SHEFFIELD ROAD HOUSEHOLD ENUMERATION REPORT

PHILIPPI, CAPE TOWN, DECEMBER 2009

Informal Settlement Network,Sheffield Road Community Leadership andCommunity Organisation Resource Centre

Background

Given the evident difficulty of Government and other agencies to fill the gap in the housing backlog, for the past 18 months CORC’s strategy has shifted from empowerment of communities towards housing, to more focused support of participative processes of informal settlement upgrading. This is especially motivated by the realisation that in our major cities where the urbanisation process is still ongoing, the large majority of vulnerable groups are excluded from the Government’s current subsidy system, even when a movement like the Federation of the Urban Poor (CORC’s traditional partner) is active to secure a number of such subsidies for the empowered poor.

CORC has therefore promoted gathering of independent social formations in all informal settlements and their re-organisation in a stronger confederation, or network. In five major cities (Cape Town, Durban, Port Elizabeth, Johannesburg and Kimberley) these dialogue sessions gave rise to the formation of the Informal Settlement Network (ISN) – that brings together not only representatives of informal settlements but also different movements of the urban poor (e.g. there is even an alliance with organised backyard dwellers) in a united front in their fight against poverty.

In March 2009, the Cape Town Informal Settlement Network held a forum where they invited politicians, government officials, academics and other NGOs to a dialogue on informal settlement upgrading in the metropolitan area of the City of Cape Town. Experiences of how Government and organised communities in Thailand deal with informal settlement upgrading were shared in the forum. Thailand, like South Africa is a middle-income country and the Thai government works closely with communities and provides subsidies for human settlements, but not towards complete houses as in South Africa. This is important as poor communities are best placed to know their own problems, what is most urgent for them in terms of development and are best placed to find their own solutions with government support. The Thai government has found that improving infrastructure for all (before proper housing) and taking time to negotiate solutions with the people, rather than imposing development upon them, has resulted in a far easier, more effective solution to the development puzzle.

Thus the concept of settlement upgrading for CORC and its partners refers to the incremental improvements of settlements, like in Thailand, where development occurs in stages and has been designed in a way that ensures that even the very poor have adequate access to improved shelter and infrastructure. A vital step in the process is the commitment from the Thai government to the poor to help them gain security of tenure on the land where they live, so that they do not face any eviction threats. This is followed by the provision of basic services that can later be built upon and upgraded.

After securing tenure rights, relevant stakeholders, including the community leaders and the government are brought together where an outline for development is created. These meetings lead to the creation of joint committees, established to oversee development in an area and to ensure that the process is not just about policy, but about successful and genuine implementation.

At the end of the dialogue session in Cape Town, inspired by these principles and good practices from Thailand, there was a general consensus that it was time for a genuine partnership between government and communities. An agreement was reached that local government would work with the Informal Settlement Network in identifying pilot projects for the above mentioned incremental approach to human settlement upgrading.

Eleven settlements in the Cape metropolis were identified for this developmental initiative, and Sheffield Road was selected as the first one for the implementation, given its size was relatively easy to handle for a pilot initiative. The agreement among all parties was clear on the first step to be taken: a community-run household survey exercise (enumeration), with the support of CORC fieldworkers.

Table of contents

Objectives and meaning of the activity

Acknowledgements

Enumeration methodology

Key findings

Analysis

Objectives and meaning of the activity

This report refers to an essential step in the implementation of a new approach devised when CORC, ISN (a network of different organisations with common objectives centred on land, infrastructure and housing), and the City of Cape Town engaged each other about an initiative of upgrading low income settlements in this City.

The upgrading is to be undertaken in the perspective that does not focus only on the provision of basic services like water and sanitation, but extends to improved shelters, too, even though still informal (shacks). The residents of the selected initial pilot project, Sheffield Road, have always expected that government would provide them with basic services and adequate housing. But they realised, in the interaction with NGO and officials, that there were neither immediate nor near-future housing development plans for this settlement. Therefore, they availed themselves for other options.

