JOE SLOVO HOUSEHOLD ENUMERATION REPORT

LANGA, CAPE TOWN, JUNE 2009

Community Organisation Resource Centre

&

Joe Slovo Community Task Team

PREFACE

The Community Organisation Resource Centre (CORC) is a non-governmental organisation with main offices in Cape Town but operating in all provinces, that supports communities prepared and willing to help themselves. CORC provides support to networks of urban and rural poor communities who mobilize themselves around their own resources and capacities. CORC’s interventions are designed to enable rural and urban communities to learn from one another and to create solidarity and unity in order to be able to broker deals with formal institutions, especially the State.

The community of Joe Slovo “surveyed” with the exercise described in this report is a good example of an organized community, willing and able to take up their own developmental issues. This community is situated ten kilometres out of the City of Cape Town, stretching on a strip of land along the N2 national road, towards the Cape Town International airport.

In 2004 the National Government launched their flagship programme, known as the “N2 Gateway”. This pilot but huge project, designed within the Government's Human Settlement Plan, was approved by Cabinet in September 2004. According to Government, this project was to demonstrate the new way of building human settlements with all basic social and economic amenities accompanying the houses. The upgrading of the Joe Slovo “slum” was identified as the first project within the N2 Gateway development.

Unfortunately, from the outset this project was riddled with problems. The main problem was lack of proper consultation with the community. Soon government was faced with protest, demonstrations and burning of tyres. To enable the State to start phase 1 and 2 of the project, the first group of Joe Slovo residents was relocated to a transit camp in Delft (about 20 km away).

The remaining residents at Joe Slovo resisted relocation to Delft, and this resulted in a long court battle with the National Department of Housing, which ended up at the Constitutional Court.

Whilst the community awaited the outcome of the Constitutional Court hearing, they realized the importance of gathering current information with regard to their settlement. Given the innovative exercise run with CORC and its ally iKhayalami in March 2009 after one more tragic fire, i.e. a blocking out of the shack to re-build towards a more rational layout, in view of allowing upgrading with no need for relocations, during mid April 2009 the Joe Slovo community approached CORC for support in doing an enumeration. Actually many figures about the households residing in the community were given and used, so a need for clarity was strongly felt. CORC linked the community with community organisations, like Federation of the Urban Poor (FEDUP) and Poor People’s Movement (PPM), well versed in the practice of enumeration. The Kenyan Homeless People’s Federation also provided support during this process and in particular in preparation for the data analysis and mapping of the community.

This Joe Slovo Enumeration report summarizes the data collected during the Enumeration exercise. The questionnaire of the survey collected data on 23 variables, of which all are represented in this report. The appendix contains further information on the forms used.

The map prepared is going under a process meant to divide it into portions and give them a more manageable electronic format.

Acknowledgement

Conducting enumerations under the SDI umbrella implies the involvement of a lot of volunteering especially from the shack dwellers community. These people are volunteers from the Joe Slovo Community, FEDUP and PPM members. They have participated in the planning phase, data collection and filing and in the capturing. They will further verify the information reported in this draft document. Their participation is seen by CORC as the guarantee of the accuracy of the data and of the potential to use them for their development purposes.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction

2. Methodology of the Enumeration

3. Key Findings

4. Graphs and Tables (of Major Findings)

Appendix : Survey Form

1. INTRODUCTION

On the 6th of May 2009, CORC and the Joe Slovo Community Task Team came together in a collaborative effort to conduct a household enumeration in the community as a way of getting the actual data about the livelihoods of the people who stay in this land strip. The main motive behind this enumeration project was to equip and strengthen the Community Task Team in the negotiation with the Government about their tenure security. The Joe Slovo residents were struggling against the eviction to Delft and CORC was keen to help in the research of win-win solutions with the community members.

This compilation is aimed at providing a tool more to both parties of the negotiation occurring between Government (National, City and Province) and the leadership representing the people of Joe Slovo, who would be strengthened in the definition of relocation and accommodation options.

