Sanitation, Hygiene And Water (SHAW)

Programme for East Indonesia

Report on the 2013 1 st Quarterly Meeting of

SHAW Programme Coordinators
Maumere, 05-07 February 2013

Prepared for
IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre, an independent non-profit-organisation based in The
Hague, the Netherlands, is a knowledge centre in the field of drinking water supply, sanitation, hygiene
and integrated water resources management in developing countries.

Since its foundation in 1968, IRC has facilitated the sharing, promotion and use of knowledge. We work
with people in the poorest communities in the world, with local and national governments, and with non-
governmental organisations, to help them develop water, sanitation and hygiene services that last not for
years, but forever. We identify barriers to making this happen and we tackle them. We help people to
make the change from short-term interventions to long-term services that will transform their lives and
their futures. Our overarching goal is “safe and sustainable WASH services for all by 2025.”

IRC employs a multi-disciplinary and multi-cultural task force of some 60+ professionals. They work with
international partners and in selected focus countries and regions towards IRC’s goal and objectives.

IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre

P.O. Box 82327, 2508 EH The Hague, the Netherlands
T +31 (0)70 3044000
www.irc.nl

This report was written by Erick Baetings, IRC Senior Programme Officer Sanitation.

The findings, interpretations, comments and conclusions contained in this report are those of the author
and may not necessarily reflect the views of either Simavi or the partner NGOs.
st
Baetings, E. (March 2013) Report on the 2013 1 Quarterly Meeting of SHAW Programme Coordinators,
Maumere, 05-08 February 2013, Sanitation, Hygiene And Water (SHAW) Programme for East Indonesia;
IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre, The Hague, the Netherlands.

Websites of participating partner NGOs

http://diandesa.org/Home.html

http://www.rumsram.org

http://cdbethesda.org/index.php

http://plan-international.org/where-we-work/asia/indonesia

http://www.simavi.nl

Materials and documents on the SHAW Programme can be found on

http://www.irc.nl/page/53746
Contents
Summary .................................................................................................................... 4

Ringkasan ................................................................................................................... 6

1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 9
1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 9
1.2 Objectives and set up of the Maumere meeting............................................................ 10

2. Proceedings and results of the Maumere meeting .............................................. 11

2.1 Tuesday 05 February 2013 ............................................................................................. 11
2.2 Wednesday 06 February 2013........................................................................................ 19
2.3 Thursday 07 February 2013 ............................................................................................ 28
2.4 Friday 08 February 2013 ................................................................................................. 30

Appendix 1: 2013 Q1 original meeting schedule ........................................................ 36

Appendix 2: List of participants ................................................................................. 37

Appendix 3: Progress status update of 2012 Q3 Action Plan ...................................... 38

Appendix 4: Review draft school STBM monitoring indicators ................................... 42

Appendix 5: Review of draft outcome monitoring pictograms ................................... 43

Appendix 6: Detailed action plan developed during 2013 Q1 meeting ........................ 45

Appendix 7: Rencana Kegiatan Berdasarkan Pertemuan Kuartal Pertama 2013 Para

Koordinator Program SHAW...................................................................................... 47
Summary
The purpose of this report is to give an impression of the proceedings and discussions that took place
during the 1st SHAW Programme Coordinators meeting in 2013. This meeting was held in Maumere,
Sikka, Flores from Tuesday 05 to Friday 08 February 2013. During the four-day event, a range of
different SHAW programme related topics were discussed. The proceedings and outcomes of the
meeting are captured in this report and are recapitulated in this summary.

The quarterly Programme Coordinators meetings, where all the SHAW partners meet, were initiated
by Martin Keijzer, SHAW Programme Coordinator for Simavi, in 2011 to facilitate the exchange of
information, knowledge and experiences, and to improve understanding and collaboration among
the SHAW partners. Similar meetings organised in 2011 made it clear that to be able to enhance the
overall performance, quality and sustainability of the SHAW programme there was an urgent need
and therefore a desire to organise more frequent meetings to reflect, discuss, exchange, and learn
and to enhance cooperation and collaboration among the SHAW partners.

The Maumere meeting consisted of two main components, namely:

1. A three-day meeting to discuss progress and to reivew and discuss a number of programme
components, in particular with regards to monitoring, school sanitation and knowledge
management components of the SHAW programme.
2. A one-day field visit to observe and learn from a 100% STBM village and from a motivated
and cooperative Kecamatan apparatus.

Tuesday 05 February 2013

During the morning of the first day we reviewed and updated the action plan developed during the
previous meeting in October 2012 in Mataram, Lombok. The progress made by the SHAW partners
during the past quarter in implementing the SHAW programme was also reviewed and discussed. The
updated information obtained during the morning revealed that by the end of January 2013 a total of
88 villages had been declared 100% STBM, equal to some 9% of the intended number of target
villages. In addition, 50 villages had been verified by the Kecamatan authorities and are awaiting the
final STBM declaration.

The entire afternoon was used to review and discuss the new SHAW programme generic output and
outcome monitoring system that was introduced in October 2012. The discussion revealed that
performance monitoring data had been collected in 438 villages during the October to December
2012 period, equal to some 56% of the total number of villages where SHAW activities have started.
The review also identified a number of challenges related to the organisation and execution of the
monitoring tasks as well as to the functioning of the performance monitoring system and tools. The
capacity (and sometimes motivation) of the village leaders and cadres, responsible for data collection
and recapitulation, remains a recurring issue for discussion. As the monitoring databases were not
tested in the field, a number of errors were discovered. These were rectified to a large extend during
the week. Furthermore, a 6-monthly report was added to the databases to facilitate bi-annual
reporting and a tutorial was organised on the correct use of the monitoring databases.

Wednesday 06 February 2013

The first half of the morning of the second day was used to discuss the 2013 annual plans and
budgets. The consequences, of the comments and restrictions given by the Embassy of the Kingdom
of the Netherlands (EKN) when giving its approval to the 2013 annual plan and budget, for the
partners for programme implementation were discussed in detail.

4
Plans to organise another internal review of the SHAW programme were shared and discussed with
the partners. It is envisioned that another review, similar to the one conducted in May/June 2011,
will be organised during the months of May and June 2013. The review will then be followed by a
meeting in Jakarta with a wide selection of SHAW stakeholders towards the end of June 2013.

The second half of the morning and part of the afternoon was used to review and discuss progress
made on developing the school sanitation component. Since the last meeting two separate school
sanitation related workshops were organised to develop the approach (November 2012) as well as
specific training modules (January 2013). An agreement was reached on how to complete the
training modules with the help of an external training expert. In the afternoon the draft school
sanitation monitoring indicators were reviewed in detail and it was decided to come up with another
draft by mid-March 2013.

In the afternoon Martin Keijzer presented the results of a recent study commissioned by Simavi to
review a Plan Indonesia STBM programme in Lembata Regency in Nusa Tenggara Timur. The study
focused in particular on measuring and understanding changes in behaviour as an outcome of STBM
activities. A range of interesting conclusions and useful recommendations are provided in this report.
The study concludes among other things that the existence of sanitation and hygiene facilities does
not automatically lead to changes in behaviour and practices. Regular visits to villages for post-
triggering follow up activities such as hygiene promotion is crucial in this respect. The remainder of
the afternoon was used to review the draft outcome monitoring pictograms.

Thursday 07 February 2013

The third day was entirely used on a field trip, organised by Yayasan Dian Desa, to visit a village that
had been declared STBM sometime towards the end of last year. A feedback session was conducted
in the evening to discuss the observations and recommendations which are presented in this report.

Friday 08 February 2013

The morning of the fourth and final day was spent entirely on World Café sessions. The following four
topics, identified by the partners earlier during the week, were explored and discussed in two
separate discussion rounds:
1) How to create ownership of STBM by the community?
2) How to conduct performance monitoring at scale?
3) Should we provide equipment or funds to masons?
4) How to sustain the SHAW STBM achievements?

The World Café methodology created a lot of energy and ideas and was generally well appreciated by
the partners.

In the afternoon a number of concrete actions were formulated with regards to the knowledge
management component. An editorial team, with members representing all partners, was formed
and a time path was agreed upon to publish the eagerly awaited internal SHAW newsletter. The final
session of the meeting was to finalise a detailed action plan to take forward all the topics discussed
during the four-day meeting. The detailed action plan is provided in Appendix 6. A simple evaluation
of the four-day meeting revealed a lot of smileys.

During the meeting it was agreed that the following Programme Coordinators meeting will be
organised towards the end of June 2013 in Jakarta to coincide with the anticipated review meeting
with SHAW stakeholders.

5
Ringkasan
Kegunaan dari laporan ini adalah untuk memberi gambaran tentang materi dan diskusi yang
terlaksana selama Pertemuan Pertama Para Koordinator Program SHAW tahun 2013. Pertemuan ini
dilaksanakan di Maumere, Sikka, Flores dari hari Selasa tanggal 5 sampai dengan hari Jum’at tanggal
8 Februari 2013. Selama pertemuan empat hari, berbagai topik terkait dengan program SHAW
dibicarakan. Hasil dari rapat tersebut disampaikan dalam laporan ini dan dirangkum dalam Ringkasan
ini.

Pertemuan kuartalan para Koordinator Program di mana para mitra SHAW bertemu digagas oleh
Martin Keijzer, Koordinator Program SHAW untuk Simavi, untuk memfasilitasi terjadinya saling tukar
informasi, pengetahuan dan pengalaman, dan meningkatkan pemahaman dan kerjasama di antara
para mitra SHAW. Dari beberapa pertemuan sejenis yang dilakukan tahun 2011 menjadi jelas bahwa
untuk bisa memperbaiki keseluruhan performa, kualitas dan berkelanjutannya program SHAW,
dirasakan adanya kebutuhan pertemuan semacam itu. Karenanya timbul keinginan untuk
menyelenggarakan pertemuan dengan lebih sering untuk ajang refleksi, diskusi, saling tukar, dan
belajar serta meningkatkan kerjasama di antara para mitra SHAW.

Pertemuan Maumere terdiri atas dua komponen utama, yaitu:

1. Pertemuan tiga hari untuk membicarakan perkembangan dan melakukan tinjauan beberapa
komponen program, khususnya terkait dengan monitoring, sanitasi sekolah dan manajemen
pengetahuan dari program SHAW;
2. Kunjungan lapangan sehari untuk melakukan pengamatan dan belajar dari desa 100% STBM
dan dari para pejabat Kecamatan yang termotivasi dan kooperatif.

Selasa, 5 Feburari 2013

Sepanjang pagi di hari pertama kami melakukan review dan pemutakhiran terhadap rencana aksi
yang dikembangkan saat pertemuan sebelumnya di bulan Oktober 2012 di Mataram, Lombok.
Perkembangan yang dicapai oleh para mitra SHAW selama kuartal sebelumnya dalam rangka
melaksanakan program SHAW juga ditelaah dan dibicarakan. Informasi yang mutakhir yang diperoleh
sepanjang pagi ini menguak informasi bahwa sampai dengan akhir Januari 2013 sebanyak 88 desa
telah deklarasi 100% STBM, setara dengan sekitar 9% dari target desa yang diinginkan. Kecuali itu
sebanyak 50 desa telah diverifikasi oleh pemerintah Kecamatan dan sedang menantikan untuk
persiapan akhir deklarasi STBM.

