Kutoa Toilets International - Gies College of Business Sanitation Business Plan Business Cases June 2012 . Kutoa Toilets International A document for BADM 533: Sustainable Product

SGWI Sanitation Business Plan Business Cases

June 2012

Kutoa Toilets International

A document for BADM 533: Sustainable Product Design and Business Plan Development

Subsistence Marketplaces Initiative| Business Cases Page 1

Subsistence Marketplaces Initiative Business Cases Feb 2015

* This case is based on a comprehensive business plan developed by a student group in the course entitled

Sustainable Product and Market Development for Subsistence Marketplaces under the supervision of the instructor, Madhu Viswanathan. The case was prepared by MadhuViswanathan, John Clarke and Srinivas Venugopal and copyedited by Tom Hanlon. We gratefully acknowledge the organizational sponsor of the project and the students who contributed to it.





Kutoa Toilets International (KTI) was founded in 2014 with the idea of bringing new and innovative sanitation products to rural Tanzania. Over 87% of the Tanzanian population lacks access to “improved sanitation” as defined by the World Health Organization, resulting in 41 million people in need of improved sanitation systems. The Tanzanian people primarily depend on themselves (and sometimes NGOs) to meet their sanitation issues. While few governments sanitation programs exist, the ones that do are community based rather than individual or local. Even so, Tanzania is experiencing rapid growth in sectors such as agriculture, communications, manufacturing, and trade on both wholesale and retail levels (according to the African Development Bank). The result is a steady rise in technology, but there is still a

lack of infrastructure in rural areas and among cultures such as the Maasai, for which scarcity and self-reliance is a way of life. Given the increased focus on the need for sustainable sanitation solutions, it is observed that the market for our product is very large. The global subsistence worldfaces infrastructural, geographic, and cost constraints that dictate a continuous need for new, creative solutions. Our immediate target market is a small village community in rural Tanzania that has an immediate need for our sanitation products. The community is primarily agrarian and comprises approximately 100 subsistence households of various family sizes, with an average of about five per family. We are looking to penetrate the market in two main stages. First, we will supply 10 households with our product as a trial phase. Following a successful launch, we will supply the remaining homes with the support of the community leaders.

Kutoa Toilets International (KTI) seeks to create simple and intuitive toilets and sanitation infrastructures for people in subsistence through dynamic systems that grow with users and give back over time. Technologies designed and implemented by KTI must meet the following requirements:



(1) Reduction of sanitation-related illnesses by the isolation and treatment of human waste. (2) Economical and sustainable treatment that seeks to limit user cost and uses locally available material. (3) Resource recovery that generates usable materials for the end user and promotes ownership and investment. (4) Dynamic systems that allow for adaptation and growth as the user’s needs change.

Kutoa Toilets empowers people by providing sanitation solutions that meet their needs. Proper waste management will isolate fecal matter and reduce the transfer of disease-causing agents, promoting cleaner environments and improving the health of our users. Our products create healthier and happier lifestyles for the home user while reducing the financial burden of disease and increasing the amount of school and workdays that children and adults can attend. In addition to passive economic gain, our systems seek to actively generate resources in the form of fertilizer and energy that may be used or sold by our users. The valuable commodities produced add monetary and perceived value to a system that is already well regarded for its more immediate use (i.e., waste removal). Successful waste management must provide people with a clean environment. As such, no technology is successful if it does not positively affect the planet as well as people. Our technologies remove waste and harmful pathogens from the home and surrounding area. Proper containment is designed to isolate or eliminate this waste from the environment rather than redistribute it. The resources generated from this process can replace costly and detrimental chemical fertilizers and fossil fuels.

In February 2014,Kutoa Toilet’s design team traveled to Tanzania to perform field research. We engaged in active discussions, interviews, and analysis of local markets that brought to our attention the needs and drivers within Tanzanian subsistence. The most important and inspiring insight our group brought back was the discovery that community leaders supported technologies that reuse human waste. They were not only interested, but excited, to help their community through such technologies. In general, community leaders and members were open to outside ideas and help. The toilets in the community were simple structures, often constructed with a wooden floor and an unlined pit beneath it. The most “comfortable” toilets were the ones with plenty of ventilation to reduce smell – many of these were without roofs. Smell was the biggest factor contributing to a comfortable experience. Some poured ash in and around their pits to neutralize smell. Construction techniques, sizes, materials, and overall setups varied widely, because individuals are fairly autonomous and it is the norm to construct both housing and toilets on one’s own. Additional infrastructure (such as water) was almost nonexistent, and any toilet solution must take this into account. In most cases, interviewees were unhappy with their current toilet and had plans or dreams to build a higher quality toilet in the future. Most postponed their goals for financial reasons. When asked “How much would you be willing to pay for a toilet that does X?”, most responded with what they paid for their current toilet. To overcome the disparity in cost of their existing toilets and our proposed toilets,



value added must be incorporated in the form of fertilizer and biogas. Of the farmers interviewed, organic fertilizer is preferred over industrial fertilizers for both cost and health concerns. Fertilizer is a large and necessary expense for farmers, and adding this to our overall design is a good way to justify the increased spending on the required equipment.

Kutoa Toilets is proud to introduce an affordable and dynamic sanitation system, the “Msaidizi,” or “helper” toilet. Just as Kutoa Toilets took its name from the phrase “kutoanyuma” meaning to “give back”, the Msaidizi toilet is designed to treat and recover waste so that it gives back to the user in a tangible way. Using the successful two-pit model of Sulabh International, our team has modified and redesigned a sanitation system that allows for the desiccation of waste for fertilizer (aerobic digestion) without the need for water. This is accomplished through a new and innovative piping system that includes a specially designed tube to easily switch between the two pit systems while maintaining a steep angle for waste to be transported into the pits. The toilet also features a modular design so that improvements can be made over time as the user requires or obtains funds. After successful implementation of two pits, one pit is allowed to fill with waste while the other (full) pit is left to desiccate for one year. After this time the dried waste may be used as fertilizer. It is estimated that one family of five could generate $24-48 of fertilizer per year, or 25-50% of their fertilizer needs for a small family farm of four acres. As the premier product of Kutoa Toilets International, the Msaidizi toilet may be referred to as theKutoa Toilet.

We are requesting a total of about $500,000 in capital for our venture. These funds will be expensed towards for critical efforts including: product specification and finalization, field research, customer relations and development of local partnerships, sales and marketing, and labor. We will need a series of capital injections every year for the first three years. After the third year, we look to be profitable enough to start pay back the investment and still retain money to fund our operations. In year zero, we need a total of $180,000 to fund critical activities for our operations – activities are affiliated with those mentioned above. We have set a price point of $210.00 per toilet.While this price point is greater than the average cost of a current toilet in a Tazania (~$90), we believe the price is justified by the additional needs met by the



Kutoa Toilet. Additionally, because the product is implemented in phases, consumers will be paying installments that are more in line with what they are used to paying. In the first year, low revenue of about $9,800 is projected. However, in the secondand thirdyears, revenue should increase with our expansion strategy that targets subsistence villages in Tanzania, Uganda, and Kenya. By year five, we project that our top line will be about $664,288. Given the low projected revenue for Year 1 and operational costs higher than revenue, the corresponding bottom line is negative. In the following year, our earnings before taxes and cost recovery are still estimated to be negative. However, by Year 3, with a year-three cost recovery rate of 5% and a corporate tax rate of about 20%, net income is projected to be about $19,600. For Years4and 5, the projected bottom line values are $131,437 and $237,500, respectively.Cash flows are estimated to be negative until Year 4. KTI’s market value is estimated to be $1,660,000 at the end of Year 5. This leads to a positive net present value (NPV) of $1M. Concordantly, the payback period is projected to be about three years and two months from first capital injection in year zero.Thus, from a purely financial standpoint, given the positive NPV and other aforementioned points, KTI is deemed as a valuable investment opportunity for investors. With our focus on sanitation in subsistence marketplaces, KTI can serve as a key asset for investors to diversify the risk in their respective portfolios.

Strengths: Kutoa Toilets International is comprised of a highly diverse team, with backgrounds in engineering, business, industrial design, and architecture. Each member of our team has unique experiences in subsistence contexts across the globe, including India, Tanzania, Nigeria, Honduras, Guatemala, Cameroon, and Romania. Members of our team have successfully designedand implemented sustainable engineering projects through Engineers Without Borders; e.g.,biosand filters in Guatemala for water purification, and ventilated improved pit latrines in Cameroon and Romania. In addition to diverse educational and experiential backgrounds, each team memberbrings different passions and expertise to the team that are invaluable. Ana is our industrial designer who focuses on the ideation and draws creativity out of each team member. Ladi is our big picture guy who is a dual MBA and masters in electrical engineering; he is always looking at the broader impact of our product. Charles is a dual MBA and master of architecture who has a keen eye for design and in particular, materials selection. Kelly is a PhD candidate in materials science and engineering and her passion is for user-centric design and engineering field work. Ian is a PhD student in civil and environmental engineering who studies waste management and recovery and is particularly focused on the practicality of design in a subsistence context. Our team works effectively by recognizing our unique strengths and complementing one another in our weaknesses.



In addition to working effectively as a team, Kutoa Toilets International has access to a wealth of knowledge on current and past technologies that have been tried in countless contexts. This top-down understanding is essential for learning from past failures and successes and not reinventing established technologies. This understanding can be paired with the bottom-up approaches and field research. Our team sent members to India and then Tanzania to interview a diverse demographic of those living in subsistence. Through this field research, our team is able to design specifically for the enduser and their actual desires, needs, and circumstances, instead of our perception of what those needs are. Weaknesses: Kutoa Toilets International is currently located in Champaign, Illinois, which is approximately 8,173 miles (and an eight-hour time difference) from Arusha, Tanzania. In addition to the distance, no one on our team has lived in the region where we plan to implement Kutoa Toilets International. Our first year as a business will be spent establishing the business in Tanzania and hiring local employees so that we can have a team that better understands the needs and context. These employees will be invaluable,becausethey will know more about the region and end user circumstances than we could hope to learn in such a short amount of time.

When considering entering the household sanitation market in Tanzania, there are many threats and opportunities that we must addressto properly position and spec the design. The long list of opportunities in this specific market is complemented by a similar list of possible threats. Opportunities: To begin, a widespread and mass-produced household sanitation solution has yet to be developed specifically for the subsistence Tanzanian market. Consequently, there is no real competition in this market space. Another factor inviting a new sanitation solution is that most current toilets are unpleasant and unsanitary to use. In most cases, the same design and construction techniques have been used for generations. Consumers are aware that their current sanitation solutions need improvement. Further, there is an opportunity to address health and hygiene in a more proactive way than current solutions. Two other needs that KTI intends to address is the shortage of fertilizer and energy that farmers experience due to high cost. When interviewed, the targeted Tanzanian population was very interested in the possibility of using a new, safer, and productive toilet system. This is to say, community buy-in is a huge opportunity for success. Similarly these particular consumers are very self-motivated and eager to take advantage of new technologies to better their lifestyles. Threats: The biggest hurdle that we must overcome when entering (or creating) the household sanitation market in subsistence Tanzania is to make sure consumers are actually thinking about improving their sanitation solutions. Currently there are no widespread examples of fertilizer and biogas generating toilets in Tanzania. In other words, new solutions may not even be on consumers’ “radar,” and even if they are, they may not be a priority. Consumers must recognize the need.



