Objectives: Infant feeding plays a critical role in child health and development. Few studies to date have examined the link between household water insecurity and infant feeding, and none in a cross‐cultural context. Therefore, we examined the perceived impact of household water insecurity in four domains: breastfeeding, non‐breastmilk feeding, caregiver capabilities, and infant health. Our research was conducted as part of the Household Water Insecurity Experiences (HWISE) study.Methods: We interviewed respondents from 19 sites in 16 low‐ and middle‐income countries (N = 3303) about the link between water insecurity and infant feeding. We then thematically analyzed their open‐ended textual responses. In each of the four domains (breastfeeding, non‐breastmilk feeding, caregiver capabilities, infant health), we inductively identified cross‐cultural metathemes. We analyzed the distribution of themes across sites quantitatively and qualitatively.Results: Water was perceived to directly affect breastfeeding and non‐breastmilk feeding via numerous pathways, including timing and frequency of feeding, unclean foods, and reduced dietary diversity. Water was perceived to indirectly affect infant feeding through caregiver capabilities by increasing time demands, exacerbating disease, undernutrition, and mortality, and requiring greater efficacy of caregivers. Respondents made connections between water challenges and infant health, for example, increased risk of infectious diseases, undernutrition, and mortality.Conclusions: These findings suggest that water presents many, and sometimes unexpected, challenges to infant feeding. By systematically investigating biocultural pathways by which water impacts infant and young child feeding, it will be possible to understand if, and how, water security can be leveraged to improve child nutrition and health.

Household survey data from 27 sites in 22 countries were collected in 2017–2018 in order to construct and validate a cross-cultural household-level water insecurity scale. The resultant Household Water Insecurity Experiences (HWISE) scale presents a useful tool for monitoring and evaluating water interventions as a complement to traditional metrics used by the development community. It can also help track progress toward achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 6 ‘clean water and sanitation for all’. We present HWISE scale scores from 27 sites as comparative data for future studies using the HWISE scale in low- and middle-income contexts. Site-level mean scores for HWISE-12 (scored 0–36) ranged from 1.64 (SD 4.22) in Pune, India, to 20.90 (7.50) in Cartagena, Colombia, while site-level mean scores for HWISE-4 (scored 0–12) ranged from 0.51 (1.50) in Pune, India, to 8.21 (2.55) in Punjab, Pakistan. Scores tended to be higher in the dry season as expected. Data from this first implementation of the HWISE scale demonstrate the diversity of water insecurity within and across communities and can help to situate findings from future applications of this tool.

Background Despite increased access to treatment and reduced incidence, vertical transmission of HIV continues to pose a risk to maternal and child health in sub-Saharan Africa. Performance-based financing (PBF) directed at healthcare providers has shown potential to improve quantity and quality of maternal and child health services. However, the ways in which these PBF initiatives lead to improved service delivery are still under investigation. Methods Therefore, we implemented a longitudinal-controlled proof-of-concept PBF intervention at health facilities and with community-based associations focused on preventing vertical transmission of HIV (PVT) in rural Mozambique. We hypothesized that PBF would increase worker motivation and other aspects of the workplace environment in order to achieve service delivery goals. In this paper, we present two objectives from the PBF intervention with public health facilities (n = 6): first, we describe the implementation of the PBF intervention and second, we assess the impact of the PBF on health worker motivation, key factors in the workplace environment, health worker satisfaction, and thoughts of leaving. Implementation (objective 1) was evaluated through quantitative service delivery data and multiple forms of qualitative data (eg, quarterly meetings, participant observation (n = 120), exit interviews (n = 11)). The impact of PBF on intermediary constructs (objective 2) was evaluated using these qualitative data and quantitative surveys of health workers (n = 83) at intervention baseline, midline, and endline. Results We found that implementation was challenged by administrative barriers, delayed disbursement of incentives, and poor timing of evaluation relative to incentive disbursement (objective 1). Although we did not find an impact on the motivation constructs measured, PBF increased collegial support and worker empowerment, and, in a time of transitioning implementing partners, decreased against desire to leave (objective 2). Conclusion Areas for future research include incentivizing meaningful quality- and process-based performance indicators and evaluating how PBF affects the pathway to service delivery, including interactions between motivation and workplace environment factors.