Back

What is next for costing WASH in healthcare facilities? Applying evidence for policy and practice

Tantum, L. K.; Cronk, R.; Asingwire, N.; Bohara, P.; Kharal Chettry, L.; Hirai, M.; Kpodzro, S.; Mavi, T.; Miller, J. D.; Ripkey, C.; Sharma, S.; Trinies, V.; Anderson, D. M.

2024-08-20 public and global health
10.1101/2024.08.14.24311992 medRxiv
Show abstract

Efforts to improve and sustain water, sanitation, hygiene (WASH), waste management, and cleaning services in healthcare facilities in low- and middle-income countries are constrained by limited funding. Assessments of the costs of delivering WASH services are critical for guiding financial planning and investment, but many countries lack costed plans for WASH in healthcare facilities. A 2023 UNC Water and Health Conference workshop explored how policymakers and practitioners collect and use cost data and identify strategies for overcoming cost barriers. Presenters shared case studies that showcased the utility of cost data for creating national costed roadmaps, identifying and addressing budgetary shortfalls, and planning WASH improvements in Nepal, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. In discussions, workshop participants described leveraging collaborations with multiple government entities and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to collect cost data. Participants also reported using cost data to plan programs and advocate for additional WASH funding. Strategies to coordinate costing approaches across stakeholder groups and standardize data collection tools will enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of planning and budgeting for WASH in healthcare facilities. HighlightsO_LILocal and national governments and NGOs routinely collect and use cost data to inform decisions about WASH services in healthcare facilities C_LIO_LIWASH responsibilities are divided across multiple institutions, necessitating coordination for cost data collection C_LIO_LIGovernments have used costing data to create national costed roadmaps and budgets C_LIO_LICosting data support program planning, monitoring, and advocacy C_LI

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.