End-line Study on

Support to FDMN in Cox’s Bazar and Bhasan Char in the

Education and WASH Sectors Project.
Programme Document No.: BGD/PCA20187/PD2021425
In camps 8E and 14, Ukhiya Upazila, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh

Submitted to:
AGRAJATTRA
Haque Tower-2 (3rd Floor)
Alir Jahal, Cox’s Bazar
Bangladesh.

Submitted by:
Md. Barkat Ullah, PhD
Individual Consultant/Team Leader
House # 43/C, Road # 02, Chand Miah Housing
Mohammadpur, Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh.
Cell: +880 1934 391 778
Email: barkat.mou@gmail.com

November 2023
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
SL. # CONTENTS PAGE NO.
Acknowledgement iii
List Of Tables iv
List Of Figures iv
Abbreviation v
Executive Summary vi
1.0 CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION AND INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction and Background 1
1.2 Objectives of the Study 2
2.0 CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY
2.1 Locale of the Study 3
2.2 Study Approach 3
2.3 Method of Data Collection 4
2.3.1 Quantitative Data Collection 4
2.3.2 Qualitative Data Collection 4
2.3.2.1 Focus Group Discussion 4
2.3.2.2 Key Informant Interview 4
2.3.3 Literature/Desk Review 5
2.3.4 Evaluation Design and Sampling 5
2.3.5 Evaluation Design and Sampling 6
2.3.5 Data Collection Management and Analysis 6
2.3.6 Ethical Considerations 6
3.0 CHAPTER III: STUDY FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
3.1 Access to Adequate and Safe Water 7
3.2 Water Collection 7
3.3 Key Challenges Faced by Women in Water Collection 8
3.4 Access to Adequate Safe Water 8
3.5 Water Container 10
3.6 Water Quantity 11
3.7 Water Treatment
3.8 Comparison between Base-line and End-line survey on water access and 11
management
3.9 Sanitary Facilities and Hygiene Services 11
3.10 Challenges Faced by Women and Girls Using the Same Latrine 12
3.11 Access to Sanitation 12
3.12 Sanitation and Hygiene 12
3.13 Defecation Practices and Access to Latrines 13
3.14 Accessible Latrine 14
3.15 Observation of the Latrine 14
3.16 Comparison of base-line and end-line survey about Sanitation and Hygine 15
3.17 Bathing Facility 15
3.18 Community Awareness and Participation 15
3.19 Personal Hygiene 15
3.20 Hand Washing and Soap 16
3.21 Hygiene Kit 16
3.22 Cleaning of Water Containers 16

i
3.23 Waste Accumulation 17
3.24 Work Burden of Women Related to WASH 17
3.25 Awareness of Stopping Early Marriage 18
3.26 Water-Borne Disease 19
3.27 Awareness of Dengue Fever 19
3.28 Environmental Situation, Polythene Use, and Plantation Initiatives 19
3.29 Gender-based Violence 20
3.30 Climate Change and Disaster Preparedness 20
3.31 WASH Committee 21
3.4 Impacts of the Project 22
3.5 Recommendation 25
3.6 Conclusion 26
3.7 References 27
4.0 CHAPTER IV: LIST OF ANNEXURES
4.1 Annexure I: Household Survey Questionnaire 28
4.2 Annexure II: FGD Checklist 28
4.3 Annexure III: KII Checklist 28
4.4 Annexure IV: HH Survey Guideline and Plan 28
4.5 Annexure V: Raw Field Data 28
4.6 Annexure VI: ToR 28

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I expressed my gratitude to the project's stakeholders especially Camp 8E and 14 of the Rohingya
Refugees who provided the necessary information for the end-line evaluation. We want to thank the
surveyed households, who allocated their valuable time for the interview.

Special thanks to the WASH Volunteers, and Enumerators of the evaluation who collected the
required data from the different stakeholders.

The author recalls all the concerns of the Camp in Charge (CiC) for his approval to enter the camps
and provide administrative support during the data collection.

It is also grateful to Mr. Mohammad Helal Uddin, Executive Director, and Mr. Md. Abir Ahmed, MEAL
Director for initiating to undertake the study and assisting in accomplishing it.

Special thanks to Mr. Md. Mizanur Rahman, the Monitoring Officer, for his administrative support.

Last but not least, there is most gratefulness to the donor (Global Affairs of Canada), and supported
organization (BRAC) for implementing the project by which it has been possible to complete the
study.

Md. Barkat Ullah, PhD

Individual Consultant/Team Leader

iii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 : Household Interview
Table 2 : Focus Group Discussion
Table 3 : Key Informant Interview
Table 4 : Sources of Safe Drinking and Cooking Water
Table 5 : Age Group-wise Water Collection for Household
Table 6 : Status of Water Supply Point
Table 7 : Type of Household Latrine in Rohingya Camp
Table 8 : Hand Washing Time
Table 9 : Hand Wash after Using Latrine
Table 10 : Defecation of Children (under 05 years of Age)
Table 11 : Comparison between Baseline Survey and End-line Survey
Table 12 : Level of Child Marriage or Violence against Women
Table 13 : Climate Changes in the Past 5 Years
Table 14 : Awareness of Climate Change
Table 15 : Water Collection Point after the Disaster.
Table 16 : Main Decision-Maker in the Household

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 : A Map of Bangladesh Showing the Study District
Figure 2 : Camp-wise Interview Status
Figure 3 : Age Group-wise Respondents
Figure 4 : FGD with Rohingya Community
Figure 5 : Comparison between Baseline and End-line survey
Figure 6 : Sanitation and Hygiene
Figure 7 : Hand Washing Time
Figure 8 : Comparison between Baseline Survey and End-line Survey in Chart

iv
 ABBREVIATION

AWD : Acute Watery Diarrhea

CiC : Camp in Charge
DRR : Disaster Risk Reduction
FGD : Focus Group Discussion
FDMN : Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals
GBV : Gender-Based Violence
HH : Household
KII : Key Informants Interview
SRHR : Sexual and reproductive health and rights
UNICEF : United Nations International Children's Education Fund
UNHCR : United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
WASH : Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
WHO : World Health Organization

v
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Applying quantitative and qualitative tools and approaches, the end-line assessment was conducted in November
2023. The study was conducted at Camps 8E and 14 in Rohingya refugee Camps of Ukhia Upazila in Cox’s Bazar
district of Bangladesh. Data collection was done with tablets in the KoBo Toolbox. The samples were drawn
systematically.

A mixed method and fully participatory approach were followed during the study including (a).
Quantitative research through questionnaire surveys, (b). Qualitative researches through facilitating
FGD and KII, and (c). Literature/desk reviews. The standard sample size for data collection has been
capitalized. Therefore, 421 Households (350 from Camp 8E and 71 from Camp 14) have been considered
to conduct the study.

It is observed that the impacts of water, sanitation, hygiene promotion and waste management are
noticeable in the end-line evaluation compared to the baseline study of the stated project. The highest
percentage (93.11%) of households collects water with a view to drinking and cooking. The water
collection sources are shallow tube wells, deep tube wells and bottled water. Around 7% of camp
residents collect water from other sources. Only 0.24% of residents use bottled water.

It was reported that about 47% of male members of the households collect water followed by 45% of
adult females. It is the most common, family member to collect water followed by Child Boys (11-18
years) at about 6%, Child girls at 1.43% and under 11 years at 1.66%. Only 89% of households reported
that a combined travel and waiting time to collect water is about 30 minutes.

Around 36 % of respondents reported that they face challenges and around 64% of respondents said
that there are no challenges during water collection. They reported that they faced challenges earlier
which are now reduced.
 It is commonly reported that the primary sources of drinking water were Tap Stands (93% of
households) whereas in the baseline survey around 61% of respondents depended on tap
stands for drinking and cooking.
 Around 91% of HHs reported that the existing water supply is sufficient for their household’s
requirements.
 In terms of water collection, male engagement has increased. Around 47% of households reported that
adult males are engaged in collecting water followed by 45% of adult women and 8% of Children. The
male also assists the women during cooking and cloth washing.
 Females preferred to get a pitcher instead of a bucket or Jerrycan for carrying water. On the other
hand, male and adolescent children preferred Jerrycan for carrying the water.
 Women also reported in the FGD and KII sessions that they faced insecurity due to the presence of
men in water points during the collection of water.
 The households do not treat the drinking water. Because they believe that the drinking water
source is safe as the supplier treats it before supplying.

