Using Wash’Em to Design Handwashing Programmes for Crisis-Affected Populations in Zimbabwe: A Process Evaluation

Astrid Hasund Thorseth (), Jennifer Lamb, Constancia Vimbayi Mavodza, Mandikudza Tembo, Anesu Petra Mushangari, Eddington Zinyandu, Thomas Heath and Sian White
Additional contact information
Astrid Hasund Thorseth: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
Jennifer Lamb: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
Constancia Vimbayi Mavodza: Biomedical Research and Training Institute, 10 Seagrave Road, Avondale, Harare, Zimbabwe
Mandikudza Tembo: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK
Anesu Petra Mushangari: Action contre la Faim, 21 Giraffe Crescent, Borrowdale West, Harare, Zimbabwe
Eddington Zinyandu: Action contre la Faim, 21 Giraffe Crescent, Borrowdale West, Harare, Zimbabwe
Thomas Heath: Action contre la Faim, 102 rue de Paris, CS 10007, CEDEX, 93558 Montreuil, France
Sian White: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK

IJERPH, 2024, vol. 21, issue 3, 1-25

Abstract: Wash’Em is a process that supports humanitarians in assessing and designing rapid but context-specific hygiene programmes in crises or outbreaks. The process consists of training implementers, using tools to learn from populations, and entering findings into a software which generates contextualised activities. A process evaluation of Wash’Em use was conducted in a drought-affected area in Midland province, Zimbabwe. Data were collected during the programme design and following implementation using a mix of qualitative methods. Findings were classified against the intended stages of Wash’Em, and the evaluation domains were defined by the UKRI Medical Research Council. The Wash’Em process was not fully implemented as intended. An abridged training was utilised, some of the tools for learning from populations were omitted, many of the recommended activities were not implemented, the delivery modalities were different from intended, the budget available was minimal, and the number of people exposed to activities were fewer than hoped. Despite these ‘on the ground’ challenges and adaptations, the Wash’Em process was considered feasible by implementers and was seen to be less top–down than most programme design approaches. The populations exposed to the intervention found the activities engaging, understood the content, and reportedly took action to improve handwashing behaviour. Programmes such as Wash’Em, which facilitate community participation and are underpinned by theory and evidence, are likely to yield positive results even if processes are followed imperfectly.

Keywords: handwashing; programme design; behaviour change; hygiene; humanitarian crises; process evaluation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/3/260/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/3/260/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:3:p:260-:d:1344713

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().