68749 The Kingdom of Swaziland Report on the Piloting of the Quality, Relevance and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services Survey (QIMS) in Swaziland National Emergency Council on HIV and AIDS (NERCHA) The Global HIV/AIDS Program (GHAP) The World Bank Pilot+ Report Quality, Relevance and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services Survey (QIMS) in Swaziland Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... ii List of Tables and Figures ........................................................................................................................... iv Glossary ........................................................................................................................................................... v List of Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................... xi Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... xii 1 Introduction to the QIMS and the Pilot+ Survey............................................................................ 1 1.1 Background to the QIMS .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Rationale for the QIMS ................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Goal of and Research Questions for the QIMS ......................................................................... 1 1.4 Rationale for and Objectives of the QIMS Pilot+ Survey ......................................................... 2 1.5 Structure of the Report ................................................................................................................. 2 2 Approach and Methodology to the QIMS Pilot+ Survey .............................................................. 3 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Approach to QIMS ........................................................................................................................ 3 2.3 Pilot+ Methods ............................................................................................................................... 4 2.3.1 Sample Frame and Sampling .............................................................................................. 4 2.3.2 Training .................................................................................................................................. 5 2.3.3 Field Procedures ................................................................................................................... 5 2.3.4 Implementation of the Quantitative Questionnaire ........................................................ 6 2.3.5 Data Entry, Validation, and Cleaning ............................................................................... 6 3 Survey Results: Homestead Characteristics..................................................................................... 7 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Reasons Why Homesteads Were Eligible for Inclusion in the Survey .................................. 7 3.3 Number of Households in the Homestead................................................................................ 8 3.4 Characteristics of Head of Homestead ....................................................................................... 9 4 Survey Results: Status of Orphans in Homestead ........................................................................ 10 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 10 4.2 Type of Orphan ........................................................................................................................... 10 4.3 Demographics of Orphans ......................................................................................................... 10 4.4 Other Factors Around Orphan Status ...................................................................................... 11 4.5 Status of Orphan Caregivers ..................................................................................................... 14 5 Survey Results: Employment, Income, Assets and Water and Sanitation Status ................... 15 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 15 5.2 Employment and Income Status ............................................................................................... 15 5.3 Services ......................................................................................................................................... 16 5.4 Agriculture ................................................................................................................................... 18 5.5 Livelihood Challenges ................................................................................................................ 18 5.6 Registration for Support ............................................................................................................. 19 - ii - 6 Survey Results: Social Capital and Coping Mechanisms ........................................................... 20 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 20 6.2 Social Capital ............................................................................................................................... 20 6.3 Coping Through Diet, Mitigation, and Other Means ............................................................ 24 6.4 Discipline and Abuse .................................................................................................................. 25 6.4.1 Support................................................................................................................................. 25 6.4.2 Discipline ............................................................................................................................. 25 6.4.3 Excessive Discipline and Abuse ....................................................................................... 25 6.4.4 Relationships ....................................................................................................................... 26 7 Survey Results: Provision of Impact Mitigation Services, and Relevance, Quality, Timeliness and Comprehensiveness of these Services .............................................................. 28 7.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 28 7.2 Access to Grants .......................................................................................................................... 28 7.3 Access to and Need for Services ............................................................................................... 29 7.3.1 School Fee Support and Stated Need ........................................................................ 29 7.3.2 School Materials Support ......................................................................................... 30 7.3.3 Non-Formal Education Support .............................................................................. 30 7.3.4 Vocational Training Support ................................................................................... 30 7.3.5 Food Support ............................................................................................................ 30 7.3.6 Support for Agricultural Activities ......................................................................... 31 7.3.7 Grief Counselling Support ....................................................................................... 31 7.3.8 Other Counselling Support ...................................................................................... 31 7.3.9 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling........................................................................... 31 7.3.10 Home-Based Care ..................................................................................................... 32 7.3.11 Legal Support ........................................................................................................... 32 7.3.12 Income Generation Support ..................................................................................... 32 7.3.13 Housing Support ...................................................................................................... 32 7.3.14 Micro-Credit Support .............................................................................................. 32 7.3.15 Medical Services for the Chronically Ill ................................................................... 32 7.3.16 Targeting .................................................................................................................. 32 8 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................................... 34 8.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 34 8.2 Lessons Learned: Implementation of QIMS .......................................................................... 34 8.3 Lessons Learned: NSPIII ........................................................................................................... 36 8.3.1 Vulnerability .................................................................................................... 36 8.3.2 Supply of and Demand for Impact Mitigation Services ....................................... 37 8.3.3 IMS Service Delivery Systems .......................................................................... 38 8.3.4 Homestead Situation Analysis........................................................................... 39 Annex A: Pilot+ Survey Questionnaire .................................................................................................. 41 - iii - List of Tables and Figures Table 1: Inclusion of Homesteads as Eligible for IMS (Primary Inclusion Criteria) ............................ 8 Table 2: Inclusion of Homesteads as Eligible for IMS (Secondary Inclusion Criteria) ......................... 8 Table 3: Characteristics of Homestead Head ............................................................................................. 9 Table 4: Orphan Status ................................................................................................................................ 13 Table 5: Status of Orphans’ Caregivers .................................................................................................... 14 Table 6: Coherence of Local Actors and Local Actions .......................................................................... 23 Table 7: Prevalence of Emotional and Physical Violence (Percentages) .............................................. 27 Table 8: Targeting ........................................................................................................................................ 33 Figure 1: Number of Orphans by type of Orphan .................................................................................. 10 Figure 2: Number of Orphans by Sex ....................