We investigate the impacts of access to piped water on drinking water quality, sanitation, hygiene and health outcomes in marginalized rural households of north-western Bangladesh, using a quasi-experimental setup. A government organization – the Barindra Multipurpose Development Authority (BMDA) – established a piped water network to connect rural households with the deep ground water resources and improve their access to potable water. Using propensity score matching, the study compares a treatment and a control group of households to identify gains in water-sanitation, hygiene and health outcomes. In terms of water safety, we find no improvement in the quality of drinking water, measured by E. coli count per 100 ml of water at the point of use (i.e. the pots and jars used to store it). Food utensils tested positive for E. coli in both the control and treatment group, thus showing no improvement through the BMDA intervention. Hygiene behavior such as handwashing with soap after defecation or before feeding children also does not improve. Finally, we do not find evidence of health benefits, such as decreased diarrhea incidence of under-five children or improved nutritional outcomes such as stunting, underweight and wasting. Although access to BMDA piped water in the premises is subject to a fee, it seems this incentive mechanism is not strong enough to improve water behavior or its outcomes: treated households are as poor as the non-treated in terms of maintaining hygiene and water quality, possibly because of lack of information.

Sanitation improvements have had limited effectiveness in reducing the spread of fecal pathogens into the environment. We conducted environmental measurements within a randomized controlled trial in Bangladesh that implemented individual and combined water treatment, sanitation, handwashing (WSH) and nutrition interventions (WASH Benefits, NCT01590095). Following approximately 4 months of intervention, we enrolled households in the trial’s control, sanitation and combined WSH arms to assess whether sanitation improvements, alone and coupled with water treatment and handwashing, reduce fecal contamination in the domestic environment. We quantified fecal indicator bacteria in samples of drinking and ambient waters, child hands, food given to young children, courtyard soil and flies. In the WSH arm, Escherichia coli prevalence in stored drinking water was reduced by 62% (prevalence ratio = 0.38 (0.32, 0.44)) and E. coli concentration by 1-log (Δlog₁₀ = −0.88 (−1.01, −0.75)). The interventions did not reduce E. coli along other sampled pathways. Ambient contamination remained high among intervention households. Potential reasons include noncommunity-level sanitation coverage, child open defecation, animal fecal sources, or naturalized E. coli in the environment. Future studies should explore potential threshold effects of different levels of community sanitation coverage on environmental contamination.