Contents Volume 1 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2 1.1. Purpose of this manual ...................................................................................................... 3 2. Key definitions of the SFD-PI .................................................................................................... 3 3. Levels of SFD Report ................................................................................................................ 5 3.1. ‘Level 1’ - Initial SFD .......................................................................................................... 6 3.2. ‘Level 2’ - Intermediate SFD .............................................................................................. 6 3.3. ‘Level 3’ - Comprehensive SFD ......................................................................................... 6 3.4. SFD Lite ............................................................................................................................. 7 3.5. The SFD production process ............................................................................................. 7 4. Assessing the enabling environment.......................................................................................10 4.1. Urban context ...................................................................................................................10 4.1.1. Policy, legislation and regulation ..............................................................................11 4.1.2. Planning ....................................................................................................................12 4.1.3. Equity ........................................................................................................................12 4.1.4. Service outputs .........................................................................................................12 4.1.5. Expansion of services ..............................................................................................13 5. Producing the SFD: Sanitation service chain analysis ............................................................13 5.1. Terminology .....................................................................................................................13 5.2. Service outcomes.............................................................................................................13 5.2.1. Containment (on-site and off-site sanitation) ...........................................................15 5.2.2. Emptying and Transport ...........................................................................................17 5.2.3. Treatment (of wastewater and/or faecal sludge) .....................................................17 5.2.4. Disposal and end-use ...............................................................................................18 5.3. Performance data.............................................................................................................18 5.3.1. Dealing with uncertainty in the data .........................................................................20 5.4. SFD Graphic Generator ...................................................................................................21 5.4.1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................21 5.4.2. Step One: Enter general city information and select sanitation systems ................22 5.4.3. Estimating risk of groundwater pollution ..................................................................23 5.4.4. Step two: Create SFD Matrix ...................................................................................25 5.4.5. Step Three: Draw SFD graphic ................................................................................26 6. Ethical Considerations .............................................................................................................27 6.1. Data Management............................................................................................................27 7. Stakeholder Engagement ........................................................................................................28 7.1. Principles of stakeholder engagement.............................................................................28 SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 III

List of tables Table 1: Components of an SFD Report .............................................................................................. 5 Table 2: Data requirements and recommendations for different types of SFD Report .......................... 8 Table 3: Summary of data collected .................................................................................................. 11 Table 4: Questions and data collection methods to analyse the range of sanitation service chain ...... 14 Table 5: Quantitative performance data............................................................................................. 19 Table 6: Qualitative performance data ............................................................................................... 20 Table 7: Stakeholders working on different parts of the sanitation service chain ................................ 29 Table 8: Stakeholder Groups ............................................................................................................ 32 Table 9: Example of phasing ............................................................................................................. 33 Table 10: SFD Variables Table ......................................................................................................... 45 Table 11: Topics for FGDs with community representatives ............................................................ 114 Table 12: Questions to be addressed during the FDGs ................................................................... 114 List of figures Figure 1: SFD Graphic Example .......................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Stakeholder influence-interest matrix .................................................................................. 29 Abbreviations FGD Focus group discussion KII Key informant interview SFD Shit Flow Diagram: a graphic tracking the flow and management of all excreta within a city, from source to final fate (or destination SFD-PI SFD Promotion Initiative SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 V

1. Introduction A Shit Flow Diagram (SFD) is an easy-to-understand advocacy and decision-support tool comprising a report (SFD Report) which contains a graphic (SFD Graphic). An SFD summarises service outcomes in terms of the flow and fate of excreta in urban areas. It includes a qualitative assessment of the context in which service delivery takes place and a complete record of data sources. The process of developing the report is as important as the report itself. Use of the SFD method enables a standardised assessment of excreta flows in urban areas. Due to the sensitivity around the term "shit", the following terms are often used interchangeably: Excreta Flow Diagram or Faecal Waste Flow Diagram. The SFD Graphic is a visual representation that enables stakeholders to identify service outcomes in terms of the flow and fate of excreta produced by the population. Excreta which is safely managed and move along the sanitation service chain are represented by green arrows moving from left to right in the graphic, while excreta which are unsafely managed are represented by red arrows. Unsafely managed flows discharging to the environment are represented by red arrows turning towards the bottom of the graphic. The width of each arrow is proportional to the percentage of the population whose excreta contribute to that flow. Figure 1: SFD Graphic Example SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 2

Excreta/Shit: consists of urine and faeces combined with any flushing water. Enabling environment: is the range and inter-relationships of non-technical elements that are needed to support service delivery. For urban sanitation services, the enabling environment is likely to consist of aspects relating to policy (including legislation and regulation), strategy and direction, institutional arrangements, programme methodology, implementation capacity, availability of products and tools, financing, cost-effective implementation, and monitoring & evaluation. Faecal sludge (FS): is undigested or partially digested slurry or solids containing mostly excreta and water, in combination with sand, grit, metals, solid waste and/or various chemical compounds. Faecal sludge comes from on-site sanitation technologies, resulting from the collection and storage of excreta or black water, with or without greywater. Sanitation service chain: for on-site sanitation systems, this typically comprises excreta capture and storage in a latrine pit or septic tank; emptying of the pit or tank; transport of the contents; sludge treatment; end-use or final disposal of the resulting products. For off-site sanitation systems this typically comprises wastewater from a flush toilet transported through sewers to a wastewater treatment facility and end-use or final disposal of the treated wastewater or by-products. Service delivery context: this addresses aspects of the policies, legislations and regulations used to guide the design and operation of sanitation services delivered by the different stakeholders all along the sanitation service chain. The service delivery context is also the setting in which the institutional capacities and tools are arranged to provide the delivery of those services. Stakeholder: is any group, organisation or individual that can influence or be influenced by the sanitation services under consideration and that has a vested interest in the sanitation sector (covering off-site or on-site sanitation services). Stakeholders may be grouped into the following types of categories: international, national, local, political, public / private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) / civil society, operators and users / consumers. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 4