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3: Age of Orphans ........................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4: Income Status ............................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 5: Domestic Water Supply.............................................................................................................. 17 Figure 6: Human Waste Disposal Systems .............................................................................................. 17 Figure 7: Excessive Discipline and Abuse ................................................................................................ 26 Figure 8: Relevance, Timeliness and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services ................ 29 - iv - Glossary Advocacy Organised efforts to influence policy, leadership and opinion at various levels of action in the national response. Source: NERCHA, 2006. AIDS The late stage of HIV, AIDS involves the loss of function of the immune system as CD4 cells are infected and destroyed, allowing the body to succumb to opportunistic infections and cancers. AIDS is defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as a CD4 cell count below 200 cells/mm3 or the presence of at least one opportunistic illness in an HIV positive individual. Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. AIDS Competence The ability of all elements of society (individuals, families, communities, businesses, governmental and non-governmental organisations of all sectors at all levels) to recognise the reality of HIV&AIDS, to analyse how it affects life at home and at work, and to take action to prevent its spread, maintain and improve the quality of life of people living with HIV/AIDS, families affected by AIDS, and the community at large. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Antiretroviral An agent that suppresses the activity or replication of retroviruses such as HIV by interfering with various stages of the viral life cycle; the four approved classes are nucleoside and nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (e.g., AZT, tenofovir), non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (e.g., efavirenz), protease inhibitors (e.g., ritonavir), and entry inhibitors (T-20). Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. Asymptomatic Not feeling symptoms of showing signs of a disease or condition. Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. Chronic Food Insecurity A state of continuously inadequate diet, precipitated by the inability to acquire food. In this case, households are persistently failing to produce and/or buy enough food. Chronic food insecurity is different from transitory food insecurity, which is a temporary inability to access adequate food in terms of quantity and quality. UNDP/Swaziland, 2007. Civil Society Organisation Non-governmental groups that provide public services, CSOs may include community-based organisations, faith-based organisations, trade unions, business associations, foundations, academic institutions and the media. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Comprehensive Comprehensiveness refers to whether the services have targeted all those in need with the support they need, and the support they need most, and whether there are any additional or new support needs to be provided in future. Continuum of Care Establishment of an experience of continuity for users of care services across the different locations where care is provided. This would mean that services ranging from social grants to medical treatment to psychosocial support are knitted into an integrated framework for improvement of access to care. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Co-ordination A process of facilitation, communications, sharing, planning and monitoring of resources, risks and rewards for the purposes of efficiency and effectiveness in scaling-up all efforts in response to the HIV epidemic. Source: NERCHA, 2006. - v - Cost Effectiveness A measure of the comparative efficiency of discrete strategies and methods for achieving the same objective. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/ urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Discrimination Treating people unfairly and unjustly on the basis of their belonging, or being perceived to belong, to a particular group. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Duty-Bearers Those actors that have a particular responsibility to respect, promote and realise human rights and to abstain from human rights violations. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Epidemic An outbreak of a disease within a population. Normally, an epidemic refers to a disease within a nation. Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. Evaluation The periodic measurement of the outcomes and ultimately the impact of a programme. Evaluation asks ‘what have we achieved?’. Frequently, evaluation uses programme monitoring data, but it also involves a specific and often independent programme of research. Gender Gender refers to differences in social roles and relations between men and women. Gender roles are learned through socialisation and vary widely within and between cultures. Gender roles are also affected by age, class, race, ethnicity and religion, as well as by geographical, economic and political environments. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Gender Equality Gender equality means equality of treatment under the law and equality of opportunity for women and men. Gender inequality is generated both by society’s written and unwritten norms, rules and shared understandings. Source: UNAIDS, 2005. HAART Highly active antiretroviral therapy, a term for potent combination anti-HIV treatment, usually with three or more drugs from different classes. Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus - The virus that weakens the immune system, ultimately leading to AIDS. Two major types: HIV-1 and HIV-2, and many subtypes of the virus. HIV=1 is prevalent throughout most of the world, HIV=2 is found mostly in West Africa and typically causes a milder form of immunodeficiency disease. Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. HIV-Negative Showing no evidence of infection with HIV (e.g., absence of antibodies against HIV) in a blood or tissue test. Synonymous with seronegative. An HIV- negative person can be infected if he or she is in the window period between HIV exposure and detection of antibodies. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. HIV-Positive Showing indications of infection with HIV (e.g., presence of antibodies against HIV) on a test of blood or tissue. Synonymous with seropositive. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Home-Based Care Any form of care given to sick people in their homes, which includes physical, psychosocial, palliative and spiritual activities. Source: NERCHA, 2006. - vi - Human Development The process of expanding the choices and opportunities that people value highly through enhancing their capacities and functioning. Three choices and opportunities are considered to be essential: having a long and health life; acquiring knowledge and becoming part of a world of information, and enjoying a decent standard of living. Other choices are however recognised as also being important for human development, including political, economic and social freedom, guaranteed human rights as well as the attainment of dignity, self-respect and a sense of belonging to the community. Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. Impact Impact, in the context of impact mitigation, comprises the negative effects of chronic illness, premature death, behavioural dysfunction, or environmental circumstance that requires the implementation of activities designed to lessen these impacts. Source: Warner, 2007; see also Alumira et. al., 2004. Impact Mitigation Impact mitigation comprises family, neighbourhood, community, or external actors taking actions designed to alleviate negative impacts. Effective impact mitigation services generally address broader systematic causes of vulnerability. Source: Warner, 2007; see also Alumira et. al., 2004. Incidence HIV incidence is the proportion of people who have become infected with HIV during a specified period of time. UNAIDS normally refers to the number of people who have become infected during the past year. In contrast, HIV prevalence refers to the number of infections at a particular point in time. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Mainstreaming Adapting a ministry or organisation’s core business to cope with the realities of HIV&AIDS. Source: NERCHA, 2006. MDGs Millennium Development Goals - Eight goals developed at the Millennium Summit in September 2000. Goal six refers specifically to AIDS but attainment of several goals is being hampered by the HIV epidemic. See: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Mitigation Activities designed to reduce the impact of the epidemic (e.g., provision of school fees, food and/or clothing to children in a household affected by HIV/AIDS, strengthening of social safety nets, etc.). Source: http://www.worldbank.org/urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Monitoring The routine assessment of ongoing activities and progress. Monitoring asks: ‘What are we doing?’ Monitoring covers all aspects of programme activity and ideally involves a plan for systematically collecting key programme information relating to inputs, activities/processes and outputs. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Multi-Sectoral Approach A policy programming strategy which involves all sectors and sections of society in a holistic response to HIV&AIDS. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Network Consists of individuals and/or organisations willing to assist one another or collaborate to achieve common goals. A network can rapidly disseminate information - lessons, innovations, techniques, ideas, news, requests, questions. A network may give its participants a strong sense of solidarity and connection. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/urban/ hivaids/glossary.htm. - vii - OIs Opportunistic Infections - Illnesses caused by various organisms, some of which usually do not cause disease in persons with healthy immune systems. Persons living with advanced HIV infection may suffer opportunistic infections of the lungs, brain, eyes and other organs. Opportunistic illnesses common in persons diagnosed with AIDS include pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, cryptosporidiosis, histoplasmosis, other parasitic, viral and fungal infections, and some types of cancers. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Orphan A child under the age of 18 who has lost one or both parents. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Pandemic A widespread disease outbreak affecting the population of an extensive area of the world. Is normally used only when discussing more than one country or a region. Source: http://www.sfaf.org/glossary. PLHIV People living with HIV/AIDS. Refers to people living with HIV or AIDS (PLHIV), as it reflects the fact that an infected person is living with HIV, whether or not a person is in the fourth clinical stage of HIV infection – having full-blown AIDS. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/ urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Prevalence Usually give as a percentage, HIV prevalence quantifies the proportion of individuals in a population who have HIV at a specific point in time. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Psycho-social Support Interventions that are meant to enhance the ability of children, families, and communities to cope with HIV&AIDS and to achieve social, spiritual, mental, emotional, and physical well-being, enabling them to experience love, protection, self-worth and belonging. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Quality Quality, in terms of impact mitigation services, refers to services being of a sufficient standard to produce desired outcomes (whether the desired outcomes themselves are achieved or not, if other factors mitigate against service quality). Source: Warner, 2007. Relevance Relevance refers to the extent to which impact mitigation services delivered are appropriate in terms of the particular needs of those receiving the services. Source: Warner, 2007. Rights-Holders Individuals and social groups that have particular entitlements. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Risk Risk refers to risk of exposure to HIV which may be high as a result of specific behaviours or situations. Examples of the latter include risk in discordant couples unaware of their serostatus and recipients of unscreened blood or blood products. Source: UNAIDS, 2008. Safer Sex Sex is 100% from HIV transmission when both partners know their HIV- negative serostatus and neither partner is in the window period between HIV exposure and appearance of HIV antibodies detectable by the HIV test. In other circumstances, reduction in the numbers of sexual partners and correct and consistent use of condoms can reduce the risk of transmission. The term safer sex reflects the idea that choices can be made and behaviours adopted to reduce or minimise risk. Source: UNAIDS, 2008. Seroprevalence As related to HIV infection, the proportion of persons who have serologic evidence of HIV infection (i.e., antibodies to HIV) at any given time. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. - viii - Social Capital Norms and networks that enable collective action, whether these networks involve family members or non-family members, and whether these networks involve those living proximate to each other, or some distance away. Source: World Bank, 2007. Stakeholders Those individuals and organisations affected (negatively or positively) by the outcome of an activity/project and/or those who can affect the outcome of a proposed intervention (e.g., PLHIV, young people, unions, health care providers, local leaders, etc.). Source: http://www.worldbank.org/ urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Stigma The holding of derogatory/negative social attitudes or display of hostile or discriminatory behaviour towards members of a group on account of their membership of that group. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/ urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Three Ones One agreed HIV/AIDS Action Framework that provides the basis for co- ordinating the work of all partners; One National AIDS Co-ordinating Authority, with a broad-based multisectoral mandate; and One agreed country- level Monitoring and Evaluation System. Source: UNAIDS, 2007. Vulnerability Vulnerability is defined as the extent to which a unit of interest -- homestead, household, individual -- is able to protect itself from unwanted exposure to negative impacts, whether these impacts come from outside or inside. Source: http://www.worldbank.org/ urban/hivaids/glossary.htm. Vulnerable Child A child aged 0-17 whose parents or guardians are not able to provide the required care, a child who is mentally or physically challenged, a child who is staying alone or with poor elderly grandparents, a child who lives in a poor sibling-headed household, or a child who has no fixed home. Source: NERCHA, 2006. - ix - siSwati terms Imiphakatsi Chiefdom. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Indlunkhulu Traditional chief’s homestead. Source: NERCHA, 2006. kaGogo Grandmother’s hut. Source: NERCHA, 2006. kaGogo Centre A centre that has been established in a community that offers support services to orphans and other vulnerable children. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Lutsango LwakaNgwane Traditional women’s regiment. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Tigodzi Sub-chiefdom. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Tinkhundla Constituency. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Umcwasho A cultural practice that aims at preserving chastity among girls by prohibiting sexual contact between girls and men. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Umphakatsi Chief’s residence, which is used as the headquarters for the chiefdom. Source: NERCHA, 2006. Yindzaba Yetfu Sonkhe ‘It is everyone’s problem’, a phrase used in Swaziland to respond to the HIV epidemic. Source: NERCHA, 2006. - x - List of Acronyms AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome CSO Central Statistical Office EA Enumeration Area GBV Gender-Based Violence HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus IMS Impact Mitigation Services NERCHA National Emergency Response Committee on HIV and AIDS NCP Neighbourhood Care Points NSP National Strategic Plan OVC Orphans and other Vulnerable Children PLHIV People Living with HIV/AIDS QIMS Quality, Relevance and Effectiveness of Impact Mitigation Services UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund WHO World Health Organisation - xi - Executive Summary The National Emergency Response Council on HIV/AIDS (NERCHA) of the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland will be commissioning a Quality, Relevance and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services (QIMS) Survey in Swaziland, to take place from early 2009. In preparation for this QIMS Survey, NERCHA led a formative research process that included a small survey intended to test the questionnaire to be used for QIMS. Originally it was intended that the questionnaire would only be pre-tested as part of enumerator training, with a small number of interviews would be conducted as part of training. However, two factors led to a decision to expand the questionnaire pre-testing exercise to conduct what was eventually called the Pilot+ Survey: 1) Upon review of available literature, few examples of questionnaires appropriate to measuring the quality, relevance, timeliness and comprehensiveness were found. This meant the original design of many components of the questionnaire, and integrating this into a questionnaire that also contained questions adapted from previous surveys on Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children (OVC), People Living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV), and Gender-Based Violence (GBV). 2) From the second half of 2008, NERCHA led the design of the National Strategic Plan III for HIV&AIDS (NSPIII). This has included consideration of the findings contained in this report. Based on these information needs, and considering cost and time constraints, a survey was conducted across twenty enumeration areas nationwide yielding 181 completed interviews. Due to small sample size it should be noted that the results mentioned in this report should be interpreted as qualitative case study findings, meaning that the numbers contained herein cannot be used to reflect the magnitude nor nature of the problems at the national scale. The majority of homestead heads interviewed during the Protocol field test were female, with low education. Half of all homestead heads were aged 60 or older, and half were widowed. Of the 181 homesteads in the survey, 147 (over 80%) only had a single household, and most of the remainder only comprised two households. One-third of the married males were in polygamous relationships, with an average of two wives. By definition, all homesteads in the survey were eligible for one type of impact mitigation service or other. However, only 40% of the interviewed homesteads indicated that they were registered as eligible for some type of services. For those who were not registered, half did not know why they had not been registered, but felt that they should have been.. School fees assistance and food aid were most commonly received impact mitigation services, while very few benefited from vocational training, non-formal education, psychosocial support initiatives, micro-credit schemes, income generation and agricultural support. The Pilot+ Survey suggests extremely severe findings from HIV&AIDS on affected homesteads. A remarkably high number of respondents noted that increased ill health or premature death in the recent past had undermined homestead coping, and that the effects of this were felt in terms of collapsed homesteads, the merging of multiple households in a homestead into a single household, and high caregiving burdens. Reflecting difficulties in coping around 20% of all homesteads participated in the Protocol testing had had at least one child drop out of school because of an - xii - inability to pay for costs associated with education. Protocol test findings also raise a possible concern associated with the health status of many caregivers since almost half of the interviewed appeared to be sick, infirm and old. Over two-thirds of caregivers had caregiving burdens of four or more children. The majority of the orphaned children had never been moved from one homestead to another, and almost all were kept within extended family structures. In general, responses were more mixed about impact mitigation services and their quality and usefulness compared to the question related to a possible decline in of Swazi values and the society. Perhaps the most serious challenge facing homesteads in need of Impact Mitigation Services has been the decline in social capital in Swaziland according to the respondents. Respondents noted the decline in the ability to rely on extended family members, neighbours and friends in recent years, and noted HIV&AIDS as a key problem in this regard. The Pilot findings suggest that the need for IMS far exceeds current supply. Even in cases where a number of