i | P a g e
End line Evaluation, ADRA WASH and Food Security Assistance 
Project ADRA SUDAN - OFDA - WFA: 720FDA19GR00228
Blue Nile State
By: Ahmed Satti Ahmed – Lead consultant 
Final report 
August 2020
2 | P a g e
Table of Content 
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................. 1
1. Executive Summary: .............................................................................................................................. 2
2. Limitation and changes: ......................................................................................................................... 3
3. Introduction and background ................................................................................................................ 4
3.1 Justification for awarding grant.............................................................................................................. 4
3.2 Background about the project:............................................................................................................... 5
3.2.1 Program goals:....................................................................................................................................... 6
3.2.2 Program objectives................................................................................................................................ 6
4. Objectives of end line evaluation ........................................................................................................... 6
5. Survey Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 6
5.1. Desk review........................................................................................................................................... 6
5.2. Focus Group Discussions (FGD): ......................................................................................................... 7
5.3. Key Informant Interviews (KII)............................................................................................................. 7
5.4. Household Interviews HHs ................................................................................................................... 7
5.5. Field Observations................................................................................................................................. 8
5.6. Survey team........................................................................................................................................... 8
5.7. Phone interviews: ....................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.8. Data Entry, Quality Assurance and Analysis .......................................................................................... 8
6. Findings, Discussion and Analysis ......................................................................................................... 9
6.1. Gender and Heads of households age groups: ....................................................................................... 9
6.2. Education level of HH head: ................................................................................................................. 9
6.3. Household composition....................................................................................................................... 10
6.4. Relevance:............................................................................................................................................ 10
6.5. Efficiency: ........................................................................................................................................... 11
6.6. Effectiveness: ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Sector1: Water Supply and Sanitation........................................................................................................... 11
Sub-sector 1: Water Supply .......................................................................................................................... 11
Sub-sector 2: Hygiene Promotion ................................................................................................................ 14
7. Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................................... 27
13.1 Impact................................................................................................................................................. 34
13.2 Sustainability........................................................................................................................................ 34
8. Case study............................................................................................................................................ 35
9. Annexes:.............................................................................................................................................. 36
List of tables
Table 1:Targeted villages and sample size ............................................................................................................................... 8
Table 2: Age and sex of the respondents: ...................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 3: Household composition ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Table 4: Water sources...............................................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 5: Waste management................................................................................................................................................... 15
Table 6:apropriate time for hand washing ............................................................................................................................. 16
Table 7: Source of treatment .................................................................................................................................................. 17
Table 8:Households methods of protection from COVID-19.................................................................................................. 19
Table 9; Sources of information about COVID-19................................................................................................................. 19
Table 10:Sources of households income for filling gap..............................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 11: source of food ......................................................................................................................................................... 22
Table 12:Food coverage during the season............................................................................................................................ 23
Table 13:HHs area cultivate annually in hectare................................................................................................................... 24
Table 14: Crop marketing....................................................................................................................................................... 26
3 | P a g e
List if figures: 
Figure 1; Education level of HH heads.....................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 2: Time for fetching water.............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3: number of water fetching per day..............................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 4: Responsibility of fetching water............................................................................................................ 13
Figure 5: time for queueing in water point ........................................................................................................... 13
Figure 6: HH keeping water containers clean ...................................................................................................... 14
Figure 7: HH water treatment...................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 8: water chlorination ................................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 9: Use of latrines ....................................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 10: material for hand washing ......................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 11: Access to health services..................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 12: Chronic diseases ................................................................................................................................. 18
Figure 13: child vaccination .....................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 14: COVID-19 training.....................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 15: HH source of income........................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 16: HH income coverage for basic needs.................................................................................................. 20
Figure 17:Household plan for future work ........................................................................................................... 21
Figure 18: HH food regular consume ................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 19: Crop protection procedures ................................................................................................................ 24
Figure 20: HH access to farming.......................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 21: HH use of improved agriculture practice............................................................................................ 25
Figure 22: HH access to seeds.............................................................................................................................. 25
Figure 23: households have a membership in agricultural associations.............................................................. 27
1 | P a g e
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency
BNS Blue Nile State
SWC Sate Water Corporation
RWA Rural Water Administration
HAC Humanitarian Aid Commission
HH Household 
MOH Ministry of Health
MoA Ministry of Agriculture
SPLM-N- Sudan People’s Movement –North
SBV Sexual Base violence
WES Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Project
WUC Water User Committee
PM Pump Mechanic 
FFS Farm Field School
SSF Slow sand Filter 
PPT Participatory Performance Tracker 
CBCPU Community Based Child protection 
2 | P a g e
1. Executive Summary:
WASH and Food Security Assistance” project is supporting the most vulnerable populations in Blue Nile 
State. WFA project aimed to target 30,000 vulnerable households. The project objectives are to increase 
the access to improved water sources, hygiene and sanitation practices to 19,800 people; and improve 
food production through increased access to agricultural input and resilient practices to 10,200 people. 
The program run for twelve months and its scope of activities spans two sectors: 1. Water, Sanitation and 
Hygiene; and 2. Agriculture and Food Security. The targeted areas are the 13 villages in the localities of 
Kurmuk, and Bau.
End line evaluation was conducted for the ended project. The evaluation used quantitative and qualitative 
data collection methods using the same tools that were used for the base line survey. Household direct 
interviews were conducted using a designed questionnaire for collecting the quantitative data, two FGDs 
and KII were applied to collect the qualitative data. Desk review was done for project documents 
including project proposal, log frame and different reports. 
The assessed project is very relevant and supported the communities to access their main needs and 
required services, this included access to safe water, environmental sanitation and hygiene. Many of the 
community affirmed that; the project solved their critical problems that they are facing.
The project was implemented in a good level of efficiency; this is manifested by; ADRA procurement 
policies and guidelines, provision of services done through quotations that guaranteed fair prices and high 
quality.. Segregation of duties is properly maintained in financial procedures as per the ADRA financial 
system this is to be further confirmed after the overall project audit. However,, this had been slightly 
assessed through questions to the Project team. The designed project activities were implemented and 
supported achieving the targeted results. 
Based on the findings from direct consultation of the project beneficiaries and other stakeholders; the 
project was implemented in adequate level of effectiveness; this include:
Food Consumption Score: From the consulted households, 34% of the HH have sufficient food for 0-1 
month, 25.5% for 2-3 months, 27.5% for 3-6 months and 13% of them have food sufficiency 7 months 
and beyond. It is shown that the majority of the HH can sustain their food for more than 2 months.
Primary Source of Water: All the consulted communities reflect that they have access to safe water 
(47.3% from wells and 43.1 from protected Hafirs). Overall, the end line survey result indicated that 
47.3% of interviewees primarily relay on protected water sources. 
Access to Water Sources: Majority of the consulted people (61.1%) are spending less than 30 minute in 
fetching water including 5.7% spending less than 5 minutes. 
Water treatment: Majority of the HH (94.7.3%) using Chlorine/other chemical reagents to treat drinking 
water whereas 7.1% practice boiling to treat water before drinking, 71.4% filter with clothes and (21.4%) 
with sun lights exposure, which indicate the messages of water treatment and hygiene well practiced 
among entire community in the two localities. 
The hand pumps visited during the assessment, at the targeted areas 95%, were fully functioning with a 
high utilization rate and waiting times of less than 15 minutes; the recommended Sphere standard (500 
meters) was overall respected
3 | P a g e
Sanitary Practices: 69.8 % of survey participants indicated that they use family toilets for defecation 
whereas 30.2% of them practice open defecation in bushes or open areas. Kurmuk locality has the highest 
latrines use (79.7%) compared to Bau locality where the latrines users are (31.4%). Awareness program 
and animation campaigns should be launched for improvement of sanitation practices.
Waste disposal practices: 63% of the surveyed households are handling and managing waste by 
throwing it away, 32.8% of the surveyed households are burning waste; nearly 2.3% bury waste, while 
1.9% of the waste is collected by municipality. Result of the analysis reveals a wide variation between 
and among localities regarding mode of waste management.
Practice Of Hand Washing: from interviews indicate that most popular hand washing habits were 
‘Before meals’ representing some 33.2% of the surveyed households, some 28.7% of the respondents do 
wash their hands after defecation, approximately 17.6% of the surveyed households prefer washing their 
hands before food preparation, around 10.4% of the surveyed households in particular women use to wash 
their hands before child feeding, and while nearly 10.3% of the surveyed households do hands washing 
after child cleaning. Hence, Concern’s Hygiene Promotion intervention needs to place particular focus on 
increasing awareness of these moments of hand washing among the community.
Protection: Form interview findings, nearly 36.7% of the surveyed households could take child 
protection using self-power, around 31.8% obtain protection by consultation with local’s traditional 
administration, some 28.8% resort to police authority and approximately 2.7% followed legal procedure 
of reporting to local authority.
COVID 19
From interview, indicates some 40.1% of the surveyed households have received training or attended
awareness program on COVID-19 protection, and while 59.9% have not received any training or
awareness program. This result reflects the lack of knowledge and the need of capacity building in the 
areas of COVID-19 among (59.9%) of the surveyed households. For protection Some 50.5% of the 
surveyed households confirmed necessity of wearing face mask, nearly 37.1% of the surveyed household 
could adhere to social distancing and 12.4% of the surveyed households do hands washing with soap and 
water. Result of the analysis indicates wearing face mask is greatly used by approximately half of the 
surveyed households.