The kind of data collected may also help to understand better life conditions in informal settlements. Furthermore, the exercise was supposed to represent an influential tool for the growth and development of other community activities such as daily savings and participation into the Urban Poor Fund (managed by uTshani Fund, the treasurer organisation of the Federation of the Urban Poor).

During this month-long enumeration, numerous demographic and settlement observations were made about the inhabitants of this settlement. In this exercise, we surveyed only the households who were not affected by the movement to Delft. It was observed that the community is made up of about 2800 teenagers (age range 1 – 17years), about 5070 adults (in the 18 – 64years range) and little more than 80 people aged 65 y.o. or more.

These numbers make up the total population observed during the period of enumeration, though it must be taken into account that there is a (small) number of families which were not enumerated due to a number of reasons.

In terms of community service delivery, the settlement has a total of 896 toilets where 706 are still functional with 190 not functional, due to vandalism. In terms of water supply, there is a total of 38 taps which are all functional.

The community is only made up of shack structures; there are no formal houses or backyards in this community. This is as a result of lack of tenure agreements between the government and the residents, hence no permanent structures.

As mentioned above, Joe Slovo settlement is situated 10 km east of Cape Town CBD on a vacant strip along the N2 highway. The settlement is a result of the increased rate of urbanisation where people leave rural areas in search of employment and better living. Due to high prices of rent and housing, people have resorted to this kind of shelter as the only cheap and accessible housing alternative. It emerged that most of the household heads in this settlement are from the Eastern Cape Province and came to Cape Town in great anticipation of a chance for employment and formal housing. The shortage of affordable housing across low income levels has seriously limited the housing options of lower-income households, hence low income earners have resorted to shack dwelling as the only option which can meet the level of their income.

During the enumeration it was established that the community has a diverse source of income, such as service jobs, state employment, construction and work in factories. However, there are some who own some small scale indigenous businesses like small corner shops locally known as “spaza” where small groceries and other basic goods like bread, cigarettes and drinks are sold. These small businesses also include beer outlets (“shebeens”). Some other activities like traditional healing are also a source of income to other people.

The monthly expenses of poor households for food, electricity, school fees and transport absorb the entire income and can be used as a proxy of it. The amount spent by a household on all the main, survival expenses per month ranges from R800 to R1500. Water and toilet services are freely delivered in this community hence there are no sanitation expenses for anyone.

There are no official statistics for the settlement’s current population, and of late there have been thick migrations into and out of the community. From the old city census records, Joe Slovo had a population of 20,000+ people. This figure is sometimes used without specification of whether the figure includes the large group of people who were evicted earlier to Delft as transit accommodation or not. From the history of the community, there is no enumeration of this magnitude which has ever been carried out in this settlement except for shack counting which was conducted by the City Council for an estimation of the population size.

The figures from our recent enumeration have some differences when compared to some previous demographic publications of the community. Therefore there is a risk of misrepresentation of figures; this has some long-term impacts on the people since demographic figures are used in making decisions about funding and other developmental issues and social programs. The need for current and accurate data has become critical in this particular community because service planning, program development and eviction deliberations will be based on this data.

This Joe Slovo Enumeration Report deals with the methodology of data collection and capture, the general lessons learnt in the enumeration project and analyzes the major findings.

2. METHODOLOGY OF THE ENUMERATION

CORC had regular meetings in early April 2009 to make all the necessary plans for the enumeration. The Community Task Team was called in to participate as a pivot and as the instrumental tool of mobilisation for the whole community about the enumeration. A series of meetings was held with the community at large about the enumeration, until it was agreed in its meaning, logistic aspects and task distribution.

Questionnaire development

The 2009 Joe Slovo enumeration survey questionnaire was adapted and revised from another recent exercise run by CORC in 2008 in Cloetesville (Stellenbosch Municipality). Based on the outcomes of the Cloetesville enumeration, many consultations and discussions to decide on what to be included, and left out of the Joe Slovo enumeration questionnaire, took place.