Once that is overcome, cost becomes the next hurdle. A new value-added sanitation solution will undoubtedly be more expensive than current setups. Will consumers be able to afford this technology? Next, complexity of the design comes in when constructing and maintaining the technology. Lack of expertise may cause new, more complex systems to be avoided, constructed incorrectly, or improperly maintained. Contributing to improper construction could be the unavailability of the necessary materials locally. If properly constructed, constantly adding to a system like this may be crucial, and a family could potentially produce an insufficient amount of waste for the system. Also affecting proper maintenance is climate change. Without sufficient water in the system, production could be compromised. Likewise, consumers adding animal waste to the system could also see large fluctuations in what is added to the system if animals are not producing enough waste. Finally, once fertilizer is produced, the idea of handling human waste is taboo in Tanzania and much of the rest of the world. Finding a way to overcome this taboo is crucial to the success of a value-added sanitation solution.

Macro Environment The history of Tanzania according to World Bank shows that Tanzania attained independence from colonial rule in 1961. Formed by the union of the Tanganyika mainland and the island of Zanzibar in 1964, the country remains democratic by nature. It has multiple political parties with representation in its Parliament. CCM and CHADEMA are the two more prominent parties, with CCM being the most influential one over the country’s history. Furthermore, the World Bank points out “In 2012, Tanzania embarked on a Constitutional review process which is expected to be finalized in 2015 ahead of the general elections in October.”

Relations withTanzania and the rest of the globe can be deemed positive for the most part. Specifically, US–Tanzania relations seem to be relatively strong, as the US continues to assist Tanzania on issues related to public health, sanitation, education, natural resource management, and the like. Various programs under agencies affiliated with the US government have been initiated over the years to mitigate or solve issues such asmalaria, poverty, water, and sanitation, and to support Tanzania’s economic development overall. There are also initiatives that support the reduction of corruption and promote increased transparency in Tanzanian government operations. (See http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2843.htm.)

According to the African Development Bank, the key sectors that are fostering growth in Tanzania are agriculture, communications, manufacturing, and trade on both wholesale and retail levels. The technological aspects of these key sectors are on a steady rise in general, but they are lacking in a few specific rural cultures like the Masaai.

Contrary to an Indian context, where all levels of government supported the development of the household sanitation sector through various programs, the Tanzanian people primarily depend on

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2843.htm



themselves (and NGOs) to meet their sanitation issues. It was apparent that federal, state, and local Tanzanian governments were more driven towards community-based sanitation programs as opposed to those for individual families and homes.

English and Swahili are the primary languages spoken across the country, and some key natural resources in Tanzania are wildlife, natural gas, fisheries. (See http://www.afdb.org/countries/east-africa/tanzania/tanzania-economic-outlook/.)

Market (For Product) – Size and Growth Potential Our product solutions are based on criteria that apply to rural contexts other than Tanzania; considering this, there is a huge potential for growth. Focusing on East Africa alone, countries like Ethiopia, Eritrea, Uganda, and Kenya all have thriving subsistence markets with demands for our product. Tanzania leads as the most populous East Africa country, with a population of about 48 million as of 2012. Kenya follows up with 43.2 million, which reflects a growth rate of about 8.4% from 2009. Tanzania’s growth rate is approximately the same as that of Kenya’s. Furthermore, according to World Bank statistics, the poverty headcount ratio at $1.25 per day in terms of purchasing power is about 38% in Uganda and 31% in Ethiopia. The poverty headcount ratio for Tanzania and Kenya is arguably in the same range.

More broadly, given the increased need for sustainable sanitation solutions, it is observed that the market for our product is very large. The global subsistence world is faced with a mix of infrastructural, geographic, and cost constraints thatdictate a continuous need for creative toilet solutions, amongst other things. Additionally, the demand for sustainable sanitation solutions has risen in recent times, serving as a justifiable business and economic incentive for our effort to supply that demand.

Our immediate target market is a small village community in rural Tanzania that has an immediate need for our toilet solution. The community comprises about 100 subsistence households of various family sizes, ranging from small to large. The community is primarily agrarian, and as part of our market strategy, we are looking to penetrate the market in two main stages. The first stage will be to supply to 10 households, and the next stage will be to supply the remaining homes with the support of the community members who were spearhead members of the first supply batch.

Competition and Collaborators From one stance, the competition is deemed as any product or service that targets the immediate sanitary needs of the people we are targeting. However, from a broader scope, any organizations that are currently working to address the needs of our customers may also serve as potential collaborators and partners in this space. In recognition of this and in understanding of how enormous the global subsistence market is, industry pressures from the competition factor are currently minimal. Thus, as a company, we will be less focused on how we can outfox our competition and more focused on how we can best serve our target customers through quality, reliable products, and service. Customer Information Profile

Rural agrarian community Eastern part of Tanzania

Segments Fathers and husbands Mothers and wives

http://www.afdb.org/countries/east-africa/tanzania/tanzania-economic-outlook/

http://www.afdb.org/countries/east-africa/tanzania/tanzania-economic-outlook/



Community size contains about 100 households Low infrastructure Limited electricity Manual labor oriented Culture of pride, respect, and trust Benefits to customers

Improved sanitation Sustainable solution Augmented benefit of fertilizer Augmented benefit of electricity Needs Served Survival needs Sanitation issues Health issues

Farmers Children Community leaders Community members Key Stakeholders State & local Tanzanian government Local community members Community leaders SGWI

Kutoa Toilets International (KTI) seeks to create simple and intuitive toilets and sanitation infrastructures for people in subsistence through dynamic systems that grow with users and give back over time.

Technologies designed and implemented by KTI must meet the following requirements: (1) Reduction of sanitation related illnesses by the isolation and treatment of human waste. (2) Economical and sustainable treatment that seeks to limit user cost and uses locally available material. (3) Resource recovery that generates usable materials for the end user and promotes ownership and investment. (4) Dynamic systems that allow for adaptation and growth as the user’s needs change. Stakeholders Stakeholders are present across all aspects of KTI’s operation, including ideation, design, manufacturing, and use phases. Beginning with ideation, the University of Illinois and the Safe Global Water Institute (SGWI) have played an extremely important role from the beginning inhelping get the project off the drawing board and into the design phase. It is important that their funding and time commitments be rewarded with successful product launches. KTI’s five designers, Ani, Chuck, Ian, Kelly, and Ladi, have spent hours researching, designing, and refining concepts and designs for future KTI products thatwill ultimately affect all other stakeholders.



In Tanzania, future manufacturers of various product components play a crucial role in the success of the final product as far as price point and longevity. Without their help, prices cannot be reduced and quality raised so that KTI products can be shared all over the world. NGOs such asOikos will help set the framework necessary to successfully implement KTI designs and play a crucial role in educating the community and its leaders. Finally, the most important role belongs to community leaders and individual users whowill purchase, construct, and use the product. Without them, change and success are not possible. Profits - People, Planet, and Prosperity Kutoa Toilets empowers people by providing sanitation solutions that meet their needs. Proper waste management will isolate fecal matter and reduce the transfer of disease-causing agents, promoting cleaner environments and improving the health of our users. Our products create healthier and happier lifestyles for the homeuser while reducing the financial burden of disease and increasing the amount of school and workdays that children and adults can attend. In addition to passive economic gain, our systems seek to actively generate resources in the form of fertilizer and energy that may be used or sold by our users. The valuable commodities produced add monetary and perceived value to a system that is already well regarded for its more immediate use (i.e., waste removal). Successful waste management must provide people with a clean environment. As such, no technology is successful if it does not positively affect the planet as well as people. Our technologies remove waste and harmful pathogens from the home and surrounding area. Proper containment is designed to isolate or eliminate this waste from the environment rather than redistribute it. The resources generated from this process can replace costly and detrimental chemical fertilizers and fossil fuels. Additionally, energy from waste can often have a larger positive effect on the environment than other “green” technologies – rather than just replacing “dirty” energy production with green energy production, energy-to-waste also eliminates the energy consumption normally necessary for waste treatment. Lastly, all of our technologies are created to be simple, minimal impact designs, using locally sourced materials.

Virtual Immersion Prior to subsistence market research, our team participated in virtual immersion to gain insights into the unique characteristics of poverty and the context with which subsistence consumers live. Virtual immersion was conducted by taking part in a poverty simulation and through readings of Nickel and



Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich and The Blue Sweater by Jacqueline Novogratz. Recurring themes in all three emphasize the powerlessness of those in poverty and the role of randomness in their lives. At the poverty simulation we were each assigned a role within a family. We went to work or school, shopped, and paid our bills while trying to take care of everyone in the family and cope with disabilities and setbacks in our everyday life. Crime, debt, and lack of money became the norm. Throughout the experience, most of us were struck by how little we could do. Initial feelings of being overwhelmed by everything – the amount of bills, the tasks to be done, the necessary planning – succumbed to feelings of powerlessness and an inability to change our situation. These feelings were amplified when we played the role of a child. We wanted to help, but had to rely on our parents and were unable to do much. Many of us found ourselves at home alone while parents were at work or doing errands. There was a reminder at the end of the simulation that planning can only take you so far. It is the nature of the simulation that makes you feel as if only you plan everything, if you do everything just right, you can “win,” but that’s not how life works. In the simulation, as well as life in subsistence, there is a tremendous amount of randomness. This randomness leads to an uncertain future and the separation of cause from effect. Poverty is dominated by short-term decisions; long-term planning is a luxury that those in subsistence do not have. In her book, Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreichexpressessimilar feelings as she experiences poverty. She feels trapped in poverty, and no amount of hard work will solve the situation. Jacqueline Novogratz writes of this as well, and comes to two conclusions that she writes about in The Blue Sweater: (1) people need to be given the opportunity to help themselves and (2) to go beyond charity, projects and solutions must be community driven, andalso community led. To truly embrace the idea of community leadership is to understand that poverty does not mean being helpless. It means lack of access to opportunity. Community leadership is an investment in people, and requires restraint on the part of those who are from outside the community. They will leave, but it is those that remain that will drive the projects and solutions to fruition. Emersion Virtual immersion required our team to examine poverty from a bottom-up perspective. In reflecting on this experience, it was necessary to emerge from our experience and reevaluate our roles and expertise in light of insights gained from the perspective of the subsistence consumer. This led to valuable ideas generated by each team member. They are described in brief below, according to profession. Engineering Engineers often approach subsistence entirely top-down: which solution (of which there are many) can we select and apply. When defining and addressing the needs in a community, we make assumptions about what they need. These preconceptions can turn into misconceptions and ultimately to a product thatdoes not provide an effective solution. Currently, users inform little other than ease of use, functionality, etc. In general, we believe our top-down approaches are shallow, and that there should be a much deeper understanding of subsistence in order to connect people to technology, not the other way around. The