homesteads have received some services, others in the same homesteads were reported to be in need of other services. For most services, quality and relevance were rated quite highly, but timeliness and comprehensiveness rated as problematic. The Pilot+ Survey clearly met the requirements of the first factor noted above: informing the revision of the QIMS questionnaire. As the report shows some questions worked and some others did not work well as was expected. These errors have been corrected for Version 21, and have been further considered for version 22 (the pre-training version for QIMS). Regarding the second objective, informing NSPIII plan development, while the findings presented herein are not statistically generalisable, they are nevertheless illustrative, and provide important insights for Plan design purposes. Plan development team members using the report for this second purpose are therefore reminded to treat the findings contained in this report with extreme caution, and not quote from any percentages contained herein. - xiii - 1 Introduction to the QIMS and the Pilot+ Survey 1.1 Background to the QIMS Swaziland has the highest HIV prevalence in the world, currently at 26% of all adults, and has reached a point in the epidemic where AIDS-related deaths have stabilised at a high level, and the number of orphans is growing exponentially. An estimated 17,000 die annually in Swaziland from AIDS-related illnesses, over half of all hospital admissions are for people living with HIV&AIDS, 60,000 people in Swaziland are in need of antiretroviral drug therapy, and some 25% of all children have been orphaned due to AIDS. Life expectancy has dropped from over 56 years in 1997 to just over 37 years in 2007 (‚Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS‛, NERCHA, Government of Swaziland, 2008). In the past 10 years, Swaziland has strengthened its response to HIV, co-ordinated by the National Emergency Response Council on HIV&AIDS (NERCHA). Resource allocation has risen significantly (from 2005 to 2007 expenditure rose from US$38m to US$50m), the co-ordination of funds and activities have strengthened, and a more coherent response is emerging. Nevertheless, given the high HIV prevalence for a sustained period of time, Swaziland is now facing a mature long term emergency with serious developmental consequences (Whiteside and Whalley, ‚Reviewing Emergencies for Swaziland: Shifting the Paradigm in a New Era‛, NERCHA, 2007). Whereas the first National HIV Strategic Plan (2000 - 2005), focused virtually only on orphan support, the second National Multisectoral HIV&AIDS Strategic Plan (2006-2008) reflected an increased understanding of the range and depth of impacts, and an increased commitment to developing a more coherent response. 1.2 Rationale for the QIMS The delivery of impact mitigation services has not kept pace with the severity and breadth of HIV- related impacts in Swaziland. Further, it has become increasingly clear that the emphasis on short- term emergency response initiatives must give way to long-term initiatives to help Swaziland cope with the impacts. As a key step in the roll-out of a more coherent and effective impact mitigation response of greater relevance, NERCHA wants to commission a periodic Quality of Impact Mitigation Survey (QIMS) to measure the quality, relevance, and comprehensiveness of impact mitigation services. 1.3 Goal of and Research Questions for the QIMS The goal of the QIMS is to assess the quality, relevance, and comprehensiveness of impact mitigation services in a standardised and population-representative way so that trend analysis over time is possible.  By quality, we mean whether the impact mitigation services delivered were of a sufficient standard to produce desired outcomes (whether the desired outcomes themselves are achieved or not, if other factors mitigate against service quality).  By relevance, we mean the extent to which impact mitigation services delivered are appropriate in terms of the particular needs of those receiving the services (needs-relevant), and the extent to which impact mitigation services have effectively supplemented, and not - 1- undermined, local means of coping with vulnerability arising principally from HIV&AIDS, food insecurity, and other challenges (contextually-relevant).  Lastly, by comprehensiveness we mean whether the services have targeted all those in need with the support they need, and the support they need most, and whether there are any additional or new support needs to be provided in future. Given this objective, the research questions that the QIMS aim to answer, are: 1) Were services provided relevant? 2) Were services provided of proper quality? 3) Were comprehensive services provided? 4) Were the services provided in a timely manner? 5) Were the modes of delivery of services appropriate? Specifically, did various stakeholders play a role in prioritising which services should be provided and to whom? 6) What should be done differently in terms of the impact mitigation response? 1.4 Rationale for and Objectives of the QIMS Pilot+ Survey Rationale: A survey such as the QIMS has never been undertaken. Therefore, to prepare for the first-ever QIMS, NERCHA led a formative research and piloting process to design a protocol and questionnaire for QIMS. Originally it was intended that the QIMS questionnaire would only be pre-tested as part of enumerator training, with a small number of interviews conducted as part of training. However, the Reference Group decided to expand the piloting – to a Pilot+ Survey – so that more data about impact mitigation could be available for Swaziland’s third National Strategic Plan III for HIV&AIDS (NSP III). The QIMS Pilot+ Survey objectives are to inform: 1) The design of a protocol for a Quality, Relevance and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services (QIMS) Survey – the findings from the Pilot+ Survey will therefore result in changes to the QIMS Protocol and to the QIMS questionnaire; and 2) The development of the impact mitigation component of the National Strategic Plan III (NSP-III), to take place in the last quarter of 2008. For NSP-III, it should be underlined that the quantitative findings contained in this report are not statistically generalisable to the nation as a whole, nor to the sampled locations themselves, because of the small sample size. While findings are presented quantitatively, they are intended to provide illustrative information for NSP development purposes, and should be treated with caution, and not indicative of Impact Mitigation Services (IMS) in Swaziland. 1.5 Structure of the Report Chapter 1 – Introduction to QIMS and the QIMS Pilot+ Survey Chapter 2 - Methods and Approach Chapter 3 - Homestead Characteristics Chapter 4 - Homestead Orphan Status Chapter 5 - Employment, Income and Assets Chapter 6 - Social Capital and Coping Mechanisms Chapter 7 - Relevance, Quality, Timeliness and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services Chapter 8 – Conclusions and Recommendations Annexes - 2- 2 Approach and Methodology to the QIMS Pilot+ Survey 2.1 Introduction In this section, the approach to the investigation is noted, and methods thereafter described. 2.2 Approach to QIMS The QIMS Pilot+ Survey was preceded by a formative research phase that comprised a review of availability documentation, qualitative fieldwork investigating cultural factors affecting the ability of Swazi homesteads to cope with challenges, notable HIV&AIDS, and considering attitudes about impact mitigation service delivery mechanisms, the design of a draft QIMS questionnaire, and extensive consultations with stakeholders. The formative research findings yielded development of the QIMS protocol and questionnaire design, as well as the design of the Pilot+ Survey: The unit of analysis for sampling purposes needed to be consistent with cultural determinants of coping. In the case of Swaziland, this meant the homestead, comprising one or more households, instead of households. Homesteads have been identified as the unit of analysis for sampling purposes because they culturally serve as a single entity for coping purposes. Findings also highlighted within-homestead vulnerabilities across different households, meaning that internal homestead dynamics needed to be considered as part of QIMS. There was also a need to interview someone who was not in a position of authority in the homestead to establish whether they held similar or different views on IMS compared to homestead decision-makers. A review of materials, the prior experience of the World Bank team members, and the findings from the qualitative fieldwork suggested that there were particular challenges, which may undermine the quality and effectiveness of these services, associated with a supply-led approach to the delivery of IMS. There were similar challenges in terms of targeting arising from who is involved in the identification of homesteads and households most in need. The National Minimum Package of IMS developed by Swaziland noted the importance of offering a basket of services to those in need, in recognition of the varied needs of those most in need. The questionnaire therefore needed to measure whether recipients perceived positive ‘cumulative’ impacts associated with multiple service provision. Impact mitigation services associated with long-cycle events, such as the impacts of HIV&AIDS, often get mixed in with short-term mitigation requirements associated with, for example, failed rains or poor seed distribution. While HIV&AIDS significantly increases both the risk of negative short-term impacts and the severity of these impacts, it requires different distribution mechanisms, and is generally an emergency approach. Having said this, the severity of the epidemic in Swaziland has resulted in severe long-term impacts that significantly worsen short-term impacts. In these respects, the two are tied together, and both need to be measured, despite requiring different approaches in response. The questionnaire therefore measured short-term problems associated with, for example, food access and consumption, as well as problems associated with chronic poverty. - 3- There was a need to check whether those most in need were the ones who received the services. This proved of particular interest, given that qualitative findings suggested that those involved in the identification of IMS tended to view households most in need differently that poor households themselves. 2.3 Pilot+ Methods The methodology adopted for Pilot+ was administration of a highly structured quantitative questionnaire to randomly-selected households in 20 Enumeration Areas (EA) nationwide. Procedures for administration of this questionnaire are described in this section. 