Sepanjang siang dipergunakan untuk melakukan review dan membicarakan sistem monitoring dasar
output dan outcome program SHAW yang sudah diperkenalkan di bulan Oktober 2012. Pembicaraan
ini mengungkapkan bahwa data monitoring kinerja telah dikumpulkan dari 438 desa selama Oktober-
Desember 2012, setara dengan sekitar 56% dari jumlah keseluruhan desa di mana kegiatan SHAW
telah dimulai. Review ini juga menemukan sejumlah tantangan terkait dengan pengorganisasian dan
pelaksanaan tugas-tugas monitoring, serta juga penggunaan sistem dan tool monitoring kinerja.
Kapasitas dan seringkali motivasi dari para pimpinan dan kader desa yang bertanggungjawab untuk
melakukan pengumpulan data dan rekapitulasi, tetap menjadi isu yang berulang. Karena belum
dilakukan pengetesan lapangan terhadap database monitoring, sejumlah kesalahan ditemukan.
Kesalahan-kesalahan ini diperbaiki dengan menyita waktu yang lama di sepanjang minggu.
Selanjutnya, laporan enam bulanan ditambahkan pada database untuk memfasilitasi pelaporan
setengah tahunan. Pelatihan dan pendampingan diberikan untuk mempergunakan database dengan
benar.

6
Rabu, 6 Februari 2013
Separoh sesi pagi pada hari kedua dipergunakan untuk membicarakan rencana tahun 2013 dan
anggarannya. Berbagai konsekuensi, tanggapan dan batasan dan persyaratan dari Kedubes Kerajaan
Belanda (KBKB) saat mereka memberikan persetujuan untuk rencana dan anggaran tahun 2013 baik
untuk para mitra maupun untuk pelaksanaan program, dibicaakan dengan rinci.

Berbagai rencana untuk melaksanakan review internal terhadap Program SHAW dibicarakan dengan
para mitra. Dirancang bahwa review internal pada program SHAW yang mirip dengan yang
terselenggara bulan Mei/Juni 2011, akan diselenggarakan pada bulan Mei dan Juni 2013. Review
tersebut kemudian akan diikuti dengan sebuah pertemuan dengan para pemangku kepentingan
SHAW pada akhir Juni 2013 di Jakarta.

Paroh kedua pagi hari dan sebagian dari siang harinya dimanfaatkan untuk melakukan review dan
diskusi perkembangan yang telah dicapai terkait komponen sanitasi sekolah. Sejak pertemuan yang
lalu, dua lokakarya terkait dengan sanitasi sekolah diselenggarakan untuk mengembangkan
pendekatan (November 2012) dan juga pelatihan khusus terkait modul (Januari 2013). Sebuah
kesepakatan dicapai bagaimana harus menyelesaikan modul pelatihan yaitu dengan supervisi
seorang pelatih ahli dari luar. Pada siang hari rancangan indikator monitoring sanitasi sekolah ditinjau
ulang secara rinci dan diputuskan untuk mengembangkan rancangan lain pada pertengahan Maret
2013.

Pada siang hari Martin Keijzer menyajikan hasil sebuah penelitian yang dibiayai Simavi untuk
melakukan review program STBM oleh Plan Indonesia di Kabupaten Lembata, NTT. Studi tersebut
memfokuskan diri secara khusus untuk menakar dan memahami perubahan perilaku sebagai sebuah
outcome dari kegiatan STBM. Sejumlah kesimpulan menarik dan rekomendasi yang bermanfaat
muncul dalam laporan ini. Di antaranya penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa ketersediaan fasilitas
sanitasi dan higiene tidak dengan sendirinya menimbulkan adanya perubahan praktik dan perilaku.
Dalam hal ini menjadi lebih penting adalah kunjungan secara berkala ke desa-desa untuk melakukan
kegiatan tindaklanjut setelah pemicuan seperti misalnya promosi higiene. Sisa waktu siang hari
dimanfaatkan untuk melakukan review atas hasil rancangan piktogram.

Kamis 7 Februari 2013

Hari ketiga sepenuhnya dimanfaatkan untuk melakukan kunjungan lapangan, dihantir oleh Yayasan
Dian Desa. Kunjungan dilakukan ke desa yang telah deklarasi STBM pada menjelang akhir tahun lalu.
Sesi penyampaian umpan balik diselenggarakan pada sore hari, membicarakan hasil pengamatan dan
memberikan rekomendasi. Pengamatan dan umpan balik disampaikan dalam laporan ini.

Jum’at 8 Februari 2013

Pagi hari keempat dan yang merupakan hari terakhir dipergunakan sepenuhnya untuk sesi World
Café. Empat topik berikut ini yang sudah disampaikan oleh para mitra pada waktu sebelumnya di
awal minggu, ditinjau dan dibicarakan dalam dua tahapan diskusi yang terpisah:
1) Bagaimana membangkitkan rasa memiliki masyarakat terhadap STBM?
2) Bagaimana melakukan monitoring terhadap kinerja dalam skala besar?
3) Apakah kita perlu menyediakan peralatan atau dana untuk para tukang?
4) Bagaimana mempertahankan capaian STBM SHAW berlanjut?

Metode World Café berhasil melahirkan banyak ide dan semangat, dan pada umumnya diapresiasi
dengan baik oleh para mitra.

7
Pada siang hari sejumlah rencana nyata disusun terkait dengan komponen manajemen pengetahuan.
Sebuah tim Editor, dengan anggota yang mewakili para mitra dibentuk dan jadual waktu telah
disepakati untuk menerbitkan newsletter internal SHAW yang sudah lama ditunggu dengan antusias.
Sesi akhir dari pertemuan ini adalah menyelesaikan rincian rencana aksi yang berhubungan dengan
seluruh topik yang telah dibicarakan selama empat hari pertemuan. Rincian rencana aksi terdapat
pada Lampiran 6. Sebuah evaluasi sederhana terhadap pertemuan empat hari ini diungkapkan
dengan banyaknya lambang senyuman.

Selama pertemuan telah disepakati bahwa pertemuan Koordinator Program mendatang akan
diselenggarakan pada akhir bulan Juni 2013 di Jakarta yang akan bertautan dengan pertemuan
review oleh para pemangku kepentingan.

8
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
During the period 2010 to 2014 a five-year Sanitation, Hygiene and Water (SHAW) programme is
implemented in nine districts in Eastern Indonesia. The programme is coordinated by Simavi and
implemented by five Indonesian NGOs (Yayasan Dian Desa, PLAN Indonesia, CD-Bethesda, Yayasan
Rumsram and Yayasan Masyarakat Peduli).

Yayasan Dian Desa in Yayasan Rumsram in

Sikka and East Flores in Nusa Biak Numfor and Supiori in
Tenggara Timur Papua

Yayasan Masyarakat Peduli in CD Bethesda in Plan Indonesia in

East Lombok of Nusa Tenggara Central and West Sumba of Nusa South-Central and North-Central
Barat Tenggara Timur Timor of Nusa Tenggara Timur

SHAW programme partner NGOs areas of operation

The programme is implemented in accordance with the STBM (Sanitasi Total Berbasis Masyarakat)
approach which was adopted by the Ministry of Health as the national sanitation strategy in 2008.
Although a number of isolated pilots took place, the SHAW programme is the first attempt to
implement the STBM approach at scale.

The overall goal of the programme is to reduce poverty by improving the health status of rural
communities in Indonesia and by doing so enhance sustainable and equitable rural development.
This is to be achieved by providing support to communities and (sub) districts in their effort to
establish and implement effective, sustained services for improved sanitation, water use and hygiene
on a (sub) district-wide level.

The overall objective of the programme is that by 2014, an enabling environment exists for
communities in nine selected districts in East Indonesia, to realise a sustainable healthy living
environment through coordinated action to promote sanitation and hygiene and to increase access
to safe drinking water and school sanitation. This will be monitored and shared at sub-district, district
and national level to reinforce sector management and for replication.

Programme Coordinators meetings are organised on a regular basis to increase collaboration among
SHAW partners by facilitating learning through the exchange of information, knowledge and
experiences, and by creating space and energy to move forward together. This report is meant to
share the results of the 1st Programme Coordinators meeting of 2013 held from 08 to 08 February
2013 in Maumere, Sikka, Flores, Nusa Tenggara Timur, East Indonesia.

9
1.2 Objectives and set up of the Maumere meeting
The objectives of this meeting were to:
1. Review and discuss progress of each partner;
2. Review and discuss the first run of the new monitoring system;
3. Discuss and decide how to move forward with the school sanitation and knowledge
management components;
4. Discuss a range of other programme issues and topics; and
5. Develop a concrete action plan, with key activities for the period February-June 2013.

The original meeting agenda prepared prior to the actual meeting is presented in Appendix 1.

The participants attending the meeting represented the SHAW implementation partners consisting of
Yayasan Dian Desa, PLAN Indonesia, CD-Bethesda, Yayasan Rumsram and Yayasan Masyarakat Peduli
plus Simavi and IRC. An overview of the participants is presented in Appendix 2.

The four-day meeting was organised and facilitated by Pam Minnigh (Simavi) and Erick Baetings (IRC)
with logistical and secretarial support from Yusmaidy and Yuli Arisanti of the SHAW Programme Unit.
Abang Rahino took care of all the translation and interpretation work during the meeting. Martin
Keijzer, Simavi Programme Coordinator and Elbrich Spijksma, Simavi the Netherlands, took an active
role in ensuring the success of the meeting.

10
2. Proceedings and results of the Maumere meeting
2.1 Tuesday 05 February 2013

Welcome, opening and agenda for the week

Pam welcomed all the meeting participants and facilitated a quick introduction round in which
everyone introduced himself/herself. A couple of new faces attended the meeting among which
Abang Rahino, translator of Simavi, and Siprianus Rahas and Eka Hadiyanti from Plan Sikka. See
the attendance list presented in Appendix 2.

Opening words by Martin Keijzer

Martin opened the meeting by thanking all the participants for attending the meeting and by giving a
special thanks to YDD for hosting the meeting. Martin apologised for the fact that the report of the
previous meeting was not yet ready although the summary translated by Abang was sent to all the
partners last Saturday. He mentioned that although there are several topics on the agenda an
attempt was made to reduce the number of topics. He invited the participants to feel free to bring up
new topics that they would like to discuss.

Martin also explained that during two separate presentations made in early January in Jakarta the
SHAW programme received appreciation for the progress made so far and for what we are doing. We
have still more than one and a half years to go which looks like a very long period. Looking back we
know that the time will go very fast. However, there is still some time to go to be able to achieve our
targets. Martin hoped that all partners are still behind the SHAW programme and feel good about
implementing it. Martin explained that there will be only one focus area during the coming period
and that deals with documentation of SHAW experiences and lessons learnt for internal use and
external sharing. Finally Martin encouraged everyone to participate fully by saying: “Without further
ado let’s start. Have a pleasant meeting with plenty of learning.”

Agenda for the week

Pam presented a quick overview of the programme for the four-day meeting. The actual programme
for the first day is shown in the following table.

When What Who

Welcome and introduction round Pam
09.00-09.45 Opening words Martin
Morning Agenda for the week Pam
09.45-10.15 Progress on action plan 2012-Q3 Erick
10.15-12.45 Progress updates Programme Coordinators
Lunch
13.30-17.15 SHAW monitoring system Erick
Afternoon
17.15-17.45 Identify issues for the World Café session Erick

Progress on action plan 2012/Q3

Erick facilitated a quick exercise in which the action plan of the previous 2012/Q3 meeting held in
Mataram in October 2012 was reviewed and discussed. Details of the progress updates on the
October 2012 action plan are provided in Appendix 3.

11
Progress updates by partners
The following participants presented short updates on activities carried out and progress made
during the period October 2012 to January 2013 on behalf of the five SHAW partners1:
 Ibu Christina for YDD
 Simon Heintje for Plan
 Ibu Kris for CD Bethesda
 Ibu Ellena for YMP
 Nasarudin for Rumsram

After the individual partner presentations time was allocated for elaborations and short question and
answer sessions. The highlights of the presentations and the most relevant discussions are
summarised below.

