Download available
In this WASH Talks video, Robert Chambers talks about the use of Rapid Action Learning (RAL) workshops, immersive research and participatory mapping methodologies in India with the purpose of checking what is actually happening on the ground, and learning from this, in relation to the national Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) (SBM-G) (clean India mission).
These methodologies have been developed and implemented with the Institute of Development Studies (IDS), the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (WSSCC), WaterAid, Delhi University and the Indian government.
Download available
Over the past few years, the Sanitation Learning Hub, in collaboration with the Government of India, Praxis, WSSCC and WaterAid India, have been developing Rapid Action Learning approaches. Multiple approaches have been trialled, with flexible formats, but the essential criteria is that learning is timely, relevant and actionable.
These learning approaches are the focus of the latest edition of the Frontiers of Sanitation series. This Frontiers explains the advantages and disadvantages of the approaches trialled and sets out a challenge to those working in the water, sanitation and hygiene sector to:
To commemorate and reflect on the publication, the Hub sat down with colleagues and partners WaterAid India and WSSCC to discuss lessons learned and the future of Rapid Action Learning. You can watch these five short videos in the playlist below.
Download available
This publication responds to the demand for guidance on how to conduct training of community-led total sanitation (CLTS) facilitators. The fast spread of CLTS to now over 40 countries means that the demand for good facilitators and trainers of facilitators currently outstrips supply. As CLTS requires a special kind of facilitation, it also calls for a different type of training of facilitators. Training always has to be hands-on, in real time, through triggering in communities and lead to emergence of open defecation free (ODF) villages.
The guide includes much useful information on how to organise and conduct CLTS training of facilitators, as well as how to follow-up, and thereby hopes to spread good practice. It is intended for immediate use by trainers around the world. It will also be helpful for those who manage and supervise trainers and facilitators in terms of giving them insight into the different ways CLTS facilitation and training work, allowing them to appreciate the flexibility, specific support needs and special ways of working that CLTS entails.
The Trainers’ Guide encourages trainers to innovate as appropriate and to add to the core principles and practices outlined in this manual.
Download available
These tools include manuals and practical guides for project managers and trainers working mainly in eastern and southern Africa.
Topics include:
Download available
Community-Leave No One Behind (CLNOB) is a new participatory approach to identify both challenges and solutions in communities’ journeys towards ODF-S.
It has been designed to be integrated into Phase II of the Swachh Bharat Mission-Grameen (SBM-G). The government of India has issued the guidelines for Phase II of SBM-G, of which one of the guiding principles is ensuring that no one is left behind. CLNOB demonstrates a way to achieve this goal. It encourages communities to identify gaps in sanitation coverage and use and promote actions they can take themselves.
CLNOB builds on experiences with Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) and with the Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin (SBM-G)’s ‘Community Approaches to Sanitation (CAS)’. These approaches have helped communities towards achieving open defecation free (ODF) environments; however, it has been acknowledged that ODF status has deficiencies.
The purposes of this handbook are two-fold: first to inform policymakers and stakeholders at all levels about this new initiative, and second to provide guidance to facilitators and practitioners for CLNOB implementation. This handbook is a living document and will be updated and refined after more field experiences are conducted. It is based on limited experience from a small pilot carried out between June and October 2020 during the challenging environment of the COVID-19 pandemic.
For Annexes on suggested talking points, a sustainability register, case studies and information on informed consent and data protection, click here to download (PDF).
Download available
In 2020, WSSCC’s India Support Unit (now UNOPS) piloted a new participatory approach called Community Leave No One Behind (CLNOB) to support the Swachh Bharat Mission Grameen (SBM-G) Phase II. This Sanitation Learning Hub learning brief outlines the purpose of CLNOB, the actions generated by the pilot and our reflections of the CLNOB approach.
The pilot took place in five districts in India (Mirzapur in Uttar Pradesh, Ranchi in Jharkhand, Kamrup in Assam, South 24 Paragnas in West Bengal and Purnea in Bihar). A Prerak (facilitator) was appointed in each district to support this process and work within villages at community level. The Sanitation Learning Hub supported an accompanying learning component of the pilot, facilitating learning sessions between the preraks and the development of a Handbook based on the experience.
This learning brief outlines the purpose of CLNOB, the actions generated by the pilot and our reflections of the CLNOB approach. The CLNOB Handbook, a handbook on Community Leave No One Behind, accompanies this Learning Brief. CLNOB was designed to ensure a participatory method to enable sustained access to safely managed sanitation facilities for people who have been ‘left behind’ or left out of the first phase of India’s national sanitation campaign.
Download available
An intentional focus on gender equality and social inclusion (GESI) is key to sustainable and effective Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) projects.
This guidance is for staff of WASH implementation and research projects and organisations, who are committed to improving the practice of GESI in their projects and organisations.
