The CWIS indicators tracked on this dashboard were informed by global monitoring frameworks, project and country and city specific frameworks across eight cities in five countries.
The indicator list was developed following a consultative and iterative process involving the sanitation service authorities and local implementation partners in these eight cities. The choice of indicators combines global and various national requirements, and aims to inform city planning and decision-making.
View CWIS measurement approach note View methodology note on the development of the CWIS IndicatorsThe full list of CWIS indicators include 40 quantitative and qualitative indicators and indicator areas, and 124 sub-indicators (a sub-indicator is only applicable if data is available for the higher level indicator). The table below summarizes the 40 CWIS indicator areas corresponding to the CWIS Service Framework.
The full list of indicators and sub-indicators used for measurement and the level at which the functions indicators are evaluated (national/ state or local service area level) can be visualized in the dashboard upon login, or is accessible via the link below.
Download the full list of CWIS IndicatorsEQ-1: % of Low Income Community (LIC) population with access to ‘safe’ individual toilets / % of total population with access to ‘safe’ individual toilets
EQ-2: % safe management LIC / % safe management citywide (only for Individual Household Latrines/IHHLs)
EQ-3: Subsidy amount paid to Non-Sewered Sanitation (NSS) / Sewered Sanitation (SS)
EQ-4: % of women in sanitation related decision-making bodies (government institutions)
EQ-5: Gender pay gap in the sanitation workforce
EQ-6: Sanitation worker equity (formalization, legal recourse, right to unionize, social security and health insurance)
SF-1: % safely managed sanitation (citywide Individual Household Latrines/ IHHLs)
SF-2: % safely managed sanitation for LIC IHHLs
SF-3: % safely managed liquid waste for shared facilities (Community Toilets/CTs + shared household toilets)
SF-4: % of public spaces that have adequate sanitation facilities (Public Toilet/ PT)
SF-5: % of educational institutions where Fecal Sludge/ Wastewater (FS/WW) generated is safely transported to Treatment Plant (TP) or safely disposed in situ
SF-6: % of healthcare facilities where FS/WW generated is safely transported to TP or safely disposed in situ
SF-7: % of desludging services completed mechanically or semi-mechanically (gulper)
SF-8: % of desludging vehicles which comply with maintenance standards
SF-9: % of water contamination compliance (on fecal coliform)
SF-10: Incidence (per 1000) of fecal-oral pathway diseases
SF-11: Sanitation worker safety (health and safety standards in place and monitored and enforced, and government funded regular health checkups)
SF-12: Presence of certification mechanism for which treated WW/FS has to qualify
SS-1: % of treated FS and WW that is reused
SS-2: % of operational cost recovered for STPs/WWTPs and FSTPs (from revenue generating activities)
SS-3: % of sanitation capital investments covered by budget line/ government transfers
RS-1a: Legal mandate for service delivery is clear and inclusive
RS-2a: Approved local service authority staff positions within mandated authority areas are sufficient to execute mandate [*Context specific. Evaluated at point where staff head count and organogram is determined for mandated authority. This could be city, state or national.]
RS-1b: Mandated service authorities are delivering inclusive services
RS-2b: Local service authority staff positions are filled and capable to execute mandate
RS-3: Local service authority sanitation budget is a separate line item independent of water, solid waste management, health, or environment
RS-4: Local authority's sanitation revenue is ringfenced
AC-1: Performance indicators are set and monitored
AC-2: Clear and progressive performance targets are set, monitored, and enforced for sanitation [*Context specific. Evaluated at the level where performance targets are set. This could be city, state or national.]
AC-3a: Performance data from service authorities are transparent
AC-4a: Incentives and/or penalties tied to performance exist for sanitation service authority
AC-1b: Service authorities actively report on the performance indicators
AC-2: (same as for national/ state level) [*Context specific]
AC-3b: Service authorities regularly collect representative data
AC-4b: Incentives and/or penalties are actively used/applied by national/ state accountability authorities at the service area level
RPM-1a: Clear financing framework at the national level to guide allocation of resources
RPM-2a: National/ state level decision-making process for sanitation budget allocation is transparent, inclusive, and informed by city /service area strategies
RPM-1b: Clear financing framework at the city level to guide allocation of resources
RPM-2b: City level decision-making process for sanitation budget allocation is transparent, inclusive, and informed by city /service area strategies
RPM-3: Quality of investment decision-making
RPM-4: Integrated citywide inclusive sanitation strategy
Besides tracking key outcomes across the sanitation service chain and the system functions that enable the achievement of these outcomes, the CWIS indicators also have a cross-cutting focus on the following aspects
Gender
The CWIS measurement framework includes gender intentional indicators on both system performance outcomes and system design.
Sanitation Workers
CWIS indicators cover a set of issues related to both the rights and the health and safety of sanitation workers, who are among the most vulnerable to occupational hazards and social stigma.
The CWIS-MLE program is collating existing data on all the CWIS indicators across the eight cities for the duration of the program. The data collected for these eight cities are visualized on this dashboard and are accessible to CWIS grantees upon login. If you are a CWIS grantee and need access support, please contact kun.z@athenainfonomics.com.