About 93 % of respondents reported that the water supply points were currently functional. Among the

vi
respondents, the male and female are 59% and 34% respectively. Only 6% of respondents thought the
water supply points were not functional.

About 91% of respondents reported that the supplied water was enough to meet their households'
needs. This water is used for drinking, cooking, laundry, bathing, etc. Around 7% of respondents
reported that the water supply points partially meet their needs while 2% only said that supply points do
not meet their needs. Around 2% of respondents did not feel safe collecting enough water to meet their daily
household' needs.

Around 98% of respondents reported they use sanitary latrines with slabs. Among the 98% of respondents, the male
and female respondents were 61% and 37% respectively. Below 01% (.48%) said that they use sanitary latrines with
septic tanks. More than 01% said they use open latrines. Around 51% of HHs use shared latrines, and 28% of
HHs mentioned that they use separate latrines.
 The most reported defecation (sanitation options) for household members is five, shared latrines
were 51%, and single-household latrines, buckets, and open defecation were not reported.
 The accessible latrine is one of the beauties of this project. This latrine includes a handle inside,
sufficient water, a commode, and a single-use pattern.
 Every household received hygiene kits including Balti, Mog, sandals, toothbrushes, and toothpaste
to use when necessary.
 The railing on the way of the latrine was demanded but not found.

More than 93% of respondents reported that they received awareness messages through attending the sessions
while about 7% did not attend any sessions. Around 55% of HHs reported that they have hand-washing facilities
near their latrines. About 86%, 90%, 87%, 67%, 87%, and 48% of respondents reported that they washed their
hands before serving food, before eating, before cooking, before breastfeeding, after using the latrine, cleaning
children's lower body, etc. The majority acknowledged that the accessible latrine has made them and their family
members' lives easy. About 63% of respondents reported that they kept their drains clean. About 93 % of
latrines were found functional and usable.

Around 78% of HHs reported that they have separate bathrooms while about 22% of HHs has no separate
bathrooms. Most of the households in WASH-related awareness sessions such as house-to-house visits,
participation in discussion sessions, and study information education and communication (IEC) materials and
received messages on health and hygiene issues participated. Households were aware of personal hygiene and
improved health through attending meetings and awareness sessions.

Among a total of 421 respondents to the study, most of them reported that they use soap to wash their hands, and
almost all respondents (98%) reported that they use colour-coded bins for different types of household waste. 50%
of respondents reported that child marriage is not common in their community at present. About 82% of
respondents reported that the gender-based violence situation has improved compared to the previous period.

vii
 CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 Introduction and Background

Access to safe drinking water, improved sanitation, and good hygiene are among the prime concerns
around the globe (Joshi et al. 2013). Improper sanitation and waste management are the causes of ill
health, disease, and death throughout the world, particularly under extremely dense living conditions in
refugee camps in the global. Inadequate sanitation and waste management are two of the world’s most
significant causes of poor health conditions and anthropogenic environmental degradation. Globally,
only four out of 10 people have access to safely managed sanitation services which means that more
than half of the world’s population lives under improper sanitation (UNICEF 2019). Over 673 million
people are forced to practice open defecation in the world (WHO 2019). Among many other health
impacts, poor sanitation leads to diarrheal deaths, the spread of tropical diseases, malnutrition, etc. In
addition, poor sanitation connects to other socio-economic crises such as sexual assault, illiteracy, lack
of access to formal education, domestic violence, and anxiety or psychological trauma (Pommells et al.
2018; Biswas & Joshi 2021).

Bangladesh has made remarkable progress in advancing access to water and sanitation services by
increasing access to drinking water and reducing open defecation practices. Safe drinking water,
sanitation and hygiene are crucial to human health and well-being. Safe WASH is not only a prerequisite
to health but contributes to livelihood, and assists in creating resilient communities living in healthy
environments. More than one million forcefully displaced Myanmar nationals as Rohingya are living in
the camps in the Cox’s Bazar district in Bangladesh. Approximately 910,000 Rohingya refugees are
residing in Bangladesh (UNHCR 2019). The Rohingya refugees are one of the most ill-treated and
persecuted refugee groups in the world (Milton et al. 2017). Due to overcrowding, poor water,
sanitation, and hygiene conditions, refugees are at high risk of communicable diseases (Phillips et al.
2015).

The Rohingya refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar have combined high population density and challenging
environmental conditions to produce a crisis with especially acute water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH)
requirements. The WASH situation in the camps is limited access to clean water, sanitation challenges,
health risks, overcrowding, and environmental impacts. This mass migration has created extensive
pressure on services existing in the refugee camps and makeshift settlements. Essential services,
including food, water, health service access, and mostly shelter and sanitation, are insufficient in
properly accommodating the needs of the refugees (Iacucci et al. 2017). The unsanitary living conditions
accompanied by poor water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) practices have facilitated the emergence of
many infectious diseases such as diarrhea, cholera, chickenpox, and diphtheria. (Ahmed et al. 2018).
Therefore, the present study was conducted to investigate and evaluate the WASH practices among
Rohingya refugees living in Bangladesh.

1.2 Objectives of the Study

The overall objective of the baseline study is to measure the changes that occurred among the targeted
Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals- FDMN community according to the stated objectives of the
project through an end-line evaluation by the external source and also understand and capture the
current gaps in terms of qualitative and quantitative aspects of WASH services in the implemented
locations/blocks.

1
Specific Objectives
 To measure WASH facilities' management and technical efficiency by the Forcibly Displaced
Myanmar Nationals- FDMN community.
 To measure the environmental situation as well as the climate resilience context.
 To assess the current gaps and necessary interventions required as per the WASH service
context.
 To assess intervention performance in terms of sustainable context.
 To assess the types of WASH facilities used by gender segregation focusing on women and girls.
 To assess the safety and safeguarding aspect of the project focusing on women and girls
considering gender engagement parameters.

2
 CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY

The methodology delineates the locale of the study followed by the study approach, quantitative
(interview schedule) and qualitative data collection (focus group discussion, and key informant
interview), and literature review (secondary data) on the WASH sector of the stated project.

2.1 Locale of the Study

The study was conducted at two Rohingya Camps (camp 8E and 14) at Ukhia Upazila in Cox’s Bazar
district of Bangladesh. The detailed locale of the study is given in Table 1.

Figure 1: A Map of Bangladesh Showing the Study District

2.2 Study Approach

A mixed method and fully participatory approach were followed during the study, including (a).
Quantitative research through questionnaire surveys, (b). Qualitative researches through facilitating
FGD and KII, and (c). Literature/desk reviews.

3
2.3 Method of Data Collection
Both quantitative and qualitative data (primary data) and secondary data (literature review) were
collected in conducting the study. The data collection methods are as follows:

2.3.1 Quantitative Data Collection

Quantitative data was collected from Camp 8E and 14 of the Rohingya allocated locations by using a
structured interview schedule having an open and closed form of questions. The Kobo Toolbox app was
used for face-to-face interviews for the collection of data from households. The total number of
collected data by household interview is given below in Table 1.

Table 1: Household Interview

Name of No. of quantitative data

Sl. # Name of Upazia District
Camp Male Female Total
1. 8E 196 145 350
Ukhia Upazila Cox’s Bazar
2. 14 67 13 71
Total 263 158 421

The interview schedule for the collection of data from the field is enclosed in Annex I.

2.3.2 Qualitative Data Collection

2.3.2.1 Focus Group Discussion

Qualitative data was collected through conducting Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) by using a semi-
structured checklist. The participants of FGDs were representatives of the Rohingya refugees under
Camps 8E, and 14 at Ukhia Upazial of Cox’s Bazar district. A total of nine FGDs were conducted which are
mentioned in Table 2.