Further improvements were made to the previous questionnaire to ensure that more relevant and comprehensive information would be collected. The format of the questionnaire is as follows.

DOMAIN OF SURVEY ITEMS INCLUDED IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE

Household details - identity and gender of household head- his/her age- number of families occupying the structure- number of young people in the house- number of people attending school- number of adults staying in the house- number of aged persons in the house

Employment - number of people employed per household- type of employment- grants received- monthly basic expenses- transport and costs- shopping options

Nature of house - type of house- area of house- number of rooms- self-built / purchased

Disaster history - disasters experienced by the household

Migration - period lived in the community- place of residence before coming to JS- period lived in Cape Town

Sanitation

- type of toilet available to the household- number of people using the toilet- collection of waste from common bins

Table 1 - Questionnaire Outline

The whole enumeration team was divided into three teams: Measuring Team, Numbering Team and the Data Collection Team. 24 sections of the community were identified; the 24 Sections were numbered in an alphabetical order from Section A to Section X.

The Joe Slovo 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. On the 6th of May 2009, the CORC fieldworkers and some Community Task Team members led a mini workshop to instruct service providers and volunteer enumerators 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. Based on the SDI methodology, enumerators were instructed to speak personally to a member of the household they would collect information about. For this reason, the Joe Slovo Enumeration leaders built up three teams made up of Joe Slovo community volunteers who

had some knowledge about the community and all its sections. This not only increased the level of accuracy in the survey but helped the survey not to be seen as an external intrusion and potentially as a tool to favour the eviction1.

For the survey component of the project, enumerators surveyed every structure in each and every section at Joe Slovo. The survey contained 21 questions and took 10-15 minutes to be fully completed. All answers provided were confidential, in the process of data collection, the respondents were informed that there would be no retribution for any of their answers they provided in the survey and also ensured that there was nothing to be done to them for turning down some questions in the questionnaire.

During the data collection, substantive efforts were made to ensure the accuracy of the data which were collected. Despite all the stringent measures taken to ensure all the accuracy expected, there are some limitations which were met in the process:

1. Some people were misinformed of the purpose of the survey hence they did not divulge the information. They thought that the information was to be used against their interests.

2. Some people got an impression that the enumeration was aimed at collecting information which would be used in the house allocation hence they tried to have their information collected more than once.

3. Issues of leadership in the community, a few members in a couple of sections were contesting the Community Task Team’s representativeness and painted the enumeration as an initiative of the Task Team, excluded themselves and tried to boycott the whole exercise.

4. The enumeration was conducted after a serious fire disaster: some people are still temporarily living outside the community while setting up their structures hence the population is probably underestimated, as well as the number of shacks constituting the community.

Fieldwork

For a period of three weeks, the enumeration team conducted the “point in time” data collection in the whole community about households found in this community. Most of the data collection was done during the day; however, there were some situations where information was collected at night because the residents could be reached only during the evening, when they were back from work.

Data

After the data entry, all the data was analyzed and reports were produced showing frequency tables and graphs for each variable from the questionnaire. Prior to the analysis of the data, the data was first subjected to frequency and cross-tabulation analysis to minimize data entry errors. Of course errors may still be affecting accuracy, due to data entry problems or inconsistent answers provided by the respondents. However, only few errors were detected, thus ensuring the overall integrity of the information elaborated upon. The final data set analysis was done through the 2007 Microsoft Excel version. The data presented is for the whole community and for some variables the data is presented separately for each section.

1 As it is mentioned below, some suspicions remained anyway in a few residents, who refused to collaborate.

3. KEY FINDINGS

Key results of the enumeration are shown on the following pages, mainly in the synthetic form of graphs and tables.

The following table summarizes the settlement profile2 established through the enumeration.

