AN ASSESSMENT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WASHING IN SCHOOLS (WinS)

PROGRAM IN THE DIVISION OF PARAÑAQUE CITY

Chapter I

Introduction

Basic cleanliness is absolutely necessary for the existence of a person and to maintain a

healthy lifestyle. Negligence of personal hygiene can subject a person to infections and diseases.

In many societies, poor hygiene is deemed as an objectionable offense. Contrary to common

belief, hygiene is not just restricted to personal grooming but extends itself to domestic,

professional and civic health of a society. In other words, cleanliness is not restricted to Washing

your body and getting rid of germs alone, but is also concerned with the well-being and mental

health of a person. After family homes, schools are considered as important places for children

where they spend long hours learning. Schools become risky of hygiene-related diseases causing

harm to children, if water is inadequate or have inferior quality, if water and sanitation

(WATSAN) facilities are inadequate or badly maintained and if children in schools lack oral

health care and hygiene education and training.

A large fraction of the world’s illness and death is attributable to communicable diseases.

According to the study of Vivas, et. al (2017), sixty-two percent and 31% of all deaths in the

world respectively, are caused by infectious disease This trend is especially notable in

developing countries where acute respiratory and intestinal infections are the primary causes of

morbidity and mortality among young children . Inadequate sanitary conditions and poor hygiene
practices play major roles in the increased burden of communicable disease within these

developing countries.

Previous hand hygiene studies have indicated that children with proper hand washing

practices are less likely to report gastrointestinal and respiratory symptoms. Hand washing with

soap has been reported to reduce diarrheal morbidity by 44% and respiratory infections by 23%.

However, globally, the rates at which hands are washed with soap range from only 0-34% of the

time.

A study conducted by the Global Public–Private Partnership for Hand Washing

(PPPHW) concluded by Curtis, et. al (2016) which included several sub-Saharan African

countries (i.e. Kenya, Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda) reported that 17% of participants washed

their hands with soap after using the toilet, while 45% used only water. Overall in rural Ethiopia,

only 8% have access to adequate sanitation facilities .In the rural Amhara region of the country,

only 21% of latrines had hand Washing facilities, none of which contained soap, and less than

4% of households had access to adequate sanitation facilities.

In addition to having proper resources and facilities, hygiene practices are heavily

influenced by students’ knowledge and attitudes towards hygiene. In a study conducted in

Senegal, reasons given for not Washing hands included stubbornness (not wanting to follow

what adults say), laziness, the rush to go to breaks, the time it takes away from playing, and the

dirt and smell of the toilet .Despite these negative attitudes towards hand Washing, many

children practice good hand Washing behavior .Based on the PPPHW study conducted in sub-

Saharan Africa, motivating factors behind proper hand Washing included avoidance of disgust

(i.e. avoid dirt and smell of defecation), nurture (i.e. teach children to WINS hands so they stay

healthy), status (i.e. clean people are more accepted), affiliation (i.e. cleanliness is associated
with better socioeconomic status), attraction (i.e. cleaner people are more attractive), comfort

(i.e. hands feel and smell fresh), and fear (i.e. avoid the risk of disease) . Furthermore, students

did not want to miss school due to illness because they would not be able to spend time with

their friends. Also, if the children had clean hands, they would have clean books, resulting in

better grades

As cited in the study of Buxton (2019), the provision of adequate water, sanitation and

hygiene (WASH) facilities and services in schools (WinS) and improvements in WASH-related

behaviors among school aged children are associated with a range of education and health

benefits, including reduction in absenteeism, increased enrolment of girls, and reduction in

respiratory infection. However, these benefits cannot be realized if facilities are not functional, or

if necessary WASH infrastructure remains locked and out of use due to lack of resources to

manage operation and maintenance (O&M). Inadequate or poorly maintained facilities may also

be an active deterrent to toilet use and/ or pupil hand washing practice.

In 2016, the Department of Education issued DepEd Order No. 10, “Policy and

Guidelines on the Comprehensive Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene in Schools (WinS) Program”

for the promotion of correct hygiene and sanitation practices among school children and a clean

environment in and around schools to keep learners safe and healthy. A milestone for WASH in

Schools (WinS) was reached in the Philippines. The Department of Education has taken a huge

step forward to give importance to the topic of water, sanitation and hygiene in public and

private schools on a nationwide scale. The inclusion of data on WinS to be collected in each

school through the Enhanced Basic Education Information System shows that the education

sector has taken responsibility to manage and improve WinS. The annual data gathering in all

schools of the country will now track the following WinS indicators: (a) availability of drinking
water, (b) regularity of cleaning of sanitation facilities, (c) availability of group hand washing

facilities, (d) accessibility of sanitary pads, (e) compliance with food handling standards, and (f)

number of learners dewormed.