Yayasan Dian Desa

 Re Sikka: Christina explained that the Sikka Pokja AMPL person in charge who was very
supportive was transferred to some remote area within the district. She reiterated that the
commitment by the Pokja has been very good but they have a very heavy workload and that is
why it is sometimes difficult to join us on field trips. The motivation of village cadres is still a
concern as some village cadres still expect financial incentives to collect monitoring data. Finally
she explained that they will have to slow down programme activities in Sikka due to local Bupati
elections starting in March 2013. It is expected that an additional 4 Kecamatan (comprising of 52
villages) will be declared STBM during 2013.
 Re Flores Timur: Christina explained that there have been no STBM declarations yet in Flores
Timur as most of the villages asked to wait for six months to see if the changes in behaviour
and practices are sustained. Although this is good, it makes it difficult for YDD to report
progress. 39 villages are expected to be declared STBM during the first half of 2013, and another
51 villages during the second half of 2013. One of the challenges in the district is the
remoteness of a number of areas, in particular three difficult to reach islands which include
Adonara and Solor.
 Eka asked who made the funds available for water supply. Christina replied that these funds have
come from Simavi. Elbrich asked about the funds allocated by the district. Christina explained
that these are mainly in-kind payments, for example staff time and allowances for Puskesmas
staff to visit villages for post-triggering support and monitoring. Ikos mentioned that the
existence of a Perda makes it possible to allocate funds for STBM activities. YDD support villages
to plan and budget for STBM activities.

Plan Indonesia
 Re Timur Tengah Utara and Timur Tengah Selatan: Simon Heintje explained that Plan tried
out the new monitoring system in the two districts. One to two days are needed at RT level to
carry out the monitoring tasks. All sanitarians in TTU actively participated in the house to house
data collection. Plan also decided to collect additional monitoring data related to the
rehabilitation of existing toilets as this will help them to establish the contributions made by
the communities. With regards to the sanitation marketing component already more than 100
masons were trained by Plan. At present 21 masons are actively engaged in the programme with
the remainder waiting for moulds. 17 masons already purchased moulds using their own money
and others will borrow moulds from the Kecamatans. Simon Heintje also explained that the

1
The presentations have been uploaded on the SHAW Google Drive webpage: [email protected]

12
 Health Offices in the two districts have put aside budget for STBM activities. Plan was involved in
the planning stage and will also be involved during the monitoring stage. He also explained that
competition will be organised among the villages to ensure their continued STBM status. Finally
efforts are made to promote pour-flush toilets by making available cheaper toilet components.
 Nas asked whether villagers are interested in pour-flush toilets and how Plan introduced this
technology in the villages. Eka replied that different types of sanitation technologies are
introduced and discussed with the villagers. Ultimately it is up to the villagers whether they are
interested or not. Erick asked about the functionality of the water seals – part of the concrete
toilet pan design – as the pictures appeared to show some problems. Martin mentioned that he
had noticed the same issue during his recent visit and that the design of the concrete pan is
something that requires attention.

CD Bethesda
 Re Sumba Tengah and Sumba Barat Daya: Kris explained that work in ST is going on in 49 villages
in three Kecamatan. In SBD work is going on in 30 villages in 2 Kecamatan. To date 30 villages in
ST have been declared 100% STBM. More declarations are in the pipeline and expected soon.
Training on toilet production making use of local materials and local innovations have been
organised. Together with the Department of Education 25 schools have been identified for the
school sanitation component. Kris also mentioned that the Dinkes in Sumba Tengah will budget
for STBM this year with funding from the national budget system (APBN). The budget will be
used to replicate the STBM programme in two more Kecamatan. Finally the SHAW water supply
component will be implemented in 28 villages during the coming one and a half year.
 Eka commented by saying that Plan would like to learn on how to access funding from the
national budget. He asked whether this could be a subject for Friday’s World Café. Elbrich asked
whether IDR 100,000 for a toilet is cheap. Apparently the IDR 100,000 is the amount needed to
purchase a concrete slab with a pour-flush pan and water seal.

Yayasan Masyarakat Peduli

 Re Lombok Timur: Ellena started by saying that the staff with pleasantly surprised with the
results from the capacity self-assessment workshop conducted by Erick Baetings and Yan Ghewa
in October 2012. Ellena was pleased with the way they were now better prepared to explain YMP
to the outside world. Ellena also mentioned that up to date some 4623 people in the 47 villages
in seven Kecamatan have been involved in SHAW/STBM interventions even before triggering
activities have started. All the staff has now received training on the five STBM pillars by a trainer
from Plan Timor. Sanitation marketing is taking off with the support from a Plan Grobogan
expert. Even before triggering has taken place there are already some 100 villagers who have
made orders for concrete toilet components that are being produced with moulds purchased by
the local government. YMP is planning to conduct triggering events by seven teams in 214 dusun
in 31 days. After triggering village volunteers will be responsible for supporting up to 20 families.
With regards to water supply activities, a 300 cubic metre water reservoir has been constructed
that will provide water to three dusun in Sajang. In Sajang and Jeruk Manis training is conducted
on how to manage the drinking water schemes.

Yayasan Rumsram
 Re Biak Numfor and Supiori: Nas explained that the global handwashing day was celebrated in
two villages in consultation with the Pokja AMPL. A road show was conducted in a new
Kecamatan: Biak Barat. Nas also mentioned that a number of advocacy and lobby activities were
carried out that included organising training on school sanitation to 28 elementary school
principals. For 2013 Rumsram expects that 42 villages will be declared 100% STBM which will
include 33 elementary schools.

13
 Martin mentioned that he had seen two presentations which mentioned ODF declaration. He
asked whether this was the decision of the partners or whether someone else had decided to
include this intermediary step. Nas explained that the idea came from the communities as a
Minister was visiting the area last year. Ikos explained that a number of villages had already been
declared ODF even before YDD intervened in these villages. Erick reiterated that to date only
some 9% of the total numbers of target villages have been declared STBM. Martin expressed
his worries about the long time it takes to declare villages STBM. He suggested including
villages verified by the Kecamatan authorities so as to increase the number of villages which
have achieved STBM status. Otherwise official STBM declarations are delaying the progress
we have made so far. The capacity of the Kabupaten and in particular the Bupati to attend
all village STBM declarations appears to be hampering progress.

Pictures included in the presentations by the SHAW partners

During the presentations the following progress overview was developed showing where we are right
now including the number of villages that have been declared STBM to date.

# of villages # of active STBM villages as % of

# of villages
Total # of where villages as % # of STBM
Location declared Total # of
target villages activities have of total # of verifications
STBM to date target villages intervention
started target villages villages
YMP Lombok Timur 47 47 100% 0 0% 0% 0
Sumba Tengah 49 49 100% 13 27% 27% 6
CD Bethesda Sumba BD 30 30 100% 0 0% 0% 0
Sub-totals CDB 79 79 100% 13 16% 16% 6
Sikka 160 101 63% 9 6% 9% 0
YDD Flores Timor 250 90 36% 0 0% 0% 0
Sub-totals YDD 410 191 47% 9 2% 5% 0
TTU (Kefa) 175 175 100% 29 17% 17%
44
Plan TTS (Soe) 248 248 100% 31 13% 13%
Sub-totals Plan 423 423 100% 60 14% 14% 44
Biak Numfor 60 38 63% 6 10% 16% 0
Rumsram Supiori 12 10 83% 0 0% 0% 0
Sub-totals YR 72 48 67% 6 8% 13% 0
Totals 1,031 788 76% 88 9% 11% 50

Totals incl. STBM verification 1,031 788 138 13% 18%

14
New SHAW monitoring system
After lunch Erick introduced the monitoring topic. He started by saying that it had been decided to
cover fewer topics during the meeting which should allow more time to discuss the topics in more
detail or depth. The three hours allocated for the monitoring topic were used to cover the following
five issues:
1) Review first run (Q4 2012) and identify challenges
2) Conduct tutorial on the correct use of the Excel databases
3) Review and discuss reporting possibilities and linkages to SHAW progress reports
4) Inclusion of old baseline data
5) Review pictograms developed for the house-level data collection forms

Review the first run (2012-Q4) of applying the new monitoring system and identify challenges
Participants were asked to form small groups per partner and to answer the following two questions:
1) work out the number of villages that were included in the 2012 4th quarter monitoring exercise;
and 2) identify the challenges that you encountered during the first monitoring run at scale.

SHAW partners reviewing the 2012-Q3 monitoring exercise

Each partner presented an overview of the villages included in the 2012 4 th quarter monitoring
exercise as well as the challenges they had identified. After the presentations the challenges were
compared and grouped under two separate main headings as follows.

Challenges related to organisation and execution Challenges related to the system

1) Capacity (and discipline) of village cadres 1) Differences were noted in the number of
(including RT and RW heads) to collect data houses between the OUTPUT and OUTCOME
2) Time needed to collect data from house to monitoring databases.
house (particularly in large villages such as 2) Differences were also noted in the population
those in East Lombok) figures between Kecamatan and Kabupaten
databases

15
 Challenges related to organisation and execution Challenges related to the system
3) Capacity to recapitulate data at dusun and desa 3) What do we do with the old baseline data that
level by village cadres and village authorities does not meet the new data requirements
4) Still a number of village cadres expect a 4) Information does not always align with SHAW
financial reward for the data collection tasks reporting requirements (e.g. instead of number
of houses that meet specific pillars, population
figures are required)
Issues that were added later during the ensuing
discussions:
5) Roles and responsibilities related to data entry
and data analysis and in particular the role of
the Puskesmas at Kecamatan level and the
Pokja at Kabupaten level

During the presentations an overview was produced of the number of villages included in the first
run covering the period October to December 2012 which is summarised in the following table.

# of villages OUTPUT monitoring OUTCOME monitoring Total # of

As % of total #
Location where activities Baseline data Progress data Baseline data Progress data villages
of villages
have started collected collected collected collected included

YMP Lombok Timur 47 47 47 47 100%

Sumba Tengah 49 49 5 49 100%
CD Bethesda Sumba BD 30 20 20 20 67%
Sub-totals CDB 79 0 69 0 25 69 87%
Sikka 101 15 15 15 15%
YDD Flores Timor 90 37 90 37 41%
Sub-totals YDD 191 0 52 90 15 52 27%
TTU (Kefa) 175 175 158 175 100%
Plan TTS (Soe) 248 47 56 47 19%
Sub-totals Plan 423 0 222 0 214 222 52%
Biak Numfor 38 38 38 38 100%
Rumsram Supiori 10 10 10 10 100%
Sub-totals YR 48 0 48 0 48 48 100%
Totals 788 47 391 137 302 438 56%

The above table shows that only some 56% of the total number of villages we are working in at this
moment were included in the 2012-Q4 monitoring sample. Part of the shortfall can be explained by
the fact that a number of villages included in the table had not been triggered by the end of 2012.
However, this does not explain the entire shortfall. In particular YDD (27%) and to some lesser extend
Plan (52%) were not able to cover all their intervention villages.

Tutorial on the correct use of the Microsoft Excel databases

As there was a certain amount of confusion about the monitoring databases, the correct use of the
different Microsoft Excel database workbooks was explained by Erick. It came to light that there were
no serious problems with carrying out the data however there were a number of partners who had
not understood the guideline (prepared in English) on how to copy and paste the data from the
Kecamatan workbooks into the Kabupaten workbooks. Some had in actual fact manually typed the
data in the Kabupaten workbooks! With the use of the projector, this simple exercise was shown a
couple of times.

