Sanitary Facilities
Kikandwa, Uganda

St. Mark Kikandwa Primary School is located in Kikandwa, Uganda, about 60 kilometres from the capital Kampala. Before the project began, the school had 14 pit latrines, which were insufficient for the approximately 700 students at the time and were nearly full. Due to inadequate sanitation facilities, the school faced closure. Therefore, it reached out to the Ugandan NGO SUUBI Community Projects. In 2020, SUUBI forwarded the request to Ingenieure ohne Grenzen e.V., shortened to IOG, for further assistance.

IOG is a non-profit organisation that works with local partners to provide basic services, building water, electricity and sanitation facilities as well as educational institutions. Our regional group in Aachen started the project together with SUUBI Community Projects in December 2020, to improve the sanitation provision at St. Mark Primary School. In total, we constructed 19 toilet cubicles and four washrooms at the school. All projects at Ingenieure ohne Grenzen are divided into three phases: the assessment, the implementation, and the evaluation.

During the assessment, we typically work out on-site in dialogue with our local partner organisation and the project participants what exactly the problem is, what possible solutions there are and whether we are able to provide support. In the implementation phase, the infrastructure is built by local workers. Furthermore, we provide the project participants with the necessary knowledge to use and maintain the infrastructure. We implemented the project at St. Mark Kikandwa Primary School in two phases. In each phase, a part of the sanitation infrastructure was built.

The final phase of our projects is the evaluation. In this phase, it is checked whether the project goals have been achieved and whether there is any further need. Close collaboration with local partner organisations is crucial for the success of our projects. In this project, we are working with SUUBI Community Projects. SUUBI is a Ugandan NGO, which advocates for access to clean water, improved healthcare, and a better learning environment in schools. We have been and continue to be in close contact with Steven Bengana, the founder and director of SUUBI.

Another important partner in this project was the construction company Curve. This is a relatively young construction company with good connections to our project partner. The company was awarded the contract for the tender in both implementations. In the project, we mainly communicated with Kenneth Kasobia, an engineer and the head of Curve. Direct communication with the workers was, however, limited, which was also due to the language barrier. During the assessment, we identified the school management, the teachers, the parents, and the school sponsor, the Church of Uganda, as important stakeholders.

The stakeholders are organised into two committees. The Parents Teacher Association and the School Management Committee. Through these committees, we were able to easily interact with the stakeholders and make or consider decisions together. For example, a member of the Parents Teacher Association expressed concerns regarding the size of the water tanks, which led us to build the water tank larger than originally planned. Together with the school management and the teachers, so-called caretakers were appointed.

Caretakers are teachers, who have special responsibility for the toilets and organise simple maintenance and cleaning tasks. With these caretakers, we conducted particularly detailed workshops. The students of St. Mark Kikandwa Primary School are mostly aged 6 to 13 years. However, there are also some older students aged up to 19 years. This also had to be taken into account in the planning of the sanitation facilities, for example, in the design of the toilet holes. The youngest students in grades P1 to P3 do not learn English yet.

Therefore, we could only communicate with them indirectly. The use of questionnaires was also made more difficult. Our educational concept for the students, however, provided for workshops with the teachers on teaching methods. In these workshops, we developed teaching methods on the topics of personal hygiene and correct use of dry separation toilets with the teachers. The materials we compiled for the teachers were in English and included as many pictures as possible.

However, many teaching methods did not rely on paper worksheets, but rather on holes drawn with chalk on the classroom floor, as found in the dry separation toilet. This is sensible, as the school can always use the methods and is not dependent on printed material. After introducing the key stakeholders, we now turn to the individual project phases, starting with the assessment.

For the exploration of the school in 2021, we were unable to travel to Uganda ourselves due to the COVID pandemic. Therefore, the NGO Engineers Without Borders USA visited the local site from their Field Office in Uganda. In advance, we developed numerous questions about the situation at the school, regarding the problems perceived by those responsible, concerning the toilets and the various stakeholders. We also took various samples on-site to be evaluated in a lab.

Engineers Without Borders USA collected all the requested data for us and presented possible types of toilets for construction at the school in a discussion with the stakeholders. Finally, we decided together with the stakeholders to build dry separation toilets. In dry separation toilets, urine and faeces are already separated during use. The urine flows into a canister per cubicle, which is regularly emptied and stored in a large IBC tank. After about six weeks, the pathogens have then reduced sufficiently, so that the urine can be diluted and used as fertiliser.

Each cubicle has two faeces chambers, which are used alternately every six months. After each use, some cover material is added, for example ash, placed on the faeces, which helps them to dry. After six months of drying during which the other chamber is in use, the faeces can be composted along with other organic waste and subsequently used as fertiliser. The production of fertiliser was the most convincing argument for the school to opt for the dry separation toilets. However, there are also other benefits.

For example, the toilets operate without water and the dry material does not produce odours, which would attract insects. Furthermore, the chambers can be emptied with minimal protective equipment, while in pit latrines companies are hired to pump out the tanks, which of course incurs costs. In short, we are convinced by the technology. After the assessment and the decision for the suitable technology, the first phase of implementation followed.

