Department of Social Development nodal baseline survey: Chris Hani results

1

Department of Social Department of Social Development nodal baseline Development nodal baseline

survey:survey:

Chris Hani resultsChris Hani results

2

Objectives of overall project • Conduct socio-economic and demographic baseline study

and situational analyses of DSD services across the 14 ISRDP and 8 URP Nodes

• Integrate existing provincial research activities in the 10 ISRDP nodes of the UNFPA’s 2nd Country Programme

• Monitor and evaluate local projects, provide SLA support• Identify and describe types of services being delivered

(including Sexual Reproductive Health Services)• Establish the challenges encountered in terms of delivery

& make recommendations regarding service delivery gaps and ultimately overall improvement in service delivery

• Provide an overall assessment of impact of these services• Project began with baseline & situational analysis; then on-

going nodal support; and will end in 2008 with second qualitative evaluation and a second survey, a measurement survey that looks for change over time.

3

Methodology for generating these results

• First-ever integrated nodal baseline survey in all nodes, urban and rural

• All results presented here based on original, primary data

• Sample based on census 2001; stratified by municipality in ISRDP and wards in URP; then probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling used in both urban and rural, randomness via selection of starting point and respondent; external back-checks to ensure fieldwork quality

• 8387 interviews completed in 22 nodes• Sample error margin: 1.1% - nodal error margin: 4.9%• This presentation is only Chris Hani data: national

report and results are available from DSD.

4

How to read these findings• Baseline survey on 5 major areas of

DSD/government work:– Poverty– Development– Social Capital– Health Status– Service Delivery

• Indices created to track strengths and challenges in each area; and combined to create a global nodal index. Allows comparison within and across node, overall and by sector.

• Using this index, high index score = bad news• Nodes colour-coded on basis of ranking relative to

other nodes – Red: Really bad compared to others– Yellow: OK– Green: Better than others

5

Findings

• Detailed baseline report available

– Published November 2006

– Detailed findings across all nodes

– Statistical tables available for all nodes

– Background chapter of secondary data available for each node

– Qualitative situation analysis available per node

• This presentation

– High level Chris Hani-specific findings

– Chris Hani scorecard on key indicators

– Identify key strengths/weakness for the node and target areas for interventions

• What next?

– 2008 will see qualitative evaluation and second quantitative survey to measure change over time

6

Chris Hani scorecard

Index Rating

Poverty

Social Capital Deficit

Development Deficit

Service Delivery Deficit

Health Deficit

Global

Compared with other nodes, Chris Hani is a mix of good, ‘OK’ and bad. Its overall composite rating is

‘OK’, reflecting the mixture of poor health status, average levels of poverty, social capital and service

delivery, and good development awareness.

7

Poverty indexPoverty Index - ISRDP Nodes

18%

36%41% 43% 46% 46% 47% 50% 50% 52%

55% 56% 57% 58%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%C

entral K

aro

o

Thabo

Mofu

tsanyane

Bushbuckridge

Maru

leng

Kgala

gadi

Sekhukhune

Chris H

ani

Ukhahla

mba

Ugu

Zulu

land

O.R

. Tam

bo

Alfr

ed N

zo

Um

zin

yath

i

Um

khanyakude

Female headed households Overcrowding

Unemployment No refuse removal

No income No RDP standard water

Informal housing No RDP standard sanitation

Functional illiteracy No electricity for lighting

The poverty deficit index is based on 10 indicators (see table below), given equal

weighting. Chris Hani is in the middle of the 14 ISRDP nodes.