Thereafter some time was taken to make an inventory of the design and development faults that had
crept into the different workbooks. It was agreed that Erick would take some time out to correct the
faults during the week.

16
Review and discuss reporting possibilities and linkages to SHAW progress reports
The different reports that are included in the workbooks were reviewed and discussed. Erick
reminded the participants that the purpose of collecting monitoring data is basically twofold, namely:
1) to report progress and results towards the donor and other stakeholders; and 2) to monitor
whether progress is being made and whether corrective action needs to be made to steer towards
the programme goals.

“Often monitoring is seen as a donor requirement rather than a management tool. Donors
are certainly entitled to know whether their money is being properly spent, and whether it is
being well spent. But the most important use of monitoring should be for the project or
programme itself to see how it is doing against objectives, whether it is having an impact,
whether it is working efficiently, and to learn how to do it better.”2

Erick referred back to the figures presented in the morning session on ‘Progress Updates’, which
made it clear that after more than two years of field implementation only some 10% of the total
number of target villages has been declared 100% STBM. This means that the remaining 90% need to
be achieved in less than two years. Christina asked what to make of the progress we have made in
other villages. Although they may not have reached 100% STBM, most villages have made substantial
progress in moving towards that goal. It was explained that that is exactly the reason why monitoring
is so important to be able to measure progress over time and to see whether villages are moving
towards 100% STBM or not. It was however also explained that unless we make substantial progress
in achieving the number of 100% STBM villages, as promised to the donor, we could have a problem
at the end of the SHAW programme.

It was finally decided that on Wednesday night Erick, with a number of participants, would check the
alignment between the reports included in the monitoring database workbooks and the SHAW
reporting requirements to ensure that no double work or manual calculations are expected from the
partners when preparing the 6-monthly progress reports.

Inclusion of old baseline data

Most of the partners collected baseline data during 2011 and 2012 well before the new OUTPUT and
OUTCOME monitoring system was developed. This means that the data then collected is not always
similar in nature to what is being monitored at present. However, to be able to show progress over
time and claim our successes and achievements it is important that baseline data is included in the
new monitoring databases. During the discussion it was concluded that there should be no problem
whatsoever in obtaining the baseline data for the OUTPUT monitoring systems from the old
monitoring systems and use that in the new databases. For the OUTCOME monitoring databases this
might be more problematic and that needs to be studied carefully by each partner in the coming
period. It was decided that all baseline data would be included in the monitoring databases before
the next reporting period.

Review of outcome monitoring pictograms

Given the time constraints it was decided to park this issue for a later moment during the week. It
was taken up in the afternoon of Wednesday 6 February 2013.

2
Baetings, E. (March 2012) Review of Monitoring Systems and Practices, Sanitation, Hygiene And Water (SHAW)
Programme for East Indonesia; IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre, The Hague, the Netherlands

17
Introduction to the World Café session
The final session of the day was to introduce the World Café session scheduled for Friday morning
and to identify issues to be discussed in the World Café. Erick started by introducing the World Café
concept with the use of a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation. He explained that it is widely used
method to discuss a wide variety of issues or topics.

The World Café is a conversational process based on small group conversations that can be adapted
to a variety of topics. The purpose of the World Café is to provide a safe place for people to discuss
diverse topics (issues, constraints, challenges, etc.), share ideas, discuss diverse perspectives and
experiences, connect with peers and ‘experts’, dream of solutions, and share the outcome with
others.

Erick thereafter explained the rules of the game (see Friday morning session) and invited the partners
to identify issues, constraints, challenges, or anything else they would like to discuss during the
World Café session on Friday morning.

Source: http://www.lopn.net/WorldCafe_Guidelines.html

18
2.2 Wednesday 06 February 2013
Erick provided a quick overview of the programme for the second day, which is summarised in the
following table.

When What Who

08.30-09.00 Identify World Café issues Erick
Morning 09.00-10.15 Annual plan and other topics Martin
10.30-12.45 School sanitation Elbrich and Erick
Lunch
13.30-14.45 School sanitation continued Elbrich and Erick
Study on changes as result of STBM activities in
14.45-16.00 Martin
Afternoon Lembata Regency
16.30-18.45 Review of draft outcome monitoring pictograms Pam
18.45-19.00 Prepare for field trip Pam and Christina

Identification of issues for the World Café

The World Café topics identified by the SHAW partners were listed on a flip chart and put on the wall.
The following topics were identified:
 YMP: 1) water supply and water treatment; 2) watershed management; 3) STBM ownership;
and 4) household solid waste management
 YDD: 1) monitoring on scale; 2) school sanitation module
 Plan: 1) should NGOs provide the capital fund and equipment for sanitation marketing
 CDB: 1) sustainability of the STBM results/achievements and exit strategy; 2) water supply to
support STBM

Erick welcomed the topics but asked the partners to make them more explicit. Be clear what you
want to get out of the discussions! If you do not have a clear/specific questions you will not get a
clear/specific answer. Partners were reminded that they will only have some 45 minutes to discuss
an issue.

Annual plan 2013 and other topics

Annual plan 2013
Martin started by saying that the SHAW programme’s annual plan and budget for 2013 was approved
by the EKN, however with a number of comments and restrictions. The EKN’s comments and
restrictions are listed below.

Main comments by EKN:

1) EKN expressed the need to follow a more long-term flexible approach.
2) EKN is concerned about the management capacity (of the SHAW programme as a whole).
Short-term Simavi support is not a long-term solution! Martin mentioned that it will be
necessary to start looking again for a coordinator.
And finally,
3) EKN believes more qualitative data on gender aspects are needed.

19
Restrictions set by EKN:
 We need to provide an overview per partner of original targets, results 2010-2012, planning
2013, and remaining targets (split up in STBM triggering, STBM declarations, STBM follow-
up, schools, water supply, etc.)
 EKN does not approve activities by WASTE and ZZL for 2013 and 2014. After further
discussions with the EKN it was decided that WASTE’s on-going activities (Ecosan activities by
WASTE and YDD) can continue.
 Limit sanitation marketing activities to those that directly contribute to the programme
results. The EKN does not approve the creation of revolving funds, however, financing of
stock for initial consumer goods (e.g. water filters) is OK but needs detailed documentation
“and at the end of the project included in the potential transfer of inventory items to partner
organisations”. The maximum amount that can be used for this purpose is Euro 25,000 (~IDR
310,000,000) see also annual plan section 4.2, bullet 2.2.
 Budget 2013 is the guide; all additional activities have to be budget-neutral!

Extra aspects (see annual plan section 4.2)

 Start-up equipment/capital as support for tukang is possible, but only if it is already included
in the 2013 budget.
 Water supply activities within EKN budget are possible, but budget neutral. As most of our
budgets have some ‘fat’, there might be some space to allocate unused funds for water
supply activities.
o Water supply at schools: budget line 3.1.1
o Water supply at village: budget line 3.2.2
 There will be additional reporting requirements In case of investments in sanitation
marketing and/or water supply on EKN funds, to clearly demonstrate what is done, why,
where, when, targets and how much budget is involved. Fund utilisation for sanitation
marketing and water supply is a deviation from the budget, but EKN is flexible as long as it
is reported.

Ellena asked who will own the remaining funds after the revolving fund is used. Martin explained that
the money should not be seen as a gift; if there is money left then it should be used as any other part
of the budget. There was some confusion about buying stocks without being able to operate a
revolving fund. Martin mentioned that he will further discuss this with the EKN and the individual
partners. He did stress that partners can buy and sell products for the time being as they are seen as
programme assets.

Review of the SHAW programme

Martin reminded the partners that an internal programme review was carried out in May 2011 which
brought up many issues and lessons learned. Martin suggested organising a similar review during
2013. The purpose of the review should be to study:
 The situation
 The changes brought about by STBM
 How to continue regarding SHAW and replication

The review should look at STBM in desa, STBM in schools, and the enabling environment at the
different levels (Kabupaten, Kecamatan and village). Martin suggested the following time schedule:
May 2013 carry out review in the field, June 2013 organise a workshop in Jakarta to discuss the
results of the review with our stakeholders. The Jakarta workshop would then be followed by a
regular SHAW Programme Coordinator’s meeting (2013/Q2). Ideally a wide range of persons
participate in the review in order to inform, compare and motivate. This can be done by inviting
members from the National level to visit the field to show what we are achieving and by asking
partners to go visit other partners to exchange ideas and to compare approaches.

20
The questions used in the Lembata study could be used to study the situation and the changes. The
questions would have to be extended to include issues such as sustainability (how to deal with the
future, exit strategy, etc.), the enabling environment, community organisation, budget aspects, etc.
In short it is important to find out whether the STBM flame will continue and even spread out or fade
out after the SHAW programme.

Miscellaneous issues
Martin brought up a couple of other issues, namely:
 Water supply: more information is to be made available with regards to planning, expected
results, and budget by each partner.
 Annual plan 2013: Simavi’s external auditor requests proof of approval of biannual reports.
Martin will follow up by email which will require a quick response by the partners.
 Child under-nutrition or stunting of under five year olds: Martin presented a quick overview
of the relation between poor sanitation and hygiene conditions found in Indonesia and the
relatively high levels of stunted children in Indonesia. According to a recent study one out of
every three children in Indonesia are stunted. This is 2.5 times higher than other Asian
countries. Stunting affects school performance and achievements and this will directly affect
adult productivity and income generating possibilities. Martin explained that it is not just
diarrhoea but Environmental Enteropathy3 (EE) that causes under- or mal-nutrition by
children.

School sanitation
Erick introduced the session by going through the topics that will be discussed. The main purpose of
the session is to determine:
“Where are we and what remains to be done?”
The following topics were reviewed and discussed during this session:
1) Results November 2012 workshop
2) Results January 2013 workshop
3) Draft school STBM monitoring indicators

Results November 2012 workshop

Elbrich gave a quick summary of the proceedings and results of the November 2012 workshop
organised in Yogyakarta. During the workshop a generic flow of activities was developed by the
participants. The key stakeholders were identified including their roles from district to desa level, and
an overview was made of the short-term and long-term results that we want to achieve in
collaboration with these stakeholders. What are the preconditions that need to be in place to
implement STBM in schools? The workshop participants also identified who should do what during
implementation including the follow up activities at schools and villages after STBM triggering. A
lobby component was included to ensure that all the relevant stakeholders get on board. A start was
made discussing the school STBM indicators which was followed up by Pam in the Netherlands. A
school monitoring component was therefore included in the flow of activities. The crucial aspect that
was discussed was the need for organising training for the different stakeholders that will be involved
in the actual implementation and monitoring of STBM at the schools. Hence, the workshop was
concluded by stressing the need to develop a training manual. Following the November workshop it
was decided to organise another workshop in January 2013 to develop the training manual.

3
A disease or other disorder of the intestines which causes growth failure in children in the developing world.

21
Results January 2013 workshop
Yus gave a similar overview of the proceedings of the January 2012 workshop. During the workshop
two different training were identified: 1) training for policy makers (TOT); and 2) training for school
sanitation implementers. The beneficiaries of the first training will be the heads of the Puskesmas,
Promkes, Camats, trainers and others. The beneficiaries for the second training will be the
sanitarians, midwifes, Kecamatan STBM teams, school principals, school inspectors, and the teachers
responsible for STBM. Most of the first two days were spent juggling with a range of issues. Each
module consists of 22 themes. Which covers the following themes: 1) understanding STBM, 2) need
for monitoring of school STBM, 3) understand and facilitate the options for the 5 pillars, 4) enable
beneficiaries to have the skill to train and to implement, 5) understand the triggering and promotion
methodology, 6) capacity on effective communication, 7) knowledge and skills to construct and
maintain school sanitation facilities. On the third day we tried to develop 2 times 22 subjects; of
course that was not possible! The solution was to provide a one-week period to the facilitator to
draft the training modules. The draft was shared in the fourth week of January. There are now three
different files consisting of a range of subjects but most of these are not yet complete and not yet
covering all 22 topics. The material is now with the partners to provide feedback to the external
facilitator, Ibu Julie. So far only Plan has reacted briefly. Verbal feedback was provided by the other
partners.