2. Limitation and challenges:
• At the time of the survey, it was still rainy season. As a result, 50 % of 13 targeted areas in Kumuk 
and Bau localities were deemed inaccessible even for vehicles, thus making it difficult to meet 
beneficiaries. It was also the time when farmers are busy on their farm (seasonal farm preparation 
period), which occurs far from their village. The consultant experienced difficulties in travelling to
different targeted areas due to the distance, bad road conditions, flooded areas and difficult terrain 
in the two targeted localities; it also meant that enumerators had to walk everywhere on foot rather 
than using vehicles. 
Communication is one of the big constraints for coordination between the two localities. Interviews 
with stakeholders and key informants were conducted via mobile phone. This was difficult due to 
lack of power source for charging phones and limited cell coverage in the areas. This resulted in 
these activities taking more time to be completed. 
4 | P a g e
3. Introduction and background
3.1 Justification for awarding grant
ADRA conducted an assessment in September 2018 and gathered information from a multi-sectoral 
assessment conducted in January 2019 by ADRA’s local implementing partner, Mubadiroon . An analysis 
of these finds the following needs:
Water Supply & Sanitation: Access to clean and safe water remains a pressing need for both male and 
female respondents. Participants indicated that water and sanitation were high priority needs in both 
localities, particularly 35 water sources damaged as a result of conflict and conflict-related breakdown of 
technical and financial capacity to maintain the infrastructure, as well as specific challenges faced by 
women and girls related to WASH. These water sources had provided service to approximately 5,250 
households, over 50 percent of which are IDPs. Respondents in highly populated areas, especially in the 
Bau locality in southern BNS, reported the need for an increase of water distribution points, as most sites 
and houses are scattered and not clustered around specific locations. In the nearby locality of Kurmuk in 
BNS, assessments highlight the need for rehabilitating a water haffir that can benefit 4,500 people. 
Women and girls remain the primary collectors of water and sometimes must travel more than two 
kilometers each way for water collection. This is four times more than the 500 meters recommended by 
Sphere standards. The distances involved in water collection and the proximity of hostile tribes, military 
and rebels give rise to frequent incidents of SGBV. Around 75 percent of IDPs collect water from 
unprotected sources that are often contaminated, as most water sources are shared between animals and 
humans; 80 percent of the population does not treat their water at home; and 70 percent of the respondents 
in the target area practice open defecation. Women and girls have limited options to access latrines, 
either going to a distant neighbor or using open fields with no privacy. This increases the risk of SGBV 
associated with open defecation and urination, particularly during the night. The schools in the targeted 
villages have insufficient water supplies, no hand washing facilities and no latrines or poorly maintained 
latrines, contributing to the spread of fecal oral disease and to higher dropout and lower completion rates 
for girls
Food Security: Many areas in Blue Nile state are stressed in IPC Phase 3, where poor households and 
IDPs are typically highly dependent on markets to access food, and below-average purchasing power. 
Blue Nile state is highly dependent on agriculture. Nearly 64 percent of the households depend on 
agriculture as their main source of food and income. One third of all households obtain food (mainly 
cereals) from their own production, which is also an increase to those reported in 2017. This might also be 
attributed to the rising prices due to the inflation rates around the country, where the price for the average 
minimum expenditure basket doubled over the year. In Blue Nile, only 14 percent of households are able 
to afford the local food basket. This leaves many households, especially IDPs and those living in remote 
locations, highly vulnerable to seasonal food insecurity, as well as falling to negative coping mechanisms 
and practices. 
Assessments conducted by ADRA on the food security situation in target communities show that 
although all communities had indicated that they had access to markets, however due to the price 
increases the majority of respondents expressed that they were unable to purchase the needed items. All 
5 | P a g e
respondents also expressed that they have had to resort to negative coping mechanisms such as skipping 
meals, buying cheaper and expired food, and around 30 percent of respondents also reported harvesting 
immature crops and collecting wild berries from trees. A majority of the population in the targeted 
localities (especially IDPs and returnees) is pastoralist and agro-pastoralists and thus highly depend on 
agriculture as their main source of income, and at times even household food supplies. 
Farming in Blue Nile is primarily rain-fed; however, assessment of 2018 rainy season farming found that 
five out of the eight communities reported unfavorable harvest due to long dry spells, plant pest, and low 
rains. These factors have resulted in growing food consumption gaps, particularly among IDP
populations, as well as declines in dietary diversity scores for moderately and severely food insecure 
groups.
Protection – Gender Based Violence: GBV, harm, abuse and exploitation was identified as a concern 
throughout Sudan, but is greater in conflict areas such as Blue Nile. In Blue Nile, the protection situation 
is further hampered by a non-permissive operational environment where disaster-affected communities
face extreme and exacerbated risks to protection. A critical overarching problem related to protection 
risks is the lack of a coordination and information gathering entity. This further amplifies the difficulties 
in data collection and the ability to access verifiable secondary information. However, as a many part of 
the Blue State, have become recently accessible to partners, information picked up by field workers or 
through various imbedded questionnaire has highlighted the growing need for protection activities in the 
area. Acts of GBV and human rights abuses in Blue Nile are also exacerbated by the conflict, include 
destruction of property and livelihoods, arbitrary killings, forcible disappearances, torture and cruel 
treatment. The economic crisis and rising inflation caused by the conflict, combined with the absence of 
socio-economic opportunities, have increased risks to abuse and exploitation and have prevented 
displaced people from rebuilding their lives. Risks to girls and boys for rape, violence, and physical and 
sexual exploitation are increased due to higher school drop-out rates and girls’ increased vulnerability 
when they work in the fields or engage in water and firewood collection.
3.2 Background about the project:
In 2019, the Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA) and Office of US Foreign Disaster 
Assistance (OFDA) signed a cooperative agreement to finance ADRA Sudan WASH and Food Security 
Assistance Project. Since then, the program was implemented by ADRA Sudan in the following two 
localities of the Blue Nile State Kurmuk (Kurmuk town, Dindiro, Alkaili, Abaigo,Deglog, Karan Karan, 
Dokan, Gambarda, Bulung, Bangalulu); and Bau locality (Derang, Wad Abuk, Masfa, Maganza,).
WFA project aimed to target 30,000 vulnerable households. The project objectives are to increase the 
access to improved water sources, hygiene and sanitation practices to 19,800 people; and improve food 
production through increased access to agricultural input and resilient practices to 10,200 people.
The program will run for twelve months and its scope of activities spans two sectors: 1. Water, Sanitation 
and Hygiene; and 2. Agriculture and Food Security. The targeted areas are the 13 villages in the localities 
of Kurmuk, and Bau.
6 | P a g e
3.2.1 Program goals:
The Goal of the program is to improve access of vulnerable communities in Blue Nile State to basic 
WASH services, increasing their food security and self-reliance, and improving their ability to prevent 
and respond to gender-based violence for 30,000 people targeted; 15,000 IDPs
3.2.2 Program objectives 
The program objectives are to:
• Increased access to improved water sources, hygiene and sanitation practices; and
Improved food production through increased access to agricultural input and resilient practices
4. Objectives of end line evaluation
The main purposes of the end of project evaluation are the following:
• To assess the performance of the project including the extent to which the enhancement of the 
water system and hygiene improvement has contributed to improve hygiene status within 
households; increase access to safe drinking water for the vulnerable population; and improved 
food production through increase access to agricultural inputs and resilient practices.
• To identify and document lessons learnt good practices and innovative ways that contributed to 
the attainment of the project objectives.
• The evaluation results will provide an opportunity for the project management team to examine 
the project’s performance more closely, learn community views on sustainability, and familiarize 
partners and key stakeholders with the evaluation outcomes and further action or correction
needed. On the other hand, it is expected that the evaluation will provide lessons learnt, success 
stories, areas of improvements and recommendations for similar programs
Scope of the evaluation 
The evaluation will focus on conducting comprehensive assessment of WASH and Food Security 
Assistance (WFA) project that have been implemented from September 1st, 2019 to August 31st, 2020.
5. Evaluation Methodology
The evaluation followed a mixed methods approach to collect and triangulate the data. Both qualitative 
and quantitative methods for collecting data were used. This included review of the existing project 
reports and other documents such as the project proposal including the targeted indicators, consultation of 
the different project stake holder including beneficiaries and service providers. In addition to the direct 
consultation of the targeted households through direct meetings and using of designed HH questionnaire.
5.1.Desk review 
Comprehensive desk review was been conducted to inform the design of data collection tools and to 
enhance the understanding of the situation in the targeted localities, that includes review of project 
7 | P a g e
documents, narrative / financial reports, monitoring and evaluation reports and project database and 
review reports from different INGOs, NGOs and government relevant institutions
5.2.Focus Group Discussions (FGD):
Focus group discussions were conducted to allow for nuanced and open-ended responses to difficult 
questions, that elicited more information on attitudes, perceptions, and experiences that otherwise cannot 
be obtained by a structured survey. Two group discussions were conducted (one in each of the targeted 
localities), with groups of maximum of 8-12 participants, which represented the different project 
stakeholders including representatives of the project beneficiaries, Water committees, Farmers School 
farm committee for insight interactions on the project’s progress.
5.3.Key Informant Interviews (KII)
Qualitative methods were employed in the end line survey for the survey key informant interviews (KIIs) 
and on the spot observation. The consultant carried out a total of five KIIs with key informants (5 ADRA 
project staff, 1 WES, 1 SWC, 2 Ministry of agriculture and 1 HAC) in Damazine town. The result of 
these interviews contributed to the details of the communities’ profile on matters concerning WASH and 
food security. 
