down

30
 14. Toilet facility got full and
was never repaired

15. Toilet facility is a disease

prone facility

SECTION D: Water supply

1. What is the main the source of water in the school? (Please you can tick more
than 1)

Piped water supply [ ]

Well [ ]

Rainwater [ ]

Surface water [ ]

No water source [ ]

Spring [ ]

Any other ……………………….

2. Is the source of water wholesome for drinking?

Yes [ ] No[ ]

3. If No, what do you do to the water before using it?

Treat it [ ] Add chlorine [ ]

4. Do you have regular water supply throughout the year?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

5. If No, what alternative source of water do you use?

……………………………………………………………………………

6. Do you store water?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

7. How do you store it?

31
 Storage tank [ ]

Gallons [ ] pot

[ ]

Other (specify) ………………………….. 8.

How often do you clean the water storage container?

Daily [ ]

Weekly [ ]

Monthly [ ]

Yearly [ ]

Other ……………………….

9. Do you experience any challenges with the maintenance of the water source?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

10. What type of challenge?

There are no available parts [ ]

There are no technical experts [ ]

The charges of repair is expensive [ ]

11. Does the water have any color?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

12. Does the water source smell?

Yes [ ] No [ ]
APPENDIX 2
OBSERVATION (CHECK LIST)

Water supply
1. Is the drinking water source
protected?

32
2. Is there a tap?

3. If there is a tap, does water flow

out of the tap?

4. Is the drinking water storage

container covered?

5. Does the drinking water storage

container look clean?

Toilet facility
6. What type of toilet facilities exist on
the school premises?

7. Is the toilet facility convenience?

8. Is the toilet having privacy and

security?

9. Is there any evidence of flies in the

toilet?

10. Is the toilet facility having a

ventilation?

33
11. Is there a water storage container
in the latrine for flushing?

12. Is there any visible used anal

cleansing material on the floor?

13. Is the latrine pan broken?

Hygiene Practice
14. Is there a place to wash hands

15. Is there a soap, detergent or

other cleaning materials?

16. What type of handwashing

facility exist?

17. Is the handwashing facility

clean?

34
Storage tank

35