2.3.1 Sample Frame and Sampling The sample frame consisted of the 2007 national census for all enumeration areas nationwide. In that database, the number of homesteads by location was included and used for sampling purposes, giving each homestead the same opportunity of appearing in the sample. CSO staff provided a list of all Enumeration Areas with corresponding to the total number of homesteads. Map 1: Sampled Enumeration Areas * Provided by the Central Statistics Office following sampling. - 4- In each of these locations, 10 interviews were to be conducted, yielding a total of 200 interviews. However, it was found during fieldwork that a few of the EAs fell into wealthier sections of urban areas, and therefore few households were found to be eligible, resulting in a total of 181 interviews. While in quantitative surveys, data would normally be weighted to accommodate over- and under-sampling across each EA, this was not required for the Pilot+ Survey as no attempt was made to treat the data as representative of the EAs or other locations in the country. In addition, no homestead listing process was conducted. Originally, it was intended that a pre- listing would occur, but problems associated with survey timing meant that this would have needed to have been done during the survey itself, which made such a listing impossible. It was only after training began that an officer was identified for this purpose. While the officer tried to prepare the listings, there simply was not sufficient time to do this. Problems were also experienced by this officer because no pre-notification was done of authorities in the 10 areas, nor chiefs responsible for communities within the EAs. Further, some of the maps proved to be inaccurate, and data on the number and location of homesteads was often inaccurate. These proved valuable lessons learned for the QIMS. Fortunately, a number of the problems in terms of listing for QIMS will be resolved because of the new listings conducted for the Income and Expenditures Survey (to be conducted in 2009). Further, the QIMS has shifted from a pre- listing of eligible homesteads to a listing of all homesteads in an Enumeration Area. Therefore, listing of homesteads in EAs not included in the Income and Expenditures Survey will need to be listed for QIMS, but not those already listed by the Income and Expenditures Survey. Overall, it must be underlined that the data collected for this survey are not statistically- generalisable to the sampled EAs, nor for any other locations. Findings should therefore be treated qualitatively. 2.3.2 Training Training lasted for a total of eight days. Training involved an extensive review of the ‘training version’ of the quantitative questionnaire, revisions to the questionnaire based on training, and two pre-tests of the questionnaire. In the end, Version 20 of the questionnaire was used for field implementation. Extra persons were trained, so that only those who performed best were selected for fieldwork. However, the enumerators and the field supervisor, identified from experienced field officers by NERCHA and UNICEF, proved to be of such high quality that in the end all officers were retained. In terms of ethical protocols, one day of training was set aside for administration of Family Health International’s ethical protocol for the conduct of fieldwork when dealing with sensitive topics. In addition, ethical procedures associated with opting out from listing, from the interview, and from specific questions during the interview were also covered. 2.3.3 Field Procedures Originally it was intended that all homesteads in each sampled EA would be listed, based on a criteria established by the Government in the National Minimum Package. Demarcation of the EA would occur prior to fieldwork, as would team visits to traditional authorities to ensure permission to conduct the fieldwork. As noted above, while homestead listing was to take place before the survey, operational problems prevented this. Further, some of the maps obtained from - 5- the census proved to have mistakes, both in terms of co-ordinates of sampled EAs, as well as naming conventions. As a result, it was not possible to demarcate boundaries in preparation for fieldwork, and the teams had to use a back-up procedure. This procedure involved the random selection of starting directions and starting households for interview, with homesteads eligible for interview interviewed at that juncture. While the adoption of this alternative procedure was not a problem, because the purpose of the Pilot+ Survey was to serve as a pilot for QIMS, it means that, for the twenty locations in the pilot survey, it is not possible to indicate the proportion of homesteads eligible for IMS. It also meant that additional days would be required for QIMS implementation, and the Protocol has been revised accordingly. 2.3.4 Implementation of the Quantitative Questionnaire If a homestead met listing criteria, enumerators asked whether it would be possible to proceed with the interview. If approved, the interview would proceed with a senior homestead member. In addition, for a subset of the interview, a separate, randomly-selected woman caring for a child aged 2-17 was also interviewed. If there was only one adult in the household, and that person was caring for a child aged 2-17, the interview continued. Levels of co-operation were extremely high, with 91.2% of respondents classified as ‘highly co-operative’, with all of the remainder (8.8%) classified as ‘moderately co-operative’. Despite the considerable length of the questionnaire, only those who had received IMS were asked a number of the questions, and in the end this meant that the average interview took less than an hour, with the median length of interview at 50 minutes. Even this is an over-estimate of administrative length, as it included especially long interviews conducted during the first days of field implementation. There were some mistakes made during questionnaire administration. Most of the questions were associated with the late arrival of comments on the questionnaire, and the subsequent mis- numbering of questions and skip prompts. These were partially overcome in the field, but in the end some questions had missing values that should not have occurred. Again, this is a ‘lesson learned’ from the pilot activity that should be avoided for QIMS. 2.3.5 Data Entry, Validation, and Cleaning NERCHA contracted a data entry and validation officer, with a tenderer based in Manzini winning the tender. Data were entered into Version 11 of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Data cleaning involved sending the completed dataset to one member of the World Bank team to check for missing values, out-of-range values, and illogical main question - sub-question entries. Only a few problems were found, and checked against the original questionnaires. A revised database, along with a revised codebook, were thereafter provided. While security protocols associated with questionnaire storage and back-up routines were specified in the Protocol, these routines were not followed. Fortunately, no problems occurred during entry and validation. Despite there being no problems, the results of the Pilot+ Survey highlighted the need to enforce data storage, back-up, and quality control systems during QIMS implementation. - 6- 3 Survey Results: Homestead Characteristics 3.1 Introduction In this chapter, information is offered on the structure and composition of homesteads in the sample survey. As noted above, these results are not statistically generalisable, and should therefore be treated as informative only in a qualitative sense. Because percentages can be misleading in the case of a small number of cases, the frequency of responses is included in all tables. 3.2 Reasons Why Homesteads Were Eligible for Inclusion in the Survey Primary inclusion criteria: A homestead was included in the survey if it satisfied any of these primary inclusion criteria: 1) A homestead where there are orphans in at least one household in the homestead. 2) A homestead where there are other vulnerable child/children (parent in prison) in at least one household in the homestead. 3) A homestead where there are other vulnerable child/children (disabled, physically/mentally, child) in at least one household in the homestead. 4) A homestead where there is at least one household that has one non-orphan member who is chronically ill (bedridden at least three months over the past 12 months). 5) A homestead where there is at least one household with at least one bereaved elderly household member aged 60+. 6) A homestead where there is at least one child-headed household (orphan or vulnerable child). Secondary inclusion criteria: It should be noted that originally the list was far longer, and has been obtained from a review of the National Minimum Package, and the National Strategic Plan II for HIV&AIDS. In seeing the complexity and magnitude of the list, NERCHA raised concerns that the criteria were too inclusive and too complex. The above six categories were therefore provided by NERCHA as homesteads eligible for IMS. Nevertheless, because literature suggested more broad inclusion criteria, a second listing was included on a questionnaire to establish whether any homesteads who met any of the above criteria also met other criteria appearing in the National Minimum Package document of the National Strategic Plan II. The reasons why homesteads were included as homesteads eligible for IMS are summarised in Table 1: - 7- Table 1: Inclusion of Homesteads as Eligible for IMS (Primary Inclusion Criteria) Response Number of Percentage Homesteads Orphans in Homestead 164 90.6 Other Vulnerable Child(ren) in Homestead (parent in prison) 0 0.0 Other Vulnerable Child(ren) in Homestead (physical/mental) 5 2.8 Non-Orphan Child Member Chronically Ill in Homestead 1 0.6 Homestead at Least One Bereaved Elderly Member 10 5.5 Homestead With at Least One Child-Headed Household 1 0.6 TOTAL 181 The vast majority of homesteads interviewed had been listed (164 out of 181) because they had orphans in at least one household in the homestead. Secondary criteria were also considered – see Table 2: Table 2: Inclusion of Homesteads as Eligible for IMS (Secondary Inclusion Criteria) Response Number of Percentage Homesteads None (no secondary criteria listed) 99 54.7 Orphans in Homestead 7 8.5 Other Vulnerable Child(ren) in Homestead (parent in prison) 8 9.8 Other Vulnerable Children in Homestead (physical or mental) 10 12.2 Non-Orphan Child Member Chronically Ill in Homestead 1 1.2 Homestead at Least One Bereaved Elderly Member 30 36.6 Homestead With at Least One Child-Headed Household 0 0.0 Abandoned Children Living in Homestead 1 1.2 No Regular Cash Income 7 8.5 HIV+ Child in Homestead 1 1.2 Disabled Adult in the Homestead 4 4.9 Chronically Ill Homestead Member Aged 60+ 2 2.4 Adult Who Abuses Alcohol 1 1.2 Other Vulnerable Child(ren) - Parent(s) Disabled 1 1.2 Homestead Made from Informal Materials 9 11.0 HIV+ Adult(s) 2 2.4 Chronically Ill Adult Aged 19-59 3 3.7 TOTAL INDICATING ANOTHER CRITERIA 87 * Multiple response question, meaning that some homesteads appear twice or three times. Just under half (87 out of 181) of the homesteads interviewed had a second or third factor that would make them eligible for IMS using either broader criteria, or having a second ‘main list’ criteria. Broader criteria included ‘no regular cash income’ and ‘informal housing materials’ most commonly. 