product we engineer should incorporate a holistic approach that addresses the need at hand. In doing so, design, marketing, and education can be much more powerful than the technology itself. Industrial Design Most designers are consumed by taking what “works” and making it better. What designers need to switch to is taking what “does not work” and designing it for the better. Design should focus on bottom-up approaches and useful design. This is a departure from design in prosperous countries, in which useless design can be manufactured and distributed just as easily, if not more, than useful design. Design must be direct and user-centric, as subsistence users do not value glutinous design or unnecessary features. Architecture Subsistence situations require a whole different set of design criteria that are often more sensitive and more complex than those of settings with easily available resources. Context is a crucial attribute and driving factor for design. “Good design,” for the most part, has overlooked consumers living in subsistence conditions because in most cases “design” is synonymous with added cost. As such, designs have to be universal in that all users can enter the structure, or area, and know immediately how to use it. Construction materials need to be locally-sourced, and structures should be durable, while also simple and cost-effective. Business Market analysis frameworks that are typically taught in business schools are inadequate. When it comes to understanding the needs of consumers in subsistence marketplaces, the top-down approach is notcomplete, as it assumes a detailed understanding of subsistence market interactions and consumer behavior. Bottom-up approaches and field immersion exercises are crucial to understanding market interactions.Given the interactive nature of the market, the force of competition is sometimes negated and substituted by a high level of collaboration between businesspeople. As opposed the a “dog-eat-dog” mentality fund in some other marketplaces, there is a high level of hospitality and cooperation found in subsistence, because people are thinking about the future and looking to maintain positive impressions for long-term business relations.The understanding of money and finance also changes at the subsistence level. The famous “time value of money” concept needs to be modified and, in some cases, ignored at the subsistence level as the value placed on physical monies (like dollars and schillings) may be minimal.



After our team virtually immersed themselves in the concept of poverty, we reflected on what we learned to create connecting concepts for our first round of India idea generation. We explored the Indian contextfurther and tried to understand the unique cultural priorities. In an effort to understand the sanitation problem, we identified the core needs, drivers, and context for sanitation systemsfrom the perspective of a subsistence user. As a team we concluded that the primary needs were safety, dignity, and health. The drivers (defined as things thatwe may have influence over) for those needs were water contamination, no perceived consequences, and normalcy of health conditions. The overarching context of these needs and drivers were perceived value, culture, and religion. After identifying the needs, drivers, and context, we individually created five or six sanitation concepts to bring to the group. This initial stage allowed us to dream possible solutions without the constraints of external knowledge. Our group then came together toconnect the ideas. It was essential at this stage not to evaluate any ideas, but to be open-minded to all possibilities. This meetingshowed the diversity of our perspectives and helped us appreciate our individual roles and identify our strengths. Ani was the idea woman, Ian the practicality guy, Ladi the big picture guy, Chuck the functionality guy, and Kelly the user-centric woman. After considering one another’s strengths, we found clear categories begin to emerge among our ideas. The six clear connecting topics were infrastructure; isolation of waste; health and hygiene; treatment of waste; resource recovery of waste; and design, functionality, and aesthetics. We filtered all of the generated ideas into each of the six categories, which can be seen on the following page. Using these as a guide, we created five practical and implemental concepts that could be incorporated into Indian culture. These concepts were separation of waste (on an individual level), latrine infrastructure that allows for waste separation (on an individual level), reuse waste as homemade fertilizer (on an individual level), latrine infrastructure that allows composting of waste (on an individual level), and a community system that allows for individual waste to be picked up and placed into one composting sight (on an community level).





In an attempt to gain a deeper understanding of our market prior to field immersion, we conducted market research primarily through secondary online sources. This involved a review of existing technologies, current solutions, and cultural context, as well as some insight on the marketing mix elements for subsistence marketplaces. Through our research, we were able to extract some general principles of buyers and sellers and gained some idea of key principles that the consumers live by or operate on. We noticed how driven parents were towards the welfare of their children. We noticed how fathers were driven toward the welfare of their family. Marketplace transactions were more interactive than in other contexts and the people placed a high value on respectfulness. Price was also a major factor and one that we would need to account for in our process. From bottom to top, the price factor needs to be addressed and considered critically to avoid producing a solution too expensive for the target market.

The team also identified certain sanitation challenges specific to women, particularly in terms of their hygiene and safety. These challenges ranged from discomfort to shame, amongst other things. While there are some female products already in the market, we identified needs not being met that presented an opportunity to develop new or complementary solutions. We also considered the needs of children.

Generally, in terms of current solutions and technologies, from our research we discovered waste separation technologies, waste isolation solutions, and solutions related to reuse and value extraction. Some parallel products that we identified were homemade fertilizer, homemade compost, solar toilets, as well as biogas creation for use as cooking and electricity fuel. As for the Tanzanian economy and culture, the country has a little over 40 million people, and a significant amount face sanitation problems. Many utilities experience challenges in trying to meet their operation and maintenance costs due to inadequate revenue generation and cost inefficiencies.

In the earlier stages of the research, we focused on the Maasai people and discovered that they are nomadic. This lifestyle implies that a creative, mobile solution would be necessary. A technology would need to effectively tackle the issue of opendefecationand provide an augmented benefit of fertilizer production through composting. Ultimately, from our analysis of the marketing mix, it is evident that the different lifestyles and unique value systems of the subsistence marketwould require us to develop an extremely innovative and sustainable solution for the bottom-of-the-pyramid consumer.



Field Research Plan In preparation for our trips to India and Tanzania, we developed a field research plan that included detailed scripts for case studies in each respective context. This plan identified who to talk to, what we should observe, items needed as stimuli, and detailed questions to better understand our user and context.

Although our end user would ultimately be located in Tanzania, traveling to subsistence India provided invaluable insights into sanitation practices, conditions, and motivations, and gavethe team the necessary experience of discussing a sensitive subject with our interviewees. In India, our field plan included:

WHOM TO INTERVIEW WHAT TO OBSERVE ITEMS NEEDED/STIMULI Elderly, young Women, men

Middle, low income Urban – shopkeepers,

homemakers Rural – farmers, herders,

homemakers

Priorities Sanitation, female hygiene products

Toilet routine Where they go to the bathroom

Public toilets, personal, access, and quantity

Quality, technology Reactions and perspective

Sanitation Feminine hygiene products

Childcare products Pictures of different technologies

Soap brands

We planned detailed questions to ask our interviewees, but our intentions were always to keep the discussion as natural as possible and to be prepared to thoughtfully augment the plan. Our first priority in every interview was to create a safe space and gain the trust of our interviewee,becausesanitation is such a sensitive subject. The first part of every interview was used to establish a connection, and we left space for our interviewee to share details about his or her family, life circumstance, and story. This conversation typically led into daily routines, followed byeither sanitation cleaning practices or house layouts, and eventually was directed toward toilets and defecation practices. We wanted to understand from a holistic perspective what the subjects felt about their sanitation condition and how they would improve their situation. We also incorporated the ideas of waste recovery in the form of energy and fertilizer into the interviews. For questions on feminine hygiene and health practices, women were interviewed separately byfemale team members and a female translator.

The field research also involved visiting Sulabh International, a nonprofit organization thathas worked to eliminate social discrimination against the untouchable class, and successfully creating cost-effective sanitation solutions with waste recovery for energy and fertilizer. After the trip to India, our team formulated a new detailed field research plan for the trip to Tanzania based on what we learned in India and what we knew of our new context. That field research plan is as follows.





India Through our first field immersion experience, we were convinced of the truth that people are people everywhere and deserve dignity and respect, especially with regard to sanitation practices. It was very clear that the caste system was not eradicated in India, and the lowest class was still mostly responsible for the management of waste – there was even a case where we saw a man emerge from the sewer with no protective gear. There is a stigma against working with human waste that will be difficult to overcome in any culture, and as such our product will have to create enough value to make that job respectable. The influence a government has on the progression or regression of people was apparent during our time in India. A significant amount of progress was being made with regards to household sanitation, and was directly influenced by government incentives and subsidy programs at the federal, state, and local levels. It was clear that incentives were needed to construct sanitation solutions, becauseeven though there was an awareness of the need, the priorities of the family did not permit money to be allocated to such things without said incentives.

Field research in public bathroom. Chennai, India (2014).



We came to see that these families in India were aware of their need for sanitation, but life pressures forced them into some tough decisions, and it’s hard to disagree that someone should send their child to school instead of giving them a toilet when that is the reality of the situation. Education is extremely important and was emphasized by all of our interviewees. There was one scenario where an Indian farmer who had graduated with his bachelor’s had to quit his city job to go take care of his deceased father’s farmland. This man was aware of his actions and mentioned even how he burns plastic although he knows it is bad for the environment. His rationale followed that, if he doesn’t burn it, then the plastic will go everywhere and accumulate. By and large, our interviewees were not ignorant, but simply had come to terms with their situation. They are experts at surviving. There was hope and encouragement in our time in India too. We visited Sulabh International, who works to eliminate the stigma associated with those who traditionally handle waste and to provide them with dignity.Sulabh has done an exemplary job of creating low-cost technology that allows for waste recovery and use as energy and fertilizer. Their business plan emphasized the importance of maintenance as the key to the long-term success and sustainability of sanitation systems.

Sulabh International: (left) models of toilets (right) dessicated waste. Delhi, India (2014).



Tanzania The most important and inspiring insight our group brought back from Tanzania is that there is willingness from the community leaders to support technologies that reuse human waste. A group of elders were not only interested, but excited about being able to help their community. This is a beautifully motivating piece of information. Furthermore, community leaders appear to have more influence on the general population than the national government. Unlike India, the Tanzanian government focused on sanitation solutions that are community-centric and, as such, the progress towards sanitation solutions for homes was notably less advanced. The setting in Tanzania was significantly more rural than the context we experienced in India. Infrastructure was almost nonexistent, which means water is a long process to collect and should not be wasted in a toilet setting. Localized systems and toilets are the norm for most villages. Lack of water translates into poor maintenance of toilet facilities. Poor education is also a factor. Even when provided with the necessary equipment to wash hands or clean toilets, contamination almost always happens, because facilities are misused. Village leaders are the key to educating community members; by setting an example big change can happen. In general, community leaders and most community members were open to outside ideas and help. The toilets in the community were simple structures, often constructed with a wooden floor and an unlined pit beneath it. The most “comfortable” toilets were the ones with plenty of ventilation to reduce smell – many of these were without roofs. Smell was the biggest factor contributing to a comfortable experience. Some poured ash in and around their pits to neutralize smell. Construction techniques, sizes, materials, and overall setups varied widely because individuals are fairly autonomous, and it is the norm to construct both housing and toilets on one’s own. In most cases, interviewees were unhappy with their current toilet and had plans or dreams to build a higher quality toilet in the future. Most postponed their goals for financial reasons. When asked “How much would you be willing to pay for a toilet that does X?,” most responded with what they paid for their current setup. To overcome the disparity in cost of their existing toilets and our proposed toilets, value added must be incorporated in the form of fertilizer and biogas. Of the farmers interviewed, organic fertilizer is preferred over industrial fertilizers for both cost and health concerns. Fertilizer is a large and

Village meeting. Tanzania (2014)



necessary expense for farmers, and adding this to our overall design is a good way to justify the increased spending on the required equipment.