“Slum” Name Joe Slovo

Age of Settlement 17 years

Status at the time of the survey on the date of drafting this report

Eviction: disputed in courts by Constitutional Court with obligation to consultations

Structures Informal residential units

Population 7946 (plus the households who refused to provide information – see below)

Not enumerated Estimated 100 households in the Section called “Zone 30”

Ownership City-owned land

No. of Individual Toilet Blocks None

No. of Community Toilet Blocks 896

Ratio of toilets to total number of people

896 for 7946 (9 people per toilet)

Most urgent needs Electricity, water, toilets

Table 2 - Brief Settlement profile

Due to the factors mentioned above, these figures are most probably slightly underestimated. There were 2799 households found to be staying in this community; children and teenagers make up 35% of the total population. The results about household leadership by gender also reflect a reality of fast transition from the stereotypical situation (household leadership is only a male role), and woman-led family units are gradually equalling the male-dominated household leadership responsibilities. 2 Settlement Profile format adapted from Ahmad Nagar Settlement Profiling, India (2009)

Analysis

From the Joe Slovo Household Enumeration exercise of May – June 2009, CORC and the Joe Slovo Community Task Team learned that in that period there were at least 2748 shacks in the community. They have to find with Government temporary and permanent solutions to accommodate with dignity these families and the ones which were forced to Delft in the past years.

CORC supported the exercise in the hope that the information contained in the tables verified by the community and the elaborations shared with all actors will favour a more informed discussion, starting from the one currently going on among local and national government, and the Joe Slovo Community Task Team, all parties assisted by their legal teams.

Empowering the community means giving them the tools for appropriate demands and for putting forward their own solutions, or to show how valuable their contribution to (any) solution may be, if consultation and negotiation take place. Staying in the slums is a bad experience and evictions may be worse both for the people affected and Government’s expenditure, hence community empowerment is needed to demand a deeper analysis.

The leadership of this community is aware that shack dwelling as an urbanization consequence has created a situation which requires intervention.3 Just as an example: Every woman responsible for a household in the community has to provide for 3.2 people on average. Grants contribute to the community for about R 340,000 (gross estimate) and apparently about 10.7% of the households depend only on them.

Every toilet has to be shared by nine people at least, and they are all in a very bad state after continuous vandalism. There are no ablution facilities and people have to wash themselves in dangerous promiscuity. Refuse is collected about once per week from the big containers at the periphery of the settlement, very far from the location of the majority of the shacks, which encourages unhealthy and unpleasant practices.

Shack dwelling has always been a poor living condition environment, there is always serious squeezing in these shacks, for example, three families sharing a 20m2 shack.

In this situation the improvement of shelter and infrastructure is a clear urgent need and government’s intention to solve the problem is welcome, however, it is the process and the relocation to a worse, far-away area that is contested.

Some consideration about the eviction (recently sanctioned also by the Constitutional Court with the condition of meaningful consultation) can be made from the data collected during the survey.

3 Several studies and reports have demonstrated that continued poverty and necessity deprivation in the first years of life will have a great influence on the shaping of children’s health, cognitive development, social skills and the future in general. The lack of basic infrastructure and services in the early stage of children’s lives may create a difficulty in social bonding with society. Growing up in physically constrained situations, with troubled parents or adults, makes it difficult for these informal settlement children to learn appropriate behaviour, appropriate conflict or problem resolution skills and proper personal management and responsibility. There is high vulnerability to developing problems which are most likely to have life-long negative impacts on education, health, civic participation, employment, skill development and social development.

The community is contributing to the city’s economy more than 2.7 million rand per month (by taking only the expenses for food and basic services). This figure alone should convince all that they have a right to a say about the development of the land where they have been staying for about nine years (on average) and about the protection of their livelihoods.

Only 4.5% of the households is spending more than R300 per month in transport (about 30% of the average income roughly estimated), and only 10.7% is spending more than R200 (about 20% of the income per household roughly estimated). It is likely that to reach their sources of income from Delft, the expenses for transport would increase significantly.

Considering the closer environment in terms of employment and income opportunities, most people are likely to lose their jobs if they are suddenly evicted to Delft. Most of the employed household heads find their workplaces adjacent to their community. Thanks to the proximity to the train station, about 57% of the households can benefit from relatively cheap (subsidized) train services. If the Joe Slovo residents had to devote a more relevant portion of their income to transport (today at about 8.6% of their expenses), the poverty cycle would worsen: if they have to travel from Delft, the train would not be available and taxis would be much more expensive.