WINS in Schools aims to support the provision of safe drinking water and improved

sanitation facilities, and promotes lifelong health for children and their families. Ensuring

access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WINS) in every school for every child can be a huge

challenge, especially during emergencies. When disaster strikes, education is often disrupted as

families become primarily focused on survival. Schools become shelters for large numbers of

displaced people, putting additional pressure on physically damaged buildings and facilities.

Ensuring schools can reopen with adequate WINS facilities is an essential part of recovery.

WINS program provides simple strategies for use and adaptation with all children to

ensure a smooth and healthy transition to a healthy and accessible learning environment. Being

in school or participating in activities in a child-friendly learning space marks the re-

establishment of routines for children, with many also gaining their first experience of formal

education. Schools are an important place to access basic water and sanitation services and

learn about hygiene practices.

Furthermore, WINS prepares learners even in cases of emergencies which can be are

traumatic for everyone, especially children. When surrounded by chaos, schools can provide

children with a sense of normality and personal safety, helping them to recover psychologically.

In these situations, children remain open to new ideas and often want to be involved in their

community’s recovery. They can also take part in helping other children and in sharing WINS

messages with adults. Water sanitation and hygiene are central to recovery and the quality of a
child’s life during and after the emergency. The practices and behaviors adopted during the

emergency will serve children for a lifetime.

Hand-Washing with soap is one of the key elements of DepEd’s comprehensive Water,

Sanitation and Hygiene (WINS) in Schools (WinS) Program, stipulated in DepEd Order No. 10,

s. 2016, which advocates correct hygiene and sanitation practices among schoolchildren, and

promotes an environment conducive to learning to keep learners safe and healthy.

As mentioned by Briones (2016), the DepEd is committed to expand and improve the

implementation of the WinS Program towards the realization of our goal to deliver quality,

accessible, relevant, and liberating basic education for all Filipino learners to have a better start

in life, and thereby contribute to a better, brighter future for this nation.

According to UNICEF (2018), the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) include

multiple WinS targets and indicators. The Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply,

Sanitation and Hygiene of UNICEF and WHO has developed service ‘ladders’ for WinS, which

enable progress to be tracked against steps on the ladder classified as no service, limited service,

basic services and advanced services. Basic school sanitation is defined as improved facilities

which are sex segregated and usable. ‘Usable’ is defined as accessible (doors are unlocked or a

key is available at all times), functional (toilet is not broken, toilet hole is not blocked and water

is available for flush/ pour flush toilets), and private (closable doors that lock from the inside,

and no large gaps in the structure).

Hygiene education is included in the school curriculum. Positive hygiene behaviours,

including correct use and maintenance of facilities, are systematically promoted among staff and

students. Correct use and maintenance of water and sanitation facilities is ensured through
sustained hygiene promotion. Water and sanitation facilities are used as resources for hygiene

education.

Learning, hygiene and health are interlinked. Schools are where children spend most of

their time. In bad hygienic conditions, children are exposed to diseases and risk infection. There

is a direct link between diarrhea and hygiene in schools. Children can carry infectious agents

from childcare settings and schools into the home, causing other household members to become

infected. To promote hand-washing with soap and to be effective, it must be practiced constantly

every time, such as after using the toilet or before contact with food. While habits must be

developed over time, this emphasizes the importance of hand-washing as a ritual behavior for

long-term sustainability. WASH in Schools focuses generally on diarrheal and worm infections.

These are the two main diseases that affect school aged children and can be drastically reduced

through improved water, sanitation and hygiene in schools.

In a study conducted by Glaas (2012) as cited by Mendoza (2019), reasons were given for

not washing hands included stubbornness (not wanting to follow what adults say), laziness, the

rush to go to breaks, the time it takes away from playing, and the dirt and smell of the toilets

Despite these negative attitudes towards hand Washing, many children practice good hand

washing behavior. Mendoza (2019) emphasized that children need to understand how to protect

themselves from disease, especially diarrhea. Their level of understanding will deepened on their

age and how simple and appropriate an explanation is given to them.