Table 2: Focus Group Discussion

Sl. # Name of Camp Name of Block Name of Sub-Block No. of conducted FGD
1. B B-82 2
2. B B-45 1
3. B B-72 1
8E
4. D B-72 1
5. D B-78 1
6. D B-89 1
7. 14 D D-3 2
Total 09

A checklist of the FGD conduction is enclosed in Annex II.

2.3.2.2 Key Informant Interview

Qualitative data was also collected by Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) through a semi-structured
checklist. The key informants were Camp in Charge (CiC), Majhi, Sub-Majhi, teachers, religious leaders
and pertinent staff of the project. A total of 12 KIIs were conducted which are mentioned in Table 3.

4
Table 3: Key Informant Interview

Sl. # Name of Key Informant Position Camp Block Sub-Block No. of KII
1. Mr. Rabindra Chakma Camp in Charge 8E 1
2. Mr. Nelson Nokrek WASH Focal 8E 1
3. MMr. Md. Alom Religious Leader 8E 1
4. Mr. Md. Abdul Gani Majhi 8E B B-82 1
5. Mr. Md. Abdul Aziz Imam 8E B B-45 1
6. Mr. Md. Faruque Project Staff 8E, & 14 1
7. Ms. Dipti Rani Chakma Project Staff 8E, & 14 1
8. Mr. Abu Tayab Majhi 8E B B-70 1
9. Mr. Md. Abdur Rahman Religious Leader 8E B B-72 1
10. Mr. Hssain Jahar Teacher 14 D B-3 1
11. Mr. Mahbubur Rahman Head Majhi 14 1
12. Mr. Omar Faruque Sub Majhi 14 D B-89 1
Total 12

A checklist of the KII conduction is enclosed in Annex III.

2.3.3 Literature/Desk Review

The secondary documents pertinent to the project including the proposal, baseline study report,
monthly report, half-yearly report, annual report, etc. were carefully reviewed. The secondary
documents were also reviewed from the various relevant global, regional, and national publications of
government, donor agencies, national and international journals, books, dissertations, and abstracts.

2.3.4 Evaluation Design and Sampling

Camp-wise Interview Status The study was participatory, descriptive,

and cross-sectional, and utilized heavily
quantitative approaches. Qualitative data
was collected through in-depth interviews
17%
with refugees, camps, and official
settings.
83%
The standard sample size for data
collection has been capitalized. Therefore,
421 Households (350 from Camp 8E and
Camp -14 Camp-8E 71 from Camp 14) are the finalized. That is
calculated according to 95% confidence
level and confidence interval 5.
Figure 2: Camp-wise Interview Status

5
2.3.5 Evaluation Design and Sampling
The age group of the HHs survey
Age Group-wise Respondents respondents of 35-64 years old which is
4.51%
almost 50% of total respondents.
6.89% Among this 50% of respondents, male
and female are 32% and 18%
respectively. The number of
respondents in age groups 18-24 years
31.59%
19.48% and above 65 years is almost the same
which is 8-9%. The participants of the
age group 25-34 years are almost 34%
35-64 Yrs 25-34 Yrs 65+ Yrs 18-24 Yrs where almost 20% are male and 14%
are female.

Figure 3: Age Group-wise Respondents

2.3.5 Data Collection Management and Analysis

Triangulation of data collection methods was used. Focus Group discussions (FGD), key informant interviews (KII)
with service providers, and a review of relevant literature on the implementation of activities by refugees (progress,
midterm, and annual reports). Quantitative data were collected through the KoBo Toolbox, analyzed, and presented
descriptive tables. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Study objectives and research questions guided
thematic analyses.

2.3.6 Ethical Considerations

All the respondents of this study have given their consent during an interview. Therefore, they synonymously
participate in the discussion. The survey interview was taken through mobile using KoBo Toolbox. All information
collected was kept confidential, and the principle of voluntary participation was ensured. The respondent had a
right to refuse to answer any question during the data collection. All the quantitative and qualitative interviews
were recorded for consistency in data collection unless a participant declined to be recorded.

6
 CHAPTER III: STUDY FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

The study helps an in-depth understanding of a project. There are a lot of findings of this end-line assessment.
The study findings are given below:

3.1 Access to Adequate and Safe Water

Ensuring sufficient clean water for the refugee population is a substantial challenge. The high population
density in the camps strained the available water supply. Access to safe and reliable water sources is
limited.

3.2 Water Collection

Water access is one of the
major interventions that the
project is working to improve.
The respondents of FGDs and
KIIs were asked about daily
water collection; time taken to
and from the water source,
storage, and treatment
methods at the household
level. The respondents replied
that households generally
spend more time waiting at

Figure 4: FGD with Rohingya Community

water sources than the distance they cover walking to reach the water points. Around 20/25 HHs use
one tap stand. A single tap stands for two times daily which is not enough for the community to collect
their required water within this timeframe. There is one shallow tube well and one tube well in the
community. Community people especially men and boys take their showers using the shallow tube well.
Deep tube well water is used for other domestic purposes.

The data presented in Table 5 show that the highest percentage (93.11%) of camp HHs collect safe
water with a view to drinking and cooking. The other water collection sources are shallow tube wells,
deep tube wells, and bottled water. Almost 7% of camp residents collect water from other sources. Only
0.24% of residents collect bottled water.

7
Table 4: Sources of Safe Drinking and Cooking Water

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. Tap stand 58.67% 34.44% 93.11%
2. Bottled water 0.24% 0.00% 0.24%
3. Others 3.56% 3.09% 6.65%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

In the FGD with female beneficiaries, they preferred the "Pipe Connection to House" facility as they had
to travel less for water collection. In addition, they described it as a less laborious job. Those who could
not access piped water expressed great demand to have standpipes at their doorsteps. As World Vision
Bangladesh is responsible for monitoring this task, therefore, when they found any pipe connection to
doorsteps, they seized the pipe as it created a waste of water.

On issues related to water collection, households were first asked who typically collects water for the
use of households. It was reported that almost 47% of male members of the households collect water
followed by 45% of adult females (Adult Females and Wives of Household Heads). It is the most
common family member to collect water followed by Child Boys (11-18 years) at about 6%, Child girls at
1.43% and less than 11 years is 1.66%.

Table 5: Age Group-wise Water Collection for Household

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. Boy (11-18 years) 2.38% 3.09% 5.46%
2. Girl (11-18 years) 0.71% 0.71% 1.43%
3. Adult male 37.53% 9.03% 46.56%
4. Adult female 21.38% 23.52% 44.89%
5. Under 11 years 0.48% 1.19% 1.66%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

During the FGD, women respondents reported that earlier the males were not collecting water as most
of the adult males were engaged in income-generating activities. But at present, they are also collecting
water from water points. It is happening because of awareness sessions conducted by Agrajatra.
However, the male members of the households assist during the cooking of food and washing the
clothes.

Households were asked to estimate the length of time usually spent travelling to and from a water
point, including waiting time at the water source. Only 89% of households reported that the combined
travel and waiting time are more than 30 minutes. From the FGD, it was found that:
 Tap water is available as well when the sky is cloudy because the solar-driven generator is used for water
supply from the water tank.
 The operator supplies water twice a day for around 20 minutes.
 It is difficult to get safe drinking water during the repair period of the deep tube well.

8
Twenty-one percent (21%) of households reported that they need to spend less than five minutes
travelling from home to water points. However, households spend more time at water points compared
to the time travelling.

3.3 Key Challenges Faced by Women in Water Collection

In response to the question of whether the family members faced any challenges/difficulties in
collecting water. Around 36 % of respondents reported that they face challenges and around 64% of
respondents said that there are no challenges during water collection at present. They reported that
they faced challenges earlier which are now reduced.

Women face many challenges while collecting water from distant water points. These challenges
significantly impact their daily lives and livelihoods. Some of the key challenges faced by women for
water collection include:

The FGD and KII respondents shared that water points are often located far from their shelters. It
required more time to collect water. It not only consumes a significant amount of time but also leads to
physical strain, especially for pregnant mothers, elderly women, and girls.

