Department of Social Development nodal baseline survey: Motherwell results

1. Department of Social Development nodal baseline survey: Motherwell 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 Motherwell data: national report and results 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 Motherwell-specific findings • Motherwell 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. Motherwell scorecard Compared with other urban nodes, Motherwell scores generally on average (for social capital, development awareness, health and the composite global index); with health status flashing a red warning light.

7. Poverty deficit The poverty deficit index is based on 10 indicators (see table below), given equal weighting. Motherwell is in the middle of the URP nodes, 4th of 8.

8. Poverty deficit Priority areas in red - where the Motherwell score is above the URP average - include refuse removal (22% above the URP average) and the rate of unemployment. Far more items are in green, meaning they are better than the URP average, including infrastructure items as well as illiteracy and female-headed households.

9. Poverty analysis • Poverty scores in urban nodes are generally better than those in rural nodes, for obvious reasons - greater connectivity to services, more economic opportunity, and so on. That said, Motherwell is the 4th poorest (of 8) node, and key challenges include the following: • A rate of unemployment of 78% (above the URP average of 63%) • 44% incidence of female-headed households • 16% of respondents were living in shacks • 13% of respondents were functionally illiterate • 10% had no refuse removal • But there also positives, including above average access to RDP water and sanitation, and to electricity (for lighting).

10. Social capital deficit • 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. • Motherwell has the 3rd highest level of social capital among the URP nodes.

11. Social capital deficit Priority areas - where the Motherwell score is higher than the URP average - includes anomie and alienation and lack of faith in politics. The positives are also evident, in green, including better than average CSO membership, trust, and so on.

12. Development deficit • 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. • Social capital was 3rd highest in Motherwell, but is not reflected in development awareness, where Motherwell is 4th worst.

13. Development deficit Priorities include below average awareness of CSO or government delivery; or of HIV/AIDS, emergency food or water projects. Better than average awareness was recorded for the items in green.

14. Service delivery deficit Motherwell ranks 3rd out of the 8 URP nodes on service delivery

15. Service delivery – weaknesses Weaknesses, i.e. where doing worse than URP average, include, for instance, respondents are 21% more likely not to rate their water as clean than the URP average.

16. Service delivery – strengths Strengths: Respondents are less likely to complain about access to/ quality of certain aspects the delivery of basic services when compared with the URP average. For instance, respondents in this node are 65% less likely to rate the electricity supply as poor than the URP average

17. Service Delivery: Main Features • Other important services provided by DSD such as Children Homes, Rehabilitation Centres and Drop-In Centres worryingly received 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 penetration of DSD services as well as grants in the node.

18. Health deficit Motherwell is ranked as the second worst URP node with respect to health measures

19. Health deficit Priority Areas, i.e. where doing worse than URP average, include, for instance respondents are 38% more likely to have difficulty accessing health care than the URP average, 35% more likely to rate their health as poor than the URP average, and 47% more likely to report that poor health limits their social activities.

20. Health • HIV and AIDS was seen by the vast majority in the node (59%) as the major health problem facing Motherwell (much higher than the average of 42% across all URP nodes) • Alcohol Abuse was also reported as a major health problem in the node (16% of respondents noted this, lower than the URP average of 27%) • 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 was far more likely to be perceived as a major issue in this node when compared with other URP nodes, in particular • 43% of respondents reported distance to health facility as being a problem • 44% 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 focuses on the issues of HIV and AIDS, alcohol abuse and access to health care facilities • A sectoral or targeted approach is need to focus on these health issues in this node • Poverty and the health challenges of HIV and AIDS and alcohol abuse cannot be separated and whatever intervention is decided upon should be in the form of an integrated response to the challenges facing Motherwell residents

21. Proportion who agree that both parties in a relationship should share decision - making Read as: Majority in the node support the view that most decisions in the household require joint decision-making by both partners, albeit that this node is below average on certain issues

22. Proportion supporting statements about female contraception Read as: Node is relatively progressive as all these myths about contraception are not as widely held as the URP average, though still problematic

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 most situations is higher in this node than the URP average and points to a negative attitudes about Gender Based Violence in the node. Disturbing 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 negative attitudes have been absorbed by men and women, young and old, and interventions are needed to break this cycle

24. Attitudes towards abortion Read as: Abortion is NOT supported by just over a quarter of all respondents (29%), lower than the average (42%).

25. Sexual Reproductive Health & GBV • Findings point to the need for nuanced campaigns around contraception and their very close link with inappropriate attitudes to women in the node • Disturbing to note the negative attitudes towards Gender Based Violence, coupled to qualified support for abortions. Nevertheless the node is relatively progressive when compared to other nodes with regards to myths about contraception. 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 • Whilst many in the node support the idea that decisions in the household require joint decision-making by both partners, those who do not support joint decision-making have taken it further and endorsed 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 Read as: Prevalence rates are high and secrecy is relatively low, suggesting stigmatization may be dropping in face of unavoidability of the epidemic

27. HIV & AIDS: Proportion who accept the following statements Read as: High awareness of how HIV is transmitted, albeit weaker than the URP average in all instances

28. HIV and AIDS • Evidence suggests that previous campaigns (and the high incidence of the pandemic in the node) have led to high awareness of impact of HIV and AIDS. • Encouraging to see how many in the node have correct knowledge about the transmission of the disease (albeit the node compares unfavourably with the URP average on all the items), nevertheless the previous slide does show areas which should be prioritised in future campaigns • Despite high levels of poverty in this node, there is some evidence that respondents are trying to actively assist those community members who are infected and suffering • 9% are providing Home Based Care (HBC) • 5% providing direct support to orphans • These findings support the need for an urgent integrated intervention in the node that incorporates health, poverty, GBV, HIV and AIDS

29. Conclusions • Motherwell has an “average” Global Development Rating K. Challenges and strengths emerging form the statistical analysis appear below.