Focused Generation of Concepts: India After the trip to India, the team came up with six potential product concepts to address the sanitation needs in an Indian subsistence market. Focused Generation of Concepts: Tanzania The team took these ideas with them to Tanzania and evaluated them. The Elderly Water Toilet, Optimized System for Resource Recovery, and Business Venture continued to be viable concepts in the Tanzanian context. Upon returning from Tanzania, a second round of concepts was generated for the Meru tribe as the end user. This year, the dry season had been especially cruel and devastated the livestock population that the farmers depend on for manure. In themidst of this adversity, an opportunity for using human waste was identified by the community and welcomed as a solution.







Ideally, each concept could be incorporated creating a complete and self-sustaining system as shown below.

Evaluation We evaluated concepts after redefining the needs, drivers, and context for our community. We deconstructed the problem from both a top-down and a bottom-up perspective, and criteria were used to evaluate the effectiveness of each design. Discussions and considerations from our sponsor, SGWI, were weighted, and we chosea final concept.

From the Swahili “kutoanyuma” meaning to “give back,” the Kutoa Toilet is designed to treat and recover the waste so that it gives back to the user in a tangible way that creates value. Using the successful two-pit model of Sulabh International, our team has modified this technology and redesigned a sanitation system that allows for the desiccation of waste for fertilizer (aerobic digestion) without the need for water.This is accomplished through a new and innovative piping system that includes a specially designed tube to easily switch between the two pit systems while maintaining a steep angle for waste to be transported into the pits.



The Kutoa Toilet is built with a modular design so that improvements can be made over time. Add-ons, such as the feminine hygiene pit or rainwater catchment system, can be incorporated as the user desires so the toilet can grow with the user. The model that provides dried waste for fertilizer is called the “Msaidizi” or “helper” toilet. This toilet is for the average household in a farming area living in subsistence. This is the technology and design that we will focus on in this document. We are developing a second model called the “Mtoa” or “provider” toilet. This toilet will also feature the two-pit design, but we will modify it so that the system produces biogas, electricity, and wet fertilizer through anaerobic digestion. This toilet will requirea significantly larger upfront cost, so it is targeted toward the ambitious farmer or for implementation at the community level. We designed the toilets to be built in phases to spread the cost and construction over a manageable period of time, following the current practices in the region of Tanzania. In the first year, the superstructure will be paid for and completed, followed by the first pit. At this time the toilet can be used. In the second year, a second pit will be paid for and purchased, after which the first pit can be left to dry so that in the third year, the treated, dried waste can be removed from the first pit and used as fertilizer. Needs-Drivers-Context

NEEDS DRIVERS CONTEXT



Water Health

Dignity/privacy Maintainability/sustainability

Affordability Self-sufficient

Water contamination Normalcy of health condition

Sickness House layout

Social acceptability No policy/no enforcement of policy

Shortage of fertilizer due to animals dying

Perceived value Culture

Lack of infrastructure Financial priorities

Inadequate government support Lack of water

Climate

Needs – Metrics – Benchmarks – Specifications Comparison of select technologies are shown in the following table. In this evaluation, we examined how a redesigned pit latrine would compare to a source-separated latrine and a resource recoverylatrine. Some of the important criteria include the creation of value, isolation of waste (how well it works to separate the user from fecal matter), simplicity, ease of maintenance, and economics. Although all technologies are seen to create value (see section D. Learning and Reflection from Field Research) and have similar community buy-in and effectiveness, they differ in the simplicity of design, economics, and ease of maintenance. As is expected, the redesigned traditional pit latrine is the simplest and easiest to maintain, while the other technologies become more complex as additional features are added. Ultimately, we decided that the resource recovery toilet’s positives outweighed this added burden. Some of the advantages of such a system include (1) generating monetary revenue in addition to perceived value, (2) advanced treatment of waste creating a safer environment, and (3) meeting multiple aspirational and functional needs such as removing waste and creating fertilizer for farmers.





In order to measure whether or not a need has been met, we must select metrics to evaluate each need and a benchmark that this metric should meet or succeed to determine success. These metrics are shown in the table below for select needs/criteria. As in our evaluation, some of the most important needs chosen include how well the system works from an isolation and treatment standpoint, value generated, economics, simplicity, and ease of maintenance. Although the advanced composting toilet is more expensive and harder to maintain, cost and burden of such a system may be offset by the value generated from fertilizer (and potentially biogas, given an even more advanced system). To capture this balance we will evaluate the cost of the system (shillings) as well as the perceived value (qualitative, favorable opinion of users) and the monetary value (equivalent shillings generated from fertilizer or energy). We will also seek to make the technology as simple and maintenance-free as possible.



Top-down Problem Deconstruction For this top-down problem destruction process, we looked at the forces and drivers for organizations and businesses today. The top-line was essentially business relevance and growth. We realized that organizations strive to stay relevant as they combat all the industry forces, including competitors and new entrants. Businesses look to grow by tapping into new markets and being innovative. In terms of outfoxing the competition, questions that arise are as follows: “What are my competitors doing? What is their business model?” “How are they doing it, and how can I do better than them?” “Why are they concerned with fulfilling a particular consumer need?” and“When did they enter a particular market?”

In terms of outfoxing the entering new markets, questions like “What is the biggest and fast growing market?” arise. With regards to being innovative, “How can I improve my processes?” What new sustainable product can I create?” Specifically for new markets, in realization that the BOP is by far the largest of any market, an understanding of the market needs, drivers, and contexts is critical. Additionally, WWWWH (who-what-when-where-how)in relation to the market needs is also a major concern.



Bottom-up Problem Deconstruction The deconstruction of the problem from the bottom-up essentially looked at the underlying rationale behind the problem from the perspective of the consumer. In this process, we identified that the need to survive and live is paramount to the people in subsistence and perhaps people in general. From this, it is deduced that this need to survive was linked to deep concerns a person had for hisfamily and/or personal welfare. In turn, this led to some other deeper questions related to health and wellness, comfort, government support, and job security. Specifically, with regards to sanitation, it was determined that people, distance, toilet sturdiness, comfort, and dignity during use were critical needs and drivers for the consumer.



Process Design Ecosystem

KTI has two models in development, the Msaidizi (helper) Toilet, which is designed specifically for individual households, and the Mtoa (provider) Toilet, which is designed for a larger farm with sufficient human and animal waste to sustain a fertilizer and biogas system. Each toilet and its corresponding phases have specific and shared factors that help determine the system’s success. Present throughout each of the toilet’s series of phases are Community Buy-in, Materials Cost, and Market Viability. Community Buy-in is always crucial for the success of a product or movement. Without it, sustainability is impossible. Market Viability closely relates to Community Buy-in, because in order for a product to sell, consumers must recognize the need that the product fills. In other words, if the consumers see no need for an improved toilet that can potentially produce fertilizer and/or biogas, these new toilets will not be successful. Finally, pricing of a product is a delicate and specific task that must be



tailored to the products’ deliverables and consumers’ perceptions. Several of the components within this system are expensive,and the success of each phase of toilet depends on consumers’ willingness and ability to pay. Below is a breakdown of the specific factors that help determine the success of each toilet and phase. Msaidizi (Helper) Toilet Phase 1 - Treatment:

A. Build superstructure: In addition to the three factors outlined above, at this point, the toilet is not functional, and a great deal of money must be sunk into the construction of this part of the system with the intention that the customer will have enough time and money to bring the toilet to its next functioning stage.

B. Dig and line first pit: Building off of the needs of part A of Phase 1, with the completion of the first pit, the toilet is now functional and can be used like a safer and more contained traditional pit latrine the customer may be used to. There is still an additional pit that must be constructed before the customer will see the value added function of the system. Phase 2 – Fertilizer:

A. Dig and line second pit: Now consumers have a fully functioning Msaidizi toilet and can experience the benefits of a fertilizer-producing toilet. For the system to function properly, sufficient and consistent waste must be added to the first pit, and when filled, sealed, and the system switched to the next pit. After the second year of full use, the waste in the first pit is ready to be used as fertilizer. Consumers must get past the taboo idea of handling something that was once human waste. Mtoa (Provider) Toilet Phase 1 - Basic Toilet: Beyond the three factors outlined above, the basic toilet needs to function on no water. Water is a very limited resource in the dry season and must be reserved for drinking, cooking, and bathing. Phase 2 - Aerobic Fertilizer: Adding to the needs of Phase 1, additional maintenance is needed to optimize the output and quality of the fertilizer that is produced. This means regularly adding to the system, and if human waste cannot fulfill this need, additional animal and plant waste must be supplemented. As far as Market Viability is concerned, this phase of toilet is mainly usable for customers with farming needs. Phase 3 - Anaerobic Biogas: Even moreso than Phase 2, maintenance is imperative for the system to operate correctly and efficiently. More than ever, a constant stream waste must be added to feed the system. With drought being a common occurrence, animals often die off in the driest part of the year if water is unavailable, which leads to a lack of waste to feed the system. This further leads to the system being incomplete and shutting down. Similarly, water is necessary for the system to stay alive and productive. Finally, once biogas is generated, the gas must be processed for usage. This may be done by converting gas for cooking or for use in a generator for electricity.



Storyboard

To further understand the daily process of creating our final concept, we created a step-by-step storyboard. Team members separately created theirown interpretation of how they thought our target user would set up and construct our toilet system. Combining all of our storyboards together, we came up with a step-by-step process on how our target user would successfully build our system.

First, we would need to get the support of the village leaders in purchasing our toilet. When the villagers see that the village leader has faith in our project, then they would be inclined to build their own. The end user then decides to buy our toilet. Phase 1 occurs over the course of one year. Money is paid and the superstructure and first pit are built and the user can use the toilet.