The FGD and KII respondents expressed that they need long walks to water points. Some water points
were found down from the top high hill where there were safety risks to the girls and women. They may
face harassment, theft, or assault during the period of water collection. It is observed that the water
points are located as described by the FGD and KII respondents during the conduction of interviews. It is
reported that the respondents felt various health problems such as back pain, joint problems, etc. due
to carrying heavy containers of water from long distances.

The respondents reported that the women were not responsible for water collection in their home
country (Myanmar). The displacement and changing living conditions in refugee camps disrupted the
traditional gender roles by placing additional burdens on women and girls.

3.4 Access to Adequate Safe Water

 It is commonly reported that the primary sources of drinking water were Tap Stands (93% of
households) whereas in the baseline survey around 61% of respondents depended on tap
stands for drinking and cooking.
 Around 91% of HHs reported that the existing water supply is sufficient for their household’s
requirements.
 In terms of water collection, male engagement has increased. Around 47% of households reported that
adult males are engaged in collecting water followed by 45% of adult women and 8% of Children.
However, the male also assists the women during cooking and cloth washing.
 Females preferred to get a pitcher instead of a bucket or Jerrycan for carrying water. On the other
hand, male and adolescent children preferred Jerrycan for carrying the water.
 Women also reported in the FGD and KII sessions that they faced insecurity due to the presence of
men in water points during the collection of water.
 The households do not treat the drinking water. Because they believe that the drinking water
source is safe as the supplier treats it before supplying.

9
In response to the quarry to the HH survey, about 93 % of respondents reported that the water supply
points were currently functional. Among the respondents, the male and female are 59% and 34%
respectively. Only 6% of respondents thought the water supply points were not functional.

In response to the questions about what extent the water supply point meets HH's daily water
requirement, about 91% of respondents answered that the supplied water was enough to meet their
households' needs. This water is used for drinking, cooking, laundry, bathing, etc. Around 7% of
respondents reported that the water supply points partially meet their needs while 2% only said that
supply points do not meet their needs.

Table 6: Status of Water Supply Point

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. Fully meet my needs 56.29% 34.92% 91.21%
2. Partially meet my needs 5.94% 1.43% 7.36%
3. Not meet my needs at all 0.24% 1.19% 1.43%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

3.5 Water Container

Containers and their different use across the camps is a starting point for determining household water
consumption and practices related to the safe storage of water. It was observed that all containers were used by
the households for collecting and storing water. The information on the type of container, amount of water
stored, cleanliness of container, used container cover, and the number of containers was collected on the day
before the survey.

However, the female participants preferred to get a pitcher instead of a bucket or jerrycan for carrying water. On
the other hand, male and adolescent children preferred to get Jerrycane for carrying the water. The survey found
that the most common water storage container is Jerrycane.

3.6 Water Quantity

It is difficult to determine the quantity of water for a household and critical to understanding how to stay safe
from waterborne diseases such as acute diarrhea/risk of cholera and the ability to maintain hygiene standards.
The survey results show that about 91% of respondents felt safe while collecting enough water to meet their
households' needs. About 02% of respondents did not feel safe to collect enough water to meet their daily
household' needs. The study findings noted that several reasons contributed to these facts which are:
 Too far from the house
 Harassment
 Men use it for bathing
 No lighting at night
 Sloping path
 Men go to collect water where have the chance of body touching
 Men gathering are nearer to the water point
 Neighbors do quarrel.

10
3.7 Water Treatment
This study revealed that a significant proportion of households do not treat drinking water. Because they believe
that the drinking water sources are safe and supply water is already treated.

The study also sought to find out on source of water point maintenance. The respondents of the FGDs confirmed
that regular maintenance is done by the authority and the WASH committee while some of them reported that no
maintenance work is done.

3.8 Comparison between Base-line and End-line survey about water access and management
The HH survey findings regarding the base-line and end-line in the area of access to water and management are
shown in line graph no. 6. The findings on tap stands for drinking and cooking, access to safe drinking water,
contamination concerns, existing water supplies and waterborne diseases in baseline survey are 51%, 49.87%,
Water Access and Management 9.33%, 31% and 41%
respectively and end-line
93% survey data are 93%, 36%,
160%
140% 2%, 9% and 31% respectively.
120% 36%
100% 31% It is found that in end-line–
80% 51% 49.87% survey findings are higher than
60% 9% 41%
2% 31%
40% 9.33% the baseline survey. It means
20% the access to water situation
0%
Tap stands for Face difficultiesContamination Existing water Waterborne
and Management is improved
drinking and in accessing concerns supplies are diseases within compared to the end-line
cooking. safe drinking insufficient. their survey.
water households

Water Access and Management Water Access and Management

Figure 5: Comparison between Baseline and End-line survey

3.9 Sanitary Facilities and Hygiene Services

The respondents were asked about the type of household latrine. Around 98% of respondents reported they use
sanitary latrines with slabs. Among the 98% of respondents, the male and female respondents were 61% and 37%
respectively. Below 01% (.48%) said that they use sanitary latrines with septic tanks. More than 01% said they use
opened latrines.

Table 7: Type of Household Latrine in Rohingya Camp

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total
1. Sanitary latrine with slab 61.05% 36.58% 97.62%
2. Sanitary latrine with septic tank 0.24% 0.24% 0.48%
3. Open latrine 0.95% 0.24% 1.19%
4. Others 0.24% 0.48% 0.71%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

The camps struggled with insufficient and inadequate sanitation facilities including toilets and bathing areas. The
ratio of toilets to refugees was often far below international standards leading to unhygienic conditions. Limited

11
access to sanitation facilities impacted the ability to maintain proper hygiene practices. This situation increased
the risk of disease within the camps. The camps were overcrowded; it was challenging to maintain sanitation and
hygiene standards. Proper waste disposal and management were also insignificant.

Each sanitary latrine was installed in the camps for the use of five households. There are five user households are
responsible for keeping the latrine clean, and seven-membered user committees are responsible for monitoring
the latrine whether the user family is cleaning the latrine or not.

3.10 Challenges Faced by Women and Girls Using the Same Latrine
In response to the questions to the HH survey respondents about separate latrines for men and women, the camp
HHs reported that 51% of HHs use shared latrines, and 28% of HHs use separated latrines. Challenges faced by
women and girls using the same latrine in camps are expressed as significant challenges. Shared latrines have a
privacy problem, as well as women and girls; feel uncomfortable while using the latrines. The shortage of
partitions or doors in the latrines decreases dignity and personal hygiene, especially menstruation period for
women and girls.

The shared use of latrines has safety risks such as harassment, assault, or voyeurism. The fear of encountering
strangers, especially at night, can discourage them from using the latrines, leading to health problems and
discomfort. Inadequate sanitation facilities increase the risk of infections and diseases, particularly for women and
girls. The lack of proper disposal methods for menstrual hygiene products can lead to unhygienic
conditions that pose health hazards.

3.11 Access to Sanitation

 The most reported defecation (sanitation options) for household members is five, shared latrines
were 51%, and single-household latrines, buckets, and open defecation were not reported.
 The accessible latrine is one of the beauties of this project. This latrine includes a handle inside,
sufficient water, a commode, and a single-use pattern.
 Every household received hygiene kits including Balti, Mog, sandals, toothbrushes, and toothpaste
to use when necessary.
 The railing on the way of the latrine was demanded but not found.
 The community also thinks that these latrines are helpful for elderly persons.

It was asked the participants of the HH survey whether they were satisfied with using the community latrine.
Around 98 % of HHs reported that they were satisfied and about 2% of HHs expressed their dissatisfaction. The HH
survey respondents said that the project conducted a series of awareness sessions for the camp residents.
Respondents added that they also attended safe water sessions and meetings in 2022. More than 93% of
respondents reported that they received awareness messages through attending the sessions while about 7% did
not attend any sessions.

3.12 Sanitation and Hygiene

It is asked that the HH survey respondents if there is any hand washing facility next to their latrine or not. Around
55% of HHs reported that they have hand-washing facilities near their latrines. The respondents who have hand

12
washing facilities reported that they washed their hands each time while at the time of hurriedness, their cleaning
activity was disrupted.