With regards to the mentioned health and educational benefits of washing hands, national

governments and multilateral agencies such as the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

have emphasized frequent monitoring of WINS key indicators in schools to target resources and

programmatic interventions to improve coverage. The provision of and maintenance of adequate

water, sanitation and hygiene (WINS) infrastructure remains a challenge not only in the

Philippines but in the whole world as well. Since hygiene education is commonly taught in

theory as part of the school curriculum. Schools have to be opened on the idea that somehow it

just cannot be taught practically due to lack of usable and clean hand washing facility. That they

have to start literally with the pre-requisites of the presence of hand soap and water. From this,

schools can schedule a supervised group hand washing activity daily depending on the scheduled

time of a certain grade level. Schools can even enhance the situation with the provision of habit

formation through a multitude of cues, social interactions and routine practices. Scheduled

activities performed daily in school provide the necessary practice to complement the theories.

These may even be tools to overcome the barriers to individual hand washing behavior.

Nonetheless, hand washing with soap and water is widely recognized as most essential

and impactful hygiene activity. Thus, the reason for the promotion of group hand washing

activity with soap and water. With this, prevention of common infectious diseases is expected

thus encouraging healthy behavior. Why? It is because a healthy and hygienic school

environment starts the promotion of essential hygiene skills school children need to develop. So

to say, health and education go hand in hand. Healthy children have higher chances of benefiting

from education and better education increases socio-economic status and long – term health

gains. Thus, schools have to be aware that water and necessary consumables such as soap as well

as appropriate sanitation facilities should be available. This opens doors for school children to

health education and related practices become visible.

The researcher, being an advocate of the aforesaid program took her own stand on the

implementation of WINS Program in public elementary schools particularly in the Division of

Parañaque City, coming up with this study. She sets her parameter with the elementary schools

teachers in SDO Parañaque City as the main respondents.

Theoretical Framework

For clarity and emphasis, this study was anchored on the following theories:

The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) started as the Theory of Reasoned Action in 1980

to predict an individual's intention to engage in a behavior at a specific time and place. The

theory was intended to explain all behaviors over which people have the ability to exert self-

control. The key component to this model is behavioral intent; behavioral intentions are

influenced by the attitude about the likelihood that the behavior will have the expected outcome

and the subjective evaluation of the risks and benefits of that outcome.  

The TPB has been used successfully to predict and explain a wide range of health behaviors

and intentions including smoking, drinking, health services utilization, breastfeeding, and

substance use, among others. The TPB states that behavioral achievement depends on both

motivation (intention) and ability (behavioral control). It distinguishes between three types of

beliefs - behavioral, normative, and control.

Triandis (1977) proposed a Theory of Interpersonal Behavior) in which intentions – as in

many of the other models – are immediate antecedents of behavior. But crucially, habits also

mediate behavior. And both these influences are moderated by facilitating conditions. Behavior

in any situation is, according to Triandis, a function partly of the intention, partly of the habitual

responses, and partly of the situational constraints and conditions. The intention is influenced by

social and affective factors as well as by rational deliberations. One is neither fully deliberative,

in Triandis’ model, nor fully automatic. One is neither fully autonomous nor entirely social.
Behavior is influenced by moral beliefs, but the impact of these is moderated both by emotional

drives and cognitive limitations. Social factors include norms, roles and self-concept. Norms are

the social rules about what should and should not be done. Roles are ‘sets of behaviors that are

considered appropriate for persons holding particular positions in a group’ (Triandis, 1977).

Self-concept refers to the idea that a person has of his/herself, the goals that it is appropriate

for the person to pursue or to eschew, and the behaviors that the person does or does not engage

in. Emotional responses to a decision or to a decision situation are assumed distinct from

rational-instrumental evaluations of consequences, and may include both positive and negative

emotional responses of varying strengths. Affect has a more or less unconscious input to

decision-making, and is governed by instinctive behavioral responses to particular situations.

There is much overlap between the TPB and TIB, and both are intended as general-purpose

theories of behavior. Both agree that deliberate intentions to perform behavior are influential and

that these intentions are determined by several other variables, including beliefs about the

anticipated positive and negative consequences of the behavior (perceived consequences) and

perceptions of what others think about the behavior (social norms). However, according to the

TPB, people’s conscious intentions are the immediate causes of behavior, whereas the TIB

additionally emphasizes less conscious, more impulsive and automatic determinants,

including habit and emotion. An additional difference is that the TPB emphasizes people’s

perceived control over behavior, whereas the TIB acknowledges more objective facilitating

conditions that impede or enable behavior.