Phase 2 occurs in the second year, where more money is paid to construct a second leach pit. When the second pit is complete, the pipe can be switched to use the second pit, and first pit can be left alone to



desiccate. After one year (the third year since initial purchase), the waste in the first pit has dried out and can be removed by hand (it is safe) and used as fertilizer. Concept Testing To test our concepts, we are contacting experts on human waste processing for biogas and fertilizer production to improve our design. It is our hope to observe an anaerobic digestion system in action. We plan to create a full-scale model of the latrine for anthropomorphic testing and empathic understanding of our user. We will create a smaller-scale model to get a holistic look at the product we are making. Prototyping We will build three prototypes. The first is a small-scale model where we can observe our design in a tangible way and bring our design to life. The second model will be a full-scale model out of crude materials for anthropomorphic testing. This will allow us to get a sense of what the end user experiences in our design. The third model will be a partial full-scale model, incorporating the real materials so we get a sense of theconstruction requirements, aesthetics, and functionality. Timeframe and Goals By 3/31 Set up Meeting with ag and bio professors By 4/7 Finalize the product for 3D printing By 4/14 Build the full-scale model for anthropomorphic study By 4/21 Begin construction with real materials on third model





Specifications of superstructure and pit



Plan view

Toilet seat showing western toilet and holes behind toilet for cleaning runoff



One of the pits

Brick lining of the pits for leaching of water



Side view showing unique pipe design

and PooToob funnel designed for

switching between pits.

Pitch of pipes is 60 degrees.



Digital Prototype



Rendering of unique tube connection



Small-Scale Prototype (1/12.5 scale), mixed media (wood, clay, plastic, cardboard, metal)











The subsistence market is a unique and intricate market that comprises the typical mass and niche characteristics while being diversified and multi-sided at the same time.For our product, we segment our market primarily based on their needs, region, and lifestyle. We focused on tackling places with major sanitation challenges like Tanzania.In terms of age, we are designing for all members of an average household, including fathers, mothers, teens, infants, and the elderly.Inasmuch as we would like to help out every household with similar problems and needs, we realize the challenge associated with such a strategy, and are employing a staged approach to enter the market. The first market entry point is through a small Meru community of about 100 households, of which about 10% will be first buyers and users. One of our major means of communication is an educational pamphlet that we will distribute through community centers and respective community leaders. In an effort to clearly communicate the functions and benefits of our sanitation solutions, the pamphlets are largely pictographic. Thus, customers can easily understand who we are and our product technicalities, irrespective of what level of literacy they are. Reasons for choosing this target market: (1) Community Buy-In From our market research and field interviews, we have a huge incentive to supply this market because of the relationship we have developed with the local community leader, MabokKiyati. (2) Patient Consumer - (Okay with Delayed Benefits) In light of the fact that our product provides longer-term sustainable benefits as opposed to benefits thatare immediate and instantaneous, it was important that the endconsumer had attributes of patience. That said, we chose this target community because its members were comfortable with waiting for the timethatour product takes toyieldthe agricultural and fertilizer benefits. (3) “Do It Yourself” and High Maintenance Culture Another reason we chose this consumer is because they are very handy and are accustomed to building and maintaining their living systems by themselves. In fact, the community already enforces a sanitation maintenance schedule that emphasizes cleanliness amongst other key things in the community on a timely basis. In light of this, we believe it will be less of a behavior change required for the community to adopt the maintenance aspect our sanitation solution. (4) Comfortable with Human Waste Management From our field research, we believe that most of the members of our target community will be comfortable with managing human waste safely and comfortably in recognition of the sustainable benefit it provides– i.e., fertilizer for their farms or for sale.



As a product that is positioned specifically at the subsistence marketplace, we must consider many unique strategies to sustainably reach our desired clientele. First, when approaching potential customers in the subsistence marketplace, most traditional strategies are ineffective. KTI uses word-of-mouth techniques primarily because based on our experiences in Tanzania, we concluded that other more widely used outlets, such as print advertisements, television, and Internet advertisements, do not reach our target markets. Specifically, encouraging community leaders to present KTI products and technology to their community is a great way to reach out to customers. In addition, demonstrations with fully functioning mockups help convey to customers in a concrete way rather than abstractly, which can be difficult to understand for some. This is particularly helpful, because the technology is so foreign. Finally, when we use printed materials, we heavily incorporate pictographic representation so that low-literate customers have a better chance of understanding the processes. Pricing for KTI’s toilet systems is a particularly delicate component contributing to the success and sustainability of its product lines. Understanding the average income of the segments we target was a driving force for our overall design. Earlier concepts and designs included costly mechanical systems, tanks, and materials. Once we realized our potential customers’ annual income, do-it-yourself mentality, and level of ability to perform maintenance, we learned quickly that simple and inexpensive is better.



For higher low-income Meru farmers, the Kutoa Toilet is the household sanitation solution that gives back to the consumer, community, and environment, because only Kutoa Toilets International (KTI) offers a three-phase producing toilet system with a payment program that allows consumers to pay for and build their system on their own time.

The following section examines the life cycle of each of the materials and parts that go into the construction of a Kutoamsaidizi Toilet. We selected allmaterialsto be durable and long lasting while also being reusable and recyclable. We also carefully considered the makeup of each material and chose materials made up of as few ingredients as possible. When possible, these few ingredients come directly “from the earth,” with as little processing and as small of a carbon footprint as possible. The Concrete Pad begins its life with local cement, sand, gravel, and water. The concrete is mixed locally and in most cases on site. The pad is poured into a reusable and biodegradable wood frame. Once installed, the slab is used for the life of the toilet, then either reused in another setting, or the concrete is broken up and recycled into more concrete, or it is harmlessly discarded. The Raised Foundation Bricks are locally constructed of mud concrete, which is made from mud, water, and cement. No specific aggregate or stone is needed to make this material, which can be mixed virtually anywhere with any soil. Once formed and dried, the bricks are installed and used for the life of the toilet. At the end of the toilet’s life, the bricks can be reused if in good shape or can be left to naturally deteriorate over time and become soil again. The Superstructure has a wide range of possible raw cladding materials. First, in all cases, the roofing material for superstructure is galvanized steel. The steel begins as iron ore that is mined, then processed into steel that is then galvanized for long-lasting resistance to rust. The metal material is purchased locally from within the country, but in most cases, not in the city. The material is then installed and used for the life of the toilet. When the toilet is no longer in used, the material can be reused or recycled. This metal roof and the petroleum-based pipes have the dirtiest lifecycle of any other parts used to construct the toilet. The walls of the superstructure can be made in the same way as the raised foundation: entirely out of mud concrete bricks. Other wall options start with a wood frame that is sustainably harvested from local new-growth trees. The wood is then used for its lifespan or the life of the toilet and then reused, burned, or left to biodegrade. Cladding can made of simple wood, utilizing galvanized steel, or even be cladded with fabric that has been coated with a stiffening agent. The fabric is produced from locally grown cotton,



installed on the structure, painted with the stiffening agent, and then used for the life of toilet or until upgraded. The fabric is then discarded or burned. The two Brick-Lined Leach Pits are made of the same mud concrete bricks as described above. The bricks are used for the life of the toilet, or until they deteriorate, are broken down and reused, made into new bricks, or discarded to break down naturally. The PVC Drain Pipes will likely be produced in China, transported to Tanzania, installed on the toilet, and used for the life of the toilet. Pipes are then reused, recycled, or discarded. The Extruded Plastic Pipe Funnel (PooToob) is produced from plastic as locally as possible. The product is used for the life of the toilet, then reused in another Kutoa toilet, recycled, or discarded.

Throughout the project process, great importance has been placed on utilizing local resources whenever possible. The Kutoa Toilet line from its onset will positively and sustainably affect the large value chain itresides in. First, the toilets are designed as a place for consumers to defecate in safely and comfortably. Second, KTI toilets offer value-added functions in the form of fertilizer production and biogas generation. These two functions, when compounded over several years, more than recoup the cost of construction one of the examples. Beyond the immediate consumer-to-product interaction, KTI toilets required local materials and businesses to produce the necessary parts for each kit. Local representatives will also manage marketing and distribution of the kits. Community leaders will play a crucial role in introducing and ensuring proper maintenance of these systems. Similarly, local teams will manage the optional kit assembly and construction, and likewise, this group will handle the optional maintenance as well. During the beginning stages of implementation, overall management, decision-making, and design alterations will be done by US-based teams, but as the toilet systems become more refined, and teams are trained locally, these tasks will be transferred to several local teams.

In terms of our value proposition, some of the key questions we needed to answer were: What value do we deliver to the customer? Which of the customer’s problems and needs are we solving and satisfying? What are the main product and service packages we are offering?KTI offers value in terms of the dynamic models and systems we design that truly grow and give back to the community over time. This is all part of the innovative culture we foster in our company. Our key designs are the helper and provider toilets, which are catered to people in subsistence globally; however,we designed our first iteration of these products specifically for the context of Tanzania. Not only are our products designed to meet the survival, health, and sanitation needs of our customers, they are designed to do so over a lifetime. This is part of what makes KTI unique in the marketplace.



To stimulate a desire for our product, our team has devised a plan for communicating the value of our product to the end user, including direct interaction with the community with pictographic pamphlets, prototypes, and desiccated waste. Kutoa Toilets International will meet with the leaders of the community



to propose the Kutoa Toilet as a sustainable solution for the community. KTI will present the prototype to the community and explain the benefits of the Kutoa Toilet and how it ranks in comparison to open defecation or to their current toilets. We will show a prototype of the toilet and provide a walkthrough of



the technology, using a friendly pictographic pamphlet showing how easy and worthwhile the toilet is, as we explain the benefits at each step as compared to their current circumstance. Finally, we will also be bringing desiccated waste, handling it with our bare hands, and showing how it is no longer waste, but



simply a brick of nutrients that can be used as fertilizer.

Expansion Plan When it comes to our expansion plan, KTI will leverage the demographic and locational advantages that exist in the various rural districts in Tanzania. With a current focus on the Meru district in Arusha, we look to expand our operations one village at a time, keeping our focus on meeting the sanitation needs of our customers, even as we stay lean in our operations.