Apart from employment, among the risks of the threatened eviction there is a great probability of a break-up of the social fabric and bonding within the community. This has a great impact on human life as it suddenly brings a great change in social life which takes a long time to shape again.

The community is mostly constituted by people from the Eastern Cape who came in search of employment and better living. 80.93% are directly from the Eastern Cape whilst a paltry 19.07% is from areas around Cape Town metropolitan zone and other provinces (refer to Graph 3). In relation to the migration from the Eastern Cape, the residents of this community have a variable history. The period of residence in Cape Town varies from less than one year to 63 years. 18% of the total population of Joe Slovo has stayed in Cape Town for five years and less, 82% has a longer history of stay in Cape Town, thus six years to 63 years.

Like any other slum in the world, the settlement is also vulnerable to different disasters. In its history, this settlement has experienced some devastating fires and floods. Almost one thousand residents have experienced both disasters. However, the most dominant disaster is flooding, which came to be an annual winter experience in the community. From 2748 families surveyed in the first enumeration, 1747 have had a fire experience, and among these 1209 (69.2%) have also experienced flooding (more than once). 1708 households have experienced flooding (please refer to Table 8 and Graph 10). In this situation, there is clearly a great need for disaster preparation and mitigation rather than emergency interventions like the ones carried out so far.

4. GRAPHS AND TABLES

Demographic background of respondents

Primary Results Table

Age Group Number of people % of the total0 – 17 2799 35%18 – 64 5066 64%

65 + 81 1%Total 7946 100%

Table 3 - Joe Slovo Population

The distribution of totals by age group is shown in Table 3 and also reflected in the diagram below.

.

1 2 30

10203040506070 35%

(17yrs below)

64%

(18 - 64yrs)

1%

(65+ yrs)

Population Distribution

Population DistributionGraph 1 - Population Distribution by age group

Analysis of household leadership by gender reflects that in 2748 households in the whole community (from the enumerated households), the leadership is predominantly male with a total of 1688 which accounts for 62.28% of household leadership. Women lead a total of 1022 households, accounting for 37.72% of the households found in this community. Refer to the table and chart below.

Gender Total number PercentageMale 1714 62%

Female 1034 38%Table 4 – Gender distribution of household heads

1 20

10203040506070

62%

(Male)

38%

(female)

Household Leadership by ...

Graph 2 - Household Leadership by Gender

In the analysis of household leadership by age, the leadership is dominated by 18–45 years age range, this range accounts for 92.39%, while the bracket 46-64 accounts for 6.04%. Households which are led by (otherwise) “dependant” population (under 17 years and above 64 years) only account for 0.69 (teenagers) and 0.87 (65+ years).

Age Range Total Population Percentile RepresentationTeenage Leadership 19 0,69%

18 – 45 Years 2539 92,39%46 – 64 Years 166 6,04%

65+ Years 24 0,87%Table 5 - Household Leadership per age range

1%(65+ yrs)

92%(18-64 yrs)

6% (46 - 64 yrs)

1%(teenage)

Household leadership by Age

Figure 1 – Household leadership per age range

The history of the community is relatively short, but the analysis of the years spent on the land by the households surveyed shows that the average of residence is 8.6 years and the median figure is 9 years, and almost 43% of the households have been residing there for more than 10 years.

Community constitution 17 yearsAverage years of residence 8.6 yearsMedian number of years of residence 9 yearsPercentage of population staying in JS

> 5 years> 6 years> 7 years> 10 years

79%70%64.4%43%

0 - 5 years22%

6 - 10 years35%11 - 15 Years

26%

16 - 20 Years11%

21+ Years6%

History of residence in Cape Town

Figure 2 Period of stay in Cape Town of Joe Slovo residents

1 2 3 40.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

30.89

Less than 5 years

28.06

5 to 9 yeras

36.33

10 to 15 Years

4.72

16+ Years

Period of stay for E. Cape migrants

Graph 3 Period of stay for people who migrated directly from the Eastern Cape to Joe Slovo.