5.4.Household Interviews HHs
The consultant conducted (262) structured household (HH) interviews with sampled beneficiary 
populations. Households were taken as a family eating from the same pot. In Bau a total of 51 households 
were targeted, of which 51 households were interviewed, where in Kurmuk 211 households were 
targeted, of which 51 households were interviewed (HHs header). The target group was selected based on 
random sampling and 40% were host community and 60% IDPs) A representative sample of targeted 
areas/beneficiaries selected and defined and the design of the questionnaire guided by the objectives of 
this assignment as outlined in the TOR agreed with ADRA. 
The questionnaire tested on a small number of beneficiaries before implementation to a wider scale. 
Moreover, as per the sample size the questionnaire will be analyzed through Statistical Package for the 
Social Sciences (SPSS). The main questionnaires designed for household beneficiaries for the males and 
females headed households who are benefitting from the project activities. 
Using a HH sampling method, these households were drawn from two localities covered six villages 
which have been selected by ADRA Damzine office, due to accessibility during the rainy season only 
50% are accessible. 
Depending on the secondary data and the size of the population in the targeted areas; the sample size was
calculated at 95% as a confidence level and a margin of error (4.5%). Sample size was calculated
scientifically using one of the methodologies available. This study used Glenn.I., 2002 method to 
determine the sample size. The sample size in each locality were distributed among villages locations 
proportionally according to the population size (HHs). 
Sample size (n) = Total Population (N) /(1+N*r^2) r is a margin of error (degree of accuracy), the value 
of r lies between 1% up 10%. So the lowest is the best.
N = Total Population (4,572)
8 | P a g e
r = Margin of errors (0.06)
Table 1:Targeted villages and sample size
Locality location Population HH locality 
proportion
% 
Proportion
Sample 
size
Bau
Derange 4,213 714
 19%
15.6 41
Maganza 1,000 169 3.7 10
Sub 
Total 5,213 883 0 0
Kurmuk
Dindiro 8,565 1,452
81%
31.8 83
Gambarda 4,000 678 14.8 39
Bulung 8,000 1,356 29.7 78
Abaigo 1,200 203 4.4 12
Subtotal 21,765 3,689 0 0
Grand Total 26,978 4,572 100 262
5.5.Field Observations
During the data collection, the program team took note of its observations. Major areas of focus for the 
observation include existing water sources and new water schemes: management, operation and 
maintenance; water quality, quantity; availability, type, location, articulate tools kit, farm, seeds, tools; 
availability of management committee for water schemes and livelihoods etc.
5.6.Survey team
The evaluation team leader was conducted by engineer consultant as team leader, able to discuss technical 
and financial issues in relation to ADRA Sudan polices, strategy and regulation together. He is 
responsible for all survey process and report writing. 
The team leader was assisted by statistician specialists with good experience in conducting such surveys;
he supported the team leader in facilitating numerator training. Six enumerator a (three male and three 
females) were recruited locally to conduct the survey questionnaire in targeted areas. 
It is important to ensure that the quality of data is considered and maintained from the time of the survey 
design, the consultant and his assistant conducted a comprehensive training for the enumerators on how to 
conduct interviews, the same modality given for data entry and analysis. 
5.7.Data Entry, Quality Assurance and Analysis
Quantitative data collected on paper were reviewed to check for consistencies and completeness, before 
coding and entering into SPSS ready for analysis. Qualitative data were asked in local language and
translated to English on the questionnaire. These were then typed and uploaded into NVIVO software. 
Data analysis was a rigorous process that explored descriptive statistics, specifically the frequencies, 
mean, sum, standard deviation and variance. Qualitative variables were coded and organized into themes 
and the emerging trends and patterns identified using NVIVO software, guided by the objectives and the 
criteria. All the findings and discussion are presented below using ratios, graphs, figures and pie charts.
9 | P a g e
6. Findings, Discussion and Analysis
6.1.Gender and Heads of households age groups: 
Table (2) below shows that of the total respondent heads of households interviewed, 81.7% were males 
and 18.3% were female. The majority of those who headed the households are of the age groups (18-49 
years), representing 64.5% of the total sample. The composition of the sample shows 35.5% are of the age 
group (>=50 years) and 0% at the age groups (14-17 years). The analysis has shown a predominance of 
woman headed households (18.3%) in the sample which could indicate the absence of male households’ 
heads who most probably immigrated to main towns seeking employment or joined rebels’ groups 
leaving family responsibilities to women.
Table 2: Age and sex of the respondents:
6.2.Education level of HH head:
(Fig. 1) Displays heads of household’s 
educational level. Nearly 26.7% attended 
basic education, 7.3% have intermediate 
education, 2.7% completed secondary 
education, and only 0.4% had university 
and post graduate education. Illiteracy 
is prevalent among the community and 
accounted to 62.6%. The analysis 
revealed a significant variation between
the two localities in illiteracy level which 
is higher in Bau.
Ages Locality of the study Total Respondent sex by locality (2)
Kurmuk Bau Locality Head of HHs sex Total
5-14 year 0 0 0 Male Female
15-17 year 0 0 0
Kurmuk
176 35 211
Age group
18-49 year 129 40 169 83.4% 16.6% 100%
61.1% 78.4% 64.5% Bau 38 13 51
>=50 year 82 11 93 74.5% 25.5% 100.0%
38.9% 21.6% 35.5%
Total
214 48 262
Total
211 51 262 81.7% 18.3% 100%
100.0% 100% 100%
Figure 1: Education level of HH heads
10 | P a g e
6.3.Household composition 
Table (3) illustrate the age groups of the family members excluding the household heads. Infants’ 
children at age one year or less represent 4.1%. Those under school age (2-5 years) represent 15.9% of the 
sample size. Those at age (6-14) represent 30.2% of the sample. Those in age group (15-17 years) 
represent 9.2%. Those in the workforce age group represent 37.4% and age groups >64 years.
Females constitute 54.7% of the family size in the two localities; while male constitute (45.3%). The 
average family sizes in the two localities range from 6 in Kurmuk locality and 6.6 in Bau locality with an 
average of 6.1 for the sample size. 
The adult women group in the workforce age 18-65 years is the group with the highest percent among 
females (21.9%). In this regard analysis reveals women are major contributors to family livelihoods, they 
assist men in farming. During the dry season when the young men of the family migrate for wage 
employment and self-employment in urban centers and irrigated farming schemes, they look after the 
family and household herd.
Table 3: Household composition
6.4.Relevance:
The project is adequately relevant and met the relevance criteria; and that the project contributes to the 
achievement of the project objectives and goals, by the end of the project life span, these are manifested 
by the following findings: 
Ages Locality of the study area Total
Kurmuk Bau
HHs members age groups
0-1 year 47 7 54
4.5% 2.4% 4.1%
2-5 year 164 47 211
15.8% 16.3% 15.9%
6-14 year 304 97 401
29.3% 33.6% 30.2%
15-17 year 85 37 122
8.2% 12.8% 9.2%
18-45 year 400 96 496
38.5% 33.2% 37.4%
46-64 year 31 3 34
3.0% 1.0% 2.6%
> 64 year 7 2 9
0.7% 0.7% 0.7%
Total
1038 289 1327
100% 100% 100%
11 | P a g e
• As per the consultation of the targeted communities, they all reflect that the project touched their 
real needs because they are living in difficult situations. The communities reflect that, the 
available resources of water became insufficient after sharing with the influx of more 
communities who shared the same water sources in addition to lack of hygiene knowledge and 
poor practice of hygiene and sanitation led to spread of many diseases, and the project had solved 
many of these problems but they think addition work is still needed 
• Significant increase in community accessing sufficient and improved quality water Most of the 
community members consulted reflect that the project meets their needs and provide them with 
good quality and sufficient water.
• Safe and proper disposing and handling of the wastes will contribute to reducing incidence and 
the spread of diseases, this is one of the key message for the proper hygiene. 
6.5.Efficiency:
The project was implemented in good level of efficiency; this is manifested by the following findings: 
▪ ADRA, as project budget holder, has a proper electronic financial system which provides 
adequate financial management and comprehensive reporting facilities.
▪ The project maintained the originally approved Program vs. Operations budget ratio.
▪ All ADRA procurements procedures were, strictly, adhered to resulting in fair prices and quality 
obtained through quotation process. Segregation of duties is properly maintained in financial 
procedures.
▪ The project run with a minimum required number of qualified staff who shows high competency 
and efficiency. There were 5 project staff aside from 2 staff from the local partner. 
6.6.Effectiveness:
WASH agriculture and food security activities were implemented as per the design of the project. As per 
the community consultation and the findings; the project was implemented in adequate level of 
effectiveness regarding its designed results as below:
Objective: Increased access to improved water sources, hygiene and sanitation practices.
Sector1: Water Supply and Sanitation
Sub-sector 1: Water Supply
• Majority of the consulted households revealed that they have access to safe water, 47.3% of them get 
their water from wells and 43,1% get it from protected Hafirs as the main sources of water, 3.8% & 
3.4% confirmed their water sources are Khor and Tanker respectively and 2.3% of the surveyed 
households rely on water from donkey carts. Communities are facing difficulties in getting water 
during summer, particularly those who are depending on Hafirs, because it is dry.