Table 8: Hand Washing Time

Sl. # Statement Hand wash time (%)

1. Before serving food 86%
2. Before eating 90%
3. Before cooking 87%
4. Before breastfeeding 67%
5. After using the latrine 87%
6. Cleaning of children's lower body 48%

The respondents were also asked about the time of their hand-washing about 86%, 90%, 87%, 67%, 87%, and 48%
of respondents reported that they washed their hands before serving food, before eating, before cooking, before
breastfeeding, after using the latrine, cleaning of children's lower body, etc. Around 78 % of households used soap.
The study further explored other hand-washing options/solutions by the households when they do not have soap,
the HHs reported that they washed their hands almost all the time by recalling the critical time such as COVID-19.

Table 9: Hand Wash after Using Latrine

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. With ash and water 0.95% 0.48% 1.43%
2. With soil and water 0.24% 0.00% 0.24%
3. Just with water 16.15% 5.23% 21.38%
4. With soap and water 45.13% 31.83% 76.96%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

Table 10 shows that about 77% of HHs wash their hands by using soap & water, and about 21% only
water while more than 01% with ash & water after defecation. It was also reported that less than 1%
(0.24%) of HHs wash their hands by using soil & water.

3.13 Defecation Practices and Access to Latrines

Challenges using toilets, bathing facilities, and water points, women and girls felt uncomfortable
standing in queues together with men to go to the toilet or bathing cubicles and they are ashamed to go
to the toilet and take a bath during the day time. They highlighted that a lack of sex segregation in the
facilities and having to queue alongside men during defecation is a major concern for women and girls.
It was a problem to reach the latrine as it was situated far away from the house they were living in the
response to the question where the HH members go to defecate.

Regarding sanitation facilities/options for household members below five of age children, about 77 % of HHs
reported that they use latrines, about 19% in the courtyard of the house, and more than 2% in the drain.

13
Table 10: Defecation of Children (under 05 years of Age)
Sl. # Statement Male Female Total
1. In open space/roadside 1.43% 0.95% 2.38%
2. In the drain 0.48% 1.90% 2.38%
3. In the courtyard of the house 11.88% 6.89% 18.76%
4. Use Latrine 48.69% 27.79% 76.48%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

However, regarding disposing of the feces of children aged less than 5 years, the respondents replied that about
93% throw it inside the latrine pit while the others' answer was mentioned below:
 Dispose inside the latrine pit
 Dispose in the open (5.23%)
 Dispose in the communal bin (0.24%)
 Bury (1.19%)
 Don't know/others (0.24%)

3.14 Accessible Latrine

In the FGD persons with disabilities and the beneficiary of Persons with Disability accessible latrines were asked
about their feelings on accessing and using the latrines. The majority acknowledged that the accessible latrine has
made them and their family members' lives easy. Except for a few latrines, they explained as follows:
 The handle inside
 The tap
 The commode

There are handles inside, making it comfortable to sit on the commode. The tap inside and getting water is easy for
even the second and third time if needed for cleaning. Because of the commode, a caregiver does not have to face
much trouble as well. The caregiver can easily make the person sit on the latrine. The beneficiaries thought that this
was a dream latrine to use in the camp. Besides, they mentioned some drawbacks which are:
 Keeping the commode and latrine clean requires three times more water than the flat commode latrines.
Carrying water is a tough job, and of course, access to adequate water is, at times, a problem.
 The floor stays wet all the time, and there are chances to slip. Having a handwashing facility inside but no
passing water system seems a design fault, as the FGD participants reported.
 Flash water comes back to the body which is not good for those who clean their body/cloth.

The accessibility of this sort of latrine is a great initiative and helpful for physically challenged persons such as
disabled and elderly people as it were reported by the non-users. In response to the question about
cleanliness and throwing feces in polythene in drains, about 63% of respondents reported that they kept
their drains clean.

3.15 Observation of the Latrine

During the latrine’s observations, about 93 % were found functional and usable. However, there is still scope to
work with the improvement of hand washing and lighting issues. The study investigated whether the latrines
ensured privacy for the household members or not. It was an affirmative answer from them. A significant number of
respondents were not satisfied because of the following reasons:
 Infrastructure/door damaged
 Door lock missing/not working
 No latrine nearby
 The door is not closing properly

14
  Male and female sharing (no gender marking) latrines
 Men congregate around the latrine
 The latrine is full of sludge

3.16 Comparison of base-line and end-line survey about Sanitation and Hygine
The HH survey findings regarding the base-line and end-line in the area of communal/shared latrines
Face inadequate running water supply in
Sanitation and Hygiene the sanitary facilities, existing latrines as
98% non-functional, need for improved
200% 98.81%
77% latrine infrastructure, practice good
150%
90%
74%
personal and environmental hygiene. In
100% 20% 68%
47.79% 19.48% the baseline survey respectively are 90%,
32%
50% 47.79%, 32%, 74%, and 68% and in the
0% end-line survey data respectively are 98%,
20%, 19.48%, 98.81% and 77%. It is found
that in end-line–survey findings are higher
than the baseline survey. It means the
Baseline Findings End-line Findings sanitation and hygiene situation is improved
compared to the end-line survey.

Figure 6: Sanitation and Hygiene

3.17 Bathing Facility

In response to the question regarding the separate bathrooms for men and women, about 78% of HHs reported
that they have separate bathrooms while about 22% of HHs have no separate bathrooms. It was asked whether the
bathing facilities and latrine facilities needed to be repaired or not. Around 99% of respondents said that the
bathing facilities and latrine facilities needed to be repaired. The study revealed that almost all of the HH male and
female members use the same bathing facilities. The male bathes in the open space by using water from the deep
tubewell. The rest of the household especially the women reported that they bathe in their makeshift. Men bathing
at open water points may be considerable as it is culturally acceptable. but it is impossible for women and girls
because it will create problems in the community. This problem may be solved by discussing with Majhis and sub-
Majhis of the camps.

3.18 Community Awareness and Participation

The finding of the baseline survey reported that about 36% of respondents were yet to participate in WASH-related
awareness sessions that are indicating gaps in community engagement. However, the findings in the end-line survey
found that they participated in WASH-related awareness sessions such as house-to-house visits, participation in
discussion sessions, and study information education and communication (IEC) materials and received messages on
health and hygiene issues.

3.19 Personal Hygiene

The study focused on crucial hygiene promotion activities or practices implemented in households and communal
levels within the project areas such as drinking water container cleaning, hand washing by soap, hygiene training
sessions, hygiene kits distribution, etc. The findings on personal hygiene are detailed below:

15
 FGD and KII respondents reported that the households were aware of personal hygiene and improved health
through attending meetings and awareness sessions. The respondents also mentioned that some communities are
still unaware of this area. It is worth noting that respondents of Camp 8E had a slightly higher awareness by
participating rate compared to Camp 14.

3.20 Hand Washing and Soap

Handwashing with water and soap is a key
Hand Wash Time practice promoted by the project to
48% prevent/reduce the risks of acute watery diarrhea
Before serving food
diseases. The study found that households had
86% Before eating soap. The study further explored other hand-
87% washing options/solutions and found that they
Before cooking
90% were aware of handwashing when they had no
67% Before breastfeeding the soap. The enumerators asked respondents to
87% baby mention the most important/critical times when
After using the latrine someone should wash their hands. They recall the
critical time of handwashing especially COVID 19
period.

Figure 7: Hand Washing Time

Among a total of 421 respondents, most of them replied that they use soap to wash their hands, whereas a
considerable number of respondents don’t use soap. Most of the respondents use the water of shallow tube wells
to wash their hands while some respondents wash their hands beside the latrine, hand washing station, and non-
specific places.

3.21 Hygiene Kit

Agrajatra distributed hygiene kits to all 6,444 HHs of the camps for hygiene practice and the behavioural changes of
the community. The hygiene kits are Balti, Mugs, Bathing soap, sandals, toothbrushes, teeth pest, etc. The
behaviour of the community is gradually changing and the demands of the community are on more items to fulfill
their family needs through volunteers of Agrajatra found to sell the double items. Among the HH survey, about 98%
of respondents reported that they all received the hygiene kit distributed by Agrajatra. They added that the items in
the kits are useful. They placed their earnest request to Agrajatra to provide the kits again as it is somehow
damaged.

