Transcript Urban Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) Case Study Kalyani Municipality

Urban Community Led Total
Sanitation (CLTS)
Case Study
Kalyani Municipality
Kolkata (India)
By
Dr. Shibani Goswami
&
Dr. Kasturi Bakshi
Kolkata Metropolis





10th most populous Metropolis in the
world (12.4 million)
Highest population density in India
Comprises of 3 Municipal Corporations
with population of 5.8 million & 38
Municipalities with population of 6.6
million
Has 55.1% of the urban population of the
state of West Bengal
33% of this urban population live in
slums
KMA Slums

Total no. of slums 9000

Total population of slums 4.1 million

Deplorable environmental conditions

Poor sanitation is a major health hazard

DFID is funding for slum improvement
since 1991-92.
Kolkata Urban Services
for the Poor (KUSP)




KUSP is funded by DFID since 2003-04
Total budget is Rs. 714.77 million( US$
17.7 million)
30.9% of total budget is for infrastructure
improvement, with highest priority for
household toilet construction
Cost of each H/H toilet is Rs.9900/- (US$
236) provided free of cost to the slum
dwellers
Urban Community Led Total
Sanitation ?
CLTS programme has been successful
in rural areas of Maharashtra,
Himachal Pradesh & Haryana in India
 Concept of urban CLTS was conceived
in late 2005 under KUSP

Background of CLTS Pilot



Lack of community participation in
accessing primary & public health care
services amongst the urban slum
communities observed
Traditionally community depends on
services delivered by Municipal Health
Care system as passive recipient
CLTS was the entry point to community
Led Health Initiatives
Objectives Of CLTS Pilot



Initiation of community driven health
and sanitation improvement
Empowerment of local communities
Test out the model and approach of
“Self Mobilisation” of urban slum
community through facilitation (shift
from the present mode of community
“participation for material incentives/
subsidy” to more “interactive
participation”)
Why Kalyani Municipality?



Kalyani Municipality liked the idea of
CLTS and offered to participate
The Chairman of Kalyani Municipality
showed political will to make Kalyani an
Open Defecation Free (ODF) City
The chief health officer of Kalyani
Municipality showed keen interest in CLTS
approach and coordinated and facilitated
the implementation of the entire
programme
Background of Kalyani
Municipality & Slums
One of the Municipalities out of 38 with
population of 0.1 million
 Total 52 Slums in Kalyani Municipality
having 10947 families
 Many of the slums are existing for the last
40-50 years
 Most of the slum residents are migrants from
neighboring states and refugees from
Bangladesh
 Livelihood is mostly daily wage laborer,
vendors, hawkers, maid servants etc.

What has been done over the past ten
years, to improve sanitation profile of
slum families before CLTS?





MDP sector built 700 toilets costing Rs. 5,000/- each
Refugee Rehabilitation Department built 3300
toilets costing about Rs. 8,500 each
KUSP built 365 toilets costing Rs. 9,900/- each
during year 2006-07
More than 35 million Rupees (about US$ one
million) spent for construction of H/H toilets for
free
Rampant open defecation was practised even by
those who had own toilets
Experience with Subsidized
Toilets






Low usage
Facilities used for other purposes than the
purpose for which it was built
Poor maintenance
Lack of ownership
Subsidy cannot cover 100% population of all
slums
Total dependence on external subsidy
Process of CLTS Pilot in Kalyani
Sensitised and exposed the stakeholders like:
Elected Municipal Councillors and all
departmental heads of the
municipality
 Local NGOs and CBOs
 Health Workers
 Community people including local
community leaders

Sensitisation of Councillors &
Dept. Heads of Municipality
It was made clear that




Increasing the number of toilets only was
not the goal
Goal was to create ODF environment
It was behavioral change, and not the model
of toilet which was important to achieve this
goal.
Community Led Total Sanitation is the
approach which totally eliminates open
defecation.
Sensitization of Local NGO,
CBO & Health Workers on

