At the time of the health survey I realized with the local Health Assistant, January 2008, thirteen houses in Limón had no latrine. We also noticed that latrines in the area do not utilize a moveable slab to cover the pit; instead, the pit is generally covered with a crude combination of logs covered with weak concrete. The repetitive cost of a non-moveable slab creates a barrier to proper latrine use in that the users procrastinate the transition to a new pit when the current pit becomes full, greatly decreasing the benefits of the latrine to health and the environment. The appropriate technology of a moveable slab (reinforced concrete) removes the costs (money and time) associated with covering a new pit, requiring nothing more than four people for five minutes to relocate it. Additionally, the structural integrity of a moveable slab is far superior to an average local slab. We discussed this information with leaders in the community and I was eventually invited to a meeting of the local Health Committee – a group of volunteers who work with the Health Assistant to maintain the health post.
I worked with a group of three project coordinators from our initial development of the project through the construction of the latrines and evaluation. We sought funding from the Governor, Mayor, Provincial Representative, National Legislator, and the Ministry of Health; we were allocated fiberglass seats for the latrines from the Rural Water and Sanitation program of the Ministry of Health. The funds for the remaining latrine materials were solicited and received through Peace Corps’ Office of Private Sector Initiatives, with funding from individual donors (giving an incredible amount - over one thousand dollars) and allocations made to Peace Corps-Panama by NGOs. We received a total of 1,397 dollars for our project, developed to provide the moveable slab and zinc roof for fifteen latrines, though it ended up providing for twenty latrines. The latrines were allocated according to the survey data, with the houses lacking a latrine receiving priority. Deadlines and attendance requirements, including attendance at a health and hygiene presentation by the Health Assistant, were established by the project coordinators and me, which eventually led to four invitees being replaced due to non-compliance, and is the reason why there are still three houses with no latrine.
The work for the initial fourteen latrines (one of the original fifteen participants was removed after missing two deadlines and refusing to pay a fine) was split up into several phases. Each recipient was required to have the latrine pit and the corner posts for the latrine hut ready prior to the date I purchased the materials; they then had to carry the materials to their house prior to the slab construction day. After the construction of the slab, the recipients had one week to finish the walls of their respective latrine hut prior to receiving the zinc roof; a two-dollar fine established in advance to apply to anyone not meeting this deadline – given the 35-dollar value of the zinc, this fine is nominal. Four houses were a few days late with the walls and accordingly paid the fine prior to receiving the zinc roof.
During the initial construction phase of the project I trained the three coordinators in the proper procedures through a form of “on-the-job training.” The coordinators worked together under my instruction for the construction of each of their moveable slabs, rotating through the tasks of measuring and cutting reinforcement steel, measuring and cutting lumber for the frame, spacing and tying the steel, mixing the concrete to a proper ratio, and vibrating the poured concrete; additionally, I highlighted management techniques including delegating tasks. In general, the capacity to properly work with reinforced concrete was developed within each coordinator. Each coordinator then led a group of recipients during two work days while I supervised from one group to the other; this demonstrated the coordinators’ capacity to both lead a small group construction project and properly work with reinforced concrete. In turn, the coordinator-led construction served as an introduction, at the very least, into properly working with reinforced concrete along with each of the aforementioned individual tasks.
I emphasized the importance of continuous evaluation throughout the project. After the group construction days I met with the coordinators to discuss areas of improvement; they indicated that one of the recipients arrived late, and through further discussion determined that a fine may have prevented the tardiness. We discussed the coming phase of the latrine wall construction and the coordinators determined that establishing presently a fine for anyone who does not meet the deadline may help prevent delays; this led to the establishment of the two-dollar fine. The significant value of the zinc (thirty-five dollars, roughly half of the total material costs) provided a strong incentive for the participants to meet the deadline or pay the fine.
Seventeen latrines were constructed in Limón. With these seventeen new latrines, the project decreased the number of houses with no latrine by ten, decreased the number of latrines in poor condition by five, and decreased the number latrines in okay condition by two.
If I were to start this project from the beginning again, I would make several changes. The most fundamental relates to the beneficiary contribution. I would require a cash or material (e.g., the sack of cement) contribution by each participant. The ease with which we acquired the 8.50 dollars/cement from each non-Limón participant leads me to believe the amount is below the average amount that would be willingly paid; a “willingness-to-pay” survey would be a fitting exercise that may indicate the most-appropriate contribution amount (Contact: PCV Steve Russo). This would help in preventing non-recipients from waiting idly for a free latrine instead of investing their own money sooner. I discussed this idea with the project coordinators and they are open to the idea though I am not confident they will implement it.
I would also follow the process for completing all aspects of the latrine in a single day, starting with the construction of slab directly over the pit. Critical to this process is the readiness of the over-pit bed and wall materials prior to the construction; these materials would need to be verified on a pre-work-day deadline, which could be the same deadline as that for the pit and corner posts. The zinc would be withheld until the materials are verified, and a fine may aid in preventing delays.
Building one demonstration latrine for a community organization or institution such as a school or health post would be beneficial for training coordinators and increasing community interest in the project; this is something I think would have been very valuable for our project.
A final consideration in similar projects would be incentivization of the coordinators’ work. In this project no problems arose with the coordinators but it was a significant time commitment for each. Of the initial pre-planned work days (two), Coordinator P worked both days for a total of six slabs, Coordinator D worked one day on three slabs, and Coordinator L worked one day on two slabs; there was a mild complaint after the work days from Coordinator P, though he had understood in advance that he would be working disproportionately more. An incentive for the coordinator to oversee the slab construction as well as the entire latrine completion (e.g., motivating the beneficiary to meet deadlines) may both directly motivate the coordinator to seek a) completion of latrines started and b) expansion of the project and indirectly lead to motivation of the participants to a) meet deadlines and b) complete their respective latrines. I put forward the idea during evaluation discussions, offering an example of the incentive as one dollar per latrine completed and the idea was received with mixed feelings but eventually considered to be an appropriate improvement. This practice could lead to coordinators rushing latrines in an attempt to complete more, faster to the detriment of quality and may be seen as conniving or generally inappropriate by the participants and other non-coordinators; the idea of incentivization and potential negative impacts should be widely discussed and considered prior to implementation.
During my going-away party, we sold my belongings that I could not take back and raised $100. This money was given to the Health Committee to build more latrines; combined with some surplus materials and collected fines, the money should be sufficient to complete two more latrines. This will serve as an excellent test to see if the Committee can function independently.