This settlement (almost 150 families squatting on a narrow strip of land reserved for the road expansion, located in the central part of Philippi residential area) was formed in 1993, when a single shack owned by an individual for (informal) business purposes was erected. The number of shacks progressively increased. Despite the fact that the community is illegally settled on the government land, the City Council provided the community with sanitation services. However, it has to be noted that these services have never been spared from the rampant vandalism in informal settlements: of 15 toilets built by the City, only seven are functioning.

When communities realize they risk to wait for long periods before anything can be done to them in terms of service improvement, they are open to a move like this pilot project, which reflects a developmental paradigm shift, from government’s technical (top-down) and “complete” approach to “eradicate the slum” towards a community-driven scaling-up after Government provides basic infrastructure. In most of the low-income settlements in urban areas, housing and access to basic services remain a critical problem, but the view that government has to be the sole provider of all the services and shelter is not contributing to effective solutions. The process described here is meant to showcase the effectiveness of the new approach.

This report witnesses that relevant steps towards development can be taken by the community itself, in particular the self-conducted household survey (enumeration) as the first step of the process. The methodology is described below, but it must be highlighted that in order to realize the survey properly and to make good use of it, the approach envisages the support and the common planning with the Informal Settlement Network, the City and CORC as technical partner and social facilitator.

The whole enumeration exercise provided the Sheffield Road community with the necessary tools and opportunity to be involved in the planning and the implementation of the pilot projects’ development plans. This process helped the community to realize their priceless input into the whole process and suggested to look beyond the concept of waiting for long periods in anticipation of a complete house from the government. Therefore, the completion of the (short) exercise and this taking stock of the advance it represents, are just the beginning.

The data collected and elaborated are now owned by the community and an asset of both parties for the action expected from Government, which will hopefully prove that community-driven enumerations are a useful tool not just to draw in the (otherwise passive) beneficiaries into play, but to combine their work with professionals, government and support organisations into a common platform for collective planning and implementation of the general objectives of the project.

The information reported in this document is obviously only the “snapshot” of October-November 2009, which the task team will further verify but especially compound with regular updates in order to set up a live cadastre.

This Sheffield Road Enumeration Report outlines the methodology of data collection and capture used in this exercise; analyses the major findings and brings forth the general lessons learnt in the enumeration exercise.

Acknowledgements

Conducting this enumeration involved a lot of volunteering, especially from the shack dwellers community. In this case the people involved were volunteers from different communities and organisations which are part of ISN nationally: FEDUP, PPM and Joe Slovo Settlement (Langa). All have participated in various ways, especially in the planning phase, data collection, filing and capturing.

Enumeration methodology

These surveys, devised and refined in various countries by affiliates of the Shack Dwellers International (SDI) network,1 consist of:

shack counting and numbering, mapping of the settlement, administration of a questionnaire devised and adjusted in community meetings, with

all the relevant information about each household, and elaboration of the information collected, verification and amendments, presentation to the public. In particular, this body of data would be shared with

Government and hopefully used by the latter as the main source of information. As mentioned above, a live cadastre of regular updates is the ultimate objective within

reach, if community, support organisation and local government continue the collaboration.

Regular meetings were held between the community, ISN and CORC in October 2009 to make all the necessary plans for the enumeration in this pilot project. The Community Leadership Team was involved in the planning and was also useful in bringing the whole community into this initiative through varying levels of mobilisation. A series of mass meetings were held with the entire community for familiarisation with this new developmental initiative so as to reach strong agreement in terms of the meaning purpose and

1 CORC and the main social movements it partners are affiliated to SDI or work in tight cooperation with its affiliates. For more information: www.sdinet.org or www.sasdialliance.org.za .

objectives of the proposed enumeration exercise. Furthermore, agreement was also reached about logistical aspects, which are likely or encountered in the enumeration.