12 | P a g e
Table 4: Water sources
Locality Sources of water Total
Tanker Cart Hafir Well Khor
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Kurmuk 9 4.30% 1 0.50% 95 45.00% 96 45.50% 10 4.70% 211 100%
Bau 0 0.00% 5 9.80% 18 35.30% 28 54.90% 0 0.00% 51 100%
• Table (4) shows wells provide water supply for 47.3% of the surveyed households, some 43.1% of the 
surveyed households reported Haffir is their main water source, around (3.8% & 3.4) confirmed their 
water supply are Khor and Tanker respectively, while 2.3% of the surveyed households rely on water 
from donkey carts. Analysis of the result reflects lacks water in dry seasons since Haffir are dry up 
after rainy season directly
• Fig.(2) below illustrates water fetching 
time of the surveyed households across the 
two localities. Nearly 54.4% of the 
surveyed households collects between 5-
30 minutes. Around 24.8% fetch water in 
31-60 minutes and 13% of the surveyed 
households take 121-300 minutes, while 
5.7% of the surveyed households take 0-5 
minutes from source to home. The analysis 
did not show any variation in time for
water fetching between the two localities.
Fig. (3 ) displays that 16.4% of the 
surveyed households collect water once 
in a day, 27.9% households do so twice 
in day, 29% households do three times in 
a day and 26.7% households do water 
collection > three times in a day. 
Figure 2: Time for fetching water
Figure 3: No. water fetched 
13 | P a g e
• 30.5% of the surveyed heads of households are 
responsible for water collection, and while 69.5% 
do not do. Result shows around 69.5% of the 
family members either boys or girls are 
responsible for water collection. 
As shown in figure (5); 52.% of the elderly 
female (18-50) year are responsible for 
fetching water for the whole surveyed 
households. Adult females (5-17) year use 
for fetching water is coming second in 
ranking which reported (27%) of the whole 
surveyed households. On the other hands, 
adult males (5-17) and elderly males (18-
50) year constitute 11% and 7% as water 
collectors of the surveyed households 
respectively, and while under 5 years 
males and females are only reported .3% 
and .7% respectively. The analysis 
revealed that females are greatly 
contributing in responsibility of water 
fetching rather than males.
56.9% of the households revealed that they do 
not stand in a queue the water source, while the 
remaining households have different queueing 
time, 61.1% of them wait for collecting water 
between15-30 minutes, around 23% of them 
household could wait in a queue between 31-60 
minutes. Nearly 15% could stand for > 60 
minutes, and while a minority (.9%) could wait 
for < 15 minutes. The analysis has shown slight 
variations between the two localities in queuing 
time duration.
Figure 3: Responsibility of fetching water
Figure 6: time for queuing in water point
Figure 5: Family members collecting water 
14 | P a g e
Sub-sector 2: Hygiene Promotion
The project succeeded to improve the 
community hygiene which was reflected in 
their practicing hand washing with water and 
soap, in addition to good practice in keeping 
drinking water clean and safe. 
As shown in Fig. (7) 92.7% of the surveyed 
households keep water container storage clean.
Fig. (9) illustrate that some 71.8% of the surveyed 
household have heard of water chlorination for the 
water treatment, and while 28.2% did not. The 
analysis revealed observable variations among two 
localities in water chlorination knowledge. In this 
regard it seems that the community of Kurmukis well 
acquainted with and widely knowledgeable of 
chlorination.
It shows around 46.8% of the surveyed households 
have experiences in water chlorination for the water 
treatment for safe drinking. Around 53.2% lack such 
experience.
Figure 7: HH keeping water containers clean
Figure 8: water chlorination
Figure 9: HH experience on Water 
chlorination 
15 | P a g e
As in figure (10); 70 % of the total surveyed households have 
latrines at home and as an average from the two localities, 
Kurmuk locality has the highest latrines use (79.7%) 
compared to Bau locality where the latrines users are (31.4%). 
Among the surveyed households that have latrines; most of 
them are traditional latrines comprising 98.9%, and while 
public latrines are used by 1.1%. 
68.4% of the households who have no latrine, they confirmed 
that they defecate in open areas, and while 31.6% defecate in 
bushes. 
 Table 4: Waste management
Table. (5) Shows 63% of the 
surveyed households are 
handling and managing waste 
by throwing it away, 32.8% of 
the surveyed households are 
burning waste, nearly 2.3% 
bury waste, while 1.9% of the 
waste is collected by 
municipality. Result of the 
analysis reveals a wide 
variation between and among 
localities regarding mode of 
waste management.
From the consulted households, 96.6% confirmed washing their hands before eating. 18.7% confirmed 
that they have allocated place for hands washing inside home
Total of 55.7% of the surveyed households wash their hands with water only, 42% use soap with water 
and 2.3% wash their hands with ash and water. However, it is remarkably seen that approximately 2.3% 
of the households are still using traditional methods of cleaning their hands with ash, which is neither 
healthy nor hygienic. Types of waste management
Collected by 
municipality
5 0 5
2.4% 0.0% 1.9%
Throw away 128 37 165
60.7% 72.5% 63.0%
Bury 6 0 6
2.8% 0.0% 2.3%
Burning 72 14 86
34.1% 27.5% 32.8%
Total 211 51 262
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Figure 10: Use of latrines
16 | P a g e
 Table 5: time for hand washing
Table (6) displays the surveyed households most 
popular hand washing habits were ‘Before meals’ 
representing some 33.2% of the surveyed 
households, some 28.7% of the respondents do wash 
their hands after defecation, approximately 17.6% of 
the surveyed households prefer washing their hands 
before food preparation, around 10.4% of the 
surveyed households in particular women use to 
wash their hands before child feeding, and while 
nearly 10.3% of the surveyed households do hands 
washing after child cleaning. However, the 
proportion of respondents who recalled that ‘Before 
feeding a child or breastfeeding a baby’ and ‘When 
hands are dirty are critical moments of hand washing 
was substantially lower, comprising 10.4% and 
28.7%for the whole sample. Hence, Concern’s 
Hygiene Promotion intervention needs to place 
particular focus on increasing awareness of these 
moments of hand washing among the community, in 
addition there is need for increasing awareness of
the other times of hands washing). 
Description Localities Total
Kurmuk Bau
Time for hands washing 
After 
defecation
175 38 213
28.8% 27.9
%
28.7%
After child 
cleaning
64 11 75
10.5% 8.1
%
10.1%
Before 
food 
preparatio
n
108 23 131
17.8% 16.9
%
17.6%
Before 
meals
199 48 247
32.8% 35.3
%
33.2%
Before 
child 
feeding
61 16 77
10.0% 11.8
%
10.4%
Total 607 136 743
100.0% 100.
0%
100.0%
17 | P a g e
The surveyed household’s water consumption per day is 
including drinking, washing and cooking. The average 
water consumed per day by the surveyed households 
are; water for drinking estimated at 3.8 jerry cans, water 
for washing is 4.1 jerkins (equal to 20 liters), water for 
cocking is 1.6 jerkin. In conclusion, the whole average 
daily water consumption per capita for all house 
activities is around 9.5 jerkin as average household with 
approximately 6 members.
Fig. (11) Shows nearly 64.9% of the surveyed 
households could easily have access to health, while 
35.1% of the households complain of lack of health 
services. The analysis has not indicated any variations between two localities regarding infection rate.
As shown in table (7) illustrates treatment sources for those without easy access to medical care, in this 
regard some 53.3% of them go to another health facility seeking treatment, around 32.2% restore to 
traditional healers or rely on herbs treatment, while 14% they do not know what to do. The analysis result 
has shown observable variation between and among both localities in treatment source. Although, it has 
been observed that some 32.2% of the surveyed households are preferring traditional treatment instead of 
medical cure because they are living in scattered villages far away from towns.
Table 6: Source of treatment
Description Locality of the study Total
Kurmuk Bau
Treatment Traditional medicine 30 0 30
38.5% 0.0% 32.3%
Go to another health 
facility
39 11 50
50.0% 73.3% 53.8%
Don’t Know 9 4 13
11.5% 26.7% 14.0%
Total 78 15 93
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Figure 11: Access to health services
18 | P a g e
Kumuk Bau Total
Yes 97.2% 98.0% 97.3%
No 2.8% 2.0% 2.7%
97.2% 98.0% 97.3%
2.8% 2.0% 2.7%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
Child vaccination
Yes No
Fig. (12) Shows that; around 6.9% of the surveyed 
households stated some of their family members felt ill of 
chronic diseases, and while 93.1% of the households did 
not complain of any illness. The analysis has not indicated 
any variations between two localities regarding chronic 
diseases infection rate.
Fig. (13) Reveals a total of 97.3% households 
confirmed that their children are vaccinated 
regularly, and while 2.7% do not do any 
vaccination. The analysis indicates no remarkable 
variations between two localities.
Fig. (14) Shows some 35.5% of the surveyed 
households confirmed their knowledge of COVID-19 
infection transmission, and while 64.4% of the 
surveyed households do not know.
33.2% of the surveyed households have considerable 
knowledge and awareness of precautions that should 
be taken towards avoidance COVID-19 infection 
transmission, while 66.8% do not know.
Figure 12: Chronic diseases
Figure 14: COVID-19 infection transmission
Figure 13: Child Vaccination 
19 | P a g e
Table (8) describes methods and precautions that are carried on by the surveyed households in order to 
avoid COVID-19 infection transmission. Some 50.5% of the surveyed households confirmed necessity of 
wearing face mask, nearly 37.1% of the surveyed household could adhere to social distancing and 12.4% 
of the surveyed households do hands washing with soap and water. Result of the analysis indicates 
wearing face mask is greatly used by approximately half of the surveyed households.
