FHTC Sirmaur

Functionality Assessment of Household Tap
Connection under National Jal Jeevan Mission - 2022
District Report: SIRMAUR, Himachal

Pradesh
Survey Duration: February to April 2022
Functionality Assessment of Household Tap Connections under JJM
Contents
Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Glossary .................................................................................................................................................. 4
1. Factsheet......................................................................................................................................... 6
2. Context ............................................................................................................................................ 8
2.1. District snapshot: SIRMAUR ....................................................................................................... 8
2.2. FHTC Assessment Objectives .................................................................................................... 9
2.3. Assessment Methodology ........................................................................................................... 9
2.4. Sample Size ................................................................................................................................ 9
2.5. Sampling Methodology .............................................................................................................. 10
2.6. Methodology for Water Quantity Measurement at Households ................................................ 11
2.7. Methodology for Water Quality Measurement .......................................................................... 11
2.8. Project implementation .............................................................................................................. 12
2.9. Sample coverage ...................................................................................................................... 13
2.10. Sampled village and household profile ................................................................................. 13
3. Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 14
3.1. Functionality status of FHTC at household level ....................................................................... 14
3.2. Quantity, Regularity, and Quality of Water ................................................................................ 15
3.3. Average water supply days in a week ...................................................................................... 18
3.4. Household utilization of water for drinking and other activities ................................................. 18
3.5. Status at HH level (Nh=630) ..................................................................................................... 18
3.6. Source sustainability at the village level ................................................................................... 19
3.7. Water quality monitoring and surveillance in the villages ......................................................... 20
3.8. Status of JJM............................................................................................................................. 20
3.9. Perception of HHs on Outcome Indicators ................................................................................ 21
3.10. User satisfaction .................................................................................................................... 22
4. Annexures ..................................................................................................................................... 23
4.1. Summary of villages .............................................................................................................. 23
4.2. Functionality – 55 LPCD vs regularity vs potability vs working tap connection .................... 23
4.3. Villages not meeting the quality parameters ......................................................................... 25
2
Abbreviations
AWC Aanganwadi Centre
FHTC Functional Household Tap Connection
GoI Government of India
GP Gram Panchayat
HF Health Facility
HH Household
HGJ Har Ghar Jal
JJM Jal Jeevan Mission
LPCD Litres per Capita per Day
MVS Multi-village Scheme
NJJM National Jal Jeevan Mission
RC Residual Chlorine
O&M Operation and Maintenance
OHT Over Head Tank
PSU Primary Sampling Unit
PWS Piped Water Supply
SVS Single Village Scheme
VAP Village Action Plan
VWSC Village Water and Sanitation Committee
WQMIS Water Quality Monitoring and Information System
3
Glossary
1. Community – Group of people living in one particular area or village/habitation
2. Cross-sectional research – A cross-sectional study is a type of research design in which
data is collected from a relatively large and diverse group of people at a single point in
time
3. Drinking water source – Groundwater (open well, borewell, tube well, handpump, spring,
etc.)/ surface water (river, lake, pond, reservoir, etc.)/rainwater, available for drinking and
domestic use
4. Improved sources – The following sources as considered improved by the National
Family Health Survey definitions: Piped water into dwelling, yard/plot with a tap, piped
water connected to public stand-posts, tube well or borewell, Hand pump, dug well–
protected, Spring–protected, Rainwater, Water ATM/ Community RO plant/ Community
Water Purification Plant (CWPP)
5. Unimproved sources – The following sources as considered unimproved by the National
Family Health Survey definitions: Unprotected spring, unprotected dug well, cart with small
tank / drum, Tanker/ truck, Surface water (river/ dam/ lake/ pond/ canal), and bottled water
6. Functional Household Tap Connection (FHTC) – A tap connection to a rural household
for providing drinking water in adequate quantity of prescribed quality on regular basis.
7. Functionality of FHTC – Functionality of a tap connection is defined as having
infrastructure, i.e., household tap connection providing water in adequate quantity, as
presented:
Definitions Fully-functional Partially-functional Non-functional
Quantity >= 55 LPCD > 40 lpcd - < 55 LPCD < 40 LPCD
9-12 months or < daily
Regularity 12 months or daily basis < 9 months or < daily basis
basis
Quality Potable Potable Non potable
8. Quantity (in litres) of water received by households per person per day should meet the
service level of 55 LPCD
9. Functionality Assessment – An assessment of the functionality of rural household tap
connections based on a sample survey
10. Fully Regular – Regularity of water is considered when a rural household receives water
for 12 months on daily basis or as per schedule.
11. Potability – Potable water is water that is safe to be used as drinking water. Parameters
of potable water are mentioned below:
Permissible Limit in the
Parameters for potable water
Unit Acceptable Limit absence of alternative
tested in the survey
sources
i. pH (tested on site) - 6.5 to 8.5 No relaxation
ii. Free residual chlorine (tested
Mg/litre 0.2 1
on site)
iii. Turbidity NTU 1 5
iv. Total hardness Mg/litre 200 600
v. Total alkalinity Mg/litre 200 600
vi. Chloride Mg/litre 250 1000
vii. Ammonia Mg/litre 0.5 No relaxation
viii. Phosphate Mg/litre 0.3 1
ix. Iron (in hotspots only) Mg/litre 1 No relaxation
x. Nitrate Mg/litre 45 No relaxation
xi. Sulphate Mg/litre 200 400
xii. Total dissolved solids Mg/litre 500 2000
xiii. Fluoride Mg/litre 1 1.5
xiv. Arsenic (in hotspots only) Mg/litre 0.01 No relaxation
4
xv. Bacteriological test for Total coliform bacteria