The enumeration survey questionnaire was developed from previous enumerations, especially the one conducted in Joe Slovo, Langa, Cape Town, in May and June 2009. The questionnaire was revised through a collective effort of CORC and ISN who had an intense consultation with the community, for it to suit the needs of the targeted beneficiaries. In order to ensure that relevant and comprehensive community information be collected, further improvements were made to the previous questionnaire. The questionnaire was outlined based on the following domains:

- Personal identity information

- Household details

- Nature of house

- Disaster history

- Migration history

- Health and sanitation

The whole enumeration team was divided into three groups: Measuring Team, Numbering/mapping Team and the Data Collection Team. Since the community is just one strip of land, it was not divided into any section, numbering was done with much reference to the community leadership indications.

The Sheffield Road household survey was structured around one main enumeration code for all the housing units, so each household was clearly identified by the numbered (and measured) structure where it is sheltered.

Prior to the enumeration, the CORC fieldworkers, ISN and some Community Task Team members led a brief workshop to instruct and technically equip the service providers and volunteer enumerators with the necessary data collection skills, especially on how to complete the questionnaire with the surveyed families.

Enumerators were instructed to collect information from people in their structures, which were numbered and measured only by the enumeration team, in order to avoid confusion. The enumerators were instructed to collect the information only through a face-to-face interview with each respondent for the entire community. For this reason, three members from the community leadership were assigned to lead all the three volunteer teams especially for their knowledge of the community. This guaranteed a high level of accuracy of the survey and helped ensure general community participation, support and ownership of the whole process. The volunteers did not face any resistance concerning the information gathering since the general population of the community responded positively to the whole exercise.

During the data collection, the volunteers were never linked to any suspicious motives like information gathering for evictions or political movements, like it had happened in other contexts. For the survey component of the project, enumerators surveyed every structure in Sheffield Road. The survey was based on a questionnaire, which took 10-15 minutes to be fully completed. All answers provided were confidential and would be handled as such. In the process of data collection, the respondents were informed that there would neither be any

action against them for the responses they made nor for any refusal to answer all or some of the questions in the questionnaire. During the data collection substantive efforts were made to ensure the accuracy of the data, which was collected through a constant check of the completed questionnaires.

The “point in time” data collection exercise conducted by the enumeration team in all households only lasted for two days. Most of the data collection was done during the day; however, there were some special cases where information was collected during the night because of the residents’ work commitment during the day.

After all data was entered, the information was checked through cross-tabulation analysis to minimise data entry errors. Analysis followed, with statistics and reports produced showing frequency tables and graphs for the variables in the questionnaire. Of course some errors may still be affecting accuracy, due to data entry by non-professionals, or because of inconsistent answers provided by the respondents. Due to the small amount of data gathered in this enumeration, only few errors were detected during the process, thus leaving us confident about the overall integrity of the information presented hereby.

The final data set analysis was done through the 2007 Microsoft Excel version. The data presented is for the whole Sheffield community, not a sample of it.

Key findings

This section only brings out the summary of the results of the whole exercise, while more detailed data are presented below in form of charts, graphs and tables.

“Slum” Name Sheffield Road

Age of settlement 16-17 Years

Type of structures All shacks

Population 504(44% female household head)(59% of household heads in the age group 18-64 years)

Number of shacks 149 (total)142 (enumerated)

Land ownership City Council (road reserve)

No. of individual toilet blocks None

No. of community toilet blocks 15 (only 7 are functional)

Ratio of toilets to total number of people

72 people /toilet (only 7 are functional)33 people /toilet (if all were usable)

Disaster experience Fire - 26Flooding - 100 Evictions - 6

Most urgent needs Electricity, water taps and toilets

The figures shown above should be considered fairly accurate, given that there were no hindrances during the whole exercise. However, like in any survey, there may be a few minimal errors, which do not contradict the overall picture of the community we intend to provide here.

Analysis

In the enumeration it was realized that the community shelters total 149 shacks. These shacks house 504 inhabitants. The general living conditions in this community are indeed very poor, especially the structures and the water drainage facilities. Through a strong participation of all the parties involved, a possible permanent solution to these issues is within reach. More so, a solution may be possible especially when we consider the general approach used by the Thai government in their country (see above) to address this problem: actually a genuine partnership is being established between the Cape Town authorities and this particular community through the relationship with ISN and CORC.