3.22 Cleaning of Water Containers

Households in the FGDs and participants of KIIs were asked about the practice of cleaning water containers. All
respondents mentioned that they cleaned every time before filling with fresh/clean water. At the time of
hurriedness, the cleaning activity is disrupted. The study also revealed that most of the households cleaned their
water containers at least once a week. When asked how the water containers are cleaned, all respondents reported
using a specific product (sponge and soap) and finally rinsing with clean water.

16
3.23 Waste Accumulation
It asked the HH survey participants whether they use colour-coded bins, plastic containers, or baskets for different
types of household waste or not. Almost all respondents (98%) reported that they use colour-coded bins for
different types of household waste.

Places for disposal of household wastes we found that the households use waste bins for waste disposal. The major
types of waste produced in the household which are organic food waste, plastics, paper, cardboard, and glass. This
sequence from most to least dominant type of waste identified by the research participants was similar in both
camps. Almost all participants were confirmed that the organic waste was the most dominant category of waste in
both camps. The second category was plastic, as responses of the participants. Apart from these categories, some
participants also referred to dust, house dirt or leaves, and other types of waste materials adding to the household
generation of waste.

The HH survey respondents were asked do they separate food waste, and plastic waste for disposal of waste in
designated garbage bins, almost 96% said that they use colour-coded bins after separating the waste into two
categories, one for perishable waste and one for non-perishable waste. Among the respondents, almost all reported
that they were satisfied with solid waste management. In the Rohingya camps, solid waste is usually collected by
community volunteers and dumped in open sites near the camps. However, Camp 14 has an insufficient number of
trash bins which is given based on population density.

It is noted that all household members of the camps are habituated to keeping the waste in designated colour-
coded bins separately as perishable and non-perishable.

3.24 Work Burden of Women Related to WASH

It is found in the HH survey that the percentage of main decision-makers is male which is higher than female. The
decision-making percentage is about 10% by the male family head and his wife jointly. HH decision-making
consultation with HH members is very poor which (0.48%) is only.

Table 11: Main Decision-Maker in the Household

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. Male member (Father/husband/brother) 50.59% 20.90% 71.50%
2. Jointly (Both father and mother) 6.89% 3.09% 9.98%
3. Jointly (Both husband and wife) 3.33% 0.95% 4.28%
4. Female member (Mother/wife/ sister) 1.43% 12.35% 13.78%
5. Jointly (In consultation with all HH members) 0.24% 0.24% 0.48%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

In Rohingya refugee camps, women face significant challenges related to their workload and rights. The
displacement and crowded living conditions in these camps often exacerbate traditional gender roles and create
additional burdens for women. Women respondents in FGDs reported that the women in refugee camps typically
bear a disproportionate burden of household responsibilities, including cooking, cleaning, and caring for children
and elderly family members.

17
 Women respondents also expressed that the increased workload, coupled with inadequate living conditions can
negatively impact women's physical and mental health. Lack of access to healthcare services and stressors related
to displacement can further exacerbate these health challenges.

3.25 Awareness of Stopping Early Marriage

Most of the respondents of FGDs and KIIs mentioned that early marriage is a concerning issue for the Rohingya
refugees. The precarious living conditions, lack of economic opportunities, and displacement often contribute to an
increased risk of early marriage among refugee populations. Rohingya refugees, particularly adolescent girls, are
vulnerable to early marriage due to various factors such as poverty, lack of education, limited access to healthcare,
and insecurity.

During the study about 50% of respondents reported that child marriage is not common in their community at
present. However, authority, Majhi, and Sub-Majhis disagreed with this statement. They said early marriage is not
possible in the camp because camp residents know about the act of child marriage in our country. After the
awareness campaign organized by Agrajatra in 2022, around 93% of respondents reported that the level of child
marriage or violence against women in their community decreased.

Table 12: Level of Child Marriage or Violence against Women

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. The level of child marriage has decreased 57.96% 35.15% 93.11%
2. The level of violence against women has
2.85% 0.48% 3.33%
decreased
3. Child marriage levels remain the same 1.43% 1.66% 3.09%
4. The level of violence against women
0.24% 0.24% 0.48%
remains the same
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

The volunteers Agrajatra conducted awareness sessions on the effects of early marriage. They disseminated the
message that early marriage of young girls is at risk both physically and emotionally. They often face the necessary
skills, education, and emotional maturity to handle the responsibilities of marriage and motherhood which can lead
to adverse health outcomes and perpetuate the cycle of poverty. Agrajatra also started community-based
interventions involving engaging with families, community leaders, and religious leaders to raise awareness about
the negative consequences of early marriage. Dialogue sessions and awareness campaigns are also conducted to
challenge harmful cultural norms and promote the value of education for girls.

The community is aware of the harms and legal framework of early marriage. Advocacy efforts often focus on
enforcing existing laws and regulations related to the legal age of marriage. Currently, the community knows that
legal frameworks that are in place and enforced can act as a deterrent against early marriage. HH survey
respondents reported that the awareness program needs to be conducted regularly with the affected communities
to address the issue as well as create a safer environment for all residents.

18
3.26 Water-Borne Disease
The camp HHS collect water from tap stands for drinking as tap stand water is treated by the authority before
supply. Earlier the water was not treated before supply. Therefore, many waterborne diseases broke out earlier.
Now there are very few cases of water-borne diseases like diarrhea and skin diseases found in the community.

During the HH survey, more than 88% of respondents reported that by attending the awareness sessions the
community knows about waterborne disease. But it is a matter of sadness that more than family members of 56%
of respondents contracted waterborne diseases like diarrhea or dysentery in late 2022. A high percentage of skin
disease, 46% of children in the camp is found. Households of camps are asked does the collected water is safe or
not. A total of 98% of respondents said that their collected water is safe.

Regarding Acute Watery Diarrhea (AWD), all the respondents of FGDs and KIIs reported they did not face Diarrhea
disease from last year. However, diarrhea and general acute watery diarrhea are vital communicable diseases that
are easily transmitted within the camp settings due to crowded living conditions and potential exposure to
unsanitary conditions. The respondents were asked to mention the causes of diarrhea disease and they mentioned
the causes for it which are eating contaminated food and contaminated water. The findings also established that
some households did not know the cause of diarrhea.

3.27 Awareness of Dengue Fever

The FGDs and KIIs respondents reported that Dengue fever is not a significant issue in the camps. However, it is
observed that the environment for the Aedes mosquitoes is conducive which transmitting the virus. The high
population density in refugee camps creates favourable conditions for the rapid spreading of dengue fever.
Stagnant water is common in refugee camps due to inadequate drainage systems which is a favorable environment
for the breeding of Aedes mosquitoes. Besides, there are limited healthcare facilities and resources that can strain
the ability to diagnose and treat dengue issues promptly.

Agrajatra conducted awareness sessions with the camp residents in both camps 8E and 14 to educate the residents
about dengue fever symptoms, transmission, and preventive measures. Camp authorities and organizations
implement vector control measures, including regular fogging and spraying insecticides to reduce the mosquito
population. Improving drainage systems, proper waste management, and eliminating stagnant water reduce
mosquito breeding sites. Humanitarian organizations provide insecticide-treated bed nets to help protect
individuals from mosquito bites, especially during sleeping hours.

Agrajatra is working to engage community leaders and residents in keeping the environment clean and free of
mosquito breeding sites. They motivate the camp residents on regular clean-up campaigns to remove discarded
items so that the mosquitoes cannot lead eggs in rainwater, and deposit water.

3.28 Environmental Situation, Polythene Use, and Plantation Initiatives

During the HH survey, the respondents said that they attended a series of awareness-raising sessions on
environmental situations, cleanliness, polythene used, and plantation initiatives. The awareness sessions were
useful for them as reported by about 99% of participants. It is found from the FGDs and KIIs respondents that
conducted sessions for the community on the plantation initiatives which have multiple benefits including
environmental conservation, providing shade, and improving air quality. Planting trees and establishing green

19
spaces in and around refugee camps can improve the environment. The residents also added that motivational
sessions on tree-planting programs are created to awareness of refugees. The community already planted a few
seedlings in their house premises by purchasing from the local market though anyone didn’t supply seedlings for
them.