3.1. ‘Level 1’ - Initial SFD An Initial SFD is appropriate when limited amounts of secondary data are available and there is limited access to stakeholders due to time, logistics or resources. The same reporting format is used as in an Intermediate SFD, but any data gaps are clearly identified and the assumptions made are clearly justified. This level of SFD may be suitable as an advocacy document, to generate interest and initiate a conversation with relevant stakeholders about the situation in the city. The initial level can support the identification of data gaps and assess the need for conducting a more detailed report. An Initial SFD Report can be upgraded to an Intermediate SFD when additional secondary data and improved access to other relevant stakeholders is obtained. 3.2. ‘Level 2’ - Intermediate SFD An Intermediate SFD is appropriate when extensive secondary data are available and a range of stakeholders can be interviewed, either in-person or remotely. Primary data, from interviews observations or measurements, may be included and will allow you to validate your assumption based on other experts’ opinions. An Intermediate SFD implies that data has been triangulated and inconsistencies could be identified. An Intermediate SFD will provide you will a broad understanding of the service delivery situation in the city and can be upgraded to a Comprehensive SFD with the systematic collection of primary data. 3.3. ‘Level 3’ - Comprehensive SFD A Comprehensive SFD requires at least the same amount of secondary data as for an Intermediate SFD, but with additional stakeholder engagement and systematic primary data collection. A Comprehensive SFD requires data from in-person interviews, informal and formal observations and direct measurements in the field, to verify data accuracy. This level will be appropriate to inform the planning of service improvement options or investment decisions. The main methods adopted for data collection are: • A literature review of secondary data, including published and grey literature, government documents, performance reports and previous field studies carried out by others. Annex 1 for further guidance. Literature alone is unlikely to provide sufficient detailed, up-to-date information about the realities of sanitation services that are actually experienced by the population on a day to day basis. For this reason it is valuable to identify further details relating to the current realities. Such information can help to produce a more credible SFD Graphic as well as provide qualitative data and perhaps additional quantitative data relating to the service delivery context. • Collection and interpretation of primary data as a means of fact-checking and triangulation of secondary data. This may consist of: o Qualitative data, that can be obtained through, for example: SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 6

4. Assessing the enabling environment 4.1. Urban context Whatever level of study is going to be developed, the process requires the report to include certain general facts and characteristics related to the urban area. The minimal information to be included in any SFD Report is: Location of the town / city and country, urban boundaries1, boundaries of the area that the SFD Report is representing 0if different) and a map highlighting significant areas and aspects 0districts, zones, etc.) • Climate: type of climate, average temperature 0minimal and maximum), rainy/dry seasons, etc. • Key physical and geographical features: topography 0a general range within the area of the study), geology, rivers, extent of frequent floods, etc. Data about groundwater levels has to be included in this section 0details of the data needed to assess the risk to groundwater pollution can be found in Section 5.4.3). • Population and population growth rate, including any significant variations in population sizes/movements/patterns 0e.g. diurnal, seasonal), distribution 0poor vs. wealthy settlements) and density. If possible include information about: o Diurnal variation of the population: the difference in the number of people during the working day and during the night; o Weekly variation of the population: the difference in the number of people between different days of the week 0e.g. weekdays and weekends); o Seasonal variation of the population: the extent to which the number of people can vary during specific times of year, affected for example by national public holidays or tourism. • Economics: principal economic activities within the area. This information may be available through carrying out a literature review of the secondary data 0see Table 2 and Annex 1). The use of additional data sources, such as Key Informant Interviews, may be a helpful in filling in any gaps in information. The following sections identify the information to be collected, analysed and documented about the enabling environment for sanitation for a Comprehensive SFD. Table 2 shows the guiding questions that should be answered based on the collected information. The questions in the table should be considered and responded to in relation to all sanitation 1 Note that the physical urban boundary may not be the same as political or administrative urban boundaries. It is useful to define and identify differences, as they can have an effect on the operating areas of service providers. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 10

• Data on service provision, which relates to those providing services along the sanitation service chain. Where data is available, it can help to assess the extent to which policies and regulations enable investments and involvement of a range of appropriate service providers – either public or private providers, or through public-private partnerships. • Standards and norms affecting the services, such as water quality standards and monitoring systems, Service Performance Indicators 0those existing and those monitored) and infrastructure design standards related to sanitation. Any records held by the water utility or within the different levels of government relating to standards of sanitation services and installations along the sanitation service chain will be a valuable source of information. 4.1.2. Planning This aspect of the analysis considers the different national, regional and local plans or strategies from which the following data is required: • Service development targets and specific actions. A comparison of these targets can be made by institution or by considering city-level, or national, development plans. • Current and future investments. Recent expenditure or budgets allocated to investment in sanitation services, including: o Budget distribution in the WASH sector 0national, regional and local). o Percentage of the budget going to each stage of the sanitation service chain. o Results of recent expenditure on services through the sanitation service chain 0including human resource allocation and technical assistance). 4.1.3. Equity This considers the sanitation technologies and services that are present in a city and how they meet the needs of the urban poor. In particular, information should be collected about: • Which technologies the urban poor rely on. • Plans and measures to ensure services are available for all: priority actions, budget allocation to reducing inequity or prioritising sanitation. • Levels of access and affordability for excreta containment, emptying and conveyance 0sewerage or otherwise) technologies, and the extent to which they are serving low-income communities. 4.1.4. Service outputs Information to collect should consider: • Capacity through the service chain to meet the needs and demands of the population – with consideration of the urban growth rate and how this will affect future service provision. • Procedures for monitoring and reporting on access to services and the extent to which the resulting services can be considered as safe. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 12