Source: http://wholevillage.umn.edu/documents/Region.pdf The first village we will target is Jacob’s village. There are about 100 households in his village, and by collaborating with Jacob, who is a community leader, we will capture about 10% of the membership. Through the strong collaboration with community leaders like Jacob and through the proven success of our product(s), we look to get the buy-in of the entire community, educating them on the benefits we provide as we inspire them to invest in our solutions for sanitation. As part of our growth strategy, not only will we grow across Tanzania’s village districts; we look to expand into villages in neighboring countries such asKenya and Uganda as well. Eventually, we look to take our unique capabilities to subsistence marketplaces all over the world.

http://wholevillage.umn.edu/documents/Region.pdf



MARKET DETAILS & EXPANSION PLAN

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

Phase 1 Community Leaders Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6First Village (Jacob) 100Village 1 107Village 2 214Village 3 333Village 4 388Village 5 443

TOTAL 100 321.3675 1164.2 0 0 0

Phase 2 Community Leaders Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6First Village (Jacob) 80Village 1 86Village 2 171Village 3 266Village 4 310Village 5 355

TOTAL 0 80 257 931 0 0

Total Community Size Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6First Village (Jacob) 500 518 536 554 574Next Village 1000 1035 1071 1109 1148Next 2 Villages 2000 2070 2142 2217 2295Next 3 Villages 3000 3105 3214 3326 3443Next 5 Villages 3500 3623 3749 3881 4016Next 5 Villages 4000 4140 4285 4435 4590

TOTAL 14490 14997 15522 16065 0 0

Phase 1 Community Buy-in Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6First Village (Jacob) 52 268 277Village 1 107 536 554Village 2 214 1071 1109Village 3 333 1607 1663Village 4 388 1875 1940Village 5 443 2142 2217

TOTAL 0 52 589 3048 7287 5821

Phase 2 Community Buy-in Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6First Village (Jacob) 41 214 222Village 1 86 428 443

Village 2 171 857 887

Village 3 266 1285Village 4 310 1500

Village 5 355 1714

TOTAL 0 0 41 471 2439 5830



The Assumptions In forecasting and projecting KTI’s financial health into the immediate future, there some important assumptions that we made that must be considered. Assumptions are stated below:

• KTI is operating based on its setup as a low-profit limited liability company • Company tax rate is 20.0% • Cost of capital is about 5.0% • Rural communities in Tanzania grow at a rate of 3.5% • For the first village, we will get 10 community leaders, including Jacob, to procure the basic toilet • 35% of all our customers will be able to pay one-time • 65% of all our customers will pay in installments • Annual variable costs are 20% of the total fixed costs • Additional organizational costs are 10% of the total fixed and variable costs • A 7-year cost recovery schedule of 0%, 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 25% over 8 years • In our fifth year, our company market value will be (at least) twice the expected revenue

Capital Request We are requesting a total of about $500,000 in capital for our venture. These funds will be expensed towards for critical efforts, including:

• Product specification and finalization • Field research • Customer relations and development of local partnership • Sales and marketing • Labor

KEY INPUTS & ASSUMPTIONSCorporate Tax (Assumed) 20.0%Discount rate (Assumed) 5.0%Community & Village Info / Assumptions

Community Growth Rate 3.5%Phase 1 Market Capture (Initial) 10.0%Phase 1 Market Capture (Recurring) 50.0%Phase 2 Market Capture (Recurring) 80.0%

PricingOne time 210.00$ Instalments 70.00$ three times

Customer CategoriesOne-time payers 35% onlyIntalmentalists 65%

CostsFixed Cost (Phase 1) - Superstruct (75.00)$ (90.00)$ Fixed Cost (Phase 1) - Tank (28.00)$ (36.00)$ Fixed Cost (Phase 2) - Tank (28.00)$ (36.00)$ Variable Costs (% of Fixed) 15%Additional Costs (% of Total Cost) 10%



• And other general expenses

Investments For our business, we will need a series of capital injections every year for the first three years. After the third year, we look to be profitable enough to meet the cost recovery schedule to payback investment dollars and still retain dollars to fund our operations. In Year 0, we need $180,000 to fund critical activities for our operations – activities that are affiliated with those mentioned above. Of the capital injection amount, about a third of Year 0’s budget will be used for stage 2 of our field market research efforts. This entails the development of stronger customer relations in the different villages we enter and the establishment of strategic partnerships on ground. We will need $50,000 to finalize our product design and specification. Over the years, we will continue improving on our overall portfolio of products in concordance with the feedback we receive from customers. We have budgeted $25,000 concurrently for years 0 to 4 to be used for additional product development efforts. We will mainly use Year 0production specification funds to finalize our unique pipe that is required for our toilets. We will use about 15% of investment capital for general and administrative costs. Customer relations development is an important aspect of our business model, and we have allocated funds for this effort as well. This will be a part of further field and market immersion that the team needs to conduct every annually. During every trip, the KTI team will develop new customers, evaluate the state of our existing products, and enhance our partnerships with local vendors. Revenue We have set a price point of $210.00 per toilet. While this price point is greater than the average cost of their toilet today, we believe that this price is very reasonable in light of all the needs that our sustainable products will address. In the first year, low revenue dollars of about $9,800 are projected. However, in the 2nd and 3rd years, revenue should increase in line with our expansion strategy that takes advantage of close proximity of our target subsistence villages in Tanzania, Uganda, and Kenya. By Year 5, we project that our top line will be about $664,288.

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

(180,000)$ (87,394)$ (87,683)$ (112,471)$ (186,010)$ (467,548)$

The Request Amount From Investors is…

Discounted Costs

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5-End

INVESTMENTSField & Market Research 1 (40,000)$ Sunk CostDesign & Conceptualization Costs (10,000)$ Sunk CostField & Market Research 2 (50,000)$ (25,000)$ (25,000)$ (25,000)$ (25,000)$ Product Specification Costs (50,000)$ (25,000)$ (25,000)$ (25,000)$ (25,000)$ Maintenance & Equipment Buffer (25,000)$ (20,000)$ (30,000)$ (40,000)$ (50,000)$ General & Administrative Costs (25,000)$ (20,000)$ (25,000)$ (30,000)$ (35,000)$ Other Costs (30,000)$ (20,000)$ (10,000)$ (10,000)$ (10,000)$ 1,461,434$ Net Working Capital -$ 1,764$ 8,434$ 38,633$ 114,643$ -$ Changes in Working Capital -$ (1,764)$ (6,670)$ (30,199)$ (76,010)$ 38,633$ Total Cash Flow of Investment (180,000)$ (91,764)$ (96,670)$ (130,199)$ (186,010)$ 1,500,067$



Operational Costs At KTI, we will run a lean and healthy operation even as we drive for quality in our production process. The total operational costs for Year 1to Year 4are $14,214, $48,367, $175,502, and $245,697, respectively. For each year, we estimate the total fixed and variable costs to be about 83.33% of the total cost of operations. The ‘Other cost’ line items include organizational and insurance expenses, and we estimate these to be 16.67% of total operational costs.

Earnings/Income Given the low projected revenue for Year 1 and with operational costs higher than revenue, the corresponding bottom line ends up being negative. In the following year, our earnings before taxes and cost recovery are still estimated to be negative. However by Year 3, with a cost recovery rate of 5% and a corporate tax rate of about 20%, we project net income to be about $19,600. For Years4and 5, weproject bottom line values at$131,437 and $237,500, respectively.

Cash Flow We estimate cash flows to be in the negative until Year 4. We estimate KTI’s market value to be $1,660,000 at the end of Year 5. This leads to a positive net present value (NPV) of $1M. Concordantly, the payback period is projected to be about three years and two months from first capital injection in Year 0.Thus, from a purely financial standpoint, given the positive NPV and other aforementioned points, KTI is deemed as a valuable investment opportunity for investors. With our focus on sanitation in subsistence marketplaces, KTI can serve as a key asset for investors to diversify the risk in their respective portfolios.


MARKET PROJECTIONS & REVENUEOne Time Payers

Price per Unit 210$ 210$ 210$ 210$ 210$ New Customers 35$ 159$ 718$ 2,047$ 2,145$ Revenue 7,350$ 33,304$ 150,809$ 429,815$ 450,350$

Instalment PayersPrice per Unit 70$ 70$ 70$ 70$ 70$ New Customers 35 159 718 2,047 2,145 Old Customers 35 194 912 912 Revenue 2,450$ 13,551$ 63,821$ 207,093$ 213,938$

Total Revenue 9,800$ 46,856$ 214,630$ 636,907$ 664,288$


COSTSFixed - Phase 1 Superstruct (7,500)$ (24,103)$ (87,312)$ (104,774)$ (125,729)$ Fixed - Phase 1 Tank (2,800)$ (8,998)$ (32,596)$ (39,116)$ (46,939)$ Fixed - Phase 2 -$ (2,240)$ (8,358)$ (39,275)$ (39,275)$ Variable (MSG&A) (1,545)$ (4,965)$ (17,986)$ (21,583)$ (25,900)$ Fixed + Variable (11,845)$ (40,306)$ (146,252)$ (204,747)$ (237,842)$ Other 1 (1,185)$ (4,031)$ (14,625)$ (20,475)$ (23,784)$ Other 2 (1,185)$ (4,031)$ (14,625)$ (20,475)$ (23,784)$ Total Operating Costs (14,214)$ (48,367)$ (175,502)$ (245,697)$ (285,410)$


EARNINGSEBT before Cost Recovery (4,414)$ (1,512)$ 39,128$ 391,210$ 378,878$

Cost Recovery % 0.0% 2.5% 5.0% 105.0% 7.5%Cost Recovery Dollars -$ (4,500)$ (9,000)$ (189,000)$ (13,500)$

EBT (4,414)$ (6,012)$ 30,128$ 202,210$ 365,378$ Taxes @ 20% 1,545$ 2,104$ (10,545)$ (70,774)$ (127,882)$

Net Income (2,869)$ (3,908)$ 19,583$ 131,437$ 237,496$



A successful waste management product will provide users with a clean environment. It is essential, therefore, that our product has a positive ecological impact. Our technology will remove waste and harmful pathogens from the home and surrounding area. Proper containment is designed to isolate or eliminate this waste from the environment rather than redistribute it. Our impact on the environment will be measured by fecal coliforms, an indicator of contamination by human waste. We anticipate that our product will reduce fecal coliforms in the home and surrounding area, as well as produce a dry waste with zero fecal coliforms that may be used as fertilizer. The resources generated from this process can replace



costly and detrimental chemical fertilizers and fossil fuels. Lastly, all of our technologies are created to be simple, minimal-impact designs using locally sourced materials.

Our product will isolate fecal matter and reduce the transfer of disease-causing agents, promoting cleaner environments and improving the health of our users as measured by lost work hours. Our productwill also create healthier and happier lifestyles for the home user, while reducing the financial burden of disease and increasing the amount of school and workdays that children and adults can attend. In addition to passive economic gain, our system seeks to actively generate resources in the form of fertilizer that may be used or sold by our users. This adds monetary and perceived value to a system that is already well regarded for its more immediate use (i.e., waste removal), and empowers users to take control of their family and farming needs. A positive impact will be measured by a combination of qualitative (user acceptance, ease of maintenance, overall satisfaction, etc.) and quantitative (fecal coliform reduction, reduced lost workdays) measurements.

As discussed in Section IV, “Field Research and Product Development,” we will measure technology performance by the following metrics: (1) Fecal coliforms (measurement of treatment) (2) Perceived (qualitative) and actual value ($ fertilizer generated) (3) Simplicity, ease of maintenance, and cultural appropriateness (qualitative) (4) Economics ($ cost of system) Benchmarks (see Section IV, E) have been selected to ensure that each product meets a minimum standard of quality. We will measure performance at the company level by (1) Profit, (2) People, and (3) Planet, as listed in Section III, D. Specifically, Kutoa Toilets International will seek to be profitable by the end of Year 3 and achieve a return to investors. People and planet will be considered successful if the benchmarks of value, simplicity, economics (people), and treatment (planet) are met.