Table 7: Households methods of protection during the pandemic 
Table (9) shows that; 65.1% of the surveyed households could easily receive information on COVID-19 
through health authority campaigns and awareness programs, around 26.7% of the surveyed household do 
get messages through mass media which are broadcasting on daily basis, while nearly 17.1% get 
messages of awareness in mosques and/or churches.
Table 8; Sources of information about COVID-19
Fig.(15) indicates some 40.1% of the surveyed households have received training and attended awareness 
program on COVID-19 protection, and while 59.9% have not received any training or program. This 
result reflects the lack of knowledge and the need capacity building in the areas on COVID-19 protection 
among (59.9%) of the surveyed households.
methods of 
protection
Face mask 30 19 49
38.5% 100.0% 50.5%
Social distancing 36 0 36
46.2% 0.0% 37.1%
Washing hands with 
soap and water
12 0 12
15.4% 0.0% 12.4%
Total 78 19 97
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Description Locality of the study Total
Kurmuk Bau
Source 
provider
Health authority 118 25 143
57.0% 52.1% 56.1%
Mass media 54 14 68
26.1% 29.2% 26.7%
Mosque/church 35 9 44
16.9% 18.8% 17.3%
Total 207 48 255
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
20 | P a g e
68.70%
49%
64.90%
1.90%
7.80%
3.10%
28%
43.10%
30.90%
1.40% 0% 1.10%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
Kurmuk Bau Total
Households main income source
Agriculture Trade Labour Employee
Objective: Improved food production through increased access to agricultural input and resilient 
practices
Sector 2: Agriculture and Food Security
Fig. (16) Shows that agriculture constitutes the 
main income source for 64.9% of households, 
and while labor activities are second in ranking 
reported by 30.9%. This followed by petty 
trade and peddlers (3.1% & 1.1%) respectively. 
The analysis revealed there is observable 
differences in job types in the two localities as
agriculture and manual labor activities reported 
by (68.7% & 28%) in Kurmuk and (49% & 
43.1%) in Bau respectively.
Fig. (17) Shows that; around 77.5% of the surveyed households stated their income is satisfactory and 
meets family basic needs, while 22.5% of the households complained of the lack of income. The analysis 
has not indicated any observable variations between 
the two localities.
Table. (10) Illustrates 76.1% of the surveyed 
households confirmed bridging gap of income 
with temporarily work in firewood, charcoal 
making and marginal work in towns. An average of 
9.4% are receiving relief from organizations and 
UN agencies, while Zakat pays 4.9% support to 
poorer families. Around 5.1% & 2.9% of the 
surveyed household generate income from animal 
rearing and subsidy respectively, and 3.6% had 
support from relatives.
Table 9: Sources of household’s income for filling gap
Figure 16: HH source of income
Figure 17: HH income coverage for basic needs
21 | P a g e
Fig. (18) Show that 77.5% of the surveyed 
households confirmed thinking of seeking future 
work, and while 22.5% of households didnot. The 
analysis revealed that there is slight variation 
between the two localities in work seekers which 
is to an extent is observable in Kurmuk (25%). 
Some 57.4% of the surveyed households work 
seekers hope to get animal rearing work, 14.9% of 
the surveyed households prefer petty trade, 
6.4% are seeking vehicles driving work, an 
average of 21.3% have ambitions to become small 
farmers. Agriculture is comes first for work 
seekers particularly in Bau locality where all 
(100%) of the surveyed households are interested 
in agriculture for generating income. More effort 
should be devoted to improving agriculture infrastructure and to supporting inhabitants through 
agricultural inputs and linking them with financial institutions in order to increase production and 
productivity. 
Sub-sector 1: Improving Agricultural Production / Food Security
Description Localities Total 
Kurmuk Bau
Relief 11 2 13
9.6% 8.3% 9.4%
Subsidy 4 0 4
3.5% 0.0% 2.9%
Zakat 4 0 4
3.5% 0.0% 2.9%
Relatives support 4 1 5
3.5% 4.2% 3.6%
Labour 89 16 105
78.1% 66.7% 76.1%
Animal rearing 2 5 7
1.8% 20.8% 5.1%
Total 114 24 138
100% 100% 100%
Figure 18: Household plan for future work
22 | P a g e
Table (11 ) below shows some 67% of the surveyed households could buy food from market, 26.9% 
could obtain food from their farm product, and while 1.9% & 1.3% receive food support from relatives
and labor for food respectively. The analysis has not shown any variations between the two localities in 
food sources.
Table 10: source of food
Fig. (19) Illustrates some 96.2% of the surveyed 
households confirmed that Sorghum is a main 
food regularly consumed by family. Meat is 
second in ranking as family food ingredient 
which is consumed by 44.2%, and while Millet 
is consumed by 1.5% of the survey households. 
This followed by consumption of vegetables 
and flour which are 9.2% & 5.3% respectively. 
The analysis did not show an observable 
variation between the two localities in food 
ingredients, or mode of family meals. In this 
regard the surveyed households indicate 
Sorghum is a main staple food for communities 
of both localities.
Total of 72.9% of the surveyed households confirmed that they are taking meals twice a day. Averages 
of 20.6% are taking meals three times. Around 5.7% take meals once a day and less than 1% of the 
Description Locality of the study Total
Kurmuk Bau
Source of food
Market 168 41 209
65.9% 71.9% 67.0%
Farm product 69 15 84
27.1% 26.3% 26.9%
Relatives 
support
5 1 6
2.0% 1.8% 1.9%
Labor for work 4 0 4
1.6% 0.0% 1.3%
Relief 9 0 9
3.5% 0.0% 2.9%
Total
255 57 312
100% 100% 100%
Figure 19: HH food regular consume
23 | P a g e
surveyed households have not eaten for a whole day. Around 1% takes meals more than three times. 
The analysis revealed a wide variation between the two localities in type of food and number of meals 
being taken (3 meals average) which reported to be 29.4% in Bau and 18.9% in Bau & Kurmuk 
respectively. In this regard the locality of Bau is the highest in meals taking number. 
Table (12) shows that around 34% of the surveyed households stated last season harvest covered their 
food needs for 0-1 month, 27.5% confirmed that product satisfied their food needs for 4-6 months. So
25.2% said product was enough for 2-3 months, and while nearly 12.6% stated the product met their 
needs for 10-12 months. 
Table 11:Food coverage during the season
The average months’ gaps in food for the surveyed household before new crops harvesting varied from 
7.4 months in Kurmuk and 8 months in Bau. The average months of food gap for the surveyed household 
are 7.5%. 
Description Locality of the study Total
Kurmuk Bau
No. of months 0-1 month 64 25 89
30.3% 49.0% 34.0%
2-3 month 58 8 66
27.5% 15.7% 25.2%
4-6 month 60 12 72
28.4% 23.5% 27.5%
7-9 month 1 0 1
0.5% 0.0% 0.4%
10-12 month 28 5 33
13.3% 9.8% 12.6%
more than 12 
months
0 1 1
0.0% 2.0% 0.4%
Total
211 51 262
100% 100% 100%
24 | P a g e
Fig. (20) Describes methods and techniques adopted by the surveyed households for crops protection in 
which some 3.8% & 2.7% of the interviewees 
applied protection techniques of plants remedies and 
pesticides, respectively. However, the majority of 
the surveyed households did not use any technique 
of crops protection. The result of analysis would 
lead to lack of improved farming practices over the 
surveyed households, in this regard partners and 
farmers association (FFS) , should have to be 
thinking of extension organizing program for raising 
knowledge on crops protection methods. However 
the farmers are well trained in the methods and
technique of crop protection, but still some process of pesticide application and other means of crops 
protection is too early in stage to be used ( in 
August)
Table (13) below shows nearly 58.5% of the surveyed households could annually cultivate 1-2 hectare. 
Around 8.4% of the surveyed households do farming in 2-3 hectare, some could practice farming in 4-5 
hectare and a minority of the surveyed households (0.4%) could cultivate > 5 hectare annually. On the 
other hand, results of the analysis shows approximately 30.5% of the surveyed households have no access 
to lands for farming. Moreover, the analysis reveals a wide variation between the two localities in farms 
land ownership which is better in Kurmuk locality rather than Bau locality.
Table 12: HHs area cultivate annually in hectare
Fig. (21) Displays nearly 68.3% of the surveyed households could have access to farmland through either 
ownership or rental or lease while 31.7% have no access to land. The analysis has shown 
accessibility to farming in Bau (52.9%) is twice Kurmuk (26.5%)
Description Locality of the study Total
Kurmuk Bau
cultivated area in hectare
None 54 26 80
25.6% 51.0% 30.5%
1-2 hectare 130 23 153
61.6% 45.1% 58.4%
2-3 hectare 21 1 22
10.0% 2.0% 8.4%
4-5 hectare 5 1 6
2.4% 2.0% 2.3%
more than 5 
hectare
1 0 1
0.5% 0.0% 0.4%
Total
211 51 262
100% 100% 100%
Figure 20: Crop protection procedures
25 | P a g e
Fig. (22) Displays some 63.7% of the surveyed households practice improved farming through weeding 
adoption, 2.3% give high consideration to integrated pest management as essential technique for crops 
protection. Also approximately 2.3% of the surveyed households apply crops cover method. Small 
segments of the surveyed households (0.4%) use a minimum soil disturbance technique in farming. On 
average 29.8% of the surveyed households do not perform any improved farming techniques. The 
analysis observed weeding as element of improved farming techniques is dominant in Kurmuk 
locality
Fig. (23) Shows 
approximately 46.6% of the 
surveyed households 
obtained the needed seeds 
quantity and while 53.4% did 
not. The analysis indicates 
Figure 21: HH access to farming
Figure 22: HH use of improved agriculture practice
Figure 23: HH access to seeds
26 | P a g e
more than half of the surveyed household had difficulties in receiving seeds supply last season.