These containment technologies may be connected to one or more of the following (although not all options are applicable in all cases): • • • • • • • to a centralised or decentralised combined sewer to a centralised or decentralised foul/separate sewer to a soak pit to an open drain or storm sewer to a water body to open ground to 'don't know where' • no outlet or overflow Firstly, the author needs to identify the range of technologies within the area (note: where technologies are identified that are not included in this list, the author needs to decide which are the most similar technologies on the SFD Graphic Generator that can be used as an equivalent). Next, the author must identify their features and whether they are properly constructed and/or located in areas where there is a low or significant risk of groundwater contamination (see Section 5.4.3 for details on how to assess the groundwater contamination risk). Categories of origin (of excreta flows) This refers to the percentage contribution of excreta from each sanitation technology or system, accounting for different settings, as listed below: • Households/domestic facilities: this includes individual occupancy households, multiple-occupancy households (e.g. high-rise apartment blocks and compounds) and multiple households sharing one system • Shared or communal toilets (i.e. not open to the general public) • Public toilets (e.g. on-street, in public transit areas, at markets or bus stations) • Institutions: including schools and universities, prisons and military barracks • Commercial areas: including businesses, offices, shopping areas • Industrial areas: (includes domestic excreta coming from sanitation facilities in factories, but not industrial effluent) • Restaurants and hotels. Comprehensive knowledge about the use of non-household facilities, and how this relates to the use of the main sanitation facility that someone uses, is required if this information is to be included, in order to avoid a misrepresentation of excreta flows in the SFD Graphic. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 16

5.2.4. Disposal and end-use Consider information about the use (both informal and formal) of output products from treatment plants, the location of all disposal points for wastewater and faecal sludge (including transfer stations), scale (capacity of end-use – as compared to the volumes treated), operation and maintenance affecting their use. Again, a general assessment of the quality, effectiveness, and functionality and performance standards of different types of end-use and disposal facilities is to be included, where appropriate to the context. 5.3. Performance data A comprehensive SFD should allow time for the collection of performance data, which aims to identify the extent to which sanitation services are effective, reliable, achieve performance standards and targets, respond to existing demand for services and address future demand. Performance data may be obtained by interviewing people face to face, through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) or observations. Including performance data will help prepare a strongly evidence-based SFD. Performance data should include both quantitative and qualitative data, as shown in the following tables (Table 5 and Table 6 respectively). SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 18

Table 6: Qualitative performance data Stage of the Data to collect Data sources service chain Containment • Level and ease of access to containment • Emptying and transportation service for emptying Emptying services • Extent to which emptying services providers (formal/informal) • Community representatives • Households • Emptying and transportation service operate in particular localities providers (formal/informal) • Whether different income groups use • Organisations supporting emptying/transport different emptying services businesses Transport (by vehicles) • Practices and equipment used to remove faecal sludge from on-site sanitation technologies in different parts of the area • Performance targets • Geographic coverage • Destination of vehicles transporting faecal sludge Transport (sewers) • Performance targets • Geographic coverage • Leakage records / reports of pollution incidents • Emptying and transportation service providers (formal/informal) • Organisations supporting emptying/transport service providers • Licensing authorities for transportation of waste • Observation • Treatment plant operators Treatment End-use Disposal • Location of treatment facilities • Performance standards of treatment • Observation • Treatment plant operators processes • Destination / final use of faecal sludge, wastewater, treated faecal sludge or treated sewage sludge, at each location • Evidence of the nature of resource recovery practices • Demand for end-use products • Locations and scale of official and unofficial disposal sites (e.g. after treatment or with no treatment) • Management of disposal sites • Observation • Discussion with organisations involved with, or supporting, end-use operations • Observation • Disposal site operators 5.3.1. Dealing with uncertainty in the data During the data collection process, it is important to be aware that local realities will vary from data that is reported through more formally documented routes (such as local authority reports of the percentage of septic tanks emptied and the extent to which faecal sludge is taken to registered treatment facilities). Uncertainties in the data may occur at any stage of the sanitation service chain. Each SFD Report should identify any areas of uncertainty, where this is thought to have a significant impact on the resulting SFD Report and Graphic. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 20