This enumeration was undertaken as the first major step in trying to implement the Thai approach in the local situation. Apart from being the first major step in this pilot project, the enumeration was also aimed at bringing forth the most reliable statistics of the community for most of the reference. The map generated in the enumeration is also of great importance as it is highly used in geographical references of the community.

From the results of the obtained, it can be acknowledged that the growth of this informal settlement has been largely fuelled by rural-urban migrations. New arrivals from these rural areas resort to slum dwelling since they hardly afford decent accommodation.

The whole community has a total population of 504. Considering the land size (4,126.29m2) and the total number of inhabitants, there is a reflection of over-crowding, 3.5 people per shack. In terms of basic services, the community has 15 toilets and only 7 of them are functional (due to vandalism and/or poor drainage), this therefore means that every functional toilet has to be shared by 72 people (even if all 15 toilets availed by the City were functional, 33 people would still need to share each toilet). These are the only ablution services in the community, meaning that there are only two options in terms of bathing: in the house or open space. Prioritising the toilet services will need to be considered in the pilot projects under way.

Moreover, the sanitation problem is not limited to toilets but also spreads to water supply: where 504 people are serviced by only three taps. This means a total of 168 people per tap.

The total expenses declared by the community amount to R174,648 per month with clothing and food expenses leading (each item amounts to 39% of the total). The working population spends a total of R20,625 in transport, which is 12% of the total monthly expenses of the community. Most of the transport expenses are for bus, mini bus (taxi) and train. The train dominates the transport usage in the community: from 131 transport users (to both work and school), 87 of the population depend mainly on the train for transport services. The average daily transport costs for households who use transport is R16.00. For those household heads who commute, the average time they take to reach their work places is 1.5 hours.

Community population

The table and chart below reflect the community’s demography: the population is dominated by the 18 – 64 years age group and then followed by the 1 -17 years old bracket, which accounts for 39% of the community’s population.

Age group Percentage Number of people1 -17 39.09 19718-64 58.73 29665+ 2.18 11

Total 504

39%

59%

2%

Community Population 1 -17 Years 18 - 64 Years 65+ Years

Household leadership by gender

The distribution in the table and graph below shows that males dominate in the household leadership with 56% and females only account for the leadership of the remaining 44%.

Gender Frequency %

Male 79 56Female 63 44

Male Female0

20406080

100

Household leadership by gender

Series1

Employment details

The employment statistics reflected below were calculated with the assumption that children under 18 of age are school-going, hence not to be considered when determining the community’s employment. From the economically active age group (18 – 64 years) 54% are employed with the remaining 46% accounting for the unemployed people in the community.

Status Percentage Number of peopleEmployed 54.4 % 167

Unemployed 46.6 % 140

Employed46%

Un-em-

ployed54%

Employment

Social welfare grants

The graph below shows that only 67 people in the community’s population receive grants for their daily expenses. The grants distribution is dominated by the child support which accounts for 65 people whilst only two people receive a different grant (disability).

Grants No grants0

50100150200250300350400450500

Grant distributionN

umbe

r of h

ouse

hold

s

Monthly expenses of the community

The community’s expenses are presented in the graph below; most of the expenses are for food and clothing, they contribute 39% each, with school fees, transport, electricity and rent/maintanance each contributing about 20% to the expenses.

Food Electricity Transport Rent School fees

Clothing0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

Community monthly expenses

Amou

nt in

Ran

ds

The chart below reflects the migration history of the household heads, the community is highly constituted by people who migrated from the Eastern Cape (55%) and a sizable number of people migrated from other residential areas in town to the Sheffield Road settlement (42%), whilst 3% came from other provinces in the country.

42%

55%

3%

Migration HistoryCape Metro Eastern Cape Other regions

Period of stay in the community and Cape Town metro

39%

32%

29%

Period of stay at Sheffield Road

1 - 5 Years 6 -10 Years 11+ years

21%

35%

44%

Period of stay in Cape Town

1 - 5 Years 6 -10 Years 11+ years

Shack size distribution

There are 38 shacks sized under 10m2 and 38 shacks in the 10–15m2 bracket. The size of shacks which accounts for the lowest number is the 15–20m2 range, with 23 shacks. The highest number of shacks (43) is larger than 21m2.

