BLT payments (that is, cash transfers from the government to poor households) than panel households (24 percent). We also observe a greater use of concrete walls and lower use of bamboo for new households. A higher proportion of new endline households had soap available at the handwashing station and had access to improved sanitation, but a lower proportion of them appropriately dispose of children’s feces. Thus, Tables 3 and 4 suggest that the attrition was mostly random with respect to treatment assignment so doesn’t lead our households in treatment communities to differ systematically from those in the control communities. Further, the panel sample does not appear to differ markedly from the original random sample so should be reasonably representative of the population.

# **7. PROGRAM EXPOSURE**

During the study period, trained facilitators went into the eight project districts and supported the local governments in conducting triggering and follow-up activities in the communities. Of the 80 treatment villages, the endline survey data established that 53 villages (66 percent) were triggered (see Table 5).<sup>7</sup> The table also reports data from an earlier, additional short survey of community heads conducted in May 2010, which generated very similar figures to the endline data. Monitoring data collected as part of the TSSM program reports a higher percentage of treatment villages (83 percent) received the triggering.

Some control villages in the sample did receive the treatment. This was largely as a result of district governments changing their target communities after the randomization plan had been agreed upon. The endline survey data suggests that 13.8 percent of the control villages were exposed to the program (TSSM monitoring data gives a lower figure, at 4 percent).

The extent to which districts adhered to the randomization varied considerably.<sup>8</sup> Jombang, Bondowoso, Blitar, and (to a lesser extent) Madiun performed well in this respect. Banyuwangi and Probolinggo performed less well, with triggering detected in only 50 percent of treatment villages. Situbondo and Ngawi adhered the least to the randomization plan, with treatment detected in only four of the 10 treatment villages (40 percent). The contamination of control communities does not vary markedly across districts.

Next, we look at the extent of exposure to TSSM by households in treatment communities. Table 6 presents evidence of triggering activities as reported by households in the endline survey.<sup>9</sup>

> 7This means that one or more of the four community leaders surveyed (village head, community head, health cadre, head of women’s organization, or other community leader) reported that the village had received a triggering. 8An independent study by Mathematica (2011) found similar results, in which program implementation varied heavily across the six districts they studied (three of the six districts are in our sample), depending upon capacity levels and cross-sectoral commitment to the program.

> 9This is in response to the question, “In the past two years, has there been a community event (such as a triggering/motivational talk) where sanitation was mentioned in this village?” Respondents were subsequently asked

11