There was some confusion about the relation between the 22 topics (subjects) and the seven themes
mentioned by Yus. Yus explained that the themes consist of several sub-themes or topics and that is
why they have come to 22 topics.

Erick repeated his earlier question: where are we and what remains to be done to complete the
training modules?
 Ishak: with regards to the modules received a lot of parts are still empty or need to be
revised. I am confused about the highlighted parts that require input and feedback from the
participants of the workshop.
 Ellena: our expectations about the workshop were too high! We invested a lot of energy in
the workshop but we are disappointed with the result of the workshop. Julie had not yet
received the important points of STBM and moreover we were so disappointed that she told
us that we do not understand the concept of the five pillars of STBM. We were confused. Did
Julie come to provide training on how to develop the school STBM training modules or to
develop the module on the basis of the inputs from the participants? I am not able to
provide feedback on the draft modules.
 Elbrich: general feedback is important to convey to Julie, particularly where it concerns the
fact that expectations were not met by her. But also you are the experts of STBM, more so
than Julie. So if you see that there are overlaps in the modules you should not get confused
but inform Julie that she is going wrong. We need you to identify the elements that are not
clear or not complete. It would be best if you could do that sometime today so that we can
provide detailed feedback to Julie. Remember that Julie will not be able to finish the
modules without our detailed feedback. We will have to give Julie another deadline to come
up with the final modules.
 Martin: Julie informed Martin that she will have two days next week to work on the
modules. It would therefore be best if we could provide feedback to her this week so that
she can work on the training modules next week.
 Christina: the workshop was not well structured until Yus took over. We understand that we
need to help her to complete the modules but it is difficult without a clear framework. We
received only one module which is a mix of the two training. I doubt that she has a good
understanding of what triggering is all about as it is not included in the module.

22
After a long discussion in which a number of disappointments were aired it was decided to stop
looking backwards and instead look ahead and decide what next steps are to be taken to move
forward. The following was agreed:
1) In the evening of 6 February 2013 the participants of the January 2013 workshop will study
the draft module and draft detailed feedback.
2) In the evening of the 7 February 2013 the participants will sit with Elbrich to discuss their
individual feedback and to compile all the feedback into one reaction to Julie. Elbrich will
thereafter forward the combined feedback to Julie.
3) On Tuesday 12 and Wednesday 13 February 2013 Julie will work on the 2nd version of the
training module incorporating all the comments and feedback provided by the partners.
4) After receiving the 2nd version, Simavi (Elbrich and Martin) and the partners will have a
critical look at the 2nd version and decide on what to do next.

Review draft school STBM monitoring indicators

The participants were divided into three groups. Group one was asked to review the output
indicators and group two and group three were asked to review the outcome indicators. The
remaining time up to lunch was used to review the draft school sanitation indicators in the groups.

After lunch the three groups presented the outcomes of their observations. The detailed
observations and comments are given in Appendix 4.

Elbrich concluded the session by saying that Pam, Erick and herself will continue working on the
monitoring forms on the basis of the feedback provided during the session and that the next version
will be shared and discussed with the partners. Simon Heintje asked whether the new format could
be made available to Plan as they are about to evaluate the sanitation and hygiene conditions in the
elementary schools in TTS and TTU. It was decided to share the draft monitoring forms with Plan as
that would be an excellent way to test the forms in the field.

Study on Changes as result of STBM activities in Lembata Regency

Martin explained that he had already talked about the study during the previous October 2012
meeting. The study4 was carried out by a policy consultancy firm called AKADEMIKA on behalf of
Simavi. The overall objective of the study was “to get lessons learnt from Lembata experiences in
changing behaviour ignited by STBM program for better and sustainable water and sanitation
development.” The specific objectives of the study were to:
1) Assess the actual sanitation and hygiene behaviour by households and individuals in the
villages.
2) Assess the capacity of the enabling environment to support and maintain the good results of
STBM.
3) Formulate a set of recommendations for relevant institutions (both government and non-
government) to scale up good water and sanitation programmes with special attention on
sustainability.

Methods applied to collect data were household surveys, in-depth interviews, focus group
discussions, most significant change stories and direct observations.

4
Simavi (January 2013) Study on changes as result of STBM activities in Lebata Regency; a study conducted by
AKADEMIKA, Jakarta, Indonesia

23
Results of the study
1. Pillar 1: Stop ODF
 Official indicator: “Every individual and community has access to basic sanitation facilities so
that open defecation free (ODF) community is achieved”.
 The indicator used during implementation was the ownership of a toilet at each home, and
for a village to be declared 100% STBM it requires 100% toilet ownership at the home.
 Most of the respondents already had access to a toilet before the programme started; 95%
in STBM houses and 92.5% in non-STBM houses. Furthermore, toilets are used by almost all
households: 97.5% in STBM villages and 97.5% in non-STBM villages.
 Defecating behaviour: of the 120 STBM houses 60% always use their toilet versus 65% for
non-STBM houses. Both in STBM and non-STBM villages, 30% of respondents still defecate in
open area although they have a toilet at home. This includes the use of open spaces when
working in the fields!
2. Pillar 2: Handwashing with soap
 Official indicator: “Hand washing facilities (including soap) are available in every household
and public facility in community (such as school, office, restaurant, health centre, market,
bus station) so that everybody can wash their hands properly”.
 The indicator used during implementation was the ownership of hand washing facilities at
the home and for a village to be declared 100% STBM it requires 100% of hand washing
facility ownership by households.
 85% of the STBM houses had no handwashing facility before the programme but have now
versus 0% for non-STBM houses. 100% of the non-STBM houses did not have a handwashing
facility at the time of the survey.
 Handwashing at critical times: before eating: 92%, after defecating: 67%, before preparing
food: 17%, other (after eating or doing activities): 66%. The figures for non-STBM households
were not very different (see table below).

 Handwashing before eating continues to be done by using a small basin with soap inside the
house. Handwashing after defecating is done with water and soap available at the toilet.
Handwashing facilities outside the house (e.g. tippy taps) are used after “outdoor activities”,
like working in the field, cleaning yard, playing (kids).
3. Pillar 3: Household level drinking water management
 Official indicator: “Every household manages drinking water and food at home safely”
 The indicator used during implementation was that a campaign for better drinking water
treatment was conducted. No clear indicator and requirement should be met for a village to
be declared 100% STBM.
 Campaign for better drinking water treatment is conducted however no clear indicator and
requirement should be met for meeting STBM criteria.

24
  Changes: treating drinking water before interventions: 98% for STBM houses and 97.5% for
non-STBM houses indicating that this was common practice already.
4. Pillar 4:
 Changes: 9% of houses do not manage their solid waste well in STBM houses, and 50% for
non-STBM houses
 Solid waste management in STBM villages is noticeably better.
5. Pillar 5:
 No clear indicator and requirement for meeting STBM standards.
 Changes: 40% of houses do not manage household wastewater well in STBM houses versus
63% for non-STBM houses.
6. Pillar 6: Livestock alienation
 Although the idea for this pillar came from the population, this pillar is considered by STBM
practitioners to be the most difficult to achieve after pillar 1.
7. Conclusions
 Lembata is considered as one of successful districts in implementing STBM. The researchers
are confident that what happens in Lembata can be a lesson for implementation of STBM
anywhere across country.
 Compared to non-STBM villages, STBM villages are better in terms of coverage of toilet
ownership (?) and in terms of quality of the toilet. However, the (almost) 100 per cent of
toilet ownership is not a guarantee for open defecation free villages.
 STBM is successful in making hand washing facilities physically available. But the use of hand
washing facilities at critical times is still lacking in STBM villages (and non-STBM villages as
well).
 Drinking boiled water has been a habit however respondents in STBM villages tend to treat
drinking water better than respondents in non-STBM villages.
 STBM villages are better than non-STBM villages with regards to management of solid waste.
That is an indication that STBM has a contribution in improving knowledge of the villagers on
solid waste management.
 Generally speaking, waste water is not managed well, both in STBM and non-STBM villages.
 Among STBM pillars, stopping open defecation is considered as the most difficult to achieve,
mainly because it involves financial investments by households.
 There is no proof (at this moment) that the health situation in STBM villages is better than in
non-STBM villages.
 There is an indication that STBM pillars, particularly Pillar 1 (stop open defecation) and Pillar
2 (hand washing with soap), are implemented in a way that fails to reflect the real essence of
the pillars.
 The lack of access to water can be a threat to sustainability of STBM achievements.
 The most important institution in water and sanitation programs (including STBM) is the
existence of local leaders. Without them, water and sanitation projects cannot be
implemented well. They can work well even without the existence of water and sanitation
project however STBM (or other sanitation projects) helps to speed up the process.
8. Recommendations
1) Either government or non-government institutions should help villages solve the problem of
access to clean water that has proven to be the main problem regarding the sustainability of
STBM achievements. Water should be available not only at household level, but also in
public areas including schools, government office and farm.
2) Village government should take initiative to find a way to make public toilets available in
public areas such as farms (?) and playing grounds (for kids).

25
 3) All relevant agencies should back the idea of stopping open defecation, instead of
concentrating only on toilet development at household level. Martin said: “access to
hardware does not mean behaviour change”.
4) All STBM practitioners should review the STBM implementation strategy so that the
essences of STBM pillars are not overshadowed by physical or visible aspect of the pillars.
That principle is applicable for all pillars of STBM, but there are two ‘critical pillars’ with very
high potential of that ‘misleading’ output indicator, namely Pillar 1 (stop open defecation)
and Pillar 2 (hand washing using soap).
5) Training for local leaders must be the starting point and the main component of any
program/project to be implemented at village level. That is essential to improve the capacity
of the local leaders so that they can contribute significantly to sanitation development.

Martin wrapped up the presentation by saying that people still continue to practice open defecation
even if they have a toilet at their home. What if they are not at home and for example working in
their fields? Similarly the existence of a handwashing facility at homes is not enough to prevent
bacterial transmission. People need to wash their hands in different places, not only when they are in
their homes. Finally triggering is an important activity but returning regularly to the villages for post-
triggering follow up is even more important.

Martin concluded the presentation by saying: “take these messages from the study with you when
you do STBM promotion in the villages. Follow up after triggering is important; continue the
discussion with the villagers.” Finally Martin mentioned that he would share the final report with all
the partners.

Review of draft OUTCOME monitoring pictograms

Erick introduced this session by saying that this session had come instead of the knowledge
management session originally scheduled as it fits better after the earlier discussions on the new
monitoring system and the draft monitoring indicators for school sanitation. He referred back to the
discussions held during the Jakarta meeting in June 2012 where it was concluded that people had
problems understanding the sometimes complex or complicated explanations of the different
outcome levels. It was then suggested to consider combining the written text with easy-to-
understand pictograms. Since then Martin has contracted a communication expert to work on the
outcome pictograms. Pam gave a quick explanation about how the partners were to read or view the
pictograms. They should be seen more as easy-to-recognise symbols or icons instead of as clear
pictures that tell the whole story.