As we need some lead time to create the building plans and to plan workshops for the toilet maintenance, we decided to bridge the gap, by pumping out the full tank of the pit latrines once. As there was a higher demand for new toilets before our first implementation, we planned the construction of a boys’ toilet with six cubicles. Additionally, an accessible toilet was planned, which can also be used by the teaching staff. The implementation initially took place remotely.

As we could not be on site during the construction, we tried to communicate as much as possible with our project partner SUUBI and the local construction company through pictures, videos, and phone calls. This worked largely well. However, we could not detail every step through this method. This led, for example, to the construction company building a urinal trough in the boys’ toilets, which was not included in the plans. Although it was a good idea, some moisture issues arose in the crawlspace after the construction, the cause of which we could not precisely trace due to the structural changes.

Fortunately, the problems subsided after a while on their own. Just in time for the inspection, travel to Uganda was again possible, allowing our departure team to visit the toilets and make final adjustments. The trip also served to strengthen the relationship with our project partner and the school community, collect further data at the school and conduct workshops.

We prepared the workshops on four topics. The target group for the workshops is not the students, but mainly the teachers. We want to train them, so that they can conduct their own lessons on the topics. The first planned workshop addressed the topic of personal hygiene and focused on proper handwashing. However, it became clear in talks with the school community, that this knowledge is already present and the teaching on this topic is already very good so we decided to skip this workshop.

We mainly prepared workshops that focus on the dry toilets. There was an introductory workshop attended by all the teachers. We deliberately held this at the start of the construction, to provide the school community with the background for the construction site in more detail. In a follow-up workshop, further topics such as composting and the structural components of the dry separation toilet were addressed. Difficulties we encountered during the implementation included finding a good time for the workshops to find, as the teachers supervise their classes all day long. And on the other hand, to maintain the attention of the participants, We learned that long periods of sitting during the workshops was not effective, while relaying the content while walking around the construction site was much better received.

In the second implementation, we then focused on the girls at the school. As part of this phase of our project, we built a large building at the school with a total of 12 toilets and 4 washrooms for girls. The building was divided into three areas, which are used by different age groups. For the number of toilets, we used the WHO standards as a guideline, which account for 45 students per toilet.

The technology of the girls’ toilets built in the second phase is fundamentally the same as that of the boys’ toilets. We drew important lessons from the experience building the first toilets. We found that the buildings must be constructed more robustly. For example, all pipes for urine and water were placed in the walls or under an additional concrete ceiling. In addition, we replaced standard taps with tap outlets to reduce water consumption. The urine canisters were placed under the washrooms, making them more accessible.

In the boys’ toilets, we had placed them in a long, low corridor. This made emptying cumbersome. Additionally, there are issues with the canisters themselves, as they cannot be particularly large, otherwise they become too heavy to carry. At the same time, they must be large enough, to collect the urine from one day. Regular emptying is so far the best solution. Additionally, we planned more IBC tanks, to store the larger quantities of urine from the new girls’ toilets.

During the evaluation of the already built boys’ toilet, we found that the children also used the new building for play, as there were hardly any alternatives in the schoolyard. Initially, there were also problems with the regular cleaning and provision of the cover material. However, we promised to address this together, and after our departure, Steven Bengana reported that his team was able to observe a significant improvement during regular visits.

In addition to the toilets, we initiated the construction of two composters before the second phase, which were used for the first time together with the caretakers on the trip. After a theoretical workshop, we began to empty the chambers and compost the material with green waste from the surroundings. Some teachers use this directly for hands-on teaching. However, a challenge arises that the compost must be regularly turned and watered to reliably kill bacteria.

However, we notice that this is difficult for the caretakers to achieve, as they also have a full working day as teachers. To still ensure that all limits are adhered to, before the compost is used, we have planned laboratory tests. This is important, as the school has a great interest in using the compost as fertiliser in the future. Similar to the departure after the first implementation, we also conducted workshops this time. With this, we wanted to ensure that the sanitation facilities function well in the long term.

As further individuals were selected to be responsible for the girls’ toilets, we trained them as caretakers. We were able to observe that they increasingly took on responsibility during our stay and successfully conveyed the information to the children. Another development we observed was the growing conviction of our project partner Steven Bengana regarding the dry toilets. Initially, he was sceptical, but after his own research and visiting a comparable project, he fundamentally changed his opinion. He is now one of the biggest advocates of this technology and actively works to promote it further in the region.

Even after the two implementations, the project at St. Mark Kikandwa Primary School is not yet complete. One thing we are currently working on is the construction of additional IBC tanks to collect urine. The IBC tanks that were built in an earlier project phase are no longer sufficient, because, among other things, we have now built more dry toilets. We are therefore adding more. The construction is relatively easy to implement and can be well coordinated from a distance. In this, our partner organisation SUUBI is again especially important, as the staff from SUUBI can travel to the school for us and oversee the construction.