3.3 Number of Households in the Homestead Respondents were asked how many households were contained in their homesteads. Of the 181 homesteads in the survey, 147 (81.2%) only had a single household, and most of the remainder only comprised two households. In team discussions, it was noted that only having a single household in a homestead was itself representative of the problems facing these homesteads, as they had grown increasingly isolated as family size declined due to deaths from AIDS-related illnesses, as extended family systems themselves weakened, and as more household members - 8- sought employment in areas away from their original homesteads (personal communications, implementation team). 3.4 Characteristics of Head of Homestead Respondents were first asked questions about the head of the homestead. The characteristics of the head of the homestead is summarised in Table 3 below: Table 3: Characteristics of Homestead Head Response Number of Percentage Homesteads Sex of Homestead Head Male 72 39.8 Female De Facto (stated male head absent 6+ months in past 4 2.2 12) Female De Jure (female stated as homestead head) 104 57.5 Child Headed (male) 1 0.6 Child Headed (female) 0 0.0 Education Status of Homestead Head None 57 31.5 Primary (Grades 1-7) 70 38.7 Lower Secondary (Forms 1-3) 33 18.2 Higher Secondary (Forms 4-5) 18 9.9 Tertiary Education 2 1.1 Non-Formal Education (equivalent to lower primary) 1 0.6 Age of Homestead Head Under 18 1 0.6 18-25 4 2.2 26-59 86 47.5 60+ 90 49.7 Marital Status of Homestead Head Married (male) 56 30.9 Married (female) 5 2.8 Cohabitating/Living in Communion 10 5.5 Single (never married) 20 11.0 Divorced/Permanently Separated 5 2.8 Widowed 85 47.0 If Married Male, in Monogamous or Polyganous Relationship Monogamous 38 67.9 Polygynous 18 32.1 If Polygynous, # of Wives Two 9 50.0 Three 8 44.4 Four 1 5.6 The majority of homestead heads were females. Education levels were low, with almost all having primary or no education. Half of all homestead heads were aged 60 or older, and half were female widowed. For married males, one-third were in polygynous relationships, with 2 to 3 wives. In addition, three-quarters of the respondents agreed with the statement that ‚many married men in Swaziland maintain a separate household for a woman they are not married to, but have a long- term relationship with’. - 9- 4 Survey Results: Status of Orphans in Homestead 4.1 Introduction In this chapter, the situation of orphan caregiving is considered. This includes type of orphan, their demographic status, which household they belonged to, special circumstances, and information on their caregivers. 4.2 Type of Orphan Orphans were classified as maternal orphans (had lost their biological mother, but not their biological father), paternal orphans (had lost their biological father, but not their biological mother), and double (had lost both biological parents). Findings are indicated in the following figure: Figure 1: Number of Orphans by type of Orphan 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Mate rnal Pate rnal Double # 83 257 74 Almost two-thirds of all orphans had lost their fathers. 4.3 Demographics of Orphans Orphans were roughly evenly divided between males and females, as can be seen in Figure 2 below. The ages of orphans are included in the following figure. Orphan children were distributed across age groups, with most aged 13-17. - 10 - Figure 2: Number of Orphans by Sex 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Male Female # 215 200 Figure 3: Age of Orphans 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Age 0-4 Age 5-9 Age 10-12 Age 13-17 # 42 93 108 170 4.4 Other Factors Around Orphan Status A number of other factors were considered associated with orphan status, including: 1) Whether siblings were moved together or separately. 2) Fostering or adoption status. 3) Whether the orphan is a step-child to the mother or father in the household. 4) Whether the orphan is disabled or not. 5) Whether the orphan is biologically related to the caregiver. 6) Whether or not the orphan is living with the mother’s or the father’s side of the family. - 11 - 7) The number of different ‘sending’ families for orphans staying in the homestead. 8) Whether the child cared for a dying parent. 9) Length of time the orphan child had been living in the homestead. 10) Whether the child had lived in the homestead before becoming an orphan. 11) Whether the child came from the same community or a different community and, if different, whether the child was moved from an urban to a rural area, a rural to an urban area, an urban to an urban area, or from a rural to a rural area. All of these were focused on orphans facing particular difficulties, pointing to, for example, psychosocial support needs (most importantly points 8, 1, 5, 10, 11), specific assistance for disabilities (point 4), and particular difficulties facing the situation of caregivers or the relationship between caregivers and the orphan children (points 3, 5, 6, 7). In a review of the literature on orphans, SIAPAC (‚A Situation Analysis of Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children in Mozambique‛, prepared for UNICEF/Mozambique and the Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion, 2005) compiled criteria from various documents intended to highlight factors that put orphans at most risk. These criteria are noted below, coupled with the conclusions drawn from the literature on ‘best practices’:  Whether siblings were moved together or separately - children should be moved together  Fostering or adoption status - status should be formalised  Whether the orphan is a step-child to the mother or father in the household - step-child to a step- father felt to be most difficult for child adjustment  Whether the orphan is disabled or not  Whether the orphan is biologically related to the caregiver - biological relationship tends to yield a more stable situation, and holds better chances for a child to hold on to inheritance  Whether or not the orphan is living with the mother’s or the father’s side of the family - orphans tend to be better cared for when living with the mother’s side of the family  The number of different ‘sending’ families for orphans staying in the homestead - the higher the number, the higher the orphan caregiving burden  Whether the child cared for a dying parent - if yes, psychosocial support needs are key  Length of time the orphan child had been living in the homestead - the longer the stay, the less traumatic the transition  Whether the child had lived in the homestead before becoming an orphan - if yes, the less traumatic the transition  Whether the child came from the same community or a different community and, if different, whether the child was moved from an urban to a rural area, a rural to an urban area, an urban to an urban area, or from a rural to a rural area - the most difficult adjustments tend to be with a move from an urban to a rural area, and to a lesser extent from a rural to an urban area Findings are summarised in the following table: - 12 - Table 4: Orphan Status Response Number of Orphans Percentage in this Situation Orphan Siblings Brought to the Same Homestead (children should be moved together) Yes 42 25.1 No 125 74.9 Orphan Siblings Sent to Another Homestead (children should be moved together) Yes 31 11.0 No 252 89.0 Foster or Adoption Status (formalising status is positive) Fostered 13 3.1 Adopted 2 0.5 Neither/No Formal Procedure 399 96.4 Step Child (step children to fathers tend to suffer from more adjustment problems) Step Child to Mother 9 2.2 Step Child to Father 8 1.9 Not Applicable - not sent elsewhere 396 95.9 Disabilities (children with disabilities more vulnerable) No 394 95.4 Yes - Mental 6 1.5 Yes - Physical - Deaf/Dumb 5 1.2 Yes - Physical - Other 8 1.9 Biologically Related to Her/His Caregiver (if not related, more adjustment problems) Yes 389 94.0 No 22 5.3 Not Applicable (no caregiver or child headed household) 3 0.7 Living With Mother’s Side or Father’s Side of the Family (those going to the mother’s family tend to be better off) Mother’s Side 231 55.8 Father’s Side 179 42.3 Neither - Non-Relative 4 1.0 Number of Different ‘Sending’ Families (children coming from various families tend to result in a more difficult caregiving burden) One 77 77.8 Two 18 18.2 Three or More 4 4.0 Did Child Care for a Dying Parent (if yes, psychological adjustment is likely to be more difficult) Yes 35 8.5 No 346 83.6 Do Not Know 2 0.5 Not Applicable 31 7.5 Did Child Live in This Household Before Becoming an Orphan (if yes, easier to adjust to orphan status) Yes 17 4.2 No 49 12.1 Not Applicable - Always in Household 339 83.7 For Those Who Were Moved, From Same Community or Different Community (if same community, easier to adjust to orphan status) Same Community 51 52.6 Different Community 46 47.4 If Different Community, From Where to Where (if from urban to rural, particular adjustment problems) Urban to Rural 9 19.6 Rural to Urban 4 8.7 Rural to Rural 33 71.9 Urban to Urban 0 0.0 Overall, findings suggest that many orphans are less vulnerable than might be the case had they been separated, moved, or gone through additional extenuating circumstances. The majority of - 13 - the children had never been moved from one homestead to another, and almost all were kept within extended family structures. In these respects, some orphans are likely to be more vulnerable than others, with the majority less likely to need psychosocial support. Nevertheless, it should be noted that, for those had been moved, half had had siblings moved to a different homestead, while over one-in-five were living in homesteads where orphans had come from other homesteads as well. Further, half of those who were moved were moved from one community to another, but most of these were moved to similar environments (mostly rural to rural). 