Step One: Provide general information about the city, the level of SFD, date of production and author’s name (these information will be added to your graphic). Then, select the sanitation systems in use in the city. Step Two: Enter data about the proportion of people using each type of system and the proportion of each system that is emptied, transported and treated. Step Three: Draw the SFD Graphic and save data for sharing and/or using in reports and publications. Clicking one of the icons will prompt a pop-up window with more detailed instructions on how to use the SFD Generator. Clicking on one of the two the icons will delete all input data, allowing the user to start again or start an SFD Graphic for a new city. 5.4.2. Step One: Enter general city information and select sanitation systems After clicking the Start new SFD graphic, in Step One users are required to enter general information about the city and select the sanitation systems in use in the city. That following information should be entered in the boxes provided: • Name of city or urban areaProvince or state • Country • Population of city or urban area SFD Level • Date on which data was entered • Name of person and/or organisation entering the data The SFD Selection Grid enables the user to define the set of sanitation containment systems present in the city. It consists of a matrix showing each possible sanitation containment system described in terms of the place to which the toilet discharges (for instance a sewer or containment technology) and the place to which the containment technology discharges (for instance a soak pit or open drain). The SFD Matrix comprises: List A (first column of the matrix), which shows the list of possible technologies: 1. No onsite container, toilet discharges directly to destination given in List B. 2. Septic tank. 3. Fully lined tank (sealed). 4. Lined tank with impermeable walls and open bottom. 5. Lined pit with semi-permeable walls and open bottom. 6. Unlined pit. 7. Pit (all types), never emptied but abandoned when full and covered with soil. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 22

The risk of groundwater pollution is assessed according to four criteria: 1. The vulnerability of the aquifer (Q1). 2. The typical lateral spacing between sanitation systems and ground water sources (Q2). 3. The degree to which drinking water supplies are provided from groundwater sources inside the city (Q3). 4. The type of technology used to produce groundwater including the level of protection that this provides (Q4). -Question Q1: lulnerability of the aquifer is divided into two sub questions: A. What is the rock type in the unsaturated zone? Five options are provided: • Fine sand, silt and clay. • Weathered basement. • Medium sand. • Coarse sand and gravels. • Sandstones/limestones fractured rock. Supplementary information can be obtained by clicking on the Table 1 button. B. What is the depth of the water table? In general this should be the depth to the groundwater table during the wettest period of the year. Three options are displayed: • <5m. • 5-10m. • >10m. Supplementary information can be obtained by clicking on the Figure 1 button. -Question Q2: Lateral separation is divided into two sub questions: A. What is the percentage of sanitation facilities that are located <10m from groundwater sources? Two options are given: • Greater than 25%. • Less than 25%. This data should be estimated. In a city, a good way to think about this question is to consider whether there are large numbers of tube wells, wells and springs located within densely populated areas. Supplementary information can be obtained by clicking on the Figure 1 button. B. What is the percentage of sanitation facilities, if any, that are located uphill of groundwater source? Two options are displayed: • Greater than 25%. • Less than 25%. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 24

shows the additional data regarding the performance of each system that is required to be entered. The values to be entered are expressed as a percentage of the preceding variable. For detailed descriptions and definitions of the various sanitation systems and labels, the user is referred to the SFD Manual Volume 2: Glossary. Note: If the percentages for the proportion of population using all types of system do not add up to 100%, a warning message appears in a pop-up window to indicate that the total population does not sum to 100%. The user should correct this by changing the "Population" entries in the SFD matrix. 5.4.5. Step Three: Draw SFD graphic In Step Three, by clicking the Draw SFD Graphic, the SFD Graphic Generator uses the input data to draw an SFD Graphic for the city. If changes are required, the user can go back and make changes to data input on the SFD Selection Grid and/or on the SFD Matrix. Any unchanged data will not be lost. Finally, users can save data and/or create outputs, which can be shared or uploaded into reports and publications, using the following options: • Download Data: This button will create a .json file of the data in the user’s Download folder. This file format can be uploaded to the generator if you would like to edit the data entry or generate another SFD based on the same data. • Download the selected file: using the drop-down menu, users can choose to save different outputs to their Download folder: o SFD Graphic as png: This will create a .png file of the SFD Graphic. o SFD Matrix as png: This will create a .png file of the SFD Matrix. o SFD Selection Grid as png: This will create a .png file of the SFD Selection Grid. o SFD Data as csv: This will create a .csv file of the data. o SFD Graphic as svg: This will create a .svg file of the SFD Graphic. • Attach to SFD Report button. The SFD Graphic will be automatically attached to the report in the SFD Helpdesk. Clicking the icon will prompt a pop-up window with more detailed information on saving data and downloading outputs. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 26

used. Copies of original write-ups (in soft and/or hard copy) must be kept securely throughout the duration of the study. Findings from a review of literature should be included in the SFD Report, with good citation of sources of data and a full reference list of both published and grey literature. 7. Stakeholder Engagement Engaging with other stakeholders in your city is important to the success of any study. It is a valuable aspect of any report as it ensures transparency, involves stakeholders in decisions and also helps to better understand the many perspectives of sanitation provision. A wide range of stakeholders exist around the provision of urban sanitation services and it is important to know which stakeholders to engage with at each stage of the study. Identifying and accessing credible data for each study requires a clear process of engagement with the key stakeholders who have influence and/or are involved in sanitation services. It is important to adopt a clear and consistent process for engaging these key stakeholders during the study, to gain both acceptance and support for the work. 7.1. Principles of stakeholder engagement Six principles of stakeholder engagement were identified by (Sharma, 2008) for the context of Supply Chain Management. The following five principles are based on this publication and have been adapted to the urban sanitation context, to follow when planning or managing a study. 7.1.1. Principle 1: Stakeholder identification It is important to develop a comprehensive understanding of who stakeholders are, what their interests are, and how they relate to the study. When performing this initial step, it helps to view stakeholders from two different perspectives: vertically and horizontally. The vertical perspective includes all stakeholders from within an organisation’s highest position (where budget and policy decisions are made) down to individuals (those directly impacted). An effective outreach strategy can only be implemented if key players at each level of the organisation are identified. The horizontal dimension includes stakeholders across an organisation (or organisations), which is likely to include many people whose roles relate to the study in different ways. Each level of stakeholder(s) across organisations represents a different perspective and type of expertise. Additionally, it is recommended to consider internal and external stakeholders. Internal stakeholders can be the city authority or utility having responsibility for providing sanitation and FSM services, while external stakeholders may include the national government, which has a direct interest in the study. Stakeholders can then be classified into four different groups: SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 28