Focusing on the population distribution illustrated in Graph 1, the economically active population also dominates the distribution in as much as it dominates in the Household Leadership. This gives us a statistical picture and explanation of the small scale dependency ratio of the community, the ratio is 1 economically active person to 3 dependant people.

In the analysis of the teenage population’s school attendance, the analysis was done with an impression that the school going age is the teenage age group only, there might however be some few cases where people out of this age range attend school as well. From the whole population of the community, 31% of the community is school going, and 69% is non-schooling population.

Total population 7946 %

Number attending school 2489 31

Number not attending school 5457 69

Table 6 - School Attendance

A further analysis was done on education about the teenagers who make up 35% of the whole population. It was observed that in a total of 2799 teenagers, 310 teenagers are not attending school4. 88.92% of the teenagers attend school whilst 11.08% do not attend school.

4 Analysis done with the assumption that only teenagers are attending school.

89%(school-going)

11%(non -schooling)

Analysis of School Attendance by Teenagers

Figure 3 - School attendance of teenagers

From the total population of 7946, a percentage which is less than 50% is employed in different types of jobs, only 2544 people are employed, thus 32%. 68% is the unemployed population. The employment statistics are demonstrated below in Figure 2.

1 20.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

32%(Employed)

68%(Unemployed)

Employment Analysis

Employment Analysis

Graph 4 – Employment Analysis

In terms of employment, the employed population is involved more with part-time and full-time jobs, a small percentage is accounted for by self-employment, however, there are some

who did not indicate the type of employment they are involved in. The table and figure below show the employment trend in the community.

Employed community members 2544 %

Self-employed 222 8.73

Part time 1163 45.72

Full time 990 38.92

Data not provided 169 6.64Table 7 – Employment synopsis

9%(Self Employed)

46%(Part Time

)

39%(Full Time

)

6%(Missing Data)

Employment Analysis

Figure 4 – Employment Analysis

We highlighted above that within the households led by women the people to provide for are on average 3.2. In the same group only 26.5% are employed. These families depend on grants for about 72%, meaning that 28% of the families led by women have no source of income.

Households without employed people are 15.2% of all the ones led by men. Among the unemployed the surveyed families declared that only 30.8% can rely on grants. More refined research would be needed to understand how 160 households with no apparent source of income can survive (and spend about R 145,000 per month), but the general picture shows a reality of fragile equilibrium if any.

1 20

1020304050607080

26.5%

Employed

73.5%

Un em-

ployed

Employment Analysis

1 20.00

20.0040.0060.0080.00

100.00 84.55

Employed15.45%

Unem-ployed

Employment Anal-ysis

Graph 5 - Female led households Graph 6 - Male led households

Income is slightly boosted by the different grants which are received from the national government. Four different grants are received by different people in the community, namely Disability, Child Support, Refugee Pension and other grants.

1

2

0.0010.00

20.0030.00

40.0050.00

60.0070.00

80.0090.00

100.00

13.03% - re-ceive grants

86.97%(No Grant)

Social Welfare Information

Graph 7 – Social Welfare

A total of 1035 people receive grants on monthly basis, Child Support Grant constituting the biggest percentage of grants received (84.35%). Disability Grant constitutes 11.69%, a Pension 3.09% of the enumerated grant receivers, while the lowest percentages are shared among other minor types of grants (they have 0.48% and 0.39% respectively). From these statistics, it can be observed that 13.03% are those who receive grants whilst 86.97% do not receive any.

1 2 3 4 50.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

11.69%Disability

84.35%Child Support

3.09%Pension

0.48%(Refugee)

0.39%(Other)

Distribution of Social Welfare Graph 8 – Social Welfare

The total expenditure of the community calculated based on the basic needs sums up to R 2 662 616, this includes the total of arbitrary addition from 47 additional households added after the end of enumeration and 59 families which refused to declare their expenses: these households are taken at the average of the others.