4.5 Status of Orphan Caregivers Four questions were asked about the status of the orphans’ caregivers, covering their age, their health status, their education, and the total number of children the caregiver was responsible for. Table 5: Status of Orphans’ Caregivers Response Number of Percentage Caregivers* Health Status Healthy 238 57.5 Sick 163 39.4 Infirm/Bedridden 13 3.1 Age of Caregiver Under 18 (child caregiver) 3 0.7 18-49 196 47.3 50-59 60 14.5 60+ 155 37.4 Education Status None 107 25.9 Primary (grades 1-7) 183 44.3 Lower Secondary (forms 1-3) 89 21.5 Upper Secondary (forms 4-5) 32 7.7 Tertiary 1 0.2 Non-Formal 1 0.2 Total Number of Children Being Cared for by a Single Caregiver One 17 5.8 Two 42 14.4 Three 52 17.9 Four 80 27.5 Five 73 25.1 Six 27 9.3 * The number of caregivers in this table is based on the number of orphans, with the case for each orphan being considered. Therefore, a number of caregivers are reported more than once, as many were looking after multiple orphans. Findings raise cause for concern associated with the health status of many caregivers (almost half are sick or infirm), being elderly (37.4% were 60 or older), the education status of most caregivers (over two-thirds had no education or only primary schooling), and over two-thirds of caregivers had caregiving burdens of four or more children. While some 80% of homesteads comprised a single household, most orphans were being cared for by the ‘main household’ even when there were multiple households (92%). - 14 - 5 Survey Results: Employment, Income, Assets and Water and Sanitation Status 5.1 Introduction In this chapter, findings are presented on income status, remittances from outside the homestead, agriculture, and assets. A section is also included on access to improved water services and human waste disposal systems. 5.2 Employment and Income Status Respondents were asked how many homestead members were currently earning cash income. In over half of all cases (n=100, 55.2%), no homestead members earned a cash income. For those with someone belonging to the homestead who was earning cash income, in almost all cases, cash was being used for homestead heads (92.6%). For the sampled homesteads, none of those aged 5-14 were in paid employment. When asked about remittances from those living away from the homestead, one-quarter noted that they had received remittances. For multiple household homesteads, in over half of all cases, only a single household in the homestead benefited from these remittances. For rural homesteads receiving remittances, half noted that they relied on these remittances for less than half of their total income, and half noted that they relied on remittances for over half of their income. Remittances from rural to urban areas were extremely rare, with only 4 of 27 urban homesteads noting that they received any remittances from rural homesteads. It is interesting to note that remittances were more important to interviewed homesteads in the past that was currently the case. While in 2008 only one-quarter were receiving remittances, the figure was at over two-thirds just five years ago. When asked about the impacts of this loss of income stream, however, only a few argued that it was severe, with almost all stating that it was ‘not very severe’ or ‘not at all severe’. Those without income or remittances were asked how long ago such income stopped. For almost all homesteads, they had never had regular cash income or remittances (82.1%, n=110 out of 134), so it was less a situation of the loss of cash income and more one of never having had such an income. For those where contributions had stopped, the main reason noted for the loss of income was that the income earner had died. Summary income status is included in the following figure: - 15 - Figure 4: Income Status 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 No re liable E251-500/m E501-1000/m E1101+ income , < E250/m % 91.7 5.0 2.8 0.6 n = 166, 9, 5, and 1 for the four categories, respectively. Almost all of the homesteads noted either low incomes, or no reliable income. However, in looking at responses to this question in comparison with the number of homestead members earning cash income, there is no clear relationship, suggesting that responses to this question understate levels of income. Using cash income as a proxy for incomes being sufficient to meet basic needs, this would lower the percentage indicating ‘no reliable income or income < E250 per month) to 96, well below the 166 indicated in the previous figure. For QIMS, a new variable would need to be created during analysis to accommodate these under-reporting of income. For multiple household homesteads, findings suggest a relatively equal share of resources across the households, approaching half in the case of two households, and one-third in the case of three households. Only 27.1% (n=49 out of 181) of all homesteads had at least one member with a bank account. 5.3 Services Respondents were asked two questions about services, covering water and sanitation, and also asked about birth registration. For water supply, a variety of sources were noted, and were thereafter combined into ‘improved’ and ‘unimproved’ categories, with the latter reflecting lack of service provision of potable water. Findings are summarised in the following figure for water supply: - 16 - Figure 5: Domestic Water Supply 44% 56% Improve d Unimprove d n = 101 for improved, 80 for unimproved Just over half of the homesteads in the survey relied on a water resource likely to be clean at the source. However, for these, the majority accessed water from off the property, suggesting threats to water quality associated with transport and storage. For the remainder who were without access to improved water sources, the majority were reliant on unprotected surface water. There were similar findings for human waste disposal systems: Figure 6: Human Waste Disposal Systems 36% 64% Unimprove d Improve d n = 115 for unimproved, 66 for improved The majority of homesteads relied on unimproved means of human waste disposal, with the majority of these relying on unimproved pit latrines (85 out of 115). For those who had improved means, almost all (60 out of 66) relied in improved pit latrines. - 17 - Regarding birth registration, of concern, less than half (47.8%) of those children aged 0-4 living in sampled homesteads had their births registered. 5.4 Agriculture The majority of households had access to agricultural fields of any type (arable field, grazing land, gardens), at 75.1% of all homesteads and 72.9% of all households (for all households, 172 out of 217 had access to fields). Of interest, second and third households in the homesteads did not have any access to separate arable fields, which instead belonged to the main household in the homestead. One-third (37%) owned at least some livestock. Of those homesteads with agricultural fields, only 30 out of 135 with gardens or fields stated that they were producing sufficient food to meet basic homestead needs. Reasons given for not being able to produce sufficient food included poor rains in the past season (64.2%), shortages of seeds (33%) or fertilisers (34.9%), and other shortages. Of interest, only a few noted a shortage of labour (8 respondents) or land (9 respondents). One-quarter (28 respondents) noted that they had reduced the amount of land under cultivation, but the reasons for this appeared to not be specifically related to labour shortages. In part this is a measurement issue, with the Pilot+ Survey coming after a year of erratic rainfall. It reflects a need to consider production shortfalls in ‘normal’ rainfall years. 5.5 Livelihood Challenges Respondents were asked questions about other livelihood challenges. A remarkably high 82 out of 181 (45.3%) of respondents noted that increased ill health or premature death in the recent past had undermined homestead coping. Of these 82, half had lost a member in the year before the survey. In 61 cases, the interviewed households had had to make financial contributions to funerals, highlighting the need for households to contribute to funerals of non-homestead members. Two more general questions about impacts were asked:  In recent years, has the level of care members have had to give to others in this homestead increased to such an extent that it has undermined the ability of your homestead to cope with the socio-economic situation?  Overall, over the past year, has this homestead suffered from any major shocks, such as drought or job loss, other than the above loss of homestead member or rising caregiving burden that affected the economic status of the homestead? Almost half of the respondents agreed with the first statement, and two-thirds agreed with the second statement. - 18 - 5.6 Registration for Support Respondents were asked whether they were registered as homesteads and households in need of support. Of the 181 households in the survey, 71 (just over one-third) indicated that they were registered as such. For those who were not registered, half did not know why they had not been registered, and almost all the remainder stated that they did not know how the selected homesteads were selected. Unfortunately, when asked why they were selected, most respondents simply said that they were informed that they qualified for support, and did not specify why they were qualified. This would need to be dealt with for QIMS itself, and the question has been revised accordingly. It is interesting to compare registration as a homestead in need of support compared to socio- economic status. In checking registration against vulnerability criteria with a rating by the enumeration, there was no clear pattern of covariation between registration and vulnerability. The implication is that targeting in terms of registration as a homestead in need of support does not appear to relate to actual vulnerability. This theme will need to be explored in some detail during QIMS, as it is a key matter of concern in the delivery of impact mitigation services. - 19 - 6 Survey Results: Social Capital and Coping Mechanisms 6.1 Introduction In this chapter, findings from Module 8 on ‘social capital and local coping mechanisms’ are presented. The aim was to establish how well social capital systems worked now, compared to the past, and what this might mean for the ability of homesteads to cope. Social capital is defined as the extent to which family members, friends, neighbours, and local opinion leaders can rely on one another in such a way that it offers protection for members in times of difficulty. 