<10m2 10.1 - 15m2 15.1 - 20m2 20.1m2+05

101520253035404550

Size of shack

Num

ber o

f sha

cks

COMMUNITY ORGANISATION RESOURCE CENTRE

SHEFFIELD ROAD HOUSEHOLD ENUMERATION

This enumeration survey collects information on housing conditions, expenditures (and income if possible), employment and sanitation in your community. Please cooperate with the enumerator to fill in this questionnaire.This form asks for the following:

Basic information about the people who are living in your house Specific information about this house and its occupancy Specific information about sanitation services and health conditions.

Thank you.

1. Household Details and Data1.1 Head of Household

SURNAME ________________________________ NAME ___________________________

ID number (only if you wish to provide it): ___________________________________________

Gender of the head of the household: Male Female

1.2 Age of the owner

1.3 How many families stay in your house? 1 2 3

1.4 How many people in the house are… (i) 1 – 17 years

(ii) 18 – 64 years

(iii) 65 +

1.5 How many people live in your house?

1.6 How many people in the house attend school?

1 2 3 4 +

2. Employment, Income & Expenses

2.1 How many people are employed in the house?

1 2 3 4 +

2.2 What type of employment are they involved in?

Self Employed Part time/Casual Full Time

2.3 If unemployed do you receive a welfare grant? Yes No

2.4 If yes, what kind of grant do you receive?

Disability Child support Pension

Refugee Other

2.5 How many people have any form of income in your house?

1 2 3 4+

2.6 How much are the main expenses per month?

1. Food 2. Electricity

3. Transport 4. Rent/Maintenance

5. School fees 6. Clothing

7. Other items

2.7 What type of transport do you use when going to work?

Private Taxi Bus Train

2.8 How far is the place of employment (or where the household head gets the income)?

(Hours, Minutes of TRAVEL or WALK)

2.9 How much do you pay per day in transport?

2.10 Where do you do your shopping?

R R

R R

R R

R

____ hrs ____ min

R

1. In the community 2. Cape Town

3. Shoprite Philippi 4. Other

3. Nature of house you live in 3.1 Type of house:

Independent Shack Backyard dwelling

3.2 What is the size of your house? M X M [e.g.3.50 m x 2.95 m]

3.3 How many rooms does your house have?

1 2 3 4+

3.4 Is this house yours? YES Self-built YES Purchased?

NO, I’m renting NO, the owner is family/friend (not paying)

4. Eligibility for Housing Subsidy

4.1 Were you ever approved for a housing subsidy? Yes No

4.2 Would you want to state your income level for the purpose of understanding how many households in the community can apply for subsidies?

5. Disaster & Relocation History 5.1 Have you ever experienced the following?

(i) Fire Disaster Yes No how many times?

(ii) Flooding Yes No how many times?

(iii) Evictions/forced relocation No Yes How many times?

5.2 Migration History

i) How long have you lived in Sheffield Rd?

ii) Where were you living before you came here? _____________________

. .

years

R

iii) How long have you lived in Cape Town? iv) Foreign National?

6. Health & Sanitation6.1 Which toilet do you use?(i) Communal (ii) Individual

6.2 How many people use this toilet?

6.3 How many times is the refuse collected in your community?

Once a week twic twice a week 3 times a week

Once a month twice a month or NEVER?

6.4 When any family member was sick, were all the problems solved at the local clinic of Philippi?

YES NO

If not, where else can/could your family access health services? (e.g. Groote Schuur, Red Cross for children, Tygerberg, private doctor, private clinic, Sangoma/traditional healers , just unaffordable…)

___________________________________________________

6.5 i. How many people are sick in your family?

ii. How many cannot look for a job because of some form of health problem?

6.6 Does your household host, feed or look after any orphan, vulnerable/neglected child,

or support any abused woman who cannot stay by herself?

ENKOSI!

ENUMERATOR ______________________________________

CODE ________ DATE __________ / ___________/ 2009

About ________ people

years