Goal of CLTS was explained in seminars
and workshops

Hands-on training on CLTS were arranged
with slum communities

Post triggering follow-up ensured in CLTS t
slums

Developed field facilitators
Methodology Used in Slum
Community





A total Participatory approach adopted where PRA tools were used
extensively
Facilitated community sanitation profile appraisal & analysis
through:
- Transect walk
- Defecation area mapping
- Fecal oral contamination analysis
- Feces calculation
- Calculation of H/H medical expenses
‘Handing over the stick’ at the ignition of moment by facilitators
No outsider advised to construct toilets or lectured on the
problems of Open Defecation or model of appropriate toilet
models
It was made clear that there was no subsidy of any kind
Mapping of OD areas
Community of Bidhan
Pally
analyzing
the
sanitation profile of the
Para on a social map
prepared on the ground.
All houses are denoted by
cards and the names of
household
heads
are
written on them. Each
household indicates the
area used by the family
for open defecation. The
amount of money spent
on medical expenses per
month per family is also
written on the cards.
Calculation of shit and house
hold medical expenses
Community of Jhil
Par Colony in
Kalyani
Municipality
making a social
map showing
houses with open
pit latrines and
defecation areas
How it was possible to clean up
entire Kalyani using CLTS ?
Dr. Kasturi Bakshi
Chief Health Officer
Kalyani Municipality
Policy Decision by Board of
Councillors
Unanimous decision taken




To stop subsidy for construction of toilets
To give full support to CLTS Pilot in 5
slums
To give support to the communities who
stop open defecation totally
5 most backward slums were selected for
piloting
What Community People didn’t
know?
Community people were fully aware of the ill
effects of open defecation but they did not
know  The concept of sanitary toilet
 Sanitary toilets can be constructed at an
affordable cost by all
 Medical expenditure will only be reduced if
everybody uses sanitary toilet
What is a sanitary toilet ?
Breaking the fecal oral
contamination cycle
•Visibility of
excreta
•Foul Smell
•Access to
insects and
animals
Pit
Water seal
prevents
•Fecal oral
contamination
Progress of CLTS






First Triggering was done in Bhutta Bazar and it
failed due to high expectation for subsidy which
was provided in the neighbouring slum
Simultaneously triggering was done in 4 other
slums
CLTS clicked in all these 4 slums as there was no
expectation for outside subsidy
Bhuttabazar also became ODF but took longer time
than others
All 5 slums eliminated open defecation in 6 months
Good number of Natural Leaders emerged
Example of Vidyasagar Colony



In Vidyasagar Colony, number of toilets
increased from initial 9 to 213 in 6 months
without subsidy
Platform of 69 hand tube wells repaired and
plastered with cement by community
themselves.
Many years old clogged drain cleaned up by
the community
Paved the bases of hand pumps
Cleaned up a clogged drain
Community Action





Community took collective action locally towards
making their environment ODF
The poorest also joined in making the slum ODF
Established mechanism for monitoring of progress
of CLTS
Started non-formal / adult education on their own
after achieving ODF status
Empowered community banned sale of country
liquor in the slums
Monitoring of performance of
Ward Councillors
Coloured cards (Green, Yellow & Red) for
each Councillors with their photo were used
to show the sanitation status of their
respective wards

Green – At least one ODF slum

Yellow – No ODF slum but collective
community action started in the slums

Red – Nothing has been done
Monitoring
Monitoring of CLTS Programme is done at different levels.
At the Municipality Board Room
Different coloured cards
indicate the status of
different wards regarding
CLTS
Monitoring
The sanitation profile of the Para on a Social Map
At the SLUM level
Outcome

Gastro Intestinal disorder declined
(as per health centre records)
GI Disorder Cases
400
347
300
225
200
124
GI Disorder Cases
100
0
05-06
06-07
07-08
Contd.
Outcome

After piloting in 5 slums, CLTS spread
simultaneously in many more

Out of 52 slums, 44 slums are 100% ODF within 2
years

More than 1500 poor slum dwellers have built
toilets on their own so far and using them

Gastrointestinal (especially diarrhoea and worm
infestation) disorders have gone down
significantly
Challenges at Policy Level




Subsidy and associated local politics are the
hurdles of community self mobilisation
Political will of Municipality Leadership &
attitude of Councillors
Mind-set of technical people &
philanthropic attitude of “doing for the
poor”
Non-flexibility of hardware design, project
log frame & expenditure as approved by the
Donors
Challenges at
Implementation Level





Tribal slums were more resistant
initially
Less social solidarity in some migrant
communities with floating population
Un-authorised slum with no legal
entities
Local political leader acting as gatekeeper
Dependency on subsidy
Message


We need to shift from the “Blue print”
approach to “Community Led
Innovative” approach which is more
flexible.
People can do it. Just empower them
THANK YOU