Despite significant progress in water and sanitation much still remains to be done. This report shows how the world has changed since 1990. It provides an assessment of progress towards the MDG target and insight into the remaining challenges. Section A provides an overview of progress against the parameters specified in the MDG target for water and sanitation in both urban and rural areas. It presents data for the world as a whole and compares progress across regions. The report goes on to examine trends over the MDG period by region and by level of service. It pays particular attention to the numbers of people who have gained the highest level of service in drinking water supply - piped water on premises - and those with no service at all who use surface water for drinking and practice open defecation. In order to understand the nature of progress it is important to look carefully at the way improvements in water and sanitation have benefited different socioeconomic groups. This report sheds light on equality gaps between urban and rural dwellers and between the richest and poorest segments of the population. It presents several new ways to visualize progress on extending service to the poor designed to reveal the nature of inequalities and give the reader insight into the great challenge that still exists in ensuring that progress reaches everyone. The JMP was established in 1990 and is celebrating its Jubilee Year in 2015. Section B provides a retrospective analysis of the evolution of water sanitation and hygiene monitoring over the past 25 years.

A bevy of statistical data, from across the world, on availability of sanitation, drinking-water and sewage. Uses the JMP method to compare those statistics.

"Even though progress towards the MDG target represents important gains in access for billions of people around the world, it has been uneven. Sharp geographic, sociocultural and economic inequalities in access persist and sometimes have increased. This report presents examples of unequal progress among marginalized and vulnerable groups. Section 1 presents the status of and trends in access to improved drinking water sources and sanitation. Section 2 provides a snapshot of inequalities in access to improved drinking water sources and sanitation. Section 3 presents efforts to strengthen monitoring of access to safe drinking water and sanitation services under a post-2015 development agenda, as well as the challenges associated with these efforts."--Publisher's website.

The new 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) at its core. A dedicated Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 6) declares a commitment to "ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all." Monitoring progress toward this goal will be challenging: direct measures of water and sanitation service quality and use are either expensive or elusive. However, reliance on household surveys poses limitations and likely overstated progress during the Millennium Development Goal period. In Innovations in WASH Impact Measures: Water and Sanitation Measurement Technologies and Practices to Inform the Sustainable Development Goals, we review the landscape of proven and emerging technologies, methods, and approaches that can support and improve on the WASH indicators proposed for SDG target 6.1, "by 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all," and target 6.2, "by 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and end open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women and girls and those in vulnerable situations." Although some of these technologies and methods are readily available, other promising approaches require further field evaluation and cost reductions. Emergent technologies, methods, and data-sharing platforms are increasingly aligned with program impact monitoring. Improved monitoring of water and sanitation interventions may allow more cost-effective and measurable results. In many cases, technologies and methods allow more complete and impartial data in time to allow program improvements. Of the myriad monitoring and evaluation methods, each has its own advantages and limitations. Surveys, ethnographies, and direct observation give context to more continuous and objective electronic sensor data. Overall, combined methodologies can provide a more comprehensive and instructive depiction of WASH usage and help the international development community measure our progress toward reaching the SDG WASH goals.