Table (14) shows some 43.2% of the surveyed households sell their crops in markets, and around 10.1% 
do crops selling through direct purchase by someone who directly purchases it. Selling through mediators 
constitute around 4.7%. The analysis also displays some 41.9% of the surveyed household do not sell any 
crops because the crops harvested are kept for family – consumption
Table 13: Crop marketing
Nearly 4.3% of the surveyed households could do food processing, and while 61% could not do. In this 
regards result revealed only 8 families out of 262 families had done Okra drying last year. 
Description Locality of the study Total
Kurmuk Bau
Crops mode of selling
Some directly purchase 
it
14 1 15
10.9% 5.0% 10.1%
Market 55 9 64
43.0% 45.0% 43.2%
Through a mediator 3 4 7
2.3% 20.0% 4.7%
crops for self-sufficient 
only
56 6 62
43.8% 30.0% 41.9%
Total
128 20 148
100% 100% 100%
27 | P a g e
2.4% 0.0% 1.9%
97.6% 100.0% 98.1%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
Kurmuk Bau Total
Households belong to agricultural organization or groups
Yes No
Fig. (24) Shows some 1.9% of the surveyed 
households have a membership in agricultural 
associations and/or groups, and while 98.1% 
do not belong to any association. Analysis 
displays that most membership for 
associations or groups is confined to Kurmuk 
locality which account for 5.1%.
Conclusions and Recommendations
7. Water 
• The WASH activities have increased access to safe drinking water from protected water sources 
such as hand pumps and treated water from Haffirs. Furthermore, communities’ knowledge on 
water treatment, using protected water sources and other key hygienic practices have significantly 
improved, which may have positive impact in a decrease of water-borne diseases such as 
diarrhea and other water related diseases especially among children’s.
• Rehabilitation of hand pumps Haffirs restored functionality for boreholes, that had been down for 
a long period, on the other hand access to safe water improved; distance travelled by girls and 
women to the nearest water point was reduced to less than 500 meter if compared with MDGs of 
sphere standard . So was the risk of violence against girls on the way to or from water points
(SGBV). However, the exclusion of hardware support such encourage and mobilization for 
latrine construction to vulnerable beneficiary households was a gap since effectiveness and 
impact of WASH interventions are maximized when increased access to safe water supply is 
coupled with increase access to improved sanitation facilities and strengthened through hygiene 
promotion.
• Haffirs rehabilitation can be measured as a remarkable to improve water access and hygiene 
conditions in El Niño-affected communities.
• Development of new program for upgrading hand pump to water yard with solar system will be 
one big challenge for using friendly environmental protection technology.
• The beneficiaries asserted unanimously their appreciation for the quality of the water, pointing to
the reduction in the incidence of waterborne diseases among children and within the households 
Figure 24: households have a membership in agricultural 
associations
28 | P a g e
performed the water quality tests in collaboration with WES /rural water corporation laboratories 
prior to the start of the distribution to beneficiaries.
• The technical and the basic management trainings delivered did effectively grow the capacity of 
committees’ members, although limited to the ordinary maintenance of the systems, also because 
the spare parts were not provided by the project (ADRA) for long. The WUCs are encouraged to 
set up a limited cost-recovery system, to spend on Operation and Maintenance (O&M) with the 
purchase of small spare parts for hand pumps maintenance, and they able to manage their water 
source effectively.
• Most of the users were collecting the water in properly maintained jerry cans, whilst a limited 
part of them were still employing broken containers or containers with missing caps. The 
beneficiaries interviewed showed overall a good knowledge of hygiene practices and the 
advantages of properly storing water in closed containers. 
• Women role and participation in WUCs and other WASH community-based water source 
management committees is one of the big challenges, due to cultural and historic reasons, women 
are often the primary collectors, transporters and users of water in The Blue Nile State. They tend 
to have the main responsibility for health, child care and are managers of domestic water as well 
as promoters of home and community based sanitation activities. However, their involvement in 
key WUC roles was associated with more effective water management, including regular 
meetings and revenue collection, and improved functioning of water systems, but the percentage 
of women involvement is very low since they playing an important role in these regards, we can 
conclude that the participation of women and girls in WASH decision making structures is a 
critical milestone towards their empowerment.
• Accountability by the WUCs is very important because it may impact on the level of collections 
that the committee is able to realize. In the absence of accountability, users of water sources loose 
trust in the management and may even refuse to contribute towards maintenance of the water 
source by subscription or paying user charges. From end line observation and interviews the 
WUCs had no lists or records of users or of their finances, they need more training in book 
keeping and monitoring of their water source performance, their roles with the care taker to 
regulate use of water sources which reduces abuse, they watch over the water source which may 
reduce vandalism and they also enforce rules on contribution towards maintenance of the water 
source.
•
8. Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion
• Emphasis need to be placed on key hygiene behaviors such as hand washing with soap at 
appropriate times, safe disposal of feces and use of latrines, safe weaning food preparation and 
safe water handling and storage, this issues will contribute and reduce prevalent of COVID 19 
outbreak . Hygiene and health education campaigns need to be held in different parts of the 
program coverage area. In schools, hygiene and health clubs will need to be formed. This will 
target the pupils as children are known to be the best agents of change.
• Explore innovative ways of changing attitudes and practices relating to use of ash/ soap during 
critical times for hand washing since adoption of use of soap/ ash during hand washing was just 
too low to be acceptable. Similarly, the setting up and maintenance of hand washing locations 
with soap and water at homesteads needs more aggressive campaigns as the evaluation received 
more excuses for the absence of hand washing locations (tip taps) than evidence of their presence 
at the homesteads visited for hygiene inspection reasons.
29 | P a g e
• Community participation plays an important role in operational planning whereby people in most 
areas participate to different degrees in identifying needs and priorities. Such processes largely 
depend on different types of local committees and organizations. The awareness-raising activities 
targeting environment and hygiene issues depend to a large extent on the participation of the 
communities.
• Hygiene promotion campaigns and trainings of community members within the committees were 
effective in reducing the open defecation according to direct observation and FGDs. Soap is 
sometimes replaced by ash or sand, as recommended during the hygiene promotion, however, 
most of the beneficiaries from targeted community after participating in FGD were not able to 
afford the cost of purchasing soap due to their poverty on the other hand the awareness raising 
sessions in Gender-Based Violence has contributed to the decrement of the incidence of SGBV 
related cases in the area. 
• The WASH activities have enhanced increased access to safe drinking water from protected water
sources. Furthermore, communities’ knowledge on water treatment and other key hygienic 
practices have significantly improved, which may have positive impact in decrement of water￾borne diseases such as diarrhea. There is an improvement in the sanitation practice of targeted 
households, which is manifested by a decrease in the incidence of open defecation and practice of 
appropriate solid waste disposal.
• Regarding solid waste management indicates that all community at the targeted areas has no 
means of proper handling and treatment of solid waste, it need more mobilization in this regards 
and introduction of regular cleaning and awareness campaign modalities is essential are to 
sensitize communities and improve environmental hygiene.
• Communities’ practice regarding solid waste disposal in the targeted areas is not to the expected 
level. This might partly be attributed to lack of sanitation facilities. Thus, future programs need to 
support the installation of community-based sanitation facilities especially in market areas in 
addition to the software activities (i.e. sanitation awareness activities). 
• WASH responses in rural setting are most effective and impactful when hard ware and software 
interventions are coupled together and treated as one packages, both in the water and in the 
sanitation sub-sectors. Rehabilitating water sources without hardware support to toilet 
construction or comprehensive software component such as CLTs/CATs approached as integrated 
process will leaves room for the environmental hazard of open defecation to undo the outcomes 
and impact of the intervention, since there are huge gabs between provision of safe drinking water 
and sanitation activities at all levels.
• The challenge of sustainability will not be solved unless and until the health system is 
strengthened to provide ongoing monitoring and promotion at household level. For this much 
more funding is needed. Funding is also needed to scale up CLTs /CATs – at present very little is 
being done by government outside of donor funded projects.
• The effectiveness of CLTs depends very heavily on the skills of the facilitators. Not everyone can 
be a good facilitator as it depends on personality and sensitivity as well. In general, NGO staff 
tends to be better suited than government officials or private sector consultants.
9. Agriculture and food security 
• The results of the end-line survey showed that the project has proven to be effective in meeting its 
objective of meeting the immediate needs of vulnerable households, promote recovery of 
livelihoods, and improve access to safe water, sanitation, hygiene and reproductive health 
services. The food security and livelihood activities under this project (such as improve seeds ad 
30 | P a g e
tools distribution) have contributed to the enhancement of the food security and nutritional status 
of targeted households.
• From benefit and experience of FFS and interviews with youth groups (males and females 
)findings, there is a high need for alternative income generating activities especially for youth 
such as small business support through vocational training, provision of capital and provision of 
tools to support sustainable returns and community’s economic development, particularly for 
women youth female.