Institution example 2 Low Influence Champions. Institution example 3 Low Influence Challengers Institution example 4 High Influence Challengers According to this, and depending on the level of SFD that is going to be developed (see Section 3), the author has to decide which stakeholders to contact ensuring the representativeness of the sanitation service chain in the city. When a high influence stakeholder could not be contacted has to be clearly stated in the report. 7.1.2. Principle 2: Early engagement It is important to contact stakeholders at the beginning of a study, not just present the final deliverable as “the solution”. Throughout the study it is important to continuously encourage participation, where appropriate. This approach achieves three main objectives: 1. It gives key stakeholders a sense of involvement and ownership in the process, and shows that their expertise and opinions are valued. 2. It starts to sensitise stakeholders about the potential benefits of the study. 3. It allows the team carrying out data collection to gain additional, potentially valuable, information and insights that may or may not support the findings compiled through data alone. Depending on the group outlined under principle one, some stakeholders require more active engagement than others and identifying an appropriate level of involvement (based on experience, judgement and common sense) is necessary to save time and resources. 7.1.3. Principle 3: Respecting opinions When conducting interviews, having FGDs or having any other type of direct conversation with stakeholders, it is always important to ensure that the stakeholder’s opinions are being considered. If this cannot be achieved, the following outcomes can be expected: • Stakeholders tell the interviewee what they believe she/he wants to hear, but not what they really think. The conversation, and ultimately the study, will be dismissed. • Stakeholders tell the interviewee their honest opinion, but have mistrust towards the study. • Stakeholders simply don’t participate. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 30

Besides providing a necessary level of respect towards those involved, these standards have to be followed to produce credible results, which ultimately contribute towards higher quality service delivery context analysis and description, as well as enhancing the quality of the related SFD Graphic. 7.2. Stakeholder engagement for each method of data collection For each method of data collection a different type of stakeholder engagement is required depending on the purpose of the method. The methods of data collection required to follow the process include (but are not limited to) literature reviews (secondary data reviews), key informant interviews, observations and focus group discussions. 7.2.1. Literature review of existing secondary data During the initial literature review, it is suggested to use the Stakeholder influence-interest matrix (see Figure 2) as a tool for stakeholder mapping and identification of key stakeholders. Contact details that cannot be obtained through existing literature or websites may need to be collected through Key Informant Interviews, which are likely part of the group identified in Table 8. Table 8: Stakeholder Groups No. Stakeholder group 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 City council / Municipal authority / Utility Ministry in charge of urban sanitation and sewerage Ministry in charge of urban solid waste Ministries in charge of urban planning, environmental protection/ health, finance and economic development, agriculture Service provider for construction of on-site sanitation technologies Service provider for emptying and transport of faecal sludge Service provider for operation and maintenance of treatment infrastructure Market participants practising end-use of faecal sludge end products Service provider for disposal of faecal sludge (sanitary landfill management) 10 External agencies associated with FSM services: e.g. NGOs, academic institutions, donors, private investors, consultants When establishing contact with the stakeholder, the process (date and purpose) of engagement should be documented, as well as a short summary of the outcomes. 7.2.2. Key Informant Interviews Key informant interviews can be held with all stakeholders having a role or interest in sanitation services within the city. They are likely to include: • City council/ Municipality/ Utility SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 32

stakeholders and the potential perspectives and responsibilities they may have, to help focus on appropriate questions for particular respondents. Key informants and stakeholders with different positions and perspectives bring their own sets of interpretive biases and analysis. For some of the study areas, there may be no single absolute truth and it can be useful to understand differences of opinion (rather than expect standardisation). Trustworthiness in interpretation can nonetheless be strengthened by cross-checking – or triangulating – the views and analysis of different key informants (and focus groups). It is important to remember that these may include people who might not normally be talked to, in order to ensure multiple and different perspectives are gathered. It is critical that women are interviewed and that the gender of each respondent is recorded on all interview reports. The total number of interviews required, as well as the range and extent of questioning, will also be influenced by the availability of current and reliable data from other sources, as well as constraints on time and resources. The actual range of stakeholders and interviewees should be determined following an initial stakeholder mapping activity. The final list of stakeholders and proposed interviews should ensure appropriate representation from a range of government ministries and service providers, as well as external agencies. Representation of service providers through the sanitation service chain should reflect the percentage of roles and responsibilities that each plays in sanitation and faecal sludge services for the study city. For example, in a city where manual emptying service providers are dominant, they must account for the majority of those observed and interviewed during emptying and transportation procedures; likewise, where private companies carry out mechanised emptying and transportation services for most areas of the city, they should account for the majority of providers observed and interviewed during emptying and transportation procedures. 7.2.3. Observations Observations can be undertaken at each stage of the sanitation service chain to identify actual practices that take place day to day in a given city. It is therefore expected that most observations will take place during an emptying and transport event, from containment to potential treatment and/or disposal and end-use. Engagement with emptying and transportation service providers, in particular, requires a certain level of discretion from the initial contact and throughout the process of data collection. Possible scenarios for emptying and transporting faecal sludge that can be expected include: 1. Emptying and transportation services are completely formalised and a public service; 2. Emptying and transportation services are completely formalised and undertaken by both public and private service providers; 3. Emptying and transportation service are formal and informal, and undertaken by both public and private service providers; and SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 34