Sniehotta et al., (2015) suggest that the TIB fits better with the available evidence on the

determinants of hand sanitation. Although many of the most prominent quantitative studies have

limited their investigation according to the constraints of the TPB many other studies, especially
interview-based qualitative studies, indicate that emotion, habit and concrete facilitating

conditions, especially time constraints, are important influences on hand sanitation adherence

(Chatfield et al., 2017;  Smiddy et al., 2015; Smith et al., 2018).

Conceptual Framework

Several concepts have proven the significance of group hand washing in schools.

According to UNICEF (2016) the concept of group hand washing has practical advantages and

long-term impacts. Doing activities in a group is a natural way of interaction in the school

context, fostering inclusion and general participation thus reducing the need to encourage and

ensure individual behavior. Observing others and being observed may create peer pressure and

positively influence hygiene behavior norms. This might even be enhanced when school children

are able to use a facility from both sides so that they do the group hand washing face – to- face.

By this, it becomes realistic for school children to WINS their hands with soap and water within

a minimal amount of time and disruption of lessons, thus, making it easier to manage and

integrate the activity into the daily schedule.

In cognizance to this, the researcher conceptualized this study. It employed the Input-

Process- Output (IPO) design. The INPUT variables were profile of the respondents in terms

of age, sex, highest educational attainment and length of service; the level of implementation of

WinS program; and the degree of seriousness of the challenges met in the implementation of the

program.

The PROCESS includes the analysis and interpretation of the data gathered through

survey questionnaire, while the OUTPUT includes the measures may be proposed to improve

the implementation of WinS program in the said locale of the study.

 Schematic Presentation of the Study

Input Process Output

 Profile of the
respondents
 Level of WinS
program  Survey Proposed measures to
 Questionnaire increase the
Implementation
 Analysis and implementation level
 Challenges met Interpretation of
in the of WinS Program
data relative to
implementation the sub-problems
of WinS
Program.

feedback

Figure 1: Paradigm of the Study

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to assess the level of implementation of WinS program in the Division of

Parañaque City. Specifically, it sought to answer the following problems:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of;

a. age;

b. sex;

c. length of service; and

 d. highest educational attainment?

2. What is the level of implementation of WinS program as perceived by the respondents in

terms of:

a. water access;

b. sanitation;

c. hygiene; and

d. health education?

3. What is the degree of seriousness of the challenges met in the implementation of WinS

program in the Division of Parañaque City?

4. Is there a significant difference between the level of implementation of WinS program

practices as perceived by the respondents and their profile variables?

5. Is there a significant relationship between the level of implementation of WinS program

practices and the degree of seriousness of the challenges met in the implementation of the

said program?

6. Based on the findings of the study, what measures may be proposed?

Research Hypothesis

At the 0.05 level of significance the hypothesis below will be tested:

1. There is no significant difference between the level of implementation of WinS

program as perceived by the respondents and their profile variables.

2. There is no significant relationship between the level of implementation of WinS

program and the degree of seriousness of the challenges met in the implementation of

the said program.

Scope and Limitations of the Study

This study will be focusing on the assessment of the level of implementation of the WinS

program in the Division of Parañaque City. Thus, this will be limited to own perceptions of the

public elementary school heads. The sample size might be small from which to draw solid

conclusions regarding the implementation of WinS program in the Division of Parañaque City.

Beyond these stipulations, and by virtue of uncontrolled circumstances, no other claims

were made.

Significance of the Study

The researcher believes that this particular study is deemed significant to the following

entities.

School Administrators - This study will help school administrators by considering it as

a fine basis for them to develop standards which are relevant to the school type even in different

contexts as well as for them to plan and carry out any improvements required.

Teachers–This study can be a great inspirational factor to teachers as it is hoped to

provide them valuable information on WINS so that they will push through enhancing the

implementation of the WINS Program in the school and will be more committed and happy to

supervise the daily Group hand washing activity of the school children. They can also help in the

assessment whether the school is leading to Three Stars Approach in the monitoring of the WINS

Program.

Learners. As their learning maybe affected by the poor implementation of the WINS

Program, no matter how diverse these learners are, they are the main beneficiary of this research

study. All benefits that maybe gained from the study are all directed toward them.
 Future Researchers. This study can be of great help to future researchers who wish to

conduct a parallel study.