8

Poverty deficit

Priority areas

Poverty Measures: Chris Hani vs. ISRDP Avg

2%

62%

59% 74

%

29%

79%

59%

2%

58%

50%

4%

75%

65% 80

%

30%

78%

53%

2%

51%

38%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Ove

r-cr

owdi

ng

No

refu

sere

mov

al

No

RD

Pw

ater

No

RD

Psa

nita

tion No

elec

tric

ity 4

light

s

Une

mpl

oyed

Fem

ale-

head

edho

useh

old

No

inco

me

Info

rmal

dwel

ling

Illite

rate

Chris Hani ISRDP Avg

Difference vs ISRDP Avg

-46%

-17%-9% -7%

-3%

1%

11% 12% 13%

34%

-60%

-50%

-40%-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%20%

30%

40%

Ove

r-cr

owdi

ng

No

refu

sere

mov

al

No

RD

Pw

ater

No

RD

Psa

nita

tion N

oel

ectri

city

4lig

hts

Une

mpl

oyed

Fem

ale-

head

edho

useh

old

No

inco

me

Info

rmal

dwel

ling

Illite

rate

Note the positives: these are lower than average Note the positives: these are lower than average

incidence compared with other ISRDP nodes, from incidence compared with other ISRDP nodes, from

over-crowding to electricityover-crowding to electricity

For example, read

as: Chris Hani

respondents 34%

more likely to be

illiterate compared

with ISRDP

average; 13% more

likely to live in

informal dwelling;

etc.

9

Poverty analysis

• Compared with other ISRDP nodes, Chris Hani has the 8th highest level of poverty in the ISRDP

• Key challenges include many issues in areas of government service delivery, others socio-economic:– 50% of respondents were functionally illiterate– 58% of respondents lived in informal dwellings– The rate of unemployment was 79%– 74% had no sanitation to RDP standards– 62% had no refuse removal– 59% did not have water to RDP standards– 29% of respondents had no electricity for lighting– 59% of households were female-headed

10

Social capital deficit

Social Capital Deficit Index - ISRDP Nodes

27%29%

38% 39% 41% 41%43% 44% 45% 45% 47% 48% 49%

52%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Alfr

ed N

zo

Kga

laga

di

Sek

hukh

une

O.R

. Tam

bo

Chr

is H

ani

Cen

tral

Kar

oo

Um

ziny

athi

Zul

ulan

d

Ugu

Ukh

ahla

mba

Tha

boM

ofut

sany

ane

Um

khan

yaku

de

Mar

ulen

g

Bus

hbuc

krid

ge

• This graph measures the social capital deficit - so high scores are bad news.

• Social capital includes networks of reciprocation, trust, alienation and anomie, membership of civil society organisations, and so on.

• Chris Hani rates (equal) 5th best on social capital among the 14 ISRDP nodes. That said, 1 in every 2 Chris Hani respondents belong to no CSO, but membership of faith-based structures is very high, making the Christian church in particular a key outreach partner in the node.

11

Social capital deficit

Priority areas Priority areas

include anomie include anomie

(63% (63%

higher than higher than

ISRDP average), ISRDP average),

alienation (43% alienation (43%

higher) etc. higher) etc.

Suggests Suggests

building social building social

capital a key capital a key

strategy for the strategy for the

node. Positives, node. Positives,

in greenin green, include , include

c’ty solving own c’ty solving own

problems, low problems, low

mistrust, etc.mistrust, etc.