The table below summarises the financial contribution of the community to the economy of Cape Town.

Average of declaring families R 967.88Additional families (59+47) R 104,516Total (with arbitrary addition) R 2,662,616

1 2 3 4 5 60

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000 Food

ElectricityTransportRent &

maintainance

SchoolFees

Clothing

Monthly Expenses in Rands

Graph 9: Main monthly expenses

In transport, the analysis was done based on the four types of transport which are minibus (“taxi”), bus, train and private.5 Train transport dominates the distribution, it has 57% with private and taxi having 18% each the bus has the lowest percentage with 7%.

Private18%

Taxi18%

Bus7%

Train57%

Transport Distribution

Figure 5

The table below shows the occurrence of disasters in the community. In relation to disasters, 105 households have had an experience of an eviction.

Disaster Households affected

Fire Only 1747

Floods Only 1708

Both 1202

Table 8

5 Transport covers work and school

20%

18%

44%

18%

Disasters Experienced

FireFloodsBothNone

Figure 6

As highlighted above, the community is only serviced by 896 toilets with 34 taps. All the taps are functional whilst there are some toilets which are not functional due to vandalism and poor servicing.

IN USE UNUSED TOTALS

TOILETS 706 190 896

TAPS 34 0 34

Table 9

The area is made up mostly of shacks with sizes ranging from 6 to 10m2 which has a total of 39.9%. Please refer to the above Table 9 and Graph for more information.

Shack SizeNo. Of h/holds %

No measurement 170 6.2< 5 m2 111 4.06 - 10m2 1097 39.911 - 15 m2 595 21.716 - 20 m2 323 11.821 - 25m2 163 5.9>26m2 289 10.5

Table 10

No mesurement

< 5 Square m

6 - 10m2 11 - 15 m2

16 - 20 m2

21 - 25m2

>26m20

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Shack size analysis

Area of shack (in square meters)

Num

ber o

f Hou

seho

lds

Graph 10 Analysis of shack area

\

COMMUNITY ORGANISATION RESOURCE CENTREJOE SLOVO ENUMERATION

THIS ENUMERATION SURVEY COLLECTS INFORMATION ON HOUSING, INCOME, EMPLOYMENT AND SANITATION. 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 YOUR SANITATION SERVICES

______________________________________________________________________________

1. Household Details1.1 Head of Household

Surname ________________________________ Name ___________________________ Gender: Male Female

1.2 Age; 0 – 17 18 – 45 46 – 64 65 +

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 details2.1 How many people are employed in the house? 1 2 3 4 +

2.2 What type of employment are they involved in?

How many How many How manySelf 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

2.6 How many people have any form of income in your house? 1 2 3 4+

2.7 How much are the main expenses per month?

1. Food 2. Electricity

3. Transport 4. Rent/Maintenance

5. School fees 6. Clothing

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

Private Taxi Bus Train

2.9 How much do you pay per day?

R

R R

R R

R R

R

2.9.1 Where do you do your shopping?

1. In the community 2. Cape Town

3. Van Gate Shopping mall 4. Other

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

3.2 What is the size of your house? + =

3.3 How many rooms does your house have?

1 2 3 4+ 4 +

3.4 Is your house Self built? Purchased?

4. Disaster History4.1 Have you ever experienced? (i) Fire Disaster Yes No how many times?

(ii) Flooding Yes No how many times?

(iii) Evictions Yes No how many times?

4.2 Migration History

i) How long have you lived in Joe Slovo?

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

iii) How long have you lived in Cape Town?

5. Sanitation5.1 Which toilet do you use? (i) Communal (ii) Individual

m²

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

ENUMERATOR: …………………………………………………………..

DATE : …………/………/………………

5.2 How many people use this toilet?

5.3 How many times is the refuse Collected in your community?

(1) Once a Week twice a week Trice a week

(2) Once a month twice a month or never

---------------------------------------------END- ------------------END-------------------------------------------------------