• Farmer Field Schools (FFS) one of successful approached which enable communities to work 
with groups of farmers to educate them on customized farming practices for their respective 
communities and to promotes experimentation and analysis using demonstration plots to help 
farmers discover the best possible solutions for common challenges they face on the other hand 
this approached will provide farmers with opportunities for sharing experiences and collectively 
solving farming problems to improve productivity which can be replicated easy to other parts.
• Majority of returnees and host communities’ practices agricultural activities but they have limited 
access agricultural extension services and agriculture inputs such as provision of improved seeds, 
farming tools, land preparation, in addition to poor storage technologies practices for their 
products ,they needs more assistant as group of association rather than individual to bridge the 
gabs of income and nutrition services.
• Since traditional livelihoods such as agriculture may not provide the means to address the root 
causes of poverty, and food insecurity for many households, particularly as populations grow, a 
new approached needed to promote alternative livelihood strategies by analyzing household 
economic assets and prospects and working with members of these households to diversify 
livelihoods through non-farm employment and entrepreneurship options. The employment and 
entrepreneurship initiatives help the income earning prospects of at-risk women, men and youth 
by assessing high-potential employment and entrepreneurship opportunities and providing 
vocational , technical education, life skills training, functional literacy and numeracy education, 
entrepreneurial training, business start-up support and job linkage support. It will also help 
program participants to apply their new skills through apprenticeships or enterprise groups, 
where they can gain confidence and credibility with employers and clients.
• The modality of the Village Savings and Loan Associations (VSLA) which will provide simple 
savings and loan opportunities in a community that does not have easy access to formal financial 
services, but this process need to be encourage Peer groups of villagers pool their savings and 
offer small loans to association members especially in livelihoods and food security . This 
provides access to credit to those who otherwise would not be able to borrow money, allowing 
them to invest in small business opportunities which will provides access to credit to those who 
otherwise would not be able to borrow money, allowing them to invest in small business 
opportunities.
• Innovative and sustainable livelihoods practices such as seed banking, irrigation, Village Saving 
and Lending Associations (VSLA), sustainable farming and improved livestock production will 
be central in the targeted areas. Local veterinary services need to be strengthened, and links will 
be created between small producers’/farmers groups and the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA).
• ADRA may need to increase promotion of the need to buy productive assets or to plough 
proceeds from VS&L into micro-enterprises as the development trajectories of those who buy 
non-productive assets and those who buy productive assets are totally different. In the long run, 
those who buy productive assets pave their way out of the vicious cycle of poverty. This 
recommendation rises from meeting with FFS committee member out of concern over a 
31 | P a g e
substantial proportion of beneficiaries who reported having bought utensils using proceeds from 
VS&L (where others reported having bought goats or materials for construction of business 
premises, for instance.
• Community capacity building through establishing grassroots structures empowers communities 
and enhances impact and sustainability of project effects as well as community resilience to 
shocks; Village Savings and Lending clubs are an effective tool for women empowerment. They 
increase women control of assets and family financial flows, this approached if applied and
adopted it will help to increase their capacity as resilience building programs
• ADRA approached modalities in livelihood and food security interventions which include 
distribution of improve seeds and tools and other extension services .The coordination in 
implementation modality used in the project of partnership between ADRA and government is 
sound, it could be further strengthened with a clearer definition of government’s responsibilities 
and tasks, especially those not funded by the project. MOU documented in joint work plans, 
with effective joint monitoring and evaluation will be one of the cornerstones for projects 
successes.
• More intervention needed in livelihoods interventions to a structured economic empowerment of 
rights holders by mobilizing and organizing them and supporting them to start income generating 
activities (IGAs).
• Improve access of agriculture packages is required (land preparation, improve seeds, seed bank, 
seedling and harvesting) and will have great impact. However, the focus need to be on improving 
access to markets, value chain, providing youth and women with skills that improve employability 
and support to those who practice seasonal farmers in neighboring rural area.
• Blue Nile Sate has one of the highest poverty and malnutrition rates in the Sudan, making it a 
target area for ADRA livelihood and resilience-building activities. The people living there are 
especially vulnerable during the agricultural lean season (break between harvests) when food 
stocks deplete. During this season, there are no other means of livelihood or income generating 
activities that would enable families to meet their basic food security needs
• An increase in commercial agriculture would lead to higher income and thus increased food 
security by consumption of more and/or better quality food. However, the promotion of cash crops 
requires well-functioning markets where the incomes from cash crops can be used to replace the 
reduction in staple crops as land is diverted to cash crops.
• A gender gap related to food production and food security is demonstrated by the fact that male 
headed households produce more food than female headed households and also are much more 
likely to be food secure. A countermeasure may be to strengthen female land ownership
• ADRA policies target households’ incomes, smallholders’ own production of food, diversify 
agricultural food crops, improve agricultural services, increase agricultural productivity through 
technology adoption, and long-term human capital development.
• Empower households economically by focusing on improving food security and increasing access 
to livelihood opportunities it will be achieved through diversification of livelihood opportunities, 
improve crops and land productivity and increasing access to market through skills and knowledge 
transfer, removal of market barriers and value addition to products, it will absorb and recover from 
the negative impacts of human-made and natural shocks.
• Most targeted communities living without enough food are smallholder farming families, their 
income from agriculture and livestock can be irregular due to price fluctuations, climate change 
and seasonality. ADRA aims to address these challenges by helping to enhance productivity 
through improved practices and technologies; reducing the susceptibility of farming to shocks 
32 | P a g e
through climate-smart and environmentally sustainable approaches; improving business practices 
to make farming more profitable; facilitating links between producers, intermediaries, markets and 
last mile service providers;. While direct support such as providing seeds or training to farmers is 
an important short-term measure this will assist in transition from these activities to more systemic 
interventions through approaches that strengthen markets and institutions as soon as possible if 
there is good coordination and cooperation within the inline government authorities.
• Marketing of agricultural produce is an important activity among the sample households, The most 
commonly sold food crops were sesame seed and beans the two varieties which distributed by 
ADRA . sesame seed sales, overall, attracted the highest volume of income . Relatively fewer 
households were engaged in selling, most likely due to the low production gained from both types, 
along with the need to satisfy household demand for the crop (Beans being the main staple of the 
communities in the study area). 
10. Protection:
• A Compressive effort in awareness and capacity building is required in gender and child and 
women protection, in addition to establishing/strengthening of Community Based Child Protection
Networks (CBCPU) and providing psychosocial support to unaccompanied children, particularly 
whom lost their families during the war and displacements.
• Child protection need special consideration particularly in IDPs and host communities, in this 
regard strong coordination need to be done with SCCW for their role they are playing and their 
experiences in formation and functioning of CBCON
• Youth, particularly female, need to be empowered by providing sources on income and should 
have chance in decision making through involve them in the different CBOs.
• Women and girls vulnerable to SGBV, especially during the collection of water, wood and open 
defecation, awareness rising needed in this regards with protection network members.
• Lack of job opportunities and lack of skills and required capital is the main challenges facing 
youth and hindering form finding jobs or establishing their own business. Vocational and skill 
training is required with provision of tools and capital to start.
• Education service at basic schools is very poor in the two states, in this regard a lot of work needs 
to be done to improve the school environment to increase the level of enrolment and reduce the 
high dropout. This can be through hard work an intervention such as improving WASH services 
and soft works such as training of teaches and forming and training of parents and teacher’s 
associations.
11. Monitoring
 
• The local organization (Mubadron) as a local partner organization sharing ADRA responsibility of 
the project monitoring, evaluation and implementation; according to KII interview we reveal that 
the organization operates in harmony with ADRA and its staff are available and remain close to
the project over the project life span and are present in the fields and office too. However, this 
office has been shut down by government and no longer active, this one of barriers need to be 
solved. ADRA tried to overcome this problem to increase their presence at field level to avoided 
the future result to be generated of poor product in terms of both qualities of monitoring and social 
facilitation in both WASH and food security, since still there is some activities not been completed 
such as cultivation of SFF program approached which need effective M&E to measure the impact 
and benefit to the communities and how to be replicate at largest areas and sustain. 
33 | P a g e
• The most important form of community capacity-building is training local committees’ members 
on community management in general and program activities in particular. Communities also 
received technical training which is usually intended only for men and women’s which qualified 
them for the installation and maintenance of the provided facilities and equipment but according to 
the field assessment results and the project’s available documentation, the project’s performance is 
demonstrated to be meeting expectations; achieving the intended outputs and outcomes and 
attaining an overall good quality of the services delivered. However, the monitoring system 
certainly needs more effort to improve, collecting evidence-based data when measuring the
indicators’ progress.
• Harmonization, cooperation and activation of unified implementation modality among partners 
working in same area, will improve the quality of the work, effective resources utilization 
measurement and reduce communities’ competition, this issues has been disturbed by shutting 
down of Mobadroon office as implementation partner and will affect negatively in M&E and long 
and short term of sustainability. 
• According to the interview with inline authorities in Ministry of agriculture we observe that there 
is a tendency to insist on more involvement and a higher profile, but in practice to take a back seat 
arguing a lack of resources especially in logistic. This was observed during the evaluation. A
clearer definition of respective responsibilities, documented in joint work plans, with effective 
monitoring and evaluation, could help overcome this difficulty in the coming future program.