illegal nature. It is important not to antagonise or alienate the service providers. Information about the sector should be obtained from the other key stakeholders through Key informant interviews. 4. Emptying and transportation service are completely informal and undertaken by private service providers: The same applies as for point three. 8. Evaluating credibility of data sources As literature is identified, the credibility of each source should be assessed. Before assessing the information, it is vital to ascertain the integrity and authority of the source. Good judgement will be needed as to the accuracy and reliability of the information. Bias in information may be deliberate or it may be due to an observer’s cultural, educational and social background. Be aware of likely sources of bias. Interpreting ‘grey’ / unpublished literature needs more care: look at who “owns” the data, how and when it was collected, who carried out a survey, how they were trained and what their experience was. This can all help to give an indication of its reliability. The principle of triangulation or cross- checking, allows for two independent sources of information to be used to corroborate and support each other. If there is a discrepancy, then further investigation and seeking additional views and sources of information are required. All literature included in the final study must be cited and referenced consistently, comprehensively and according to an approved standard format (such as Harvard referencing). 8.1. Self-assessment The procedure on how to assess credibility of the sources used to produce the SFD Report and Graphic is presented in the SFD Review Procedure document. The idea of this stage in the process is to consider the credibility of sources used in a quantitative way by creating a source assessment ranking that identifies one of three outcomes: Poor, Medium and High. 8.2. Reviewing Process A prepared SFD Report can be submitted for review by the SFD Promotion Initiative through the helpdesk (http://sfd.susana.org/toolbox/sfd-helpdesk), once the self-assessment has been completed. This process will allow for classification, consistency and improvements in the quality of an SFD Report whilst providing informed comments to the authors and constructive criticism to help improve the report. This is done through: • Reviewer checklist SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 36

9. Reporting The SFD Report should be written using the process described in the SFD Reporting Template and SFD Lite Template - Guidance Note documents. In this way, a record can be kept of the information collected, gaps in data identified, and all assumptions made as analysis of the sanitation service chain is being carried out. 9.1. Guidelines The main guidelines to produce the report are the SFD Reporting Template Document and the SFD Lite Template - Guidance Note. Guidance is provided about which data to report and to what level. The SFD report (Level 1, 2 or 3) is defined by three parts: 1. Executive summary: a 4 page document in which the key outcomes and conclusions, as well as the major assumptions that have been made, are clearly presented. 2. Detailed report: this includes all of the information collected, covering all the relevant and credible information. It should not be longer than 20 pages with additional details provided in the appendices. At the end of the report the references must be included, with all literature cited and referenced consistently, comprehensively and according to an approved standard format (such as Harvard referencing). 3. Appendices: Relevant information to understand the sanitation situation in the area should be included in the appendices in addition to the Stakeholder Identification, (see Section 7), the SFD Selection Grid and SFD Matrix (see Section 5.4) and the Evaluation of the Quality and Credibility of data (see Section 8) The detailed report can be uploaded to the SFD website portal using the standard agreed format after being subject to the procedure for quality assurance through the SFD helpdesk. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 38

SFD Manual lOLUME 2: Glossary

Part 1 – Master SFD Graphic Notes: 1. This document should be read in conjunction with Section 5.4 of the SFD Manual Volume 1 and with the three other parts of this Volume 2: • Part 2 - Definition of SFD Variables • Part 3 - Definition of Terms • Part 4 – Sanitation Containment System: SFD Schematics 2. The Master SFD Graphic (see over) locates all the possible variables used in the SFD Graphic Generator and shows how they are connected. 3. Using relevant input data for a given city, the SFD Graphic Generator assigns values to the appropriate variables and draws an SFD Graphic for the given city. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 42

Part 2 - Definition of SFD variables Notes: 1. This document should be read in conjunction with Section 5.4 of the SFD Manual Volume 1 and the three other parts of this Volume 2: • Part 1 – Master SFD Graphic • Part 3 - Definition of Terms; and • Part 4 - Sanitation Containment System: SFD Schematics. 2. This document describes and defines all the variables used in the SFD Graphic Generator and shown on the Master SFD Graphic. 3. The System Selection Grid (see below) shows the variable group labels (e.g. L7) and individual references (e.g. T1A2C5) for each sanitation containment system. 4. The SFD Variables Table (see over) shows all the variables used in the SFD Graphic Generator and shown on the Master SFD Graphic, and are listed the order in which they are defined in the following pages. 5. Refer to Part 3 – Definition of Terms for full explanations of all the technical terms used. System Selection Grid SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 44