Refugee camps, especially in densely populated areas like Ukhia, often face significant challenges related to
environmental degradation and cleanliness. Limited resources, inadequate waste management systems, and a high
population density led to improper disposal of waste and pollution. It is observed that like Agrajattra, different
humanitarian organizations and local authorities are working on waste management services, promoting hygiene
education, and establishing sanitation facilities to mitigate the challenges.

Excessive use and improper disposal of waste materials especially polythene, plastic, etc. can indeed exacerbate
environmental issues. Agrajatra often conducts awareness campaigns on the environmental impact of polythene,
and plastic and promotes alternatives of it. Agrajatra also motivates the community to reduce the use of polythene
as well as plastics as they clog drainage systems, pollute water sources, and harm wildlife.

3.29 Gender-based Violence

Gender-based violence (GBV) is a pervasive issue in many humanitarian settings, including the Rohingya refugee
camps. The displacement, overcrowded living conditions, and lack of resources often exacerbate the risks faced by
women, girls, and other vulnerable populations.

awareness sessions conducted by Agrajatra on harmful gender norms, promoting gender equality, and the
importance of respecting women's rights and preventing GBV where more than 93% of respondents attended. The
situation is better in 2023 compared to 2022. About 82% of respondents reported that the gender-based violence
situation has improved compared to the previous period. Among the survey participants, 98% fully agreed to stop
the violence.

Women respondents in the FGDs reported that women’s traditional role is understood to be in the home to cook,
clean, and care for the children, although there is some indication of some shifting of gender norms in the response,
with men taking an increased role in water collection, childcare and children’s education. It is happening as
Agrajatra conducting awareness sessions continuously. The findings in the baseline survey highlighted a gender gap
(50.40%) in the WASH sector where 17% of respondents were unaware of the GBV risks on women and girls face
during water collection.

GBV in Rohingya refugee camps requires a comprehensive approach including prevention, response, and other
supports. Collaboration efforts among humanitarian organizations, local authorities, and the affected communities
are required to combat GBV by creating a safer environment and protecting the rights and dignity of refugees,
particularly women and girls.

3.30 Climate Change and Disaster Preparedness

Among the survey participants, around 87% of respondents reported (Table 13) that they are feeling the climate
change effects, especially during high temperatures in the summer and very low temperatures in the winter.
Around 9% of respondents reported on their experiences in heavy rainfall.

20
Table 13: Climate Changes in the Past 5 Years

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. Temperature too high or too low 55.34% 31.35% 86.70%
2. Heavy rainfall (instantaneous and continuous) 4.51% 4.28% 8.79%
3. Excessive drought or sun 1.43% 1.66% 3.09%
4. Salinity 1.19% 0.24% 1.43%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

Disaster preparedness is critically important in Rohingya refugee camps due to the vulnerable living conditions and
the potential for natural disasters. Agrajatra and local authorities work together to establish comprehensive disaster
preparedness plans to protect the refugees. Agrajatra is conducting regular awareness sessions within the refugee
community to help residents understand safe practices during disasters, and how to use emergency equipment.
Sessions also focuses on fire safety measures, such as proper use of stoves and avoiding hazardous situations.

Table 14: Awareness of Climate Change

Sl. # Statement Male Female Total

1. Awareness campaigns and sessions at
54.16% 27.55% 81.71%
the community level
2. Tree plantation 7.60% 9.50% 17.10%
3. Media exposure and publicity 0.71% 0.48% 1.19%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

Agrajatra is aware of the community for pre-positioning emergency items, including food, clean water, medical kits,
and necessities, and ensures that essential items are readily available in the immediate after of a disaster. The
community became aware of pre-positioning the items but the community yet not doing this.

The camp residents reported they collect water from different sources during natural disasters. The alternate
sources of water collection during natural disasters especially during are mentioned in Table 15.

Table 15: Water Collection Point after the Disaster.

Sl. # Statement 0Male Female Total

1. Collected water from other areas 18.76% 10.93% 29.69%
2. Spent a lot of money to collect water 5.70% 2.14% 7.84%
3. Spent a lot of time collecting water 0.48% 0.24% 0.71%
4. Not applicable 37.29% 23.75% 61.05%
5. Others 0.24% 0.48% 0.71%
Total 62.47% 37.53% 100%

3.31 WASH Committee

The WASH committee is responsible for monitoring the water supply, water quantity, safety issues of water,
cleanliness of sanitary latrines, etc. Agrajatra formed two user groups, the Latrine user group and the Bathroom

21
user group. The responsibilities of these two groups are to ensure the proper use of the latrine and bathroom,
monitor the performance of user groups so that the groups play their role properly, and keep both the latrine and
bathroom clean.

The survey findings also revealed that 91 % of the Latrine user committee plays a very effective role in keeping the
latrine clean by the user HHs. The latrine user committee recommended that the damaged latrine be repaired
immediately. There is also the same as for the bathroom user committee. The committee also plays a very effective
role in keeping bathrooms clean.

3.4 Impacts of the Project

It is found in the end-line survey regards the usage of waste bins, awareness of gender-based violence,
access to safe drinking water, functionality of sanitary latrines, and willingness of the Rohingya camp
residents is increased compared to the base-line survey which is stated in Table 16

Table 16: Comparison between Baseline Survey and End-line Survey

Impacts of the Project

End-line
Interventi Baseline Survey
Sl. # Survey Item Survey
on Findings
Findings
Tap stands for drinking and cooking. 51% 93%
Water Access and

Face difficulties in accessing safe drinking

Management

49.87% 36%
water
1. Contamination concerns 9.33% 2%
Existing water supplies are insufficient. 31% 9%

Waterborne diseases within their households 41% 31%

Manag Sanitation and Hygiene

Households rely on communal/shared latrines 90% 98%

Face inadequate running water supply in the
47.79% 20%
sanitary facilities.
2. Existing latrines as non-functional. 32% 19.48%
Need for improved latrine infrastructure. 74% 98.81%
Practice good personal and environmental
68% 77%
hygiene.
WASH Participatio ement
Gender Awareness Waste

Households are not using household bins 7% 4%

3.
Struggle to access communal waste bins. 17% 2.38%
Community

Participate in WASH-related awareness

36% 6.89%
sessions
and

4.
n

Exhibited reluctance to join WASH committees 26% 30%

Gender gap in WASH duties. 50.40% 37.30%
and

5. Unaware of the GBV risks women and girls

17% 2%
faced during water collection.

22
Comparison between the Baseline Survey and End-line Survey is indicated in Figure 8 as well:

Baseline Survey and End-line Survey comparison highlights

96% 98%
93%
88%
83% 81%
77%
70%

51%
Axis Title

Baseline

24% Endline

Usage of Waste Bins Awareness on GBV Access to safe water Access to functional Awareness and
supply latrines Willingness to join
WASH Committees
Axis Title

Figure 8: Comparison between Baseline Survey and End-line Survey in Chart

23
The outcome and output levels progress of the project are mentioned in the following box:

I. Ultimate Outcome Level

1) Access to Safe Water: The current water supply point meets the daily water needs of 91% of
respondents.
2) Safety from Waterborne Diseases: Around 83% of respondents are safe from waterborne diseases.
3) Hygiene Practice: Around 98% of respondents practice good personal and environmental hygiene
regarding hand washing with soap, waste disposal at designated bins, use of hygiene kits, and active
participation in cleaning shelter surroundings and drains. However, qualitative data suggest that the
actual practice is lower due to inadequate supply and limited hygiene awareness.

II. Intermediate Outcome Level

1) Functional Water Points: About 93% of households reported that their water points are functional.
2) Functional Latrines: Around 81% of households have access to restrooms.
3) Awareness of Hygiene: About 94% of respondents are aware of health and hygiene practices.
4) Awareness of Equal Work Distribution: Around 95% of respondents are aware of the need for equal
work distribution related to WASH.