Social Capital Measures: Chris Hani vs. ISRDP Avg

0

10%

47%

14%

51% 62

%

11%

55%

79%

0

31%

70%

20%

58%

56%

9%

38% 49

%

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Soc

ial

Cap

ital

Inde

x

C'ty

unab

le to

solv

e ow

npr

oble

m

Mus

t be

care

ful

deal

ing

with

peop

le

Peo

ple

only

car

e4

selv

es

No

CS

Om

mbr

ship

Pol

itics

isw

aste

of

time No

relig

ion

Alie

natio

n

Ano

mie



-67%

-33% -31%

-11%

11% 13%

43%

63%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

C'ty

unab

le to

solv

e ow

npr

oble

m

Mus

t be

care

ful

deal

ing

with

peop

le

Peop

leon

ly c

are

4 se

lves

No

CSO

mm

brsh

ip

Politi

cs is

was

te o

ftim

e No

relig

ion

Alie

natio

n

Anom

ie

12

Development deficitDevelopment Deficit Index - ISRDP Nodes

23%27%

30% 31%34% 34% 35% 36%

38% 40%44% 46%

49%

57%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Kga

laga

di

Ukh

ahla

mba

Chr

is H

ani

Bus

hbuc

krid

ge

Um

ziny

athi

Sek

hukh

une

Tha

boM

ofut

sany

ane

Cen

tral

Kar

oo

Um

khan

yaku

de

Zul

ulan

d

Alfr

ed N

zo Ugu

O.R

. Tam

bo

Mar

ulen

g

• This index measures respondents’ awareness of development projects, of all types, carried out by government and/or CSOs. It is a perception measure - not an objective indication of what is actually happening on the ground.

• Chris Hani rates as the 3rd best ISRDP node on development awareness, a positive finding and in stark contrast with a number of other Eastern Cape ISRDP nodes.

13

Development Measures:Chris Hani vs. ISRD Avg

45%

25%

24%

41%

28%

25%

28%

27%

29%

31%

31%

31%

29%

30%

27%

67%

33%

32%

54%

36%

31%

34%

32%

34%

35%

35%

34%

31%

31%

26%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Devt-

NPO

s

Farm

ing

Gard

ens

Devt-

Govt

Sport

Wate

r

Cre

ches

Houses

HIV

/Aid

s

Oth

er

Dev

Health

Com

Halls

Food

Schools

Roads


Difference vs ISRD Avg

-33%

-25% -24% -24%-22%

-19%-16% -16% -15%

-10% -10% -9%-7%

-3%

2%

-35%

-30%

-25%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

Devt-N

PO

s

Farm

ing

Gard

ens

Devt-G

ovt

Sport

Wate

r

Cre

ches

Houses

HIV

/Aid

s

Oth

er D

ev

Health

Com

Halls

Food

Schools

Roads

Development deficit

High levels of High levels of

awareness of most awareness of most

types of types of

development development

project. project. Only Only

negativenegative is lower is lower

than average than average

awareness of road-awareness of road-

building.building.

14

Service delivery deficit

Service Delivery Deficit Index - ISRDP Nodes

39%

47% 48% 50% 50% 51% 51% 53% 54%57% 57%

61% 61% 62%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Cen

tral

Kar

oo

Zul

ulan

d

Um

ziny

athi

Alfr

ed N

zo

Um

khan

yaku

de

Kga

laga

di

Ukh

ahla

mba

Ugu

O.R

. Tam

bo

Chr

is H

ani

Sek

hukh

une

Tha

boM

ofut

sany

ane

Mar

ulen

g

Bus

hbuc

krid

ge

Chris Hani ranks 5th

worst on service delivery

out of the 14 ISRDP

nodes

Chris Hani ranks 5th

worst on service delivery

out of the 14 ISRDP

nodes

Service Delivery Index• Average proportion receiving DSD Grants• Average proportion making use of DSD Services• Average proportion rating government services as poor quality• Proportion who rarely have clean water

• Proportion with no/limited phone access• Proportion who believe there is no coordination in government• Proportion who believe local council has performed badly/terribly• Proportion who have not heard of IDPs

