Table 2. Test of balance across treatment and control villages using pre-intervention (2005) data in study of community demand-directed water, sanitation and hygiene programme in Maharasthra, India.
Covariate of interest, mean/average value | Treatment | Control | z-valuea |
---|---|---|---|
Based on secondary census data used in matching model | |||
Percentage of children < 6 years old in village | 17 | 16 | 0.74 |
Percentage of scheduled castes in village | 10 | 8 | 1.78 |
Percentage of scheduled tribes in village | 29 | 31 | −0.36 |
Percentage of female workers in village | 45 | 45 | −0.05 |
Percentage of cultivators in village | 49 | 52 | −1.18 |
Percentage of agricultural labourers in village | 39 | 34 | 1.55 |
No. of households in village | 385 | 387 | −0.03 |
Household size in village (no. of dwellers) | 5 | 5 | 0.03 |
Percentage of literate females in village | 52 | 54 | −1.05 |
Percentage of households with private tap in block | 42 | 42 | 0.07 |
Percentage of households without toilets in block | 83 | 84 | −0.49 |
Based on baseline (2005) household survey data | |||
Percentage of children aged < 5 years with diarrhoea | 11 | 10 | 1.62 |
Percentage of households using private tap | 18 | 24 | −1.55 |
Percentage of households using private toilet | 13 | 10 | 0.96 |
No. of critical times a caregiver washed hands | 2.3 | 2.4 | −0.51 |
No. of critical times a child washed hands | 1.1 | 1.2 | −0.44 |
No. of households treating drinking water | 64 | 63 | 0.11 |
No. of households stating public well water quality was poor | 19 | 24 | −1.77 |
No. of households stating public tap water quality was poor | 24 | 22 | 0.44 |
a For mean differences after adjusting standard errors to account for clustering at the village level.
Data from Pattanayak et al., 2009.32