• Facilitators in FFS need to be able to adapt their messages and approaches in accordance with 
local conditions, the quality of facilitation needs to be monitored and retraining provided if 
necessary, or ineffective staff replaced.
• During FGD with water committees, the finding indicated weak of community consultation 
meetings regularly to discuss the critical issues to discuss their role in water management, the 
water attendance and develop system to provide spare parts and changes broken points which 
should be done by water committee team and pump mechanic which has been trained by ADRA, 
this issues need continuous visit from ARDA to activates M&E and follow up system 
performance.
• Weak of community consultation meetings regularly to discuss the critical issues to discuss their 
role in water management ,the water attendance and develop system to provide spare parts and 
changes broken points which should be done by water committee team and pump mechanic which 
has been trained by ADRA.
• To enhance communities' ownership and resilience and sustain the service, this also will need to 
continue focusing on capacity building and promoting community contributions by working 
together with other actors in the areas, involve, youth, women in all project cycle and not depend 
on Omda or Shakih in committee selection alone to avoid confect between community groups, 
Water committee need to be selected through participatory approach, women representative is 
essential , according to the survey all groups interviews confirm this facts therefore, ADRA 
intervention plan to put a strong emphasis on developing beneficiaries' ownership and self￾reliance.
• Review all process of the contract either for water rehabilitation, and ensure that site engineer 
presence at all time for checking and inspection of all materials used so as to ensure standard and
specification for system has been met, together with specific handing over process together with 
presence of client, ADRA and any other partners.
12. COVID 19
34 | P a g e
• The already dire food security situation in Blue Nile state could worsen with the adverse 
economic impacts of COVID-19 for some extend, including a slowdown in the importation of 
basic commodities.
• Humanitarian partners have been adapting the response to deliver safely, responsibly and 
effectively in this COVID-19 environment although communities is likely to be more vulnerable 
because of the dependence on markets for food and a higher population density, which exposes 
them to greater risk of disease transmission;
13. Impact 
There are no specific studies and researches that provide evidence base for the direct impact of WASH 
services in improving the health and living standard of the target communities, reducing school dropout 
rates (especially of girls since water been so near home) and reducing conflicts among pastoralist and
farmers/resident communities. The major success and impact of the WASH programme was the 
contribution of ADRA in avoiding any serious outbreak of WASH related diseases over this year as 
indicated in the weekly Morbidity and Monitoring report (generated by SMoH). 
The communities in many states mentioned that the walking distance from the household to the water 
point is reasonable and queuing time as well) contribution to the reduction of human suffering, 
particularly for the vulnerable groups compared to the situation before intervention. Rehabilitation of 
water sources contribute positively in reduction in distance - and hence also time for women and girls 
travel to fetch water through in which they challenging many constrains and abuse (GBV) during water
collection.
Key informants listed several impacts they believe are a result of the programmer’s intervention. Listed 
below in brief are the main results of key informant interviews, followed by an in-depth examination of 
the impacts. 
▪ Obvious impacts on health conditions and disease prevalence rates, and the complete eradication 
of some diseases such as Guinea Worm.
▪ The programs resulted in clear positive impacts, which are appreciated by all parts.
▪ The program has more impact on the poorest segment and most vulnerable groups. 
▪ The program has more impacts on women than on men.
14. Sustainability 
The quality of the established WASH facilities through ADRA has been inspected and found to be 
satisfactory and compatible to the technical specifications. The facilities are still in good condition, 
operational and in use by the local communities, indicating that project outputs are effective and meeting 
community requirements, but the elements of sustainability are not in place as mentioned above.
Empowerment of the community members by training them to foster sustainable operation and 
maintenance of the water facilities is crucial for keeping the systems operational. This activity has been 
properly done by ADRA team. However, in the same way community leaders were involved in selection 
of community volunteers for training and other related activities Community based hygiene promoters 
disseminating hygiene messages regularly to their communities. But despite all these genuine supports
35 | P a g e
but situation on the ground does not reflect the expected outcome in this regard, more attention in criteria 
of committees and monitoring their progress in highly appreciate. 
The program has been effective in increasing access to WASH services in rural and emergency areas and
improving the quality of those services, and has been implemented as agreed with the government and 
usually based on participatory decision making and in consultation with the relevant stakeholders. Almost 
all actors work in harmony which positively impacts the effectiveness of the program’s implementation 
but the main gap in effectiveness is in the regularity of maintenance and monitoring in general. There is a 
lack in equipments and requirements, especially with respect to means of transportation, inadequate
program funding, irregular financial transfers from the government, recurrent failure of partners to fulfill 
their obligations and commitments in time, insecurity, inaccessibility, remoteness, inadequate monitoring 
and information system, unclear ownership of some services and weak capacity of private sector.
The WASH programme in Blue Nile is considered to be one of the best development programmes due to 
the integration of water supply, sanitation and hygiene in one package. The linkages between water
supply, sanitation and hygiene are very strong in most NGOs supported projects but not appropriately 
practiced within the government institutions as the components are scattered among entities (MofH and 
Mof Urban palming. The sustainability will not be achieved unless there is a realistic M&E plan been 
implemented, since all the local communities which has been trained and motivated need to be followed 
and strengthens the WASH and food security program issues.
7. Case studies
7.1.Selected d farmer for FFS (Derange )
Yousif Sava Jamouse (30 yrs.) said, when he was chosen to take part in the ADRA project, he did not 
believe that it would change his life and increase his knowledge through training in farming. He was one 
of the beneficiaries that benefited from improve seeds and tools which were distributed by ADRA as well 
as information on improved farming. He said the project changed his priorities for crops that they now 
know that these are more suitable for the weather patterns in this area.
Yousif has been migrating from his villages (Dearange) since 2015 to Damzine due to war and came back
on 2019. He returned and settled in the village where they can now participate in asset creation for the 
benefit of the community.
Last year Yousif farm of 5 acres produced 2.5 sack of sesame, this year his 2.5 acre and expected to
produce 5 sacks of improved sesame corops that can be kept in store as improved seeds. to increase the 
areas to more than 5 acre and hoping life will changing for the better in the coming future, so he can by 
goats and cow for his family to improve his live stander and share and replicate his experience with
farmers .He in the future t to work in group of association rather than individual .
7.2.Selected Young Girls as FFS facilitators
As case study; three girls at age 16-17 have been selected as facilitator for FFS, namely Halima Dafalla, 
Islam Abad Rahaman and Miriam Belal. They were very active, they reflected in the interview all process 
for farming starting from land preparation, cleaning, extension tell the final process of harvesting and
36 | P a g e
storing the final product in very smart and confidant ways ,which represent excellent facilitation for 
farmers ,compared with their age and approached . 
Food security, nutrition and resilience are greatly impacted by the power relations between men and
women and the different levels of access, control and decision making they have over resources. To 
address this, ADRA focuses on gender transformative programming that empowers women and girls 
socially and economically. The FFS facilitators some of which are female, can be also able to engage
community influencers to tackle harmful gender norms and promotes joint decision-making between men 
and women using culturally appropriate and sensitive approaches to increase equity and inclusion. ADRA 
also works to ensure that community governance structures are equitable and include representation from 
women, youth and marginalized groups.
The main roles of facilitator are to follow and monitor and give advice to farmers as a The Participatory 
Performance Tracker (PPT) which is a participatory self-assessment tool that allows farmers belonging to 
a particular group to monitor their progress against collectively set targets and recommended practices. 
This exercise helps farmers of a producer group to discuss which practices they are adopting and the 
benefits they may be experiencing from such new adoptions. This also provides a platform for farmers to 
discuss any challenges that they may be facing in adopting certain practices. This participatory discussion 
creates an environment where farmers those with lower adoption rates may be encouraged by their peers 
to try out the improved practices in the next crop season and groups together with their field officers can 
make plans to address challenges the farmers are facing.
8. Annexes: 
Annex 1: Updated log frame
Number
Indicator
Desired 
Direct
(+/-)
Disaggregation
Baseline
End line
Goal: Improving access of vulnerable communities in Blue Nile State to basic WASH services, increasing 
their food security and self-reliance, and improving their ability to prevent and respond to gender-based 
violence
Sector 1: Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
Objective: Increased access to improved water sources, hygiene and sanitation practices.
Sub sector 1: Water Supply
Indicator 2:
Percent of households targeted
by WASH program that are
collecting all water for drinking,
cooking and hygiene from
improved water sources
(+) N/A 11%
90.4%
Indicator 3:
Percent of water user committees
created and/or trained by the
WASH program that are active at
least three (3) months after
Training.
(+)
Percentage 0% 95%
Sub-sector 2: Hygiene Promotion
Indicator 2: Percent of people targeted by the 
hygiene promotion program who
(+)
Percentage 11%
79.5%
37 | P a g e
know at least three (3) of the five
(5) Critical times to wash hands
Male 4% 36.1
Female 7% 43.4
Indicator 3:
Percent of households targeted
By the hygiene promotion
program with soap and water at a 
designated hand washing
Location.
(+) N/A 28%
56.9%
Indicator 4:
Percent of households targeted 
by the hygiene promotion 
program who store their drinking 
water safely in clean containers
(+) N/A 91%
92.7%
Sector 2: Agriculture and Food Security
Objective: Improved food production through increased access to agricultural input and resilient practices
Sub-sector 1: Improving Agricultural Production / Food Security
Indicator 1:
Number of months of household 
food self-sufficiency as a result
Of improved agricultural
production programming (+) N/A 2-3 months
4-6 
months