The pictograms of the different pillars were divided among the partners and they were asked to
review whether the pictogram in combination with the original text would make it easier for village
cadres and village leaders to conduct their monitoring tasks.

Group work on the outcome monitoring pictograms

26
The results of the discussions, which is a combination of feedback by the groups and plenary
discussions, is provided in Appendix 5.

An example of the outcome pictograms (Pillar 1.3) and group work reviewing the pictograms

27
2.3 Thursday 07 February 2013
Most of the day was spent on a field trip to visit Yayasan Dian Desa SHAW intervention villages. A
quick overview of the programme for the third day is summarised in the following table.

When What Who

08.00-16.00 Field trip All
Morning &
Break
Afternoon
17.45-18.45 Review field trip Erick

Field trip to visit YDD SHAW intervention areas

During the field trip organised by YDD, Paubekor village (STBM) and the toilet construction activities
in Kelurahan Hewoli were visited.

Review of the field trip

Erick introduced this session by saying that we take time to review the field trip for two reasons,
namely:
1) To provide feedback to the host (YDD) who organised the field visit. What is our impression?
This can be negative or positive as long as it is constructive.
2) To consider what we are going to take home. What can we implement in our areas?

All three groups presented their observations and findings.

Group 1 visiting Dusun Arat

 Positive: 1) committed community; 2) willingness to change; 3) obedient to the leaders; 4)
high level of resilience; 5) YDD smartly makes use of the strength of the community, 6)
existence of 5-year village development plans.
 Critical: 1) water reservoir is dirty and there is a high presence of skin diseases; 2) cattle are
tight-up in pens but the village is still dirty and smelly; 3) need to improve wastewater
management in the village (pillar 5); 4) the tippy tap designs should be improved so that they
become accessible to small children; 6) the lids used to cover the toilet squatting holes are
too small; and 7) household solid waste is placed in pits but it would be good to separate the
solid waste first.
 Lessons learned: 1) this village has already a long term planning in place; 2) how to
successfully develop the network among the stakeholders (from Camat to lowest level); 3)
strong unity among the villagers; and 4) networking among the villages in the Kecamatan.

Group 2 visiting Dusun Tomu

 In general all households have all facilities in place for the 5 STBM pillars. However, villagers
are still practising open defecation when working in the fields. Similarly there are still people
who do not know the critical times to wash hands. Some people still throw the garbage in
the river and there is still stagnant water in the yard from the dishes and the bathroom.
Children cannot wash their hands at the school as there are no facilities.
 YDD should assist the villagers to find alternative methods to manage their solid waste and
to ensure that wastewater does not end up in stagnant pools. YDD should also ensure that
facilities are not just built but also used (e.g. tippy taps).

28
Group 3 visiting Rita Sisan
 Most of the issues were already covered by the first two groups.
 The physical facilities are in place and the suitable behaviour is in place. 80% of the toilets
were already in place before the start of the programme.
 Village development plans are made but it would be good to include monitoring in these
plans as there is no special budget for monitoring. Push and motivate to get the local
government involved.
 There are still houses where people ask themselves why they should change their behaviour.
 YDD should ask for BOK funds as there are only limited ADD funds available. BOK funds
should be used to enhance sustainability, in particular for continuous monitoring.

This group also visited the local artisan Frans in the Hewoli village. Some observations:
 In this village there are two masons but only Frans completed the training organised by YDD
on the construction of all types of toilets. The villagers indicated to Frans that they could
build the normal types of toilets themselves, hence, they only require his services if they are
interested in the YDD toilet model.
 So far Frans has sold six YDD toilets and he has received another two orders at a price of IDR
3.5 million.
 The toilet that Frans installed at his own house was inspected by the group and this revealed
a number of problems, particularly related to the lack of access to the septic tank and the
manner in which the effluent from the septic tank drains into the open environment. After
the training there should be more attention to supervise and monitor the work of the
tukang.

Pictures taken during the field visit

29
2.4 Friday 08 February 2013
Erick provided a quick overview of today’s programme as shown in the following table.

When What Who

Morning 08.30-12.00 World Café Erick
Lunch
Conclude presentations and discussions on World
14.00-14.30 Erick
Café outcomes
14.30-15.15 Knowledge management Pam
Afternoon
15.30-16.45 Develop action plan 2013/Q1 Erick
16.45-17.30 Evaluation Erick
17.30-17.45 Closure Martin & Christina

World Café
Erick quickly revisited the ‘rules of the game’ for the World Café session presented in the afternoon
of the first day.

Purpose of the World Café

The purpose of the World Café is to provide a safe place for people to discuss diverse topics (issues,
problems, etc.), share ideas, discuss diverse perspectives and experiences, connect with peers and
‘experts’, dream of solutions, and share the outcome with others.

‘Rules of the game’

 Two rounds of 45 minutes each
 One table host (table owner) per issue
 Other participants ‘experts or consultants’ choose a table on the basis of their expertise and/or
interest
 Process for first round:
 Table host gives a short introduction of the issue / constraint / challenge
 This is followed by a table discussion; and
 The main results or outcomes of the discussion are captured on paper by a note keeper.
 After the first round of discussions, the experts or consultants move around and pick another
issue that they are interested in
 Process for second round:
 Table host starts with a short introduction of the issues and a quick recap of what came out
of the first round of discussions
 This is followed by a table discussion; and
 The discussion is wrapped up by capturing the main results or outcomes.
 In a plenary session the table hosts give a brief recap of what was discussed and an overview of
the main results of the table discussions.

The issues identified earlier during the week were revisited and a final selection was made. A total of
four issues identified by four out of the five partners were selected. Thereafter table hosts and teams
of experts were identified for each issue.

30
Partner Issue Table host Experts for round one
How to create ownership of STBM by
YMP Noer Anneke, Raphael, Christina, Henny
the community?

YDD How to conduct monitoring at scale? Ikos Nas, Pam, Simon, Azwan, Kris

Should we prove equipment or funds

Plan Eka Yus, Elbrich
to masons?
How to sustain the SHAW STBM
CD Bethesda Agus Sipri, Yos, Ellena, Martin
achievements?

The ‘parked’ issue of organising STBM declarations at scale was resolved when it was suggested to
copy the YDD solution where:
 The Camat is responsible for village level STBM declarations; and
 The Bupati is responsible for Kecamatan level STBM declarations.

After the first round the table hosts remained at their own table and the ‘experts’ were asked to
move to a new table on the basis of their own interest.

World Café sessions in progress

Plenary presentation and discussion of World Café discussions

The four table hosts presented the main outcomes of the two rounds of discussions.

Ownership of STBM by Noer

 We need an effective strategy to work on this issue so that the communities embrace STBM
and take the lead.
 Working with Government institutions:
o Provide clear and comprehensive understanding on STBM
o Invite them to take the lead and we support them in this

31
 o Provide the chance for them to learn and to get inspired by organising a study tour
 Create ownership at community level:
o Carry out the strategy and principles of STBM
o Build partnerships among the communities
o Identify the strengths of the community
o Develop their awareness about their current situation and conditions
o Follow up, monitoring, etc.
 Include STBM issues into the structure of the Government institutions, systems and
budgeting processes
 Discussion: Do we focus on the community as a whole? What is the role of the village
leaders? Yesterday’s field trip once more showed the importance of active, committed and
motivated leaders at different levels. May be we are spending more time with village cadres
than with the community leaders. There needs to be a better balance between supporting
cadres and inspiring, encouraging and motivating local leaders.

Monitoring at scale by Ikos

 Training of trainers (TOT) need to be carried out at Kabupaten level for Kecamatan STBM
teams. Thereafter the trained individuals will carry out further trainings in their respective
villages. Our role is to organise the Kabupaten level TOT and to assist the trained people to
carry out further trainings. Trainings can be paid from the SHAW budget.
 Make sure the system of STBM monitoring is carried out properly at all the different levels.
The monthly evaluation meetings at desa level could be the right moment to collect and
analyse the monitoring data.
 Advocate the need for a specific budget for monitoring from the BOK with the Puskesmas
and Dinkes.
 Monitoring updates and results can be published on the information board in the village
office.
 Discussion: Monitoring is not just our responsibility. We do not do this on our own. We
facilitate but all the work needs to be done by others (village cadres, village leaders,
Puskesmas staff, etc.) Quality of the data is equally important. How do we ensure reliable as
well as consistent data? Quality checks are needed and therefore should be put in place. We
are proud of our new monitoring system, but then the information needs to be reliable.
What is new in the presentation? May be the situation of YDD is different from other
partners. 86 villages do not know about the new monitoring system and therefore we are
proposing the cascading trainings to make working at scale possible.

Material or financial support to artisans by Eka

 The market is the most important thing and the selection of the artisans is the most
important aspect.
 We could play a role in providing smart support and stimulus. There is no need to provide
financial support to artisans as there are other ways to support them (e.g. facilitating access
to financial institutions).
 We need to support the artisans to tap the market potential. The artisans should market
products for improved sanitation facilities.
 Since Government institutions have funds available, they could maybe financially support
the private sector.
 One solution is to create an association of artisans as it might be easier to access finance
from finance institutions as a group instead of as an individual.
 Discussion: It was said that obtaining loans from commercial banks is very difficult. One of
the constraints is related to the need to provide a security in the form of collateral. Eka
mentioned that there are alternative sources for obtaining financial support. For groups it is
easier to come up with collateral.

32
Sustaining SHAW STBM achievements by Agus
 The community should have the awareness about healthy living.
 Government should use STBM as a way to promote healthy living.
 There should be local legislation put in place which sees to it that people live healthy
including punishments for those that do not follow the law.
 The role of the private sector increases if the demand from the community increases.
 Discussion: The private sector should be involved from the onset of the programme. This
would for example include pit emptying services but also facilitating access to for example
water filters. We need to think about the proper use and allocations from the government
budgets. What are we going to do to enhance sustained behaviour change? We should lobby
and advocate with all stakeholders continuously so that they will play a more active role and
create an enabling environment. Carry out the school sanitation component so that students
are made aware about and accustomed to STBM. Start to involve the Education Department
at Kabupaten level. We need to continue to empower the key persons (e.g. village leaders,
sanitarians, cadres, etc.). What is the reason for putting budgets in place? Isn’t the spirit
more important? Focusing on changing behaviour is our first focus but budgets help to keep
the momentum going in the long run.

Knowledge Management
Pam gave a brief presentation on what we are going to do with regards to knowledge management.

SHAW internal newsletter

A number of different logos for the SHAW newsletter were presented and these will be forwarded to
Simavi for approval.

Examples of possible SHAW logos

Thereafter Pam presented a number of designs for the cover of the SHAW newsletter. Earlier in the
week it was decided that the editorial team for the newsletter will consists of Agus Hari of Plan, Dody
Kaunang of Rumsram, Christina Aristanti of YDD, Dewi Utara of CD Bethesda and Ucok Mubarok of
YMP, Pam and Yuli from Simavi. First contact will be established next week with an email from Pam
to the team members. The team members were requested to provide the following information:
 Topics for the next four newsletters: the editorial team will come up with a list of topics next
week and that will be shared with the partners.
 Additional items, features you want to include: activities by partners carried out in the field
(e.g. STBM declarations and so on). Deadline for articles for the first newsletter is 15 March
2013, for the second issue will be 15 June 2013.
 The logos of your organisations (PDF) nice and clear: deadline: as soon as possible.

Google Drive
Yus started by saying that the idea about using Google Drive (GD) is to be able to store SHAW
documents on a central location so that they become available to all partners. However, so far only a
few people have requested to access GD. Some others failed to access GD for example because they
forgot their password. Guidelines were provided earlier but they could be incomplete or not clear to
all. Folders can even be accessed when not online by storing them on your computer’s hard disk.