Definition of Terms

To provide a common base of understanding of this study, the following terms are

operationally and conceptually defined.

Age. This is the variable pertaining to the chronological age bracket where the

respondents belong.

Group Hand washing. The daily supervised activity of the children as they altogether

WINS their hands with soap and water depending on the grade levels schedule being

programmed by the WINS Coordinator.

Highest Educational Attainment. This is in referral to the highest academic attainment

the respondents have as either baccalaureate, masteral, with masteral units, doctoral or with

doctoral unit

Hygiene. The things being practiced by school children to keep themselves and their

environment clean in order to maintain good health.

Length of Service .This pertains to the number of years the respondents have been

teaching in the public service.

Relevant Trainings Attended. These count for the seminars, trainings and workshops

the respondents have attended.

Sex. The biological characteristics of the respondents as either male or female.

WINS. The program being implemented in schools in advocacy of having clean water,

sanitation and hygiene in school.

 Chapter 2

METHODOLOGY

This chapter covers an overview of methodology used in the study. The discussion will

be structured around the research design, the sources of data, instrumentation and data collection

and the statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

This study will be utilizing the descriptive method of research with the questionnaire as

the main data gathering instrument. According to Venson (2014), descriptive research “describes

and interprets what is, and reveals conditions and relationships that exist, practices that prevail or

do not prevail, beliefs or points of view of attitudes that are held or not held, procedures that are

continuing or otherwise, effects that are being felt or trends that are developing”.

Further, Adanza (2013) describes the nature of a situation as it exists at the time of the

study and to explore the causes or interaction of variables in the particular phenomena. It is

primarily concerned with present, although it often considers past events as they relate to current

conditions. The researcher will utilize in this study the questionnaire survey in the data gathering.

The rationale for adopting survey design will allow a collection of data using a questionnaire at a

particular point in time from a sample of participants and from a target population in order to

determine the current status of that population with respect to one or more variables (Orodho,

2013).

Sources of Data
 The respondents will be the elementary teachers in the Division of Parañaque City. The

researcher will use the Slovin’s Formula to compute for the sufficiency of sample size. The

margin of error, the amount of error the researcher can tolerate is at 5% and the confidence level,

the amount of uncertainty that the researcher can tolerate is 95%. The sample will be determined

using purposive sampling technique to allow for a representative sample, avoid bias and reduce

sampling errors.

Data Gathering Instrument

Questionnaire will be the principal instrument to be used in gathering data. This will

have three parts, namely: Part I will be about the profile of the respondents and the schools’

profile; Part II is about the level of implementation of WinS program as percieved by the

teachers; Part III will be the level of seriousness of the challenges met by the respondents in

implementation of the said program.

The questionnaire will serve as data gathering instrument in the assessment of the

demographic profile of the respondents in terms of the aforementioned variables. The items in

the questionnaire will be adopted from the readings of the researcher along books and

dissertations. The researcher personally will distribute the questionnaires and likewise retrieve to

ensure 100 percent retrieval.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The information that will be gathered through the questionnaires will be collected,

analyzed and interpreted to provide answers to the problems embodied in this study. The data

which will be gathered will be subjected to appropriate statistical treatment for interpretation

using the SPSS software.

Different sub-problems will be statistically treated:

 For sub-problems 1, along the profile of the respondents in terms of variables, frequency

count and percentage will be used. Frequency count is the most straightforward approach to

working with quantitative data. Items are classified according to a particular scheme and an

arithmetical count is made of the number of items (or tokens) within the text which belong to

each classification (or type) in the scheme. This method tabulates how many times a certain

variable occurs within a calculation.

The process of creating a frequency count involves first identifying the total number of

observations to be represented; then counting the total number of observations within each data

point or grouping of data points; and then dividing the number of observations within each data

point or grouping of data points by the total number of observations.

Sub-problems 2, and 3 will be treated using the frequency and average weighted mean.

The average weighted mean is a type of mean that is calculated by multiplying the weight (or

probability) associated with a particular event or outcome with its associated quantitative

outcome and then summing all the products together. It is very useful when calculating a

theoretically expected outcome where each outcome shows a different probability of occurring,

which is the key feature that distinguishes the weighted mean from the arithmetic mean.

To interpret sub-problem 2, the scale below will be used.