II. Output Level

1) Water Points: About 64% of households need water points repair, renovation, or re-installation.
2) WASH Committees: Around 91% of people are aware of and willing to join WASH committees.
3) Awareness of Safe Water: About 98% of respondents know how to use safe drinking water.
4) Improved Latrines: Around 20% of latrines require improvement through installation or renovation.
5) Bathing Cubicles: 99% of bathing spaces require improvement through construction.
6) Usage of Waste Bins: About 98% of households use colour-coded bins and communal waste bins.
7) Community Awareness: 98% of respondents are aware of improved health, personal hygiene, and
environmental issues through awareness sessions on hand washing, cleanliness, MHM, safe water
use, waste management, tree planting near shelters, and shelter cleanliness.
8) Awareness of Equal Work Distribution (men and boys’ engagement): 95% of respondents,
particularly men and boys are aware of women’s rights and the need to share work-burden.

24
3.5 Recommendation
1. It is required to extend the water supply period, increase the number of tap stands, and ensure
regular maintenance of water pumps for smooth water supply to the HHs.
2. It is recommended to improve hygiene access by supplying handwashing facilities and hygiene kits.
3. It is suggested to construct strong, gender-segregated bathing and sanitary latrine systems to ensure
privacy and safety. Installment of gender-segregated urinal cubicles is needed to maintain privacy
and hygiene practices.
4. It is required to take the initiative to repair the latrine and bathroom on a routine basis to make it
functional and improved.
5. It is important to make railing on the way to the bathroom and latrine, especially for pregnant
mothers, persons with disability, elderly persons, and children.
6. It is suggested to enhance community involvement in WASH initiatives through decision-making and
management roles.
7. It is needed to keep attention to the elderly person along with Persons with Disabilities in terms of
WASH facilities.
8. It is recommended to conduct customized awareness sessions regularly for both male and female
HHs.
9. It is suggested to engage community leaders i.e., Head Majhi, Majhi, and Sub-Majhi to endorse
gender equality in WASH initiatives, fostering women's empowerment, etc.
10. It is needed more awareness sessions on gender roles, women's rights, and equitable WASH work
distribution.
11. It is recommended to continue the awareness sessions on different issues such as sanitation and
hygiene, GBV, environment and cleanliness, climate change and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR),
waterborne disease, early marriage, etc.
12. It is suggested that addressing GBV in Rohingya refugee camps requires a comprehensive approach including
prevention, response, and support for survivors.
13. It is proposed to distribute more hygiene kits among the HHs to reduce diseases and to motivate
behavioural changes.
14. It is needed to take the program on family planning to control the family size considering all limited
available resources and services.
15. It is suggested to distribute pitchers instead of Jerricane as the women prefer to use them because it
is easy for them to carry water. It can also be covered to protect water from dirtiness.
16. It is recommended to conduct awareness programs on sexual and reproductive health and
rights (SRHR) for adolescent girls.
17. The current approach to the WASH program is providing basic humanitarian support to refugees,
but it is not sufficient in the long term. Given the uncertainties in Rohingya refugees returning to
Myanmar, the government of Bangladesh should consider implementing projects to design and
build water infrastructure that ensures the long-term water supply to the camps.
18. Rainwater harvesting could be adopted as a sustainable solution to water scarcity in the dry seasons
in the camp.
19. Indiscriminate disposal of waste around the camps leads to reduced hygiene and increases the
likelihood of contamination during water collection, transportation, and storage. An additional
effort from authorities is required to ensure proper disposal and management of waste.

25
20. Basic training on the repair and maintenance of water infrastructure may be arranged and
conducted for the volunteers who can take care of the water infrastructure in the camps and
support their community when it is needed.

3.6 Conclusions
Rohingya population is still dealing with challenges arising from congested and unhygienic camp
conditions, the lack of sufficient water and sanitation infrastructure, fecal contamination, and
geographical limitations such as a shortage of land area and groundwater, and a susceptibility to natural
disasters including floods and landslides.

Considerable progress was noted in terms of water handling, sanitation practices, waste management,
etc. among Rohingya refugees in camps, reflecting positively due to the awareness sessions conducted
by the project. Further awareness rising is required with regards to water supply, hygiene practices,
washing transport containers, disposal of waste, etc. Almost all of the Camp residents reported
satisfaction with their living conditions, with minor exceptions of occasional water collecting problems
and technical failures of infrastructure for the execution of the project. In comparison between baseline
data and end-line study, it is found positive impacts on water, sanitation, waste management, etc.
Therefore, this comparison can attract researchers, government agencies, and development
organizations to prepare further projects on WASH that will be helpful to the Rohingya refugees. The
outcome of this study can assist not only the camp authorities and various agencies working to improve
the well-being of the Rohingya refugees but also provide useful information and strategic direction to
the global research and development communities who are working to tackle water security challenges
in refugee camps across the world.

26
 3.7 References

Ahmed, B., Orcutt, M., Sammonds, P., Burns, R., Issa, R., Abubakar, I. & Devakumar, D. (2018):
Humanitarian disaster for Rohingya refugees: impending natural hazards and worsening public
health crises. The Lancet Global Health 6 (5), e487–e488. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30125-6.

Biswas, D. and Joshi, S. (2021): Sanitation and gendered psychosocial stress in peri-urban Bangalore.
Development in Practice 31 (4), 548–5.

Joshi, A., Prasad, S., Kasav, J. B., Segan, M. & Singh, A. K. (2013): Water and sanitation hygiene knowledge
attitude practice in urban slum settings. Global Journal of Health Science 6 (2), 23–34.
doi:10.5539/gjhs. v6n2p23.

Iacucci, A. A., Copeland, R., Mahmood, Z., Campbell, A., Hanley, B. & Jameel, P. (2017): Information
Needs Assessment: Cox’s Bazar – Bangladesh. Internews, London. Available from:
https://www.internews.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/ Internews_Coxs_Bazar_Publication
30Nov_web.pdf (accessed 23 August 2019).

Milton, A., Rahman, M., Hussain, S., Jindal, C., Choudhury, S., Akter, S., Ferdousi, S., Mouly, T., Hall, J. &
Efird, J. (2017): Trapped in statelessness: Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. International Journal
of Environmental Research and Public Health 14 (8), 942. doi:10.3390/ijerph14080942.

Phillips, R. M., Vujcic, J., Boscoe, A., Handzel, T., Aninyasi, M., Cookson, S. T., Blanton, C., Blum, L. S. &
Ram, P. K. (2015): Soap is not enough: handwashing practices and knowledge in refugee camps,
Maban County, South Sudan. Conflict and Health 9 (1), 1–8. doi:10.1186/s13031-015-0065-2.

Pommells, M., Schuster-Wallace, C., Watt, S., and Mulawa, Z. (2018): Gender violence as a water,
sanitation, and hygiene risk: uncovering violence against women and girls as it pertains to poor
WaSH access. Violence Against Women 24 (15), 1851–186.

UNHCR (2019): Situation Refugee Response in Bangladesh. Available from:

https://data2.unhcr.org/en/situations/ myanmar_refugees (accessed 14 March 2019).

UNICEF (2019): Sanitation, WHO/UNICEF JMP (2019): Progress on Household Drinking Water, Sanitation
and Hygiene 2000–2017. Special focus on inequalities. Available from:
https://data.unicef.org/topic/water-and-sanitation/sanitation/ (accessed on 8 June 2022).

27
 CHAPTER IV: LIST OF ANNEXURES

1. Annexure I: Household Survey Questionnaire

HH Survey questionnaire.pdf

2. Annexure II: FGD Checklist

FGD Checklist.pdf

3. Annexure III: KII Checklist

KII Checklist.pdf
4. Annexure IV: HH Survey Guideline and Plan

HH Survey_ Guideline & Plan.pdf

5. Annexure V: Raw Field Data

Data Sheet_ Analyzed

Data in Excel.xlsx

6. Annexure VI: ToR

ToR.pdf

***************
**********
******

28