15


17% 20% 21% 24% 25% 25% 25% 26%33%

53%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Qua

lity-

sew

erag

e

Pens

ion

poin

t

Qua

lity-

refu

se

Cle

anlin

ess

Rig

htse

rvic

es Staf

fco

mpa

ssio

n

Staf

fhe

lpfu

lnes

s Staf

fkn

owle

dge

Acce

ssfa

cility

Phon

e

Service Delivery Measures: Chris Hani vs. ISRDP Avg

81%

56%

81%

54%

58%

61%

60%

58% 66

%

37%

69%

47%

67%

44%

47%

48%

48%

46%

50%

25%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Qua

lity-

sew

erag

e

Pen

sion

poin

t

Qua

lity-

refu

se

Cle

anlin

ess

Rig

htse

rvic

es

Sta

ffco

mpa

ssio

n

Sta

ffhe

lpfu

lnes

s

Sta

ffkn

owle

dge

Acc

ess

faci

lity

Pho

ne


Service delivery – weaknesses

Weaknesses Weaknesses

include most include most

aspects of DSD aspects of DSD

service delivery, service delivery,

e.g. respondents e.g. respondents

were 33% more were 33% more

likely in this node likely in this node

to rate access to a to rate access to a

DSD facility as DSD facility as

poor than the poor than the

ISRDP average, ISRDP average,

28% more likely to 28% more likely to

rate staff rate staff

knowledge as knowledge as

poor, 25% more poor, 25% more

likely to rate staff likely to rate staff

helpfulness as helpfulness as

poor when poor when

compared with compared with

ISRDP average ISRDP average

and so on and so on

16

Service Delivery Measures: Chris Hani vs. ISRDP Avg

8%

25%

21% 2

8%

29%

15%

42%

34%

44%

41%

0%

20%

40%

60%

Quality-

educatio

n

Quality-

wate

r

Govt D

ept

Co-

ord

inatio

n

Quality-

transport

Quality-

health



-47%

-41%-38%

-35%

-30%

-24%

-16%-14%

-50%

-45%

-40%

-35%

-30%

-25%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

Quality-

educatio

n

Quality-

wate

r

Govt D

ept

Co-

ord

inatio

n

Quality-

transport

Quality-

health

Old

age

pensio

n

Child

support

gra

nt

Quality-

housin

g

Service delivery – strengths

Strengths: Strengths:

Include some Include some

aspects of basic aspects of basic

service delivery service delivery

(e.g. respondents (e.g. respondents

are 47% less likely are 47% less likely

to rate education to rate education

quality poor than quality poor than

ISRDP average) ISRDP average)

and the and the

penetration of penetration of

grants (e.g. grants (e.g.

households are households are

16% more likely to 16% more likely to

access a child access a child

support grant than support grant than

the ISRDP the ISRDP

average)average)

17

Service delivery: main features

• Other important services provided by DSD such as Children Homes, Rehabilitation Centres and Drop-In Centres worryingly received almost no mention by respondents and signals very low awareness of these critical services.

• Urgent thought should be given as to how best to raise awareness across the node with respect to these under utilised services - and how to increase greater penetration of DSD services as well as grants in the node even though the node is doing better than the ISRDP average

Chris Hani ISRDP

• Of the households receiving grants two thirds (65%) are receiving Child Support Grants

• ISRDP average for households receiving Child Support Grants is half (50%)

• Five out of ten (52%) households receiving grants are receiving Pensions

• ISRDP average for households receiving pensions is a third (31%)

• Four out of ten (43%) encounter DSD services at a DSD office

• Half across all nodes (50%) experience DSD services at a DSD office

• Four out of ten (44%) interact with the DSD at a Pension Pay Out point

• A third (31%) across all nodes will receive DSD services at a Pension Pay Out point

18

Health deficitHealth Deficit Index - ISRDP Nodes

45% 46% 46% 47%

53% 54% 55% 56% 56% 57% 58% 58% 58%63%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Cen

tral

Kar

oo

Sek

hukh

une

Alfr

ed N

zo

Kga

laga

di

Ugu

Mar

ulen

g

O.R

. Tam

bo

Ukh

ahla

mba

Um

ziny

athi

Tha

boM

ofut

sany

ane

Bus

hbuc

krid

ge

Chr

is H

ani

Zul

ulan

d

Um

khan

yaku

de

Chris Hani is rated 3rd

worst of the 14 ISRDP

nodes in respect of health

measures, the only red

warning light in the node

Chris Hani is rated 3rd

worst of the 14 ISRDP

nodes in respect of health

measures, the only red

warning light in the node

Health Index• Proportion of household infected by malaria past 12 months• Proportion who experience difficulty accessing health care • Proportion who rated their health poor/terrible during past 4 weeks