Scale Statistical Range Descriptive Equivalent

5 4.50-5.00 Advanced level of implementation (AI)
4 3.50-4.49 High level of implementation (HI)
3 2.50-3.49 Medium level of implementation (MI)
2 1.50-2.49 Low level of implementation (LI)
1 1.00-1.49 Not implemented at all (NI)
 To interpret sub-problem 3, the scale below will be used.

Scale Statistical Range Descriptive Equivalent (DE)

Very Serious (VS)
5 4.50-5.00
Serious (S)
4 3.50-4.49
Fairly Serious(FS)
3 2.50-3.49
Mild Serious(MS)
2 1.50-2.49
Not Serious(NS)
1 1.00-1.49

To answer sub-problem number 4, One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) will be used

while sub-problem number 5 will be treated using Pearson’s Correlation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Research Materials (Published/Unpublished)

Angell, Beth (2019). Addictions and Substance Use, Aging and Older Adults, Health Care and
Illness, Mental and Behavioral HealthOnline Publication Date: Jun 2013DOI:
10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.30

Buxton, S. (2019). Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Standards for Schools in Low-cost Settings,
Geneva; WHO, 2019). 10 J.

Chatfield, SL, DeBois, K, Nolan, R, Crawford, H, Hallam, JS. (2017). Hand hygiene among
healthcare workers: a qualitative meta summary using the GRADE-CERQual process. Journal of
Infection Prevention 18(3): 104–120.
Curtis, VA. et al (2016). Review Planned, motivated and habitual hygiene behaviour: an eleven
country review. Health Educ Res. 2009 Aug; 24(4):655-73.

Mendoza, V. (2019). Assessment of WinS Program in the #rd Congressional District of

Pangasinan 1. Unpublished dissertation. Colegio de Dagupan.

Smiddy, MP, O’Connell, R, Creedon, SA (2015). Systematic qualitative literature review of

health care workers’ compliance with hand hygiene guidelines. American Journal of Infection
Control 43(3): 269–274.
Smith, JD, Corace, KM, MacDonald, TK, Fabrigar, LR, Saedi, A, Chaplin, A, MacFarlane, S,
Valickis, D, Garber, GE (2018). Application of the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify
factors that influence hand hygiene compliance in long-term care. Journal of Hospital Infection
101(4): 393–398.
Sniehotta, FF, Presseau, J, Araújo-Soares, V (2015).Time to retire the theory of planned
behaviour. Health Psychology Review 8: 1–7.

Triandis, HC (1977) Interpersonal behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and World Health Organization. (2018). Drinking
water, sanitation and hygiene in schools: Global baseline report 2018. New York; 2018.

Vivas, A. et al (2017). Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) of Hygiene among School
Children in Angolela, Ethiopia. J Prev Med Hyg. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 Apr
13. Published in final edited form as: J Prev Med Hyg. 2010 Jun; 51(2): 73–79.

JOURNAL

Basic Education Information System (BEIS), 2010 data, provided by UNICEF Philippines for
‘Equity of Access to WASH in Schools’ (see reference 10).

Crofts, Tracey, and Julie Fisher, ‘Menstrual Hygiene in Ugandan Schools: An investigation of
low-cost sanitary pads’, Journal of Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene for Development, vol. 2, no.
1, 2012, pp. 50–58.

Fashemi, Bisiayo, et al., ‘Effects of Feminine Hygiene Products on the Vaginal Mucosal Biome’,
Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease, vol. 24, 2013.

Freeman, Matthew C., ‘Module 1: Introduction to WASH in Schools’, The WASH in Schools
Distance-Learning Course, United Nations Children’s Fund, New York, 2012, pp. 8–13.

Glaas 2012 Report: World Health Organization, UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of
Sanitation and Drinking-Water, (Geneva: World Health Organization, 2012).
(Geneva: WHO, 2013), United Nations Children’s Fund, Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-
Water - 2013 Update,

Irinoye, O. O., A. Ogungbemi and A. O. Ojo, ‘Menstruation: Knowledge, attitude and practices
of students in Ile-Ife, Nigeria’, Nigerian Journal of Medicine, vol. 12, no. 1, January–March
2003, pp. 43–51.

JOURNAL

Basic Education Information System (BEIS), 2010 data, provided by UNICEF Philippines for
‘Equity of Access to WASH in Schools’ (see reference 10).