What is this tool for? To support individual and collective reflective practice among staff on the extent and quality of gender equality and social inclusion work in their WASH projects and organisation.
Who should use this tool? Anyone working on WASH implementation or research projects that wants to improve (GESI) practice.
Who needs to be involved in the process?
How long does the process take?
This publication is also available in French and Portuguese:
This is part of a series of chapter summaries of the Handbook of Participatory Research and Inquiry.
Participatory research typically sets out to improve some real situation. In such research, two outcomes are typically pursued, research and action. The research provides increased understanding of the situation. The action seeks to bring about desired improvement. This chapter describes how facilitation and facilitators can assist both outcomes and their integration. Good understanding supports more effective change. Well-informed change contributes to a deeper understanding of the research situation.
Throughout, it is assumed that, wherever possible, best results are achieved by engaging participants as equals. In addition, the interests of all stakeholders are preferably taken into account. Good outcomes, if possible, are pursued for all. It is acknowledged that these goals may not be fully achieved easily. Also, they may not be accomplished at a single attempt. They may develop slowly throughout a study.
To guide facilitators, the chapter provides some overarching principles that, if followed, enhance both research and action outcomes. Useful principles provide helpful guidance for novice facilitators. They also allow more experienced facilitators to apply the principles in ways that allow the facilitators also to draw on the experience they already have.
For ease of application, the principles are then usually illustrated with specific and detailed process descriptions. Some are detailed enough for novices to follow them, much as a novice cook might follow a recipe. In addition, two extended case studies provide a more general background. They offer a context to help bring the principles and the process descriptions to life.
One case study is of leadership in organisational settings. The other is about interventions for community development in a number of community settings. Both help to illustrate what the principles and practices look like in reality. They also serve to demonstrate that general principles are not an obstacle to shaping each research study to fit the actual situation.
One of the ways in which participants are commonly involved as equals is through the use of decision-making meetings. Even when participants are unwilling to engage more deeply in the research they may accept and welcome their involvement in decision making. Similarly, when the participation is modest for reasons of practicality, participant involvement in some decisions is still feasible and useful. Accordingly, processes for participative decision making are an emphasis in the chapter.
Many of the processes described are robust enough that they are fairly safe even in inexperienced hands. The processes in effect provide some of the facilitation. At other times, the use of experienced facilitators may allow access to a greater variety of options. Experienced facilitators are usually better able to react in the moment to unexpected developments. Some writers on participatory research recommend their use. The more complex and uncertain the research situation, the more benefit there is in the use of experienced facilitators.
Every application of participatory research is likely to be unique to some extent. However, some generalisations can be (and are) offered. For example, different styles of participant engagement may be appropriate at different stages of facilitated participatory research. The chapter describes a framework that summarises four overlapping components that, though overlapping, tend to occur in sequence.
In this framework the first component usually happens before most participants are engaged. The initial scope and purpose of the research are first defined. Some researchers and participants may be more directly involved in early planning. If so, they are recruited and briefed.
The framework includes a second component that is often overlooked in research. It is worth including for its substantial benefits. As any participant comes on board, relationships are built with existing participants. There may also be deeper relationships built in smaller groups of participants too, if applicable. Expectations are then clarified so that participants, whatever their role, develop shared aspirations for research and action outcomes.
Such activities are used before what might be regarded as the formal research might otherwise begin. The activities aim to build trusting relationships between all those taking part, whether researchers or participants. Shared expectations about the situation to be improved and the desired research and action outcomes make facilitation easier. With shared expectations, decision making becomes more productive and satisfying.
An early task recommended for a facilitator is therefore to encourage agreed expectations about the overall approach to be used. Expectations about different participant roles can also be developed, if applicable. The chapter includes specific suggestions about how a facilitator can encourage constructive interactions between those taking part.
Actual data collection and analysis together form the third component. The prior components (described above) increase the likelihood that participants can continue to be involved as equals in the actual research. The fourth component — implementation and action — may or may not occur. However, as research becomes more participatory, the likelihood of action, often concurrently with the research, is increased.
In participatory research, minority groups may require special attention during all four components. Such groups often express feelings of being exploited. The styles of participation described in this chapter are relevant. They may be achieved in such a way that such groups are given equal voice with the researchers and the other participants.
There can be several different aspects to the overall approach to facilitation. One is likely to be the general form and style of the processes used. This may include the role of the facilitator or facilitators, if any. The social structures of the research and change components are also addressed. For instance, where there are many participants, this may include how a coordinating group of researchers and some participants may be established.
The group’s role may be to allow the local participants to inform researchers about features of the organisation or community. Particularly in larger studies it may also act as an intermediary between the study and the organisation or community. It may take on the role of helping to keep all relevant participants informed and involved.