Kutoa Toilets International aims to come alongside these communities and make sure their basic sanitation needs are being not only met, but exceeded. At least once every five years, Kutoa Toilets International will pay a visit to the implemented toilets to check in on the community and to evaluate how the design can be improved and how effectively it is impacting the user and creating value. KTI will sit down with its consumers to evaluate their changing needs and keep a dynamic business with continuous assessment and field research. Since our consumers will be growing economically, we want to assess and



design improvements that can be made through the lifetime of the toilet so that we follow through on our promise of providing a dynamic system. KTI will also have the potential to generate a great numberof jobs once it is established in Tanzania. As this business is established and growing, one measure of success will be the employment rate and wages of these employees. As the company expands into new regions, continuous monitoring and evaluation will be essential so that an appropriate amount of customization can occur, including the role of water and maintenance.



The image part with relationship ID rId110 was not found in the file.



Tanzania Field notes:

2/17/14

Ngarenanyuki:

• School: o Farming:

Natural Pesticide + Fertilizer: Urine, tobacco, with water. Ferment for a few days and then use. Can add ash to solution to neutralize

Hot peppers used to naturally deter pests from crops o History:

Site originally to educate workers’ children from the surrounding farm House on site served as a chapel for the head master, also a location for slavery

• House #1: o 5 women and a baby boy

• House #2: o Mom, Dad, 3 kids (9, 6, 1) o Income: 60,000 shillings per month

Raise approximately 6 liters of meat a day and save one for themselves They also farm corn and onions, but these crops are unreliable

o Typical day: Wake up a little before 6 to prepare them for school Prepare food, feed cattle and cook for husband Collect water in large containers. Takes approximately 20 minutes round trip to

get it if the well is not crowded o ~8+-year-old pit latrine made of wood with a stone foundation

Walls about 7’ tall Lockable door about 6’ tall x 20” wide Inside had an unstable slatted floor with a hole in it Pit was hand dug with dirt walls

• Issues are that walls fall in easily and compromise the entire structure’s stability

o What does sanitation mean to you? Having water for the toilet, washing hands, cleaning

o What is good sanitation? Having water

o What is bad sanitation? Having no water to clean

o What would you do without water? Not really an issue because there are sources near by Without water, there will be disease and sickness

o How do you know if water is safe to consume? Looks at color, smell and proximity of defecating animals to judge if water is

safe o Medical treatment:

Has not been to hospital since she was in school Has had a cough, but licks a mossy stone and believes this will make her healthy

o What are your most important tasks as a wife? Cooking, cleaning, washing clothing



No chemicals used to clean, ONLY water o Toilet:

8 years old Used only by the family Use ash to kill smell New toilet: ~700,000 for a new one as an estimate

• This is the cost of one nicer than an outhouse • Perhaps with nicer materials including a porcelain hole and foot grip

o Bathing: done outside in different locations o Trash: everything including plastic is burned o Government support? None whatsoever

2/18/14

Malula School: • Elizabeth, community development leader: • School built in 1998 (same with toilet) • 4-14 years old. More girls (75%) • Tap is empty by the school • 14 female teachers, 4 male

o teachers have a different toilet: o they aren't happy about it, but would like something with better materials and that is

larger • Hand-washing station with soap in containers

o pouring mechanism not functioning o wire too loose, but some children know how to use it o children do not use the washing station all the time o strong smell of waste in and around toilets/structure

• Pit latrine, o Not sure how deep, but 200 meters o city comes in and empty it, never been emptied o empty in a dump outside the city

• Maintenance: o cleaned once a day because of shortage of water, Use some soap Omo

students bring jugs of water from home for cleaning If no water, have to help with other chores water that they bring is for washing and cleaning drinking water is from a water bottle, but is filled at home from tap Students and teachers both clean Cleaning habits learned from mothers and teachers

• what to improve? o 250 to 607 students. They want to make 10 for boys and 12 for girls o Want to have a separate building for girls and boys o Students complain about not being enough space

• Student sickness? o Some sickness, but can't tell where it is from: home or school o Urinary tract infection 25% o No open dedication at school, but yes in the community



Community Leaders

• They are all farmers as well o Usually go to bathroom in the bush when farming o Industrial fertilize, corn, grain, beans, rice, no manure. Because there is no more

livestock o Manure they prefer, fertilizer are expensive. Side effects, but better crops

• Average family size? 6 people, 2 on low end. 6, 6, 5 • What is sanitation to you? Sanitation is day to day with toilet, washing, cleaning. No soup, they

just use water • Water is boiled for drinking • Been a leader for a long time now. Sanitation, not a real concern for a while. A routine now for

families • What have they done to ensure good sanitation?

o Oikos came in and implemented a toilet in every household and improved house • What is good sanitation? • What is bad sanitation?

o Overflowing of sewage in the rainy season because thee is so much to do in this season • What do these toilets look like? • What would you like to see in sanitation? • Thursday they go around and take care of sanitation things and makes sure that they keep a

standard. A hired agency takes the rubbish away. • Committee makes regulations and changes are implemented over time.

o Deadlines to get toilet, either punished or sent to court to ask why • Do they have to maintain the toilet?

o Need to have it cleaned • What is "clean"?

o Toilet has to have a cover, water, and soap • How much does a toilet cost?

o 1,000,000, cheaper ones o 500,000 with worse materials and no water or soap o It is important to have the toilet, if cannot afford it, they are encouraged to make a

simpler one o Nice ones are tiled

• Is there any government support? o No policy in place, but Oikos will provide for shoes cannot afford it

• What is the average income? • 70% with standard toilet, 27% have normal, 3% use public

o They all like the flush, but there is no water • Human fertilizer:

o Heard about human fertilizer o Some make bio gas and use the waste as manure o Would they use human manure?

If processing technology was made available o ***They would really like it!!! o Would you be willing to pay for the equipment if over time was effective?

Yes, always ready • What is next?

o Pipelines for water. And then water in toilets for flush



*** Waste of water? o Is there enough water?

Not sure, get some from a mountain • Health issues related to toilet or water?

o Not recently • Do these improve with toilet mandate?

o Used to be a lot more diarrhea and eye issues. Sanitation changes have been key to changing health. Have found that the issues are due to sanitation and not water.

• Water from neighbor city from a tap 4k away • Future goals?

o Water is key because family health is improved, quality of life is better because jot fetching water all the time.

• Kitchen cleanliness? Very important, don't want to eat waste ***how do you keep the kitchen clean, the surfaces, plates, utensils? ***Where do you change your baby?

• Human waste processing: knowledge is power. • Would like to have it asap. ***

2/19/2014

Maasai Training Camp – Nomael Gabrielle

• 9 children: 5 boys and 4 girls • Where do you live?

o Life is difficult, but she is living o No rain now, which means no cows o No schools anymore either

• Milk used to be sold, but no more cows o Used to be 40 liters a day @ 500 shillings per liter o 10 cows 20,000 shillings per cow/day or 200,000 shillings a day

• What does you do all day? o She beads most of the day o Looks for fire wood every other day o Gets water, with donkeys and takes 4 hours round trip

2-4 containers on a donkey and 1 on her back She uses the water for drinking, washing, clothing, gods, and cows Would like to use for bathing everyday, but not enough water. Bathe once a

week • She bathes in her bedroom for privacy

• What does your house look like? o Round mud house on a wood frame, grass/thatch roof o 3 rooms in her house o Husband has his own house o She built the houses o No bathrooms o Have a toilet

• What does the toilet look like? o Concrete floor with wooden enclosure



o Wood is better than mud because it can wash away into the pit o Built by her oldest son o Has a deep pit o 5 years old o Cost 150,000 shillings

• How do you clean the toilet? o Pours in water and then brushes it out with a broom

• Beading: o All women in the boma make jewelry o 7,000 per necklace o Makes 10 necklaces a week o Sells 2-4 of them (14,000 – 28,000 shillings per week)

• Where does she cook? o She cooks in her sitting room o She uses a lot of fire wood o Takes 30 minutes to cook or longer with limited wood

• Health issues? o Shoulder problems from falling o Had spots all over body and not sure why

• What do you do with trash? o Burn all trash, including plastic

Maasai man - Abraham Goloba

• Family: wife, 3 kids: 2 boys, 1 girl • Wife is 24, he is 27 • What do you do for work?

o Herds animals Had 45 goats and now down to 22 Had 13 cows and now down to 8

o No milk, but for meat • Where do you get water?

o Used to go to Gayanuki: 19 km away o Now go to dam built by Oikos in Makuru that is 3 km away o Water collected is just for people o *** When there is sun, there is no water, must go to dam

• Where do you bathe? o Inside during the day and outside at night

• What does your toilet look like? o Does not have one yet, must go in the open. He goes far away from the house to do so,

his children go closer • What would your new toilet look like?

o 150,000 for small one o 2m deep pit o Wood walls, floor, and ceiling o Would prefer a concrete floor because it is sturdier, but is too expensive (300,000) o Would be 20m from house o *** Would be willing to consider an alternative idea o Would like a deep hole with concrete walls because it lasts longer



Not actually true, would have to be emptied Would not like to have to empty it because he would have to do it himself

• Would you use a toilet that separated liquids from solids? o No, because it is strange

• What do you hope for your family’s future? o He wants a good house and toilet (would stay if it was) o Wants his kids to go to school

Village Doctor –

• Been the doctor since 1970 • What diseases have you witnessed?

o Most common diseases are cancer and malaria o From water? No

• What issues do women have? o Problems with their stomachs…

• Where did you get the materials for your toilet? o Most of the materials are from Kilimanjaro, which was 10 hours away by car

• How much did your toilet cost? o He built it and it cost 200,000 shillings

• Why do you like your toilet? o Because it can provide good health

• Does everyone have a toilet? o Not everyone has one

• Do you open your toilet up to others? o Not to everyone, just the boma

• What do you wish for your community? o Would like water and a hospital

• Would you be willing to use waste for something? o Never heard of it and would not give it to his people o Would sell it to white people, but not for him o If he saw it working, he would consider it o Would be open if he was the only one doing it

Maasai Woman - Agnes

• Do you like your toilet? o Yes because with a toilet comes good health and no diseases

• What diseases? o Bad smell in the house can make you feel sick

• Would you like a different toilet if it were improved? o Yes, I would like a modern toilet with nicer materials o Would like a water flush, but no water around

• How do you clean your toilet? o No cleaning because she never remembers to o She bathes in the toilet with water

• Does the smell bother you?



o It is what it is • What do you want for your family’s future?

o She wants a bathroom and nice toilet for her 6 children o She likes the Oikos toilet because it is closer