Crofts, Tracey, and Julie Fisher, ‘Menstrual Hygiene in Ugandan Schools: An investigation of
low-cost sanitary pads’, Journal of Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene for Development, vol. 2, no.
1, 2012, pp. 50–58.

Fashemi, Bisiayo, et al., ‘Effects of Feminine Hygiene Products on the Vaginal Mucosal Biome’,
Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease, vol. 24, 2013.

Freeman, Matthew C., ‘Module 1: Introduction to WASH in Schools’, The WASH in Schools
Distance-Learning Course, United Nations Children’s Fund, New York, 2012, pp. 8–13.

Glaas 2012 Report: World Health Organization, UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of
Sanitation and Drinking-Water, (Geneva: World Health Organization, 2012).

(Geneva: WHO, 2013), United Nations Children’s Fund, Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-
Water - 2013 Update,

Irinoye, O. O., A. Ogungbemi and A. O. Ojo, ‘Menstruation: Knowledge, attitude and practices
of students in Ile-Ife, Nigeria’, Nigerian Journal of Medicine, vol. 12, no. 1, January–March
2003, pp. 43–51.

MarcyVadurro, (2018) The Importance of Health Education

Philippine Department Of Education Wash In Schools Three Star Approach Brochure

Rivera, Roberto, and David Borasky, Research Ethics Training Curriculum, 2nd edition, FHI
360, Research Triangle Park, N.C., 2009.

Sommer, Marni, ‘Ideologies of Sexuality, Menstruation and Risk: Girls’ experiences of puberty
and schooling in northern Tanzania’, Culture, Health & Sexuality, vol. 11, no. 4, May 2009, pp.
383–398.
Sommer, Marni, ‘Putting Menstrual Hygiene Management into the School Water and Sanitation
Agenda’, Waterlines, vol. 29, no. 4, 2010, pp. 268–278.

Sommer, Marni, ‘Where the Education System and Women’s Bodies Collide: The social and
health impact of girls’ experiences of menstruation and schooling in Tanzania’, Journal of
Adolescent Health, vol. 33, no. 4, August 2010, pp. 521–529.

STREAMS of Knowledge, ‘WASH Situation Analysis in Poor and Under-Served Communities

in the Philippines’ (Draft v.1 Report), United Nations Children’s Fund, August 2011.

Ten, Varina Tjon A., editor, ‘Menstrual Hygiene: A neglected condition for the achievement of
several Millennium Development Goals’, Europe External Policy Advisors, Zoetermeer,
Netherlands, 10 October 2007.

United Nations Children’s Fund and World Health Organization, ‘Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
Standards for Schools in Low-Cost Settings’, WHO, Geneva, 2009.

United Nations Children’s Fund, WASH in Schools Monitoring Package, UNICEF, New York,
April 2011.

United Nations Children’s Fund, WASH in Schools Monitoring Package, (New York: UNICEF,
2011).

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, World Atlas of Gender
Equality in Education, UNESCO, Paris, 2012.

WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation, ‘Progress
on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2013 update’, World Health Organization and United Nations
Children’s Fund, Geneva and New York, 2013.

OTHER SOURCES

Deped Order no.10 s. 2016 policy and guidelines for the comprehensive, water sanitation and
hygiene (WINS) in schools program

www.unicef.org/wash/schools UNICEF Programme Division/WASH 3 United Nations Plaza

New York, NY 10017 USA

http://washinschoolsmapping.com/wengine/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Philippines-An-
Assessment-of-Menstrual-Hygiene-Management-in-Schools.pdf

http://www.unicef.org/wash/ schools/ World Health Organization

http://www.wpro.who.int/philippines/areas/health_systems/financing/philippines_health_system
_review.pdf

http://www.fitforschool.international/resource/philippine-department-of-education-wash-in-
schools-three-star-approach-brochure/

OTHER SOURCES

Deped Order no.10 s. 2016 policy and guidelines for the comprehensive , water sanitation and
hygiene (WINS) in schools program

www.unicef.org/wash/schools UNICEF Programme Division/WASH 3 United Nations Plaza

New York, NY 10017 USA

http://washinschoolsmapping.com/wengine/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Philippines-An-
Assessment-of-Menstrual-Hygiene-Management-in-Schools.pdf
http://www.unicef.org/wash/ schools/ World Health Organization

http://www.wpro.who.int/philippines/areas/health_systems/financing/philippines_health_system
_review.pdf

http://www.fitforschool.international/resource/philippine-department-of-education-wash-in-
schools-three-star-approach-brochure/

QUESTIONNAIRE:

General Direction: Please fill in the information asked for and answer all the items as honestly
as you can. Each part of this survey has specific directions to assists you in making choices.

