Table 3. Household Ownership of a Private Latrine and Latrine Characteristics Before and After CLTS Interventions in Ethiopia.
| latrine
ownership |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| variable | baseline | follow-up | change | p value | |
| infrastructure | any observed latrine | 79% | 77% | –1.1% | 0.476 |
| durable flooring materialb | 21% | 17% | –3.3% | 0.139 | |
| stable and safe flooringc | 54% | 62% | 8.7% | <0.001 | |
| fully intact walls | 4% | 6% | 2.3% | 0.044 | |
| intact door | 5% | 9% | 3.5% | 0.005 | |
| protective roof | 3% | 8% | 4.3% | <0.001 | |
| complete privacy | 4% | 6% | 2.5% | 0.037 | |
| improvedd | 17% | 16% | –1.4% | 0.460 | |
| upkeep | hole covered | 2% | 8% | 6.5% | <0.001 |
| clean (no feces on floor) | 48% | 53% | 5.0% | 0.046 | |
| less than ∼10 flies | 56% | 61% | 5.1% | 0.048 | |
| handwashing station with water or cleansing material | 14% | 18% | 4.5% | 0.044 | |
a
This analysis covers the 1684 of 1692 privately owned latrines that were observed at baseline and 1779 of 1803 at follow-up. Variables are based on surveyor observations, who had descriptions so that latrine categorization was consistent. Percentages are simple proportions. A t test was used to check for significant differences. Percentages and p values account for unequal selection probability, nonresponse rates, and village clustering. ICC = 0.317 for household ownership of any observed latrine at the village level.
b
Concrete or wood.
c
Based on surveyors’ observations and judgment.