Part 3 - Definitions of Terms Notes: 1. This document should be read in conjunction with Section 5.4 of the SFD Manual Volume 1 and the three other parts of this Volume 2: • Part 1 - Master SFD Graphic; • Part 2 - Definition of SFD Variables; and • Part 4 - Sanitation Containment System: SFD Schematics 2. This document defines all the terms used in the SFD Graphic Generator, and provides examples of commonly used regional variations. The definitions are provided for the purpose of the SFD Promotion Initiative only. 3. Terms in each definition shown in italics are also defined within this document. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 78

Part 4 – sanitation containment systems: SFD schematics Notes: 1. This document should be read in conjunction with Section 5.4 of the SFD Manual Volume 1 and with the three other parts of this Volume 2: • Part 1 - Master SFD Graphic • Part 2 - Definition of SFD Variables • Part 3 - Definition of Terms 2. These schematic drawin4s show all of the possible sanitation containment systems defined on the selection 4rid (see over). 3. For ease of reference, and to indicate which systems populate the same variables, the systems have been 4rouped to4ether and numbered L1 to L20 and S1 to S5. 4. Variable 4roup L1 to L20 are for use when pollution of 4roundwater is a Low Risk. 5. Variable 4roup S1 to S5 are for use when pollution of 4roundwater is a Si4nificant Risk. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 94

SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 96

SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 98

SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 100

SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 102

SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 104

SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 106

Annex 1: Literature review of existing secondary data Literature review is necessary to achieve the followin4 objectives: • To 4ain an understandin4 of the 4eneral city context, includin4 the scale of sanitation services, ran4e of off-site and on-site sanitation technolo4ies in the city; and • To identify key stakeholders responsible for sanitation and FSM services in the city. It may be important to en4a4e and consult with some of these stakeholders durin4 the city study, to 4ather more detailed information or to access other valuable documents. Methodology The literature review is likely to have two phases: • The first phase can develop an understandin4 of the context of the study. Durin4 this phase it is important to search for and collect relevant information in a systematic way. This information is then summarized, synthesized and analysed to record the evidence and ar4uments 4iven by others, as contained in the literature. • The second phase of the literature review can be carried out after collectin4 data from other sources (such as throu4h interviews, FGDs or infield studies), to fill in any remainin4 information 4aps. Where new sources of information have been identified durin4 the study, the literature review can be updated accordin4ly. The process of preparin4 a literature review must be: • Focused, based upon the questions to be addressed in the city study; • Comprehensive, yet concise; • Critical, analysin4 and commentin4 on information rather than just reproducin4 and summarizin4 it; and • A discussion of a ran4e of different, reliable perspectives. When written-up the literature review should: • Describe the main factors of the study that the literature contributes to; • Explain the similarities and differences between reported evidence and the ar4uments, and compare and contrast the findin4s, opinions, options and approaches presented; and • Identify any knowled4e 4aps reco4nized in the literature, includin4 any supportin4 evidence that other people have also identified this 4ap. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 108

Annex 2: Key Informant Interviews Key informant interviews (KIIs) are the way in which primary information will be sou4ht to address key questions about how both the ‘enablin4 environment’ and the operatin4 environment affects sanitation and FSM services (past, current and future). KIIs with stakeholders havin4 responsibility or interest in sanitation and FSM services at city-level and beyond will allow the enablin4 and operatin4 environments to be better understood in relation to the influence within the city, or to wider spheres of influence – such as State or National le4islation. KIIs are also a means to en4a4e stakeholders in other aspects of the process, includin4 to: • Clarify the purpose, objectives and interests of each stakeholder, in relation to current sanitation services and the likely outcomes of chan4es to those services; and • Facilitate further data collection, includin4: providin4 specific documents/ ‘4rey literature’, 4rantin4 access to localities, makin4 contacts with other or4anizations or individuals, trian4ulatin4 data. It is anticipated that one individual, with experience in conductin4 interviews with a broad ran4e of stakeholders, will carry out the interview. However, it is possible that on occasion it may be deemed appropriate to have two people involved – one to facilitate the questions and the other (or both) to take notes. The len4th of interviews will vary, but it is su44ested to keep interviews to a maximum of about 1 hour. Quality control Key informant interviews should follow commonly adopted 4ood practice, particularly those outlined in Section 6 under “Ethical Considerations”. If the interviewee invites other participants to join the interview, be aware of their appropriateness to the subject matter, whether their presence may inhibit the ori4inal interviewee in answerin4 questions, and any possible disruption this may cause to the exchan4e of information. If the other participants have valid contributions to make to the interview, incorporate these into the notes, and clearly identify in the write-up who 4ave which answers and participated in a broader discussion. Comprehensive notes should be captured electronically (Typed directly into a Word document or similar) – either durin4 the interview itself or within 24 hours of the interview. Key points relatin4 to the main topic areas of the interview should be identified and summarised, as soon as possible followin4 the interview. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 110