6.2 Social Capital The questionnaire included a number of questions designed to establish whether coping mechanisms in place in all cultures remained robust in Swaziland for homesteads in need of impact mitigation services. The intent was to establish the extent to which affected homesteads could continue to draw upon support networks among family, friends, neighbours and communities in times of need, and the extent to which affected homesteads could support others in the same manner. This includes emotional support, financial support, and other types of support (including, for example, willingness to take someone to the clinic and stay with them, willingness to care for someone who is sick, etc.). Referred to as social capital, the intention was to establish whether this ‘first line of defence’ could still be relied on for affected homesteads. Only half of the respondents had family members living close to their homesteads. Only one- quarter spoke with extended family members weekly, and another one-quarter indicated that they had been in touch on a monthly or more frequent basis. Findings indicate that almost half of all homesteads in the survey were not in touch with extended family members on a regular basis. Further, when asked how often they could rely on birth family members for support ‘in time of real need’, only 15.5% noted that they could ‘always’ rely on them. Almost half noted that they could ‘never’ rely on them in times of serious need. When asked whether, if they needed cash, they could rely on their extended families for cash support, only around 20% argued that the could, and half noted that they could ‘never’ rely on them for cash support; findings were similar regarding labour support. In terms of neighbourhoods, over 80% of the respondents argued that neighbours knew each other ‘very well’ or ‘somewhat well’. Having said this, less than half said that there was a ‘sense of community’ that was ‘very strong’ or ‘somewhat strong’, despite knowing one’s neighbours. Further, only 11% argued that you could rely on your neighbours for cash support in times of serious need, and only 17.7% argued that you could rely on them for labour support in times of need. Respondents were asked whether the situation had changed over time, using the period of the past five years. Respondents were asked whether support was ‘much more common now’, ‘somewhat more common now’, ‘somewhat less common now’, or ‘much less common now’. In all cases, respondents argued that the situation was worse now, and that their ability to rely on household member, other family members, and friends and neighbours was less possible now than five years ago. It is interesting to note, however, that the role of women in household decision-making had increased over time. But, after further exploration, it appears that this was related to the absence of men and the isolation of households, rather than a positive increase in female decision-making influence. - 20 - A series of attitudinal scale statements were thereafter included, designed to establish levels of social capital and in some cases to changes over time. A summary of key findings is offered below:  Almost all respondents agreed (and most ‘strongly agreed’) with the statement: ‚friends and neighbours help households with someone ill at the beginning, but if the illness lasts a long time, this support faces away‛.  Almost all respondents agreed (and most ‘strongly agreed’) with the statement: ‚For the most part, cultural factors here make it more difficult for females to cope with the problems they face‛. There was a similar concern about the two year mourning period for widows following the death of a husband, and with the effectiveness of traditional inheritance systems on the ability of widows to cope.  Respondents tended to agree with the statement ‚our strength is our homestead system, where we can effectively cope‛, but almost one-in-five could not say how they felt about the system, while many of those who agreed only ‘somewhat agreed’.  Virtually all respondents agreed with the statement ‚in the past few decades, there has been a moral decline in Swaziland that undermines our coping‛, with the vast majority ‘strongly agreeing’ with the statement.  Virtually all respondents agreed (and most ‘strongly agreed’) with the statement that ‚in the past decade or so, the impacts of HIV&AIDS on our communities has been so severe that many of our homesteads simply cannot cope any more‛.  All respondents agreed with the statement ‚in the past year or so, the impacts of food and fuel price rises has been such that many of our homesteads simply cannot cope any more‛.  Three-quarters of respondents agreed (and most ‘strongly agreed’) with the statement ‚over the past few years, our homestead has become poorer due to the loss of human resources and chronic illness‛.  Just over half of the respondents agreed with the statement that job losses had made coping more difficult, with levels of agreement possibly low due to the fact that over half the homesteads had not had a member in employment for a number of years, if ever.  Of interest, half of the respondents ‘strongly disagreed’ with the statement ‚the system of polygamy has been important in protecting us from economic decline, because it strengthens our social systems‛, and almost 20% more ‘somewhat agreed’ with the statement. Female homestead heads were more likely to disagree with the statement than male homestead heads, but male respondents were still more likely to disagree than agree with the statement. Almost all respondents instead agreed with the statement ‚the system of polygamy has weakened the ability of married women to cope with the situation we all face in Swaziland due to HIV&AIDS‛, and most of these strongly agreed. It is interesting to note that respondents in polygamous homesteads were less likely to agree that polygamy offers protection, and just as likely to agree that it weakened the ability of women to cope.  Respondents were ambivalence about the impacts of bride price on protection women from the negative impacts of HIV&AIDS.  Two-thirds of the respondents argued that HIV&AIDS had resulted in children providing more labour to households.  Almost all respondents agreed (and most ‘strongly agreed’) with the statement ‚one of the main impacts of HIV&AIDS has been the loss of generational knowledge from parents to their children‛. And, virtually all agreed with the statement ‚it is not only generational knowledge - 21 - from parents to children that has been lost due to HIV&AIDS, but moral values that used to strengthen Swazi society has also declined‛.  Respondents were uncertain with regard to the statement ‚the homestead system allows some households in the homestead to suffer more than others, because they may be stigmatised‛.  More generally, 85.1% of the respondents agreed with the statement ‚more and more, Swazis are falling into a situation of hopelessness‛. A similar number agreed with the statement ‚most of us have little hope for the future‛. Overall, respondents were extremely negative about recent trends in Swazi society, about the strengths of social capital networks, about the future, and about the ability of homesteads to cope with the emergent situation. These concerns were summarised in high levels of agreement about a pervasive sense of hopelessness. A set of attitudinal statements were also included about impact mitigation services. These are summarised as follows:  Two-thirds of the respondents agreed with the statement ‚the way in which interventions to support homesteads have come from outside has undermined the extent to which we used to be able to rely on one another‛, while 11% argued that this could not be the case ‘because there are no outside interventions’.  Over half of the respondents agreed with the statement ‚the way in which interventions to support homesteads have come from outside has weakened the willingness of local people to help in the community‛, with only one-quarter disagreeing with the statement (12.2% noted that the statement was not true - there were no interventions in their areas).  Over half of the respondents agreed with the statement ‚there are some interventions here that target need based on outside criteria, and this causes conflict’, one-fifth disagreed, and the remainder argued that there were no such interventions.  Over 60% agreed with the statement ‚most interventions by outside agencies here are based on what they have to offer, not based on what we need‛, while most of the remainder felt that there were no such interventions.  Over 80% of the respondents agreed with the statement ‚one of the main weaknesses in impact mitigation activities is that there is no clear financial or material support to caregivers to allow them to volunteer in their communities‛.  Almost all respondents agreed with the problem of ‘children of the community‘ was worsening.  Over 80% of respondents agreed (and most ‘strongly agreed’) with the statement ‚one of the main problems we face is the inconsistency and irregularity of services offered‛. In general, responses were more mixed about impact mitigation services then about a decline in Swazi society and the situation facing Swazi. Nevertheless, findings would suggest that people saw a connection between the way in which the country was responding to the challenges arising from HIV&AIDS and weakened systems of social capital. In over half of all cases, respondents noted that there were no kaGogo Centres in their communities. For the remainder, a small majority agreed that the centre system worked well, that it had proven effective in helping to care for children, and that they were important points for the co-ordination of initiatives in the community. There were similar findings for Neighbourhood - 22 - Care Points, where those in communities with the Points tended to feel that the Points were targeting those in need. Few respondents (6 out of 181) disagreed with the statement ‚the most effective way to provide local support through NCP’s and home based care is to encourage local caregivers to provide impact mitigation services‛. In addition, in module 7 on participation, four statements were included asking respondents to indicate how coherent they felt certain actions and actors were as follows:  The ability of various actors from outside to be able to co-ordinate their responses consistently.  The ability of local actors to co-ordinate various activities, from within the community and from outside.  The ability of different actors to behave in a coherent manner over time in support to this community.  The ability of traditional authorities in this community to help co-ordinate various actors involved in development activities over time. Findings are summarised in the following table: Table 6: Coherence of Local Actors and Local Actions Response Frequency Percentage The ability of various actors from outside to be able to co-ordinate their responses consistently Very Coherent 8 4.4 Somewhat Coherent 46 25.4 Not Very Coherent 35 19.3 Not At All Coherent 14 7.7 Do Not Know/Cannot Say 49 27.1 Not Applicable (no such actors) 29 16.0 The ability of local actors to co-ordinate various activities, from within the community and from outside Very Coherent 8 4.4 Somewhat Coherent 39 21.5 Not Very Coherent 42 23.2 Not At All Coherent 16 8.8 Do Not Know/Cannot Say 48 26.5 Not Applicable (no such actors) 28 15.5 The ability of different actors