2/20/2014

Community Leader – Jacob Nyiti

• House has electricity, radios, generators, tile flooring • He has no prior knowledge of biogas/human waste fertilizer • What are your energy/nutrient (fertilizer) needs for your community/family?

o Would like to have 10 systems to serve as an example o Organic fertilizer costs 40,000 for 50kg o Industrial fertilizer costs 80,000 for 50kg

• Have you ever seen biogas used? o Has heard about it and thinks that it will be cheaper than using fire wood because of the

government ban on cutting down trees • How long does it take to collect firewood per day?

o 2-3 hours per day o (Using biogas could save some of this time)

• 98 households in community o All have latrines except 3

• How much fertilizer do you use for your farm? o 200kg per season (only one season per year) o He has 4 acres (roughly 50kg of fertilizer needed per acre)

• How many acres in the community? o Roughly 2000 total o Most farms use manure they can produce because industrial is too expensive o They prefer organic fertilizer because they know it’s better for their health o They allowed outside farmers to come in and farm to show the community new

techniques • How many animals do you have?

o 3 cows and 10 goats • Biogas can open the door to cooking, electricity, appliances • If you had to choose, would you like biogas or fertilizer (5 minutes a day for composting or 30

minutes a day for both fertilizer and biogas)? o I would prefer to spend more time and get both for a little more time

• How much would you be willing to pay? o I would be willing to pay a lot for this technology because I know it will help

• What are your worries about the technology? o No really worries, even political issues related to using human waste around growing

food because he believes his community will see the value and the results • How long are you willing to wait to see results from the system? 2 months it has an 80% chance

of working? o Would be willing to wait because he believes there will be results in the long run and it

will produce something • Do you believe your community can sustain such a technology after the NGO leaves?



o Yes because they are willing to work for a result and a better life • What is the likelihood someone won’t be around to add (waste) to the system?

o Very little chance because most people spend time at home and use the toilet at home • Would farmers be willing to handle human waste if like soil? Like dry manure? Like wet manure?

o Less of an issue when it has gone through a process, but best if done without using bare hands

• Latrine size: o Enclosure: 4’ x 3’ x 6-7’ o Door: 2’ wide o Foot pads 12” on center o Pit depth: 5-10 meters

NGO – Action for National Environmental Protection Organization (Anna Natola)

• If we have health we are happy • Used to have a lot of natural foods and clean water in Tanzania, but in recent times we have

been destroying it • In many cases, women are blamed for a lot of the issues dealing with health

o When children are sick because of contaminated water and food, women are blamed o Men should share the responsibility

• Bottom line, must stop contaminating water sources and environment to stop issues • Barson Filter

o Uses local materials in its construction o Mold cost 5,000,000 shillings

Can produce one filter every 24 hours o Uses concrete, crushed stone (not sand because stone is cleaner) o Small stone is where bacteria dies o Also uses a bio-layer with “starving” bacteria that eats new bacteria from new water

dripping in. o Very effective at 98% removal of bacteria o Capacity is 20 liters o Education is key to making it work correctly

5 day program to learn how filter works (very expensive program to run) o Filter cost 150,000 shillings each

***This is a preventative technology and can be hard for potential customers to see

• 6000 shillings to boil 20 liters of water o Can filter up to 200 liter per day when waiting 20 minutes between each batch o Can last up to 40 years o Maintenance: must change bio-layer every 3 months and leave for 5 days o Filter brings peace to families

No need to search for fire wood as often No need to go to a special place for cleaner water Can work on other things while water is filtering

o Does NOT remove other contaminants like fluoride o Very durable and long lasting o There is a lot of demand, but not enough supply because takes too long to produce o Would like to change countries attitude about the environment, but no support from

the government Government would like to support larger scale efforts



She believes change must start at the family scale o She approaches potential customers by asking about illness, and usually related to

water o Currently 55 liters in the surrounding area

People hear about the filter on TV and radio • EcoSun Toilets:

o Separates urine from solids 15,000 shillings for just the separated molded concrete o Pee goes into a separate container and can be used as fertilizer when mixed with water o Two pits are used for solid waste- each for 6 months, and then switched o Each pit sits for 6-9 months minimum where it is mixed with ash and let to sit and dry

out o Used for families and homes

Encouraged not to throw and feminine hygiene material into pit o Needs to be above water table and out of the way of flooding or can overflow o Produces 10-15kg per family per 6 months and 60 liters of urine

• Tippie Tap: o Used for hand washing so that dirty hands do not touch water source

• Mold for VIP toilet: o They offer a mold for feet pads (30,000 shillings)

Local Materials:

• Wood: o Expensive and getting more and more scares and government mandates about cutting

down trees increase • Brick:

o Homemade and sustainable o Clay, mud, concrete

• Steel: o Used primarily in structure and in corrugated form as roof and wall materials o Expensive

• Concrete: o Widely used and expertise is available locally o Not positive reinforcement is used or not

• Fabric: o Can be used as is or with a stiffening agent that is painted on

• Mud: o Always available, but not very long lasting or durable

• Plastic: o Can be molded into practically anything o Expensive o Holds bacteria?

Miscellaneous Notes:

• Extensive ventilation must be used to create a better experience



o The best examples of comfortable latrines had no roof or a large clerestory for ventilation

o Could be done on all four sides including door • Move pit away from being directly under user to help reduce spell • Vent to collect gas or reduce smell • Add a lid to toilet to cap smell • Put a removable floor in to aid in cleaning? • Build-in water pour in area that directs water to clean the toilet

o Could also be tied into rain collection from the roof

Tanzania Field Notes:

Ian – Field Notes

2/17/14

Primary School

School has garden – use cow urine from nearby farmer with mix of tobacco, urine, water. Insecticide and fertilizer

Households

Introduction to family, 4 women and children. Interviewed and took samples

Interview #1 Ngukuru:

What does sanitation mean? Hygiene/cleanliness/etc.

Sanitation in toilet means: having water for toilet and environment

Good sanitation is having water for washing, bad is not having water

Challenges to good sanitation: shortage of water

Takes 20 minutes to get water there and back

What happens from bad sanitation? Disease, illness in family but also around house

Last time went to hospital was grade school.

Use “nagai” plant to treat cough



Can water cause bad sanitation? Water from cattle is not good

How to tell if bad water? Smell and color

Most important responsibilies? Cooking and cleaning for family

How to clean? Water

Toilet: 8 years old, use ash to get rid of smell. Afraid of it collapsing (wooden toilet and slab)

Want to construct new toilet, if money. Says there’s cost 150,000. 700,000 for nice VIP ones.

Bathroom is not designated earlier. Collapsing big worry.

2/18/14

Primary School – Malula, Elizabethe Community Leader

City comes to pump and dump waste.

Interview #2 (head teacher):

Doesn’t know how much waste is to pump. Because of shortage of water, clean 1 time a day. Uses Omo soap.

Every student brings jug of water from home for washing. Built 1998, 200 students, over 600 now. Update for 2 buildings. Age 4-13/14. Very roughly 75% girl, 25% boy. No gov’t support for sanitation. Have some at secondary school.

Some sick children, usually UTI, don’t know where get from. Up to 25% of kids sick.

Kids complain about toilets, mostly how many students use them. Drinking water – kids bring bottles from home.

Pit unlined.



Interview with kids:

Clean toilets w/ soap, brought home, but learned at home as well.

Some (one) has flush at home. Those that don’t want flush because it “flushes” the bacteria away. But would still clean with soap. Clean toilet every day with soap.

Community Center – Health and Water Committees

What is sanitation? Day to day activity. Toilets, cleaning, water for drinking. Boiling water

How has sanitation changed? More education and sanitation.

What has education done? Oikos programs/workshops on sanitation, every household has toilets now.

Bad: Overflow of pits during rainy season, no time for cleaning

Good: Special day for sanitation issues. Health officer checks for standards. Keep mentioning standards: Regulation made in area. Garbage comes around, collects. Standards change with time. Includes having toilet and cleaning. More specifically:

(1) has water (2) toilet cover and (3) soap

Average cost 1 million shillings or 500,000 (ideal system)

Most important to be clean. What if people can’t afford? Big challenge. Need to have toilet of any kind. Support from Oikos, but not government.

70% w/ standard, 27% normal, 3% use neighborhood

Community center toilets were not high “standard”. When on the farm, go wherever. Same as women.

Children/fam: 6, 6, and 5 family size.



Industrial fertilizer. Maize and grain. Only fertilizer. Why not manure? Use to use, but animals are dying, global warming, rough dry season. Wish to use, but to access. Can’t always afford fertilizer, so just have to do without when don’t have manure.

A few farms (far away) may use biogas or waste, but they are unfamiliar with it.

Next big thing: Pipelines from water source, want to hook up toilets. Priority is water. If can afford, flush. If not, tap only.

Is there enough water for flush? Can’t tell. Water source is near mountain near Arusha.

As of recent problem, more diarrhea before Oikos.

2/19/14

Maasai Training Camp (Mkuru)

Name: Gabriela, 9 children. “Life is difficult, but I am living.” No rain, last year life was good, more cows. Cows are gone this year. Cows give milk and money, kids go to school, she makes beads.

Tap “not far” from house is 2 hours away, 4 total. Can’t go alone, use donkey to carry. Some carry 4 or 2 jugs, she can carry 1 only.

She built her house. Bathe once a week in bedroom, doesn’t have bathroom. Has toilet, used wood to build. Her son bought the wood, thought it was better. Concrete floor. To clean, pours water and sweeps. Built 5 years ago. 150,000 shillings.

Abraham: Family 1 wife, 3 kids.

Goats and cattle, 13 cows down to 8, 45 goats down to 32.Rough dry season.



Water from Ngunenyuki (19km) Oikos (3km, January to April). Water from Mkuru pump from solar, not enough for animals.

Toilet cost 150,000.Wood to cover (wall) and floor.Concrete better, more expensive say 300,000.

Elias and Agnes

Husband, Maasai village doctor and wife. She likes toilet, good health, no disease but bad smell. Wants modern, flush. But doesn’t think it is possible. No water. What does she hope for? Bathroom, nice toilet.

2/20/14

Second interview with Jacob.

40,000 shillings – org. fertilizer/50kg

80,000 – urea,

200kg per season for 4 acre farm. Estimates 98 households, 95 toilets, and 2000 total acres in his sub village.

Research centers in area “Savannah” that tests manure and shows farming techniques. Had 6 cows, but only 3 now.

For biogas or composting toilet – will pay whatever it costs.

2/21/14

Fluoridation center. Mainly use adsorption processes, bone char. 500-600 best temp, says 400 has best removal but organic matter and color released into water.















India Field notes





















Documents

Kutoa Toilets International - Gies College of Business Sanitation Business Plan Business Cases June 2012 . Kutoa Toilets International A document for BADM 533: Sustainable Product