Part I. Demographic Profile of the Respondent.

Name (optional): ________________________________________________________
Name of School: ________________________________________________________
Age: ________ Sex: _________
Highest Educational Attainment:

_____ Bachelor’s degree graduate

_____ Master’s degree (with units)
_____ Master’s degree graduate
_____ Doctoral or Professional degree (with units)
_____ Doctoral or Professional degree Graduate

Length of Service in DepEd:

_____ 10 yrs. and below

_____ 11-20 yrs.
_____ 21-30 yrs.
_____ 31 yrs. and above

Part II. Level of Implementation of WinS Program

Direction: Below is a list of criteria to determine the level of implementation of WinS Program
in your school. Your ratings/judgment shall be as follows:
Scale Descriptive Equivalent
5 Advanced level of implementation (AI)
4 High level of implementation (HI)
3 Medium level of implementation (MI)
2 Low level of implementation (LI)
1 Not implemented at all (NI)

  Water 5 3 4 2 1
M L
  Indicators
AI HI I I NI
1 The school provides safe and free drinking water.          
2 The drinking water provided by the school for free.          
The school coordinates with the LGU or water district to test the
3
quality of drinking water.          
The school lets the authority to inspect/test the potability of the
4
available source of water for drinking.          
The school secures a quality certificate if the water is some s
5
refilling station.          
  Sanitation 5 4 3 2 1
A M L
Indicators
I HI I I NI
All functional toilets are secured, private and have door with
1
locks.          
All functional toilets have lighting (incudes natural light or
2
alternative sources) and have adequate ventilation.          
 All exclusively female toilets have wrapping materials and trash
3
bins for used sanitary pads.          
Detached toilets for girls are within view of school building and
4
people.          
There are toilet/s designed for persons with limited mobility
5 (These toilets must have a ramp, railing and adequate space for
a wheelchair)          
6 The School applies segregation of solid waste materials.          
The school has policies/sanctions which promote the practice of
7
solid waste segregation.          
In the canteens, the staff are required to secure health
8
certificates and are oriented regarding food safety measures.          
The school has a functional drainage from the kitchen and all
9
wash areas to ensure that there is no stagnant water.          
  Hygiene 5 4 3 2 1
M L
  Indicators
AI HI I I NI
1 The school provides a regular supply of soap for hand washing.

There are hand washing facilitates available in the areas such as

2
classroom, canteen, play areas, clinics and laboratories?          
The school encourages the children to perform individual hand
washing. (Before meals/eating/handling food, after using the
3
toilet, after handling soil and animals, after cleaning activities
activities/handling garbage, and after playing.)          
The School provides a regular supply of toothbrush and
4
toothpaste for tooth brushing.          
The repair and maintenance requirements for WASH facilities
5 reflected in SIP(School Improvement Plan) and/or in AIP
(Annual improvement plan)          
  Health Education 5 4 3 2 1
M L
  Indicators
AI HI I I NI
The school has organized structures (eg. TWGs, student clubs)
1
to promote WinS?.          
2 The School includes WinS as part of INSET.          
The school provides learning materials available for teaching
3
WinS.          
4 WinS is being advocated in the GPTCA assembly.          
The school has planned and organized activities for advocating
5
WinS to parents/stakeholders.          
 WinS becomes part of the co/extra-curricular program for
6
students.          

Part III. Level of Seriousness of the Challenges Met

Directions: Below are the challenges met in the implementation of WinS Program. Please check

(/) those that concern you and indicate the degree of seriousness by checking under the

appropriate column.

5- Very Serious
4- Serious
3- Fairly Serious
2- Mild Serious
1- Not Serious
Challenges met in the Implementation of WinS program 5 4 3 2 1
V F M N
  Indicators
S S S S S
1 Lack of budget.          
2 Uncooperative PTA officers and members.          
3 Reluctant parents.          
4 Poor communication to stakeholders.          
5 Hardheadedness of pupils          
 6 Lack of Facilities          
 7 Inadequate supply of materials to be used.          
8 Lack of information dissemination.          
9 Deworming done semi-annually          
Others(Please
10 Specify)___________________________________________
________