• Proportion who had difficulty in doing daily work • Proportion whose usual social activities were limited by physical/emotional problems

19

Health deficitHealth Measures: Chris Hani vs. ISRDP Avg

1%

61%

49%

79%

80%

3%

64%

39%

61%

54%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Mal

ari

Acc

ess

Poo

rH

ealth Ltd

Soc

ial

Act

iviti

es

Can

not

wor

k



-74%

-4%

25% 28%

49%

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

Mal

ari

Acc

ess

Poo

rH

ealth

Ltd

Soc

ial

Act

iviti

es

Can

not

wor

k

Priority Areas: Priority Areas:

Respondents are Respondents are

49% more likely 49% more likely

to report that to report that

their health has their health has

prevented them prevented them

from working from working

than the ISRDP than the ISRDP

average. Poor average. Poor

health has also health has also

limited their limited their

social activities. social activities.

20

Health • HIV and AIDS was reported as the major health problem in node, by a four

out of ten of all respondents (39%, higher than the average of 30% across all nodes).

• Alcohol Abuse was also reported as a major health problem in Chris Hani by 23% of respondents (lower than the average of 28% across all nodes), as was Drug Abuse (17% of respondents mentioned this vs. an ISRDP average of 9%)

• Men were as likely as women to rate their health as poor• Youth were as likely as older adults to rate their health as poor• Access to services, whilst perceived to be 4% better than the IRDP average,

nevertheless also impacts the health of those in the node, in particular– 39% of respondents reported distance to health facility as being a problem– 54% of respondents reported paying for health services as being a

problem• These findings highlight the key health issues facing those in the node and

point to the need for an integrated approach that focusses on the issues of HIV and AIDS, alcohol and drug abuse, and also takes into account the challenges respondents face in accessing health care

• Poverty and the health challenges of HIV and AIDS, alcohol and drug abuse cannot be separated and whatever intervention is decided upon should be in the form of an integrated response to the challenges facing Chris Hani residents

21

Proportion who agree that both parties in a relationship should share decision - making

57

68

78

65

59

79

78

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Agree on whether to takea sick child to the clinic

Agree on using income topay for health care or

medicines

Agree on when to havechildren

Agree whether to usefamily planning

Average Chris Hani Read as:

Majority in the

node support

the view that

most decisions

in the household

require joint

decision-making

by both partners

Read as:

Majority in the

node support

the view that

most decisions

in the household

require joint

decision-making

by both partners

22

Proportion supporting statements about female contraception

60

43

39

30

52

61

24

18

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Agree that women getpregnant so women must

worry aboutcontraception

Agree that femalecontraception is a

women's business andnothing to do with men

Agree that women whouse contraception risks

being sterile

Agree that contraceptionleads to promiscuity

Average Chris Hani

Read as: Node is

relatively progressive

in certain instances and

conservative in others

when compared with

the ISRDP average.

Read as: Node is

relatively progressive

in certain instances and

conservative in others

when compared with

the ISRDP average.

23

Proportion who agreed that a man is justified in hitting or beating his partner in

the following situations

Read as: Support for violence against women in all situations is much lower in this node than the ISRDP average and points to a proportion of positive attitudes about Gender Based Violence in the node.

Encouraging to note that the differences between males and females, and young and old, in terms of attitudes towards Gender Based Violence are not large - these positive attitudes have been absorbed by all within the node

Read as: Support for violence against women in all situations is much lower in this node than the ISRDP average and points to a proportion of positive attitudes about Gender Based Violence in the node.