Annex 3: Observations Observation of service providers and facilities may prove a useful tool to trian4ulate and/or confirm the reliability and consistency of information collected from other means. Observation can be used to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. The observation of service providers and facilities will help to assess the type of equipment used and actions taken (by households and workers) in relation to containment, emptyin4, transport, treatment, disposal or end-use of faecal slud4e. Observations require makin4 visual inspections about how on-site sanitation technolo4ies are mana4ed. This may involve observin4 the emptyin4 process, as well as how the removed faecal slud4e is transported either to a disposal site or treatment plant. In this way, the sta4es of operation throu4h the service chain can be identified and reported. Observation can then provide information about the effectiveness of operations and methods used at each sta4e. To observe emptyin4 and transportation practices, visits need to be planned, a4reed and carried out as and when on-site sanitation technolo4ies are bein4 emptied. Havin4 4ained approval to conduct an observation (e.4. from households, those carryin4 out the emptyin4 service, operators or mana4ers of treatment plants), details should be recorded about the on-site sanitation technolo4y (containment), the practices of the service provider emptyin4 the system (emptyin4, transportation and disposal), and the facilities handlin4 the faecal slud4e (treatment plant, disposal and/or end-use site). Gainin4 access to observe treatment plants and disposal sites will need to be arran4ed with those responsible for mana4in4 them. Observation will 4enerate both quantitative and qualitative data. All information collected should be recorded in note form and transferred into a document. Havin4 a standard reportin4 format for observations will help to ensure that relevant information is captured as far as possible durin4 each observation visit. Documents should clearly state the type, arran4ement and location of services and facilities observed. A note on holding discussions or interviews with collectors and transporters of faecal sludge Those who empty and transport faecal slud4e from on-site sanitation technolo4ies are not necessarily the same people as the "owners" of the transport vehicles. They have different interests, opinions and knowled4e which is often missed durin4 standard research processes. Where possible, interviews (formal or less formal) should be arran4ed and held with those directly involved in the emptyin4 and transportation of faecal slud4e. Manual collectors, as well as those who operate motorized emptyin4 equipment should be interviewed where possible. Such discussions can help to ensure that all stakeholders are consulted on questions of direct relevance and purpose to the services they provide. Lan4ua4e is an important factor to consider when talkin4 with informal operators in the city. Use of local dialects may be necessary, which mi4ht require the use of a local translator to support the process. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 112

Annex 4: Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) The objective of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with community representatives is to 4ather qualitative data that will complement, validate, or perhaps challen4e data collected durin4 the literature review and interviews. Questions will focus on emptyin4 and transportation services and how they affect communities. They will be likely to focus on obtainin4 information relatin4 to: • The ran4e of emptyin4 practices and emptyin4 services within the city; and • Levels of support received (or perceived as bein4 needed) to improve services to areas of the city. In relation to the service delivery context, questions for FGDs focus on issues relatin4 to the Quality and Equity of emptyin4 services provided. Su44ested topic areas and questions to address throu4h FGDs are shown in Table 11 and Table 12 respectively. Table 11: Topics for FGDs with community representatives Component Issue Topics for discussion Service context analysis delivery Quality: Equity: - Extent to which functionin4 services are available or provided, to support 4ood emptyin4 and transport of faecal slud4e - Extent to which the city's emptyin4 and transport technolo4ies serve low-income communities Table 12: Questions to be addressed during the FDGs Suggested primary questions and discussion ‘probing’ questions: to stimulate Topic discussion areas for Primary questions Secondary questions Tertiary questions to Extent which functionin4 services are available: emptyin4 and transport Can families find suitable latrine emptying services, when they want to have their latrine emptied? Who provides those services? What are the functionin4 transport services available in the city? Who provides those services? support Extent to which the city provides to ensure services reach low-income communities: emptyin4 and transport Do families 4et any external support for emptying latrines? Who provides the support? How is the support provided? How reliable are the services? How satisfied are families with these services? How reliable are the services? How satisfied are families with these services? What are the benefits, if any, of 4ettin4 this support? What are the disadvanta4es, if any, of this support? SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 114

Appropriate approvals to conduct the FGDs should be sou4ht, prior to runnin4 them. This will be with individuals invited to participate as a minimum, but may also require approval from officials representin4 affected communities and households (if deemed necessary). FGDs should be run by teams of two people. One person facilitates the discussion, while the other person takes notes and observes non-verbal communication. Both team members should have previous experience and suitable skills in runnin4 and/or documentin4 FGDs, as well as technical knowled4e in urban sanitation. Relevant individuals or 4roups may be identified and invited to participate, but any ‘4roup selection’ needs careful discussion and a4reement in advance, to ensure it is appropriate and will be effective to the needs of the study. FGDs should take place in a convenient, quiet and comfortable location for participants. The availability and accessibility of women and other vulnerable 4roups must be considered when plannin4 all locations and times at which to hold the FGDs. FGDs typically last an hour or more but the duration of each discussion may vary dependin4 on the dynamic of the 4roup and number of participants. Participants should be notified of the expected duration and the facilitator should ensure not to run over this time. Focus 4roups are typically 4-10 participants however researchers need to anticipate likely ‘no- shows’ and recruit accordin4ly, aimin4 for no more than 10 participants. Quality control The mana4ement of FGDs should follow commonly adopted 4ood practice, includin4: • Pre-plan: select and invite the ri4ht participants; • Set an appropriate venue, time and duration; • Explain the purpose of the FGD at the start and 4ain approval from participants to continue; • Seek a4reement of 4round rules with participants (one person speaks at a time, everyone’s views are important, there are no ri4ht or wron4 answers, etc.); • Only voice-record the FGD with prior knowled4e and 4ranted permission of ALL participants; • Allow participants to opt-out or leave at any time; • Allow everyone the opportunity to participate and no-one to dominate; • Summarise key messa4es received with participants before endin4; and • Re-state what will happen to the data they have supplied. SFD Manual Volume 1 and 2 116