Shall not be detectable in any 100 ml sample
and E. coli or thermotolerant coliform bacteria
12. Sampling – Selection of a subset of individuals from within a statistical population to

estimate water service delivery among the population. In the current study, households
have been sampled to estimate the representation of the village and subsequently of the
district as well as of the state.
13. Types of schemes: Following are the piped water supply schemes that were assessed
a. Mini-solar based piped water supply scheme in isolated/tribal hamlets
b. Single Village Scheme (SVS) in villages having adequate groundwater that needs
treatment
c. Single village scheme (having adequate groundwater/ spring water/ local or
surface water source of prescribed Quality)
d. Retrofitting of ongoing schemes taken up under erstwhile NRDWP for the last mile
connectivity/ retrofitting of completed rural water supply schemes to make it JJM
compliant
e. Multi-village PWS scheme - with water grids/ regional water supply schemes
14. Village Action Plan (VAP) – Plan prepared by Gram Panchayat and/ or its sub-committee,
i.e., VWSC/ Paani Samiti/ User Group, etc. based on baseline survey, resource mapping
and felt needs of the village community to provide FHTC to every rural household, treat
the generated greywater and plan its reuse, undertake surveillance activities, etc. VAP
also indicates the fund requirement and timelines for completion of work under the Mission
and will be approved by the Gram Sabha. Irrespective of the source of funding, all drinking
water-related works in the village are taken up based on the VAP.
15. Source Sustainability – includes measures such as aquifer recharge, rainwater
harvesting, increased storage capacity of water bodies, reservoirs, de-silting, etc. improve
the lifespan of water supply systems
16. Har Ghar Jal (HGJ) – An administrative unit wherein all HHs are provided with water
supply through FHTCs is called “Har Ghar Jal”.
17. Public Institutions – The public institutions in the survey include Aanganwadi Centre
(AWC), Health Facilities, Schools, Gram Panchayat, and government buildings.
18. Working tap connection – A tap connection supplied water at least one day in the week,
preceding of survey
19. Functional Scheme – A scheme is said to be functional if it was reported to be working
for all 12 months in a year.
5
1. Factsheet
Table 1: District level factsheet
Himachal
Indicators Sirmaur
Pradesh
Functionality status of FHTC at households
Households (HHs) which received water through FHTC at least once in last 7 days
97 100
(%)
Fully functional (%) 82 93
Partially functional (%) 15 6
Non-functional (%) 3 1
Quantity of water received by households
Adequate quantity (>55 LPCD) (%) 95 97
Partially adequate quantity (> 40 LPCD - < 55 LPCD) (%) 2 2
Inadequate quantity (<40 LPCD) (%) 3 1
Regularity of water received by households
Fully Regular Supply (as per schedule) (%) 87 97
Partially Regular Supply (not as per schedule) (%) 12 3
Irregular Supply (less than 9 months’ supply) (%) 1 1
Potable (Quality) water received by households
Potable (%) 98 100
Non-potable (%) 2 0
Residual Chlorine (RCL) detected with in permissible limits (%) 14 5
Household level indicators

Households receiving water supply daily-7 days a week (%) 83 90
Daily HH requirement of water being met by FHTC (%) 92 96
Households reported FHTC as a primary source of drinking water (%) 83 79
Households purifying water before drinking (%) 27 10
Households paying water service delivery charges (%) 51 48
Households having coping mechanisms during scarcity (%) 65 35
Households aware of grievance redressal mechanism for reporting problems with
88 98
FHTC (%)
Households reported incidence of water-borne diseases in the last year (%) 4 0
Households reported a reduction in time and effort in collecting water (%) 97 100
Overall user satisfaction at the household level
Regularity (%) 92 99
Overall quality (%) 95 100
6
Himachal
Indicators Sirmaur
Pradesh
Village level indicators (based on village questionnaire)
Schemes reported to be functional (%) 77 96
Villages with groundwater resource (%) 19 29
Villages having groundwater recharge structure1 (%) 9 29
Water supply and storage status in villages
Average no. of times water is supplied in a day 2 4
Villages having OHT/ Sump for storage of water (%) 77 100
Water quality monitoring and surveillance in the villages
Villages with Field Test Kits (%) 48 74
Villages in which bacteriological test was done in last 1 year by VWSC/ Pani Samiti
38 84
(%)
Villages reported to have a mechanism for chlorination (%) 16 16
VWSC/Pani Samiti and PWS signage in villages
Village reported having presence of VWSC/ Pani Samiti (%) 51 81
Villages in which VWSC/ Pani Samiti is responsible for Operation & Maintenance of
16 42
PWS schemes (%)
Villages in which persons are trained to use Field Test Kits (%) 50 84
Villages in which signages about JJM were observed (%) 19 48
Operation and maintenance at village
Villages levying water service delivery to households (%) 58 81
Convergence of JJM activities with other schemes in the villages (%) 17 29
Villages having skilled manpower for Operation & Maintenance of PWS schemes
38 52
(%)
Community monitoring of water wastage in villages (%) 21 26
1
Out of villages who reported to have groundwater source (Nv=9)
7
2. Context
Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) was launched on the 15th of August 2019 with the objective to
provide functional household tap connections (FHTCs) to all rural households.
Figure 1: Har Ghar Jal - Objective, Vision, & Outcome
In accordance with the overall objectives as specified in the Operational Guidelines for the
implementation of the NJJM, GoI carried out a sample survey to assess the functionality of
household tap connections. As part of this endeavour, NJJM, GoI engaged HTA Kantar Public
to conduct the ‘Functionality Assessment’ of the household as well as public institution/
buildings such as schools, anganwadis, gram panchayat buildings, public health facilities, and
wellness centers in all the rural districts for the fiscal year 2021-22.
2.1. District snapshot: SIRMAUR

District SIRMAUR of Himachal Pradesh has a population of 6,22,434. The district has 6 blocks.
Out of 979 villages in the district, 363 are SC dominated and 12 are ST dominated villages.
The district lies in Western Himalayan Region and receives an annual rainfall of 1357.6mm.
Presented here are district level information collated from the DDWS-IMIS:
Figure 2: District IMIS Status & Map
IMIS status:
- 544 (56% of all) villages are Har Ghar Jal
- 435 (44% of all) villages are Non-Har ghar Jal
- SC/ST dominated district
- Non JE/AES
- No- History of water contamination
- 821 (84% of all) villages with PWS more than 20
FHTC
8
2.2. FHTC Assessment Objectives

Figure 3: Objectives of Functionality of Tap Connections
2.3. Assessment Methodology

A cross-section research design has been used for this functionality assessment study.
Quantitative data were collected from villages and households across all states/UTs using the
CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing) mode. The survey includes two components,
village, and household.
Figure 4: Survey Components & Respondents
2.4. Sample Size

The sample size was calculated to provide estimates with a 95% confidence interval (CI) and
5% margin of error (MoE) after incorporating the correction factor for a finite population
considering the total number of geographic units having FHTCs.
▪ Village sample is estimated to be representative at the state level
▪ HH sample estimated to be representative at the district level
9
▪ Number of Har Ghar Jal (HGJ) villages were proportionately sampled at the district
level
▪ All PWS schemes (up to 4) were covered per village. Per scheme approximately 9 (3
each from the head, middle, and tail HHs) or 18 households (6 each from head, middle,
and tail HHs) were sampled to achieve the desired sample at the district level.
2.5. Sampling Methodology

As per the design, all villages having a PWS scheme with 20 or more functional household
tap connections were included in the sample frame. The probability proportionate to size (PPS)
method was used for village selection in each district. The steps for random selection of
villages using PPS are as presented:
Figure 5: Steps for Village Sampling
The key considerations for the village and household sampling were:
Figure 6: Sampling Considerations – Village & Households
The record of all district-wise village replacements is maintained and reported as part of the
annexure.
10
2.6. Methodology for Water Quantity Measurement at Households

Figure 7: Steps for Measuring Flowrate from Supply-tap at HHs
The flow rate of the water supply was measured using a container with gradual markings
(either 5 litres or 1 litre, based on the flow of the tap) and a stopwatch/timer-watch. The process
followed is as described in Figure 7.
In the case of households where the FHTC is connected directly with the storage tank, the
following steps were adopted to measure the quantity:
▪ Assessor first asked and recorded length, breadth, and height.
▪ Assessor dipped a 5 feet long rod, marked the level of the water table, and calculated
the volume – length x breadth x-height of water.
▪ Next the assessor opened the valve of the connection and allowed the water to flow
inside the storage for 10 minutes.
▪ After 10 mins, the valve was closed, and the assessor again dipped the rod and
recorded the new height of the water inside the tank. Based on this new ‘height’ and
the CAPI calculated the changed volume.
▪ The difference in the volume of water in 10 minutes divided by 10 provided the flow
rate of the water supply per minute.
The water flow rate was not measured for village-level public institutions.
2.7. Methodology for Water Quality Measurement

Water quality was tested for all public institutions available in the villages, including schools,
anganwadis, gram panchayat buildings, public health facilities, and wellness centers, and at
the selected households. Two types of quality tests were carried out – a) spot test for pH and
free residual chlorine, and b) water sample was collected and transported to labs for testing
against 13 quality parameters (total 15) as specified in Figure 8.
11
Figure 8: On-site & Laboratory Based Quality Test
JJM, with the support of the BMI Division of ICMR, enabled a new interface on the WQMIS
portal for “Functionality Assessment (FA) User” to enable seamless harmonization of water
sample registration, sample submission for testing, and sharing of results as per the applicable
quality parameters.
2.8. Project implementation

An overview of the project implementation is as presented:
Figure 9: Broad project implementation framework
12
A total of 8 teams (comprising 8 supervisors, 48 assessors, and 8 water collection assistants)

were recruited, trained, and deployed to complete the survey across the state of Himachal
Pradesh. One survey team covered approximately 2 – 3 districts. The state-wise team
deployment and fieldwork dates were as presented:
Table No. 1: State-wise team deployment and data collection start & end dates
Total data
State Teams deployed Start date End date
collection days
Himachal Pradesh 8 Teams 19-02-2022 22-04-2022 60 Days
A four-tier quality control (QC) system was put in place. At the ground level, the data collection
exercise was done using a computer-aided Personal Interview (CAPI) application which
contained all logic and skip-checks inbuilt. Also, 5% of the total samples were accompanied
by the supervisors. Sub-targeted QC was done by the state field managers (5%) and the
central project management team (5%). Apart from this, the central research team monitored
the data trend and as per requirement debriefed data collection teams to improve quality.
2.9. Sample coverage

Table No. 2: Sample covered
Targeted sample Achieved sample
District Village HH Village HH Public Institutions
SIRMAUR 31 612 31 630 108
Himachal 374 6,597 374 6,753 404
Pradesh
2.10. Sampled village and household profile

SAMPLED VILLAGES SAMPLED HOUSEHOLDS
• Total no. of villages covered in the district – 31 • Total no. of households covered in the district
• Percentage of SC dominated villages covered – 630
in the district is 39% (which is higher than the • Proportion of General - 47%, SC 30%, ST% 0,
state average, i.e., 23%) OBC 23% households
• Percentage of ST dominated villages covered • 10% of the FHTC connections are under the
in the district is 0% (which is lower than the name of a female member
state average, i.e., 6%) • Average household size – 6
• No the district reported to have any historical • >75% positive user experience in 5/5
incidence of water contamination measures
13
3. Findings
3.1. Functionality status of FHTC at household level
A. Overall functionality* (in %)
Figure 10: Functionality of HH tap connection

100 97 97 100
100 93
80
60
40
20
0
Working tap Fully Functional Adequate Quantity Fully Regular Supply Potable (Quality)
connections (Atleast
once in last 7 days) % Household
Nh =630
* Fully Functional has been computed as = Adequate Quantity ∩ Fully Regularity Supply ∩ Potable (Quality)
It has been found that 100 percent of the sampled HHs (N=630) had working tap connections
(i.e., received water at least once in last 7 days). More than nine out of ten (93 percent) HHs
had fully functional tap connection (i.e., HHs receiving adequate quantity of prescribed quality
of water on a regular basis).
14
3.2. Quantity, Regularity, and Quality of Water

Under JJM, functionality is defined as having infrastructure, i.e., household tap connection
providing water in adequate quantity (55 LPCD or more) of prescribed quality on regular basis
(every day or as decided by GP and/ or its sub-committee) with adequate pressure. It will also
include long-term source and system sustainability. Presented here are the findings in this
respect.
A. Water quantity measured as LPCD (Litres per Capita per Day)
97% HHs reported receiving adequate quantity of water
Figure 11: Quantity of water received by households
2%
2%
Adequate quantity
Partially adequate quantity

96%
Inadequate quantity Nh=630
Quantity of water received across head, middle, and tail end HHs
Figure 12: Quantity of water received across head, middle and tail end households
Head End Middle End Tail End
1%
2%
0%
2% 3%
1%
97%
98% 96%
Nh=630
B. Regularity of water supply to households

97% HHs receive a regular supply of water (as per agreed schedule)
Figure: Regularity of water received by households
1%
3%
Fully regular supply

Partially regular supply 96%
Irregular supply Nh=630
15
Regularity of water received across head, middle, and tail end

Figure 13: Regularity of water received across head, middle and tail end households
Head End Middle End Tail End
0%
5% 1%
1% 1%
2%
95% 98% 97%

Nh=630
C. Water quality – Potability

Figure 14: Potable water received by households
Potable* Not Potable 100%
Nh=630
*Potable water has been considered basis testing of water samples through laboratory tests for physical, chemical, and
bacteriological as given in Table 4 parameters (within acceptable/ permissible range) and onsite testing of pH. The details
of laboratory test are mentioned in the table given above in the glossary.
Table No. 3: Village quality parameters reported within permissible range (in %)
Quality Parameters (NV=31) Water Samples Tested from Public Institutes
Anganwadi Anganwadi Anganwadi Anganwadi
Centre Centre Centre Centre
pH (on-site) 97 100 100 100
Turbidity 100 100 100 100
Total Hardness 100 100 100 100
Total Alkalinity 100 100 100 100
Chloride 100 100 100 100
Ammonia 100 100 100 100
Iron No history
Nitrate 100 100 100 100
Sulphate 100 100 100 100
Total Dissolved Solids 100 100 100 100
Bacteriological Test 100 100 100 100
Fluoride No history
Arsenic No history
16
Table No. 4: Household water quality parameters reported within permissible range (in %
sample within permissible range)
Quality Parameters No of samples tested % Households
pH (on-site) 630 100
Turbidity 624 100
Total Hardness 624 100
Total Alkalinity 624 100
Chloride 624 100
Ammonia 624 100
Iron No history
Nitrate 624 100
Sulphate 624 100
Total Dissolved Solids 624 100
Bacteriological Test(Presence/Absence) 623 100
Fluoride No history
Arsenic No history
Safeguarding piped water supply for unforeseen bacteriological contamination-

Presence of Residual Chlorine (RC)
The Residual Chlorine (RC) in the Sirmaur district was found in 5% samples. The remaining
95% samples had no RC. It may be mentioned that 100% of water samples passed the
bacteriological contamination test but to assure the protection against bacteriological
contamination, addition of RC is must in PWS system.
The Residual Chlorine in piped water supply is one of the most important preventive actions
to assure quality of water against bacteriological contamination from source to consumption.
The presence of residual chlorine within permissible limits is indicator of well-maintained and
healthy piped water supply system.
It is advised that behavioural change communication campaigns on appropriate dosage of
residual chlorine is held in all villages and monitoring system for chlorine dosing is established.
The FTK must have residual chlorine testing facility for effective WQM&S.
Comment on functioning of District Lab:
The district lab tested water samples for 9 water quality parameters. 738 water samples were
submitted, and 715 water samples were tested, and reports made available. The turnaround
time for testing was more than 48 hours in most cases.
The labs did not have any issue with testing the number of water samples submitted nor had
any issues with human resource, reagents etc however only concern was the lab did not
receive any sample of weekends and public holidays.
17
3.3. Average water supply days in a week

Figure 15: Average number of days households receive water supply in a week (in %)
Average days of water supply per week in HHs
100 90
80
60
40
20
7 3
0
1 or 2 days 3 or 4 days 5 or 6 days 7 days
% Household Nh=630
3.4. Household utilization of water for drinking and other activities

Fulfilment of requirement Primary source of drinking water
96% HHs reported that their daily requirement 79% HHs reported HH tap connection as their
of water is being met by FHTCs primary source of drinking water
Figure 17: Daily household’s requirement of water Figure 18: Households reported FHTC as primary
being met by FHTC source of drinking water
2%
2%
0%
14%
7%
Fully met FHTC (improved)

More than 3/4th 79%
96% Other Improved
Nh=630
> Half but <3/4th Nh=630
Half or less Unimproved
3.5. Status at HH level (Nh=630)

% HHs purifying water % HHs paying water % HHs with booster % HHs having coping
before drinking service delivery charges pumps mechanism during scarcity
10% 48% 3% 35%
% HH aware of grievance Channel for registering Key problems for % Reported complaints
redressal mechanism for grievance (Nh=630*) reporting grievances resolved (Nh=28)
reporting problems with (N=630)
FHTC
98% Pump-operator Irregular supply 89%
*HHs who reported complaints in last 1 year
18
3.6. Source sustainability at the village level

Schemes based on surface and ground water
56% of schemes are reported to be based on surface water and 25% ground water.
Figure 19: Schemes based on water source in village
100
80
56
60
40 25
20
0
Surface Water Source Ground Water Source Both (Surface and Ground Water) Source
% of Schemes Nv=31
*’Surface Water Source’ is Stream, Spring, Glacier, River, lake, pond etc. and Groundwater Source is open well, borewell,
tube well, handpump, spring, etc
Villages reported having presence of a groundwater source

29% of villages reported the presence of groundwater sources like improved dug wells
and borewells, 29% and were supported by recharging structures.
Figure 20: Villages reported the presence of groundwater sources and among those how many reported to have
a recharge structure
100
80
60 71
40
20 29 29
0
Presence of groundwater source Presence of groundwater recharge structure
Groundwater as source Other sources Groundwater source with recharge structure

Nv=31
The top 3 other source sustainability measure taken by villages

Figure 21: Villages reported having taken other source sustainability measure
100
80
60 52
40
23
16
20
0
Recharge pit De-silting of existing water bodies Trench
NV = 31
% of villages
19
3.7. Water quality monitoring and surveillance in the villages

Figure 22: Water quality monitoring and surveillance by villages
100
84 84
80 74
60
40
20 16
0
FTK available Bacteriological test done Chlorination done Contamination history VWSC trained to use FTK
% of villages NV=31
3.8. Status of JJM
A. VWSC/Pani Samiti and PWS signage in villages (Nv=31)
Presence of VWSC/Pani VWSC/Pani Samiti % Villages – VWSC/PO % Villages in which

B.
Samiti responsible for O&M of trained to use FTKs signages about JJM was
PWS Schemes observed
81% 84%
42% 48%
B. Water supply, storage and operation & maintenance at village level (Nv=31)
Average no. of supply in a % Villages levying water % Villages having skilled Community monitoring of
day service delivery to HH manpower for O&M for water wastage in villages
PWS
4 81% 52% 26%
% Villages having OHT/ % Villages having faced Primary points for Key problems for
Sump O&M challenges reporting grievances reporting grievances
100% 32% Block functionary Pipeline leakage
20
3.9. Perception of HHs on Outcome Indicators
a. Health b. Economic Income

Incidence of water borne diseases at HH Change in employment days since FHTC
level in last one year as reported programmes/schemes
Figure 23: Household reported incidence of water Figure 24: Household reported a change in
borne diseases in last one year employment days since FHTC programmes /schemes
100 100
19% 14%
80
60
40
20
0 Increase
Waterborne Water related None 67%
No change
diseases diseases % of HH Nh=630
Nh=630 Don't know
Nh=604
100%
Yes No
c. Drudgery
Reduction in time and effort in collecting
water
Figure 25: Households reported reduction in time
and effort in collecting water
21
3.10. User satisfaction
Table No. 5: User satisfaction - more than 75% happy with FHTC services
S. No. Parameter (Nh=630) In %
1 Regularity 99
2 Overall quality 100
3 Colour 100
4 Taste 100
5 Odour 96
Note:
Base (Nv)=31 means all villages sampled and covered in SIRMAUR district
Base (NH)=630 means all households sampled and covered across the 31 villages in SIRMAUR
district
Base (NH)=630 means all households where female members used to fetch water before HH tap
connection
22
4. Annexures
4.1. Summary of villages
Table No. 6: Village summary
No of No of
Name of Sample Actual sample No. of source of source of
S.No.
sample village HHs HHs (achieved) scheme surface Ground
water water
1 Total 612 661 68 27 15
2 Baru Sarera 27 28 3
3 Bag Pashog 18 19 2 3
4 Bhailan 18 19 2 1
5 Jangla Bhud 27 29 3 1 1
6 Surla Charjan 9 10 1 2
7 Kotla Molar 27 28 3
8 Jamni Ghat 27 28 3 1
9 Rampur
9 10 1
Banjaran
10 Bharog Baneri 18 19 2 2 1
11 Khali Achon 18 19 2 2
12 Taruwala 9 10 1 2
13 Kamroo 18 20 2 1
14 Jakhal 27 28 3 1
15 Bhagani 27 29 3
16 Jagatpur 9 10 1 1
17 Parduni 9 9 1
18 Kharotiyon 27 28 3 3
19 Bhanra 27 39 3 1
20 Gajwa 18 19 2 1
21 Dhal Palyara 27 28 3 1
22 Barag 18 19 2 2
23 Kinu Kalan 9 10 1 2
24 Naina 27 28 3 1
25 Kairi Gundah 27 28 3 2
26 Ishari 27 28 3 1
27 Sanora 9 11 1 1
28 Bhog Kashmali 18 19 2 1
29 Kulath 27 30 3 1
30 Dimbar 18 20 2 2 3
31 Nehar Pab 27 29 3
32 Kiyarda 9 10 1 1
4.2. Functionality – 55 LPCD vs regularity vs potability vs working tap

connection
Table No. 7: Functionality of HH tap connection
Fully
Adequate Potable Working tap
S. Fully Functional* Regular
Village Quantity (Quality) connections
No. (% HH) Supply
(% HH) (% HH) (%HH)
(% HH)
1 Total 92.7 96.5 96.7 99.4 100.0
2 Baru Sarera 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
3 Bag Pashog 50.0 50.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
4 Bhailan 44.4 61.1 77.8 100.0 100.0
5 Jangla Bhud 92.9 100.0 96.4 96.4 100.0
6 Surla Charjan 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
7 Kotla Molar 88.9 92.6 96.3 100.0 100.0
23
Table No. 7: Functionality of HH tap connection

Fully
Adequate Potable Working tap
S. Fully Functional* Regular
Village Quantity (Quality) connections
No. (% HH) Supply
(% HH) (% HH) (%HH)
(% HH)
8 Jamni Ghat 81.5 100.0 81.5 100.0 100.0
Rampur
9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Banjaran
Bharog
10 94.4 100.0 94.4 100.0 100.0
Baneri
11 Khali Achon 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
12 Taruwala 77.8 100.0 88.9 88.9 100.0
13 Kamroo 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
14 Jakhal 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
15 Bhagani 96.4 100.0 96.4 100.0 100.0
16 Jagatpur 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
17 Parduni 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
18 Kharotiyon 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
19 Bhanra 94.7 97.4 97.4 100.0 100.0
20 Gajwa 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
21 Dhal Palyara 96.3 100.0 100.0 96.3 100.0
22 Barag 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
23 Kinu Kalan 88.9 88.9 100.0 100.0 100.0
24 Naina 92.6 96.3 100.0 96.3 100.0
25 Kairi Gundah 81.5 100.0 81.5 100.0 100.0
26 Ishari 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
27 Sanora 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Bhog
28 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Kashmali
29 Kulath 96.6 100.0 96.6 100.0 100.0
30 Dimbar 94.7 94.7 100.0 100.0 100.0
31 Nehar Pab 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
32 Kiyarda 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
* Fully Functional has been computed as = Adequate Quantity ∩ Fully Regularity Supply ∩ Potable (Quality)
24
4.3. Villages not meeting the quality parameters

Table No. 8: Quality parameters dissatisfied at village level
1. pH (Acceptable Range- 6.5 to 8.5)
S.No. Block Name Panchayat Name Villages No. of HHs outside the acceptable range
1 Burma Papri Jangla Bhud 0

2 Nahan Kotla Molar Kotla Molar 0
Surla
3 Surla 0
Charjan
4 Bag Pashog Bag Pashog 0
5 Lana Bhalta Baru Sarera 0
Pachhad
6 Sirmouri Mandir Bhailan 0
7 Badri Pur Taruwala 0
Bharog
8 Barog Banary 0
Baneri
9 Bhagani Bhagani 0
10 Chhachhetti Khali Achon 0
11 Haripur Khol Jamni Ghat 0
Paonta Sahib
12 Kamroo Kamroo 0
13 Kiyarda Kiyarda 0
14 Melion Jagatpur 0
15 Pardooni Parduni 0
Rampur
16 Rampur Bharapur 0
Banjaran
17 Thonta Jakhal Jakhal 0
18 Bohal Talia Kulath 0

Rajgarh
Bhog
19 Chandol 0
Kashmali
25
20 Dimber Dimbar 0
21 Nehar Pab Nehar Pab 0
22 Shaya Sanora Sanora 0
23 Bharari Bhanra 0
24 Dewri Kharah Kharotiyon 0

Sangrah
25 Ganog Barag 0
26 Rajana Dhal Palyara 1
27 Sathan Gajwa 0
28 Ishari Ishari 0
29 Kiari Gundah Kairi Gundah 0

Shillai
30 Naini Dhar Naina 0
31 Panog Kinu Kalan 0
2. Free residual chlorine (Acceptable Range- 0.2 to 1 PPM)
HHs outside the acceptable/permissible

S.No. Block Name Panchayat Name Villages
range
1 Burma Papri Jangla Bhud 0
2 Nahan Kotla Molar Kotla Molar 0
Surla
3 Surla 0
Charjan
4 Bag Pashog Bag Pashog 0
5 Pachhad Lana Bhalta Baru Sarera 1
6 Sirmouri Mandir Bhailan 0
7 Badri Pur Taruwala 0
Bharog
8 Barog Banary 0
Baneri
9 Bhagani Bhagani 0
10 Paonta Sahib Chhachhetti Khali Achon 0
11 Haripur Khol Jamni Ghat 0
12 Kamroo Kamroo 0
13 Kiyarda Kiyarda 0
26
14 Melion Jagatpur 0
15 Pardooni Parduni 0
Rampur
16 Rampur Bharapur 0
Banjaran
17 Thonta Jakhal Jakhal 0
18 Bohal Talia Kulath 0
Bhog
19 Chandol 0
Kashmali
20 Rajgarh Dimber Dimbar 1
21 Nehar Pab Nehar Pab 0
22 Shaya Sanora Sanora 0
23 Bharari Bhanra 0
24 Dewri Kharah Kharotiyon 0

25 Ganog Barag 0
Sangrah
26 Rajana Dhal Palyara 0
27 Sathan Gajwa 0
28 Ishari Ishari 0
29 Shillai Kiari Gundah Kairi Gundah 0
30 Naini Dhar Naina 0

31 Panog Kinu Kalan 0
3. Turbidity (Acceptable Range- 1 to 5 NTU)

range
NA NA NA NA NA
4. Total hardness (Acceptable Range- 200 to 600 Milligram/litre)

range
NA NA NA NA NA
5. Total alkalinity (Acceptable Range- 200 to 600 Milligram/litre)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
6. Chloride (Acceptable Range- 250 to 1000 Milligram/litre)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
7. Ammonia (Acceptable Range- 0.5 Milligram/litre)

range
NA NA NA NA NA
27
8. Phosphate (Acceptable Range- 1 Milligram/litre)

range
NA NA NA NA NA
9. Iron (Acceptable Range- 1 Milligram/litre)

range
NA NA NA NA NA
10. Nitrate (Acceptable Range- 1 Milligram/litre)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
11. Sulphate (Acceptable Range- 200 to 400 Milligram/litre)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
12. Total dissolved solids (Acceptable Range- 500 to 2000 Milligram/litre)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
13. Bacteriological test (Presence)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
14. Fluoride (Acceptable Range- 1 to 1.5 Milligram /litre)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
15. Arsenic (in hotspots) (Acceptable Range- 0.01 Milligram /litre)
range
NA NA NA NA NA
28

FHTC Sirmaur

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FHTC Sirmaur

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FHTC Sirmaur

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Functionality Assessment of Household Tap

Connection under National Jal Jeevan Mission - 2022

District Report: SIRMAUR, Himachal

xv. Bacteriological test for Total coliform bacteria

12. Sampling – Selection of a subset of individuals from within a statistical population to

Household level indicators

2.1. District snapshot: SIRMAUR

Figure 2: District IMIS Status & Map

2.2. FHTC Assessment Objectives

2.3. Assessment Methodology

2.4. Sample Size

2.5. Sampling Methodology

2.6. Methodology for Water Quantity Measurement at Households

2.7. Methodology for Water Quality Measurement

Figure 8: On-site & Laboratory Based Quality Test

2.8. Project implementation

A total of 8 teams (comprising 8 supervisors, 48 assessors, and 8 water collection assistants)

2.9. Sample coverage

2.10. Sampled village and household profile

Figure 10: Functionality of HH tap connection

3.2. Quantity, Regularity, and Quality of Water

Partially adequate quantity

B. Regularity of water supply to households

Fully regular supply

Regularity of water received across head, middle, and tail end

95% 98% 97%

C. Water quality – Potability

Potable* Not Potable 100%

Safeguarding piped water supply for unforeseen bacteriological contamination-

3.3. Average water supply days in a week

3.4. Household utilization of water for drinking and other activities

Fully met FHTC (improved)

3.5. Status at HH level (Nh=630)

10% 48% 3% 35%

98% Pump-operator Irregular supply 89%

*HHs who reported complaints in last 1 year

3.6. Source sustainability at the village level

Villages reported having presence of a groundwater source

Groundwater as source Other sources Groundwater source with recharge structure

The top 3 other source sustainability measure taken by villages

3.7. Water quality monitoring and surveillance in the villages

3.8. Status of JJM

A. VWSC/Pani Samiti and PWS signage in villages (Nv=31)

Presence of VWSC/Pani VWSC/Pani Samiti % Villages – VWSC/PO % Villages in which

100% 32% Block functionary Pipeline leakage

3.9. Perception of HHs on Outcome Indicators

a. Health b. Economic Income

3.10. User satisfaction

S. No. Parameter (Nh=630) In %

4.2. Functionality – 55 LPCD vs regularity vs potability vs working tap

Table No. 7: Functionality of HH tap connection

4.3. Villages not meeting the quality parameters

1 Burma Papri Jangla Bhud 0

7 Badri Pur Taruwala 0

10 Chhachhetti Khali Achon 0

11 Haripur Khol Jamni Ghat 0

17 Thonta Jakhal Jakhal 0

18 Bohal Talia Kulath 0

21 Nehar Pab Nehar Pab 0