Encouraging to note that the differences between males and females, and young and old, in terms of attitudes towards Gender Based Violence are not large - these positive attitudes have been absorbed by all within the node

Average Chris Hani

Is unfaithful 23 10

Does not look after the children

21 11

Goes out without telling him

16 7

Argues with him 15 4

Refuses to have sex with him

9 3

Burns the food 7 2

24

Attitudes towards abortion

49

37

42

59

9

4

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Total

Chris Hani

Agree that abortion should only be allowed if mother's life in danger

Agree that abortion is morally wrong and should never be allowed

Agree that abortion on request should be the right of every women

Read as: Abortion is NOT

supported by more than half of the

respondents (59%) in this node,

much higher than the ISRDP

average (42%)

Read as: Abortion is NOT

supported by more than half of the

respondents (59%) in this node,

much higher than the ISRDP

average (42%)

25

Sexual Reproductive Health & GBV

• Findings point to the need for nuanced campaigns around contraception and their very close link with conflicting attitudes towards women in Chris Hani

• Encouraging to note the the positive attitudes towards Gender Based Violence and towards certain myths about contraception, but at the same time there is very little support for abortions. Hence the need for a campaign that is based on a solid understanding of local attitudes towards both sexual reproductive health and GBV as opposed to the interests of a national campaign

• Strong support for joint decision-making by both partners on matters of importance, has been taken further as very few actually endorse physically abusing women

• Need to develop an integrated approach that takes poverty and the health challenges facing nodal residents into account and also integrate critical aspects of GBV and Sexual Reproductive Health

• Challenge is to integrate Sexual Reproductive Health and GBV issues with other related services being provided by a range of governmental and non-governmental agencies - integration and co-ordination remain the core challenges in the ISRDP and URP nodes.

26

HIV & AIDS: Awareness levels

63

64

18

61

56

2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Heard about those incommunity with AIDS?

Heard about those whohave died of AIDS in

community?

If household memberwas infected would want

to keep it secret?

% Yes

Average Chris Hani Read as: Prevalence rates

are relatively high and

secrecy is very low,

hopefully indicating that

stigmatization is dropping.

Read as: Prevalence rates

are relatively high and

secrecy is very low,

hopefully indicating that

stigmatization is dropping.

27

HIV & AIDS: Proportion who accept the following statements

33

80

82

85

83

25

71

47

58

69

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Mosquitoes pass on HIV

Infected mothers canpass on virus through

breastfeeding

Healthy looking personcan have AIDS

One can get AIDS fromsharing razors

Condoms preventtransmission of HIV

% who agree

Average Chris Hani

Read as: Whilst some

awareness of how HIV is

transmitted, distinct gaps in

respondents’ knowledge can

be observed

Read as: Whilst some

awareness of how HIV is

transmitted, distinct gaps in

respondents’ knowledge can

be observed

28

HIV and AIDS • Evidence suggests that previous campaigns (and the high incidence of the pandemic in the

node) have led to some awareness of impact of HIV and AIDS.

• Whilst encouraging to see how many in the node have correct knowledge about the transmission of the disease, Chris Hani is generally worse than the average scores for ISRDP (except in the case of Mosquitoes)

• HIV and AIDS campaigns in this node need to address the gaps observed in peoples’ knowledge

• Despite high levels of awareness of AIDS sufferers in their communities few respondents can actively assist

– Less than 3% in the node reported on providing support to orphans or providing Home Based Care

• Despite high incidence of HIV across Chris Hani, levels of poverty are so crippling few can do much to assist those who are infected and suffering

• These findings support the need for an urgent integrated intervention in the node that incorporates health, poverty, GBV, HIV and AIDS, in particular to providing targeted support to increase the numbers of households providing HBC and/or supporting orphans

29

ConclusionsChris Hani has an average Global Development Rating. Key challenges and

strengths emerging from the statistical analysis are summarised below.

Challenges Strengths

Poverty • Poorer than average on illiteracy, informal housing, access to regular income

• Better than average on over-crowding, refuse removal, RDP water

Development

• Generally high across the board

Service Delivery

• Below average DSD service delivery

• Positive re quality of education & certain other basic services, access to grants

Health • Key priority for the node, includes generally poor health, Sexual Reproductive Health, HBC

• Access to health facilities better than average

Social Capital

• Alienation & anomie above average

• Lower than average communal mistrust and caring

Documents

Department of Social Development nodal baseline survey: Chris Hani results