33
What to do to get access?
 You require a Gmail email account
 Then request Yus to provide access by sending an email to [email protected]
 The administrator (Yus) will reply by email with info on how to access Google Drive including
an attachment with the user guidelines.

To be 100% clear: Yus is the Google Drive administrator but the partners are responsible for the
content of what is put on GD. Documents and so on should be send to Yus for uploading on GD.

It was suggested to store the monitoring data files on GD in future as they are often too big to send
by email. Pam reacted by saying that another way to forward big files is to use the internet based
program “wetransfer”. She explained that files of up to 2 GB can be shared via wetransfer.com5.

Action planning
This session was used to recap the results of the different sessions and to develop a detailed action
plan. Where necessary decisions made were also included in the action plan to enhance
transparency. The detailed action plan was shared with all the partners immediately following the
meeting and is shown in Appendix 6.

This session was also used to review the new 6-monthly report included in the OUTCOME monitoring
Excel workbooks and to compare this report with the bi-annual reporting format. A number of
changes were made to the bi-annual reporting format which will be incorporated by Martin.

Evaluation
The participants were asked to evaluate the four-day meeting by ‘buzzing in pairs’. No guiding
questions were provided as it was a ‘free-for-all’ exercise. The following is the outcome of the
plenary presentation.

Outcome of the meeting evaluation

 Enjoyed the topic on monitoring in combination with bi-annual reporting Brought up by 5 pairs

World Café methodology was very effective in resolving our questions

 and concerns
Brought up by 5 pairs

 Field trip was a good moment for learning and inspiration Brought up by 4 pairs

 There was sufficient time to discuss all the topics on the agenda Brought up by 3 pairs

Good discussion on the school sanitation component and it is now

 getting clearer. One person felt re-motivated and re-energised.
Brought up by 3 pairs

The 4-day meeting was very effective to share, evaluate and improve the
 programme
Brought up by 2 pairs

 Good opportunity for knowledge sharing among the partners Brought up by 2 pairs

 Facilitators were more creative this time Brought up by 2 pairs

 Translator was good and at times a bit of a joker Brought up by 2 pairs

5
https://www.wetransfer.com

34
 Outcome of the meeting evaluation
Feedback after the field trip for improving the implementation of the
 programme was useful
Brought up by 1 pair

 No time for relaxation and shopping Brought up by 1 pair

Closure
Martin said that there have been a lot of detailed discussions on a reduced number of topics during
the past four days. He explained that in line with the findings of the MTE no new topics or activities
were introduced (possibly leading to new programme activities) as everybody is already busy
enough. The only thing we will continue to pursue in the coming period is to start with the school
sanitation component. Martin also referred to the 2013 annual plan approval letter from EKN which
also advised from starting up additional activities. What is approaching vast is the second round of
the new monitoring system. Your challenge is to get monitoring institutionalised so that it becomes a
normal part of life.

Martin reminded the partners that he will be approaching them soon with regards to the additional
information requested by the EKN concerning the 2013 annual plan, and the approval of the annual
reports requested by the external auditor. He said that he will also contact the partners to hear their
ideas about the organisation of the review tentatively scheduled for May 2013. Advocacy is the only
topic that remained in the ‘parking lot’ at the end of the meeting and Martin said that he will contact
the partners to hear them out.

Finally Martin mentioned that partners should contact him first before making any changes to their
budgets if they are thinking of carrying out sanitation marketing and water supply activities. Martin
ended by thanking everyone and by wishing them courage for the coming period. “I like these
meetings.” Thank you very much and have a safe journey.

Christina thanked the group and hoped that the organisation of the meeting had helped to make it
successful.

--o-0-o--

35
Appendix 1: 2013 Q1 original meeting schedule

st
What 2013 1 Quarterly Meeting of SHAW Programme Coordinators
When 05 to 08 February 2013
Where Maumere, Sikka, Nusa Tenggara Timur

Day When Topics Expected results Remarks

Opening and welcome Pam and Martin
Progress on action list Q3/2012 Updated action list Erick
Morning
Understanding of where we are and Programme
Progress updates
whether we are on track coordinators
Tuesday
5/2 Improved capacities and easy-to-
SHAW monitoring system use tools to carry out monitoring Erick
Afternoon and reporting tasks
Identifying issues for the World
Erick
Café session
 Understanding of the conditions
Annual plan 2013 and other set by EKN
Martin
topics  Agreement on review (period,
topics, who, workshop, etc.)
Morning
 Clarity on where we are and
what still needs to be done
School sanitation & hygiene Elbrich and Erick
 Agreement on school STBM
Wednesday indicators
6/2  Better understanding and
insight in what affects sustained
Study on Changes as a result of
change Martin
STBM
 Learning will help to refine
Afternoon SHAW STBM approach
Knowledge management Pam and Yus
Christina and
Preparations for field trip
Pam
Morning Field trip All
Prepare field trip feedback
Thursday Teams
presentations
7/2 Afternoon
Present and discuss field trip An overview of challenges and
Erick
feedback reports lessons learnt
One or two challenges or
constraints would be resolved by
Morning World café making use of the expertise Erick
available within the group of
Friday
participants and facilitators
8/2
Parking space Pam
Afternoon Action list Q1/2013 Clear and concrete action list Erick
Evaluation and closure Erick and Martin

36
Appendix 2: List of participants

No Name Organisation Email Hand phone

1 Kristiani Sulistiyowati CD Bethesda [email protected] 081228153712

2 Henny Pesik CD Bethesda [email protected] 081393163111

3 Agustinus Umbu Rupa CD Bethesda [email protected] 085237828469

eka.setiawan@plan-
4 Eka Setiawan Plan 081210507344
international.org
Simon.HeintjeTulado@plan-
5 Simon Heintje Tulado Plan 085253037534
international.org
Siprianos.Rahas@plan-
6 Siprianos Rahas Plan 081 353 767 034
international.org

7 Ishak Mattarihi Rumsram [email protected] 081344013634

8 Nasaruddin Rumsram [email protected] 085244383850

9 Dolfin Rumawak Rumsram 081247567853

10 Abang Rahino Simavi [email protected] 082168532441

11 Elbrich Spijksma Simavi [email protected] 082262575732

12 Martin Keijzer Simavi [email protected] 08112507140

13 Pam Minnigh Simavi [email protected] 0811381287

14 Yusmaidy Simavi [email protected] 08124639219

15 Azwarudin YMP 081237213030

16 Noer Sakinah YMP [email protected] 081237119844

17 Susana Helena YMP [email protected] 081237213030

18 Christina Aristanti YDD [email protected] 08122704055

19 Rafael YDD [email protected] 085333325175

20 Yos Kauro YDD [email protected] 082146196877

21 Erick Baetings IRC [email protected] 081239904198

22 Anneke Ooms 081229944806

37
Appendix 3: Progress status update of 2012 Q3 Action Plan

2013-Q1 Status Update

Theme What Who When
Overall Details
Decisions:
 Output and outcome monitoring system is finalised and should
be used for programme monitoring from now onwards
 Frequency: see Q3 meeting report
 Sample size: 100%
 No modifications to be made to the data collection forms now
 New system will be reviewed after March 2013
Action items:
1 Monitoring
 Continue (Plan, YDD, Rumsram, YMP) or start (CD Bethesda) =
All partners As from now
using the new monitoring system
 Database will be completed Erick < End Nov 2012 +
 Final 2012 output and outcome monitoring data must be ?
st
available by 1 week of January 2013. This means that data
collection activities are carried out in November/December 2012 All partners < 5 Jan 2013
and completed databases are sent to Erick, Pam and Martin
before Saturday 5 January 2013
Decisions:
 Two SHAW knowledge products will be produced in 2012:
 Two-pager on SHAW

Knowledge  Document on demand creation at scale

2  An internal SHAW newsletter will be produced from now on:
management
 SHAW newsletter will be used to share information, lessons
learnt and new topics on SHAW and to share experiences
from outside SHAW

38
 2013-Q1 Status Update
Theme What Who When
Overall Details
Pam, Yus, Yuli and Carmen will form the editorial team
Partners will identify one dedicated person to support the
team
 A virtual working group will be set up by Pam
 Google Drive will be used to store and share SHAW related
documents, pictures, etc.
 Yus will act as the Google Drive administrator

Action items:
 Produce the two SHAW knowledge products in close consultation No progress as Carmen fell ill.
with Pam, Martin and the partners. Carmen will contact partners Carmen < End 2012  Needs to be followed up during
if additional information is required. 2013
 Select and inform Pam about the dedicated contact person to List of names was gathered
work on the SHAW newsletters
Partners < 31 Oct 2012  during the meeting
 Forward email with details and instruction manual on Google Nobody seems to use GD; people
Drive to partners
Yus < 26 Oct 2012  may require training
 Those with a Google email account are requested to send an
email to [email protected] to get access to the SHAW Partners ASAP = Only 4 or 5 persons so far
Google Drive account
Decisions:
 The overall advocacy goals and strategy need to be developed
including a mapping of target groups
 Factsheets or leaflets, and opinion papers and articles will need
3 Advocacy to be produced (part of KM)
Action items:

To be discussed in 2013/Q1
 Martin will think on how to take this forward Martin < End 2012  meeting

39
 2013-Q1 Status Update
Theme What Who When
Overall Details
Decisions:
 A school sanitation strategy and guidelines need to be developed
on the basis of the flow chart presented during the Q3 meeting
 Include progress monitoring in flowchart and guidelines
 School sanitation activities will focus on elementary schools in
old and new villages
School Action items:
4
sanitation  Obtain all required information (homework) on SS from MoE,
Elbrich ASAP Will be discussed on Wednesday
UNICEF and others
 Organise a SS working group meeting to work on the strategy Elbrich &
< End Nov 2012
and guidelines Yus
 Develop SS monitoring data collection form (output and
outcome) on the basis of the outcome of the SS working group Erick < End 2012
meeting
Decisions:
 Current working group document outlines current SM practices
of partners
 Working group will continue developing the SM component
Action items:
Sanitation  React to the working group document on current SM practices in
5 Partners < End Oct 2012
marketing case information is incomplete / not correct
 Document the SM flowchart on the basis of the working group Following the outcome of the
Martin < End Nov 2012
document and discussions MTE there will not be a shared
approach hence no flowchart.
 Organise a SM working group meeting to discuss the flowchart SHAW will continue to document
Martin Dec 2012 the approaches and experiences
and to take the next steps
of the partners.

40
 2013-Q1 Status Update
Theme What Who When
Overall Details
Action items:
Follow-up on  Provide input and/or comments on MTR recommendations table
6
MTR discussed during Q3 meeting
Partners <26 Oct 2012 
 Complete response to EKN on final MTR report Martin 31 Oct 2012 
Decisions:
 All partners will use the same STBM verification framework
 Verification criteria should be consistent with the new outcome
monitoring indicators
Action items:
 Respond to the STBM verification framework discussed during
STBM Q3
Partners < 2 Nov 2012  Done and share with partners
7 verification
Plan: used in 44 villages
framework
YDD: not yet used as they need
to convince the Pokja
 Finalise STBM verification framework and share with all partners Yus 9 Nov 2012  Rumsram: not yet used as there
have been no declarations
CDB: used in 3 villages
 Share and discuss the new STBM verification framework with In November 2012 a meeting was
MoH
Yus < End Nov 2012  held with STBM Secretariat

Annual plan Action items

8 and budget  Submit the 2013 annual plan and budget to Simavi (Martin) in
2013 time
Partners 15 Nov 2012 
Biannual Action items
9 reporting
format  Forward modified biannual reporting format to all partners Martin < 15 Dec 2012

41
Appendix 4: Review draft school STBM monitoring indicators

Group one feedback on the draft school OUTPUT indicators

 Feedback has been provided in the Excel workbook up to pillar 3
 General information:
o Added: the number of groups on top of the page (e.g. grade 1a and grade 1b makes two
groups). Its relevance was questioned by some but others explained that the number of
groups will give an indication of how many teachers and tools are required to implement
STBM at the school.
o Include male/female in the questions on number of students and teachers.
 Pillar 1:
o Added: existence of separate toilets for boys and girls and for male and female teachers.
o Added: does the toilet room have a ventilation opening? Apparently children are afraid
to use toilets that are dark inside. May be better to rephrase the toilet to accommodate
both issues of ventilation and light.
 Pillar 2:
o Type of handwashing facility: confusion about option a) and option d) as they appear to
be the same. Needs to be made more obvious.
o Location of handwashing facility: added option a) located in front of class room and they
changed a number of the other options. What is the most crucial location? Near the
toilet or near the class rooms?
 Pillar 3:
o Added safe handling of food (snacks). It this not too difficult to control as food is
provided by private food vendors outside the school component?
o Correct questions on whether students and teachers drink water brought from home or
provided at the school.

Group two and group three feedback on the draft school OUTCOME indicators
 General information:
o Added: type of school e.g. Muslim school, Christian school, etc.).
o Where do students go to defecate: option b) was changed to house near school and
option d) a number of sub-options were added (e.g. near the river, in the bush, etc.).
With regards to sub-options for option d) it was decided to keep it simple!
 Pillar 1:
o Pillars 1.1 and 1.2 need to be completed for each toilet.
o Pillar 1.3: wordings for level 2 and level 3 were changed somewhat.
 Pillar 2:
o Level 1: there is a handwashing station without water and soap
o Level 2: added that some students already wash their hands
o Level 3: all practise what they have learned
o Pillar 2.2: don’t expect curriculum but focus on extra-curriculum activities
 Pillar 3:
o Appears to require some changes or to be left out completely particularly in those cases
where children bring their water from home.
 Pillar 4:
o Level 0: add something like waste is thrown around indiscriminately
o Level 1: questions were raised about leaving out the burn option
 Pillar 5:
o Level 1: add the word ‘collect’ and ‘dan dibiarkan tergenang’
o Level 2: add the same word ‘collect’ also in level 3

42
Appendix 5: Review of draft outcome monitoring pictograms

Pillar 1.1: Access to healthy toilet (reviewed by YDD)

 We need to understand the explanations before looking at the 4 levels.
 Level 0 = okay
 Level 1 = left pic is most common one; second pic requires a closed pit (covered offset pit).
Use pit shown in level 2!

Pillar 1.2: Maintenance and repair of the healthy toilet (reviewed by YDD)
 Level 0: dirty sign can go
 Level 1: take out flies from slab pic. Some problem with the definition and it should be: toilet
is intact and clean.
 Level 3: again a problem with the definition. The issue of well-maintained and safe to use
should have been at level 1. For the time being include a pic of a hammer and a nail.

Pillar 1.3: Usage of the healthy toilet (reviewed by YMP)

 Levels 0 – 2 = okay
 Level 3: baby in pic 3 does not add anything. Children shit outside should be disposed of
inside the toilet in pic 4. Not clear what woman is carrying, should look like shit used before.

Pillar 2: Handwashing with soap (reviewed by Rumsram)

 Level 0: looks like common washbowl used normally before eating food. May be better to
put a cross through it.
 Level 1: prefer pic of tippy tap. Erick explained that it is much better to go for only one pic
instead of 3 different options to make sure that level 1 has only 1 pic and thereby
maintaining the logic.
 Level 2: use same pic for handwashing facility and a different pic for soap. Merge water and
soap into one pic.
 Level 3: make the individual a bit more human and the dream a bit bigger.

Pillar 3: Household water treatment and safe storage (reviewed by Plan)

 Level 0: you cannot see the glass used for drinking the water! Put a person with a glass of
water next to a dug well.
 Level 1: use only the boiling water picture and do not use the pic with the open container
 Level 2: use pic of bucket with proper cover and no glass on the ground.
 Level 3: use same bucket with cover pic, and the third pic should have a scoop and a glass.

Pillar 4: Household solid waste management (reviewed by CD Bethesda)

 Level 0: add plastic wrappings and flies on the pic. Consider adding a house in the
background.
 Level 1: use a heap of garbage and a broom instead of the container. Flames are not clear.
 Level 2: same first pic. Burned in open pit option should be removed as it is not an option
right now in our monitoring forms. Use + instead of arrows in between the pics.
 Level 3: use same type of waste in the second pic.

Pillar 5: Household wastewater management (reviewed by Plan)

 Level 0: okay but it can be even worse (e.g. combining the tippy tap with washing clothes or
dishes). Or alternatively just the house with stagnant water and no specific activities.
 Level 1: water should be more obviously collected in one place.

43
 Level 2: pic 2 was selected but it needs some reworking as there is only one pic for level 2
which actually requires 2 pics.
 Level 3: the lady pouring water from the bucket is not that clear and leave out the source of
the water.

44
Appendix 6: Detailed action plan developed during 2013 Q1 meeting

Theme What Who When

Decisions:
 Ensure that all villages in which we work are included < 31 March
Partners
in the Jan-Mar 2013 monitoring data files 2013
 Forward Jan-Mar 2013 OUTPUT and OUTCOME
Partners < 30 April 2013
Kabupaten files to Martin and Erick
Action items:
 Repair all the Kecamatan OUTPUT and OUTCOME data
files and include a 6-monthly progress report in the < End of this
1 Monitoring Erick
Kabupaten OUTCOME monitoring files to make bi- meeting
annual reporting easier
 Include the original baseline data in the data files Partners < 30 April 2013
 Include a 2-monthly progress report in the Kabupaten < 15 February
Erick
OUTPUT monitoring files for easy reporting to Martin 2013
 When encountering any problems with the monitoring
data files forward the file to Erick with clear
Partners
instructions on what is wrong and what needs to be
done
Decisions:
 The SHAW partners will come up with a combined < End of this
partners
reaction to the first draft of the training module meeting
Action items:
 Finalise feedback on the first draft of the training Elbrich and < End of this
module and forward to Julie SS team meeting
 Provide feedback on the next version of the training
STBM at Partners 22 February
2 module to Elbrich
schools
Elbrich and
 Decide what to do next 22 February
SS team
 Forward draft monitoring data collection formats to
Pam 9 February
Plan (Simon) for testing in the field
 Finalise STBM at schools monitoring indicators and Elbrich, Pam
< 15 March
data collection tools and Erick
 Finalise STBM at schools monitoring database Erick < End April
Decisions:
 Review will be organised and conducted in May 2013;
Martin will take the lead to organise the review
3 Other issues
Action items:
 Revise bi-annual reporting format on the basis of the
Martin < July 2013
discussions on Friday afternoon

Decisions:
 The editorial team will consist of:
Knowledge  For partners: Agus Hari of Plan, Dody Kaunang of
4
management Rumsram, Christina Aristanti of YDD, Dewi Utara of
CD Bethesda, Ucok Mubarok of YMP
 For Simavi: Pam and Yuli

45
Theme What Who When

Action items:
 Newsletter #1 and #2 will be finalised and translated in 17 February
Pam
Indonesian 2013
 Newsletter #3 will be developed by new editorial Editorial < 30 March
team: team 2013
 Inputs for Newsletter #3 are to be received by 15
Partners 15 March 2013
March 2013
Editorial
 Newsletter #3 will be published by 30 March 30 March 2013
team
Decisions:

Next meeting  The next Programme Coordinators meeting will be Second half of
combined with the SHAW programme review All
June
workshop in Jakarta

46
Appendix 7: Rencana Kegiatan Berdasarkan Pertemuan Kuartal Pertama 2013
Para Koordinator Program SHAW

Tema Apa Siapa Kapan

Keputusan:
 Memastikan bahwa seluruh desa dalam wilayah kerja
< 31 Maret
kita sudah termasuk dalam file data monitoring Jan- Mitra
2013
Mar 2013
 Menyampaikan files OUTPUT dan OUTCOME
Kabupaten periode Jan-Mar 2013 kepada Martin and Mitra < 30 April 2013
Erick
Butir-butir Kegiatan:
 Memperbaiki seluruh file data OUTPUT dan OUTCOME
1 Monitoring Kecamatan, dan memasukkan Laporan Perkembangan < Pada akhir
Erick
(Progress Report) Enam Bulan ke dalam file monitoring pertemuan ini
OUTCOME
 Memasukkan data baseline ke dalam file data Mitra < 30 April 2013
 Memasukkan Laporan Perkembangan Dua Bulanan ke
< 15 Februari
dalam file monitoring OUTPUT Kabupaten untuk Erick
2013
memudahkan pelaporan ke Martin
 Jika mengalami permasalahan dengan file data
monitoring, agar menyampaikan file tersebut kepada
Mitra
Erick dengan keterangan yang jelas tentang
permasalahannya dan hal-hal apa yang perlu dilakukan
Keputusan:
 Mitra SHAW akan menyampaikan respon bersama < Akhir
Mitra
terhadap draf perdana modul pelatihan pertemuan ini
Butir-butir Kegiatan:
Elbrich dan
 Menyelesaikan umpan balik pada draf perdana modul < Akrhir
Tim STBM
pelatihan dan menyampaikan pada Julie pertemuan ini
Sekolah
 Menyampaikan umpan balik disampaikan ke Elbrich
Mitra 22 Februari
STBM di terhadap versi berikut dari modul pelatihan
2
Sekolah Elbrich dan
 Memutuskan apa yang harus dilakukan berikutnya Tim STBM 22 Februari
Sekolah
 Mengirimkan draf formulir pengumpulan data kepada
Plan (Simon) untuk dilakukan ujicoba pemakaian di Pam 9 Februari
lapangan
 Menyelesaikan indikator untuk monitoring STBM di Elbrich, Pam
< 15 Maret
Sekolah dan tools pengumpulan data dan Erick
 Menyelesaikan database monitoring STBM di Sekolah Erick < Akhir April
Keputusan:
 Review akan diselenggarakan di bulan Mei 2013;
Martin akan memimpin kegiatan review tersebut
3 Hal-hal Lain
Butir-butir Kegiatan:
 Memperbaiki format Laporan Setengah Tahunan
Martin < Juli 2013
berdasarkan pada diskusi pada hari Jum’at siang.

47
 Tema Apa Siapa Kapan

Keputusan:
 Tim Redaksi: Agus Hari dari Plan, Dody Kaunang dari
Rumsram, Christina Aristanti dari YDD, Dewi Utari dari
CD Bethesda, Ucok Mubarok dari YMP, Pam and Yuli
Manajemen dari Simavi
4
Pengetahuan Butir-butir Kegiatan:
 Newsletter #1 and #2 akan diselesaikan dan 17 Februari
Pam
diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Indonesia 2013
< 30 Maret
 Newsletter #3 akan dibuat oleh Tim Redaksi yang baru: Tim Redaksi
2013
 Masukan untuk Newsletter #3 harus sudah
Mitra 15 Maret 2013
diterima tanggal 15 Maret 2013
 Newsletter #3 akan diterbitkan tanggal 30 Maret Tim Redaksi 30 Maret 2013

Keputusan:
Pertemuan  Pertemuan berikut akan digabungkan dengan
Berikut Paruh kedua
lokakarya review program, dan diselenggarakan di Semua
bulan Juni
Jakarta

48