The final step in our project is the concluding evaluation and it is central, to assess the long-term impact of our work to be able to assess. In doing so, we are guided by the method of results-oriented project planning, which has formed the structural framework of our project from the very beginning. Right at the start of the project, we worked with our partner organisation and the project participants on site to analyse the initial situation. What are the specific challenges?

What changes do we want to achieve? From this, we derived goals and measurable target values, so-called outcomes, outputs, and associated indicators. One of our outcomes was that the staff should be able to operate the sanitation facilities independently in the future. The corresponding indicator was the proportion of functional sanitation facilities, based on observations and discussions with the school. Now we are checking whether this goal has been achieved. And if not, what the reasons are and whether improvements are necessary.

Depending on the evaluation results, we will decide ultimately whether further support from us is sensible or necessary, or whether the project can fully hand over responsibility to the school. If it becomes clear that the school permanently accepts the dry separation toilets and operates them independently, then we consider the goal achieved and the project can be concluded.

In parallel with the implementation of our project, we are currently dealing with a broader topic, the standardisation of dry toilet construction at Engineers Without Borders in Uganda. In the project work on site, we observed that each new project group, us included, often starts from scratch and develops individual solutions for the respective school. This approach allows for a high degree of flexibility, but it also leads to valuable knowledge being lost and many work steps having to be repeated.

To make this process more efficient in the future, we are working on systematically collecting, documenting and standardizing central elements of the project work, such as workshop materials, plans or quantity calculations, and making them accessible. In this way, we want to provide future project groups with a reliable foundation, on which they can further develop their own concepts, without having to start from scratch with each project.

The impetus for this initiative came from our local project partner, and we share the assessment that standardisation can bring great value not only within IOG, but also for other organisations working in the field of sanitary infrastructure, can bring significant benefits. In conclusion, we look back on our project with satisfaction, especially because not everything went smoothly. Such challenges are part of it and provide valuable experiences, that each individual takes with them in future projects. What would be the biggest challenges in gaining acceptance in the community?

On the one hand, the concept must find acceptance in the community. By having a large number of students not only learn to use the toilets, but also get to know the advantages and functions in workshops, it allows for the knowledge and benefits to be spread. Similarly, we work with the construction companies and try to find a solution that takes into account both our planning and the Ugandan construction methods. Through continuous exchange with all parties, including the construction firm before, after, and during the implementation, we share knowledge and experiences.

What did the planning process look like? The planning of the toilets that were built during the first implementation, was based on the planning and experiences of a different IOG project team, which had already built dry separation toilets in Sierra Leone. The planning of the following toilets, which were built during the second implementation, has been further developed based on the experience from the first implementation. The planning process of the boys’ toilets and the accessible toilet took approximately 10 months.

Both buildings were modelled in 3D, to help the other participants visualise the project. During the planning process, the boys’ toilets underwent structural analysis, and design plans as well as execution plans were created. The planning took place in a construction subgroup within our project team. The planning process for the girls’ toilets that were built during the second implementation could be significantly simplified. The girls’ toilets were not specifically modelled in 3D. Furthermore, the existing plans could be partially adopted and adjusted. Nevertheless, time was spent on detailed planning, which was adjusted based on the findings from the first implementation. In total, the planning process for the girls’ toilets took about 6 months.

How was the composting implemented? In fact, the temperature measurements during the composting revealed that we only reached just over 40°C in the first attempt. However, composting should be seen as only one safety measure among several. We had the dry matter from the faeces chamber tested in the laboratory after storage and found that already through drying and the ash, three out of four hygienic parameters were still met before the composting, below the limits from DIN SPEC 91421.

This is a type of standard for the use of products from dry toilets in horticulture. The last such hygienic parameter concerns a spore-forming bacterium, which is correspondingly persistent. The measurement after composting has shown that this value has been reduced by about 400 times and the other values have also decreased further. After composting, the crop restriction is then a further safety measure, that is, the restriction of the use of the material to such plants that do not have direct contact with the soil, for example, banana trees instead of cassava. Overall, it has become clear to us again, that the staff carrying out the composting plays a particularly important role and that they must be well-trained. We will continue to work together on this.

What did the initial collaboration with Engineers Without Borders look like? We held extensive online meetings and constantly exchanged information with the local partner organisation. In addition, we created a list of questions, which we discussed with Engineers Without Borders USA. EWB USA also has sufficient experience, so the methodology did not need to be discussed and EWB was left to it. In addition, we conducted interviews. The head of our partner organisation, SUUBI Community Projects Uganda, who is constantly on site and with whom there was much exchange, took over communication and was the local contact for any queries. Due to the long-standing collaboration, there were already some projects that we had carried out together, which were thematically comparable or very similar. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding was already in place.

How is the fertiliser used in practice? Fertilisers and urine could either be used by the school itself, for example in the school’s garden, given to the community, or sold to external parties. Generally, it has emerged in discussions that the resulting fertiliser is a major incentive, as it is in high demand. Tendentially, personal use is therefore valued higher in priority than a possible sale. With other toilet technologies, emptying the toilets even incurs costs, as an external service provider must be involved. The advantage of cost avoidance and the additional benefit of the fertiliser is a frequently mentioned plus point among all project partners.