cassionData Analysis

Back to the lessonLesson 8 of 8What the monitoring did not see

Eleven numbers and six denominators

The same deck as the downloads, rendered as a page. Start the slideshow to present it full screen — arrow keys or a click advance one slide, Escape leaves.

Slides · PDFSlides · PowerPoint

  1. Slide 1 / 16

    What this lesson covers

    • Count the denominators before writing anything
    • The report
    • Four rules the layout has to obey
    • What each number is for
    • What this course did not cover
    • What comes next
    Speaker notes
    Everything this course computed, on one page, with the table that says which figures may be compared with which. Six different denominators across eleven indicators, and no layout will warn a reader about that on its own.
  2. Slide 2 / 16

    Count the denominators before writing anything

    IndicatorDenominatorn
    At least basic drinking waterAll households2,403
    At least basic sanitationAll households2,403
    Basic hygiene serviceAll households2,403
    Open defecationAll households2,403
    Below 15 L/person/dayAll households2,403
    Round trip over 30 minutesAll households2,403
    E. coli risk classHouseholds tested802
    Chlorine at the householdHouseholds tested961

    …

    Speaker notes
    The course has produced eleven indicators. They come from two files, and they run on six different denominators.
  3. Slide 3 / 16

    Count the denominators before writing anything

    • Six denominators, and only the first six rows share one — Every horizontal comparison across a boundary in that table…
    Speaker notes
    Six denominators, and only the first six rows share one. Every horizontal comparison across a boundary in that table needs a sentence, and every one made without a sentence will be made wrongly.
  4. Slide 4 / 16

    Count the denominators before writing anything — In Python

    import pandas as pd
    
    denominators = pd.DataFrame({
        "indicator": ["basic water", "basic sanitation", "basic hygiene",
                      "E. coli safe", "point functionality", "reliable points"],
        "denominator": ["households", "households", "households",
                        "households tested", "visits made", "water points"],
        "n": [2403, 2403, 2403, 802, 2629, 242],
    })
    print(denominators)
  5. Slide 5 / 16

    Count the denominators before writing anything — In R

    # Build this table first, in code, and print it above the results.
  6. Slide 6 / 16

    Count the denominators before writing anything

    • Write it as data, not as prose — A denominator table generated by the same script that computed the numbers cannot…
    Speaker notes
    Write it as data, not as prose. A denominator table generated by the same script that computed the numbers cannot drift from them; a paragraph describing the denominators can and will.
  7. Slide 7 / 16

    The report — Example (cont.)

    WASH situation, three districts, 2024
    
    ACCESS                                          n = 2,403 households
      At least basic drinking water     56.3%       (82.3% on an improved
                                                     source; 25.0 points sit on
                                                     limited service for
                                                     collection time alone)
      At least basic sanitation         43.2%       (62.0% have an improved
                                                     facility; 18.8 points are
                                                     shared)
      Basic hygiene service             34.1%       (67.8% have a facility;
                                                     soap observed at half)
      Open defecation                   13.3%
    
      Safely managed not computable: availability was not asked and quality was
      tested on a subsample.
  8. Slide 8 / 16

    The report — Example (cont.)

    
    QUANTITY AND TIME                               n = 2,403 households
      Median                            23.7 L/person/day
      Below Sphere minimum of 15 L      13.4%       323 households
      Round trip over 30 minutes        39.3%       944 households
      Queue time not separated from walking time. Distance not recorded.
    
    WATER QUALITY                                   n = 802 tested (33.4%)
      Free from E. coli                 53.6%
      High risk (>100 CFU/100 mL)        7.5%
      Improved sources                  61.1% safe  n = 625
      Unimproved and surface            27.1% safe  n = 177
    
      Tested subsample over-represents untreated water: 533 households reporting
      home treatment have no chlorine reading.
    
  9. Slide 9 / 16

    The report — Example (cont.)

    WATER POINT FUNCTIONALITY                       242 points, 2,904 visits due
      Visits finding a working point    74.4%       2,629 visits made (90.5%)
      Points working at every visit     33.9%       82 of 242
      Population-weighted              83.3%       ~96,700 users
      Range if every missed visit found a failure: 67.4% - 74.4%
    
      Failure shapes: 82 never failed, 80 intermittent, 46 seasonal, 34 down at
      year end. Seasonality is confined to protected wells and springs.
    
      Median days down at the visit: 68 under community committees, 29 under
      private operators.
    
    NOT COMPARABLE
      Water quality figures are on a tested subsample and do not share the access
      denominator. Functionality figures count visits, points and people and are
      three different quantities. Districts are not ranked: Nord-Ouest visited
  10. Slide 10 / 16

    The report — Example (cont.)

      82.7% of its due rounds against Sud-Est's 96.3%.
  11. Slide 11 / 16

    Four rules the layout has to obey

    • Group by denominator, not by theme — The block headings above are denominators wearing topic names
    • Put n in the heading, not the footnote — A footnote is read after the comparison has already been made
    • State what is not computable — Safely managed drinking water, queue time and distance are all absent, and each is…
    • Put the non-comparability in its own block at the end — Not as a caveat under each number, where it becomes noise, and…
    Speaker notes
    Group by denominator, not by theme. The block headings above are denominators wearing topic names. A reader who takes one number from each block has taken four numbers with four bases, and the blank line between blocks is what tells them so. Put n in the heading, not the footnote. A footnote is read after the comparison has already been made. State what is not computable. Safely managed drinking water, queue time and distance are all absent, and each is something a reader will assume is in a WASH report. An absent indicator that is not named reads as an indicator at zero or as an oversight. Put the non-comparability in its own block at the end. Not as a caveat under each number, where it becomes noise, and not in a methods annex, where it is not read.
  12. Slide 12 / 16

    What each number is for

    FindingDecision it informs
    25 points on limited water for collection timeWhere to site new points
    18.8 points on shared sanitationWhether the programme is building or subsidising
    Soap at half the facilities that existHygiene promotion against hardware
    46 seasonal pointsDry-season alternative, not rehabilitation
    34 down at year endSpare parts and management, not new construction
    68 days median downtime under committeesThe maintenance model itself
    Nord-Ouest at 82.7% coverageThe monitoring plan before the next report
    Speaker notes
    A report that only classifies is an assessment. A report that also says what to do is a deliverable, and the WASH figures divide cleanly by the decision they inform.
  13. Slide 13 / 16

    What each number is for

    • The last row is the one most reports omit and the one most likely to change next year's numbers — A monitoring system…
    Speaker notes
    The last row is the one most reports omit and the one most likely to change next year's numbers. A monitoring system that cannot reach a district in the rains produces a report that cannot describe it, and fixing that is cheaper than any of the others on the list.
  14. Slide 14 / 16

    What this course did not cover

    • Menstrual hygiene management needs questions this survey does not ask — private space, materials, disposal — and…
    • School and healthcare facility WASH are separate instruments with their own ladders, and the household ladder does…
    • Faecal sludge management is the second half of safely managed sanitation and needs a containment and emptying…
    • Cost per beneficiary and tariff analysis need financial records; the fee_collected field says whether a fee was…
    • A report that names its gaps is more credible than one that appears complete — and a gap named is the first line of the…
    Speaker notes
    Named plainly, because a WASH analyst will be asked for all of them. A report that names its gaps is more credible than one that appears complete, and a gap named is the first line of the next terms of reference.
  15. Slide 15 / 16

    What comes next

    • Module 4 continues in other sectors — food security and the IPC, protection case management, education attendance — and each brings the same three questions in new vocabulary.
    Speaker notes
    Module 4 continues in other sectors — food security and the IPC, protection case management, education attendance — and each brings the same three questions in new vocabulary. You have now met them three times: what did I count, over what, and what should change because of it.
  16. Slide 16 / 16

    Where this goes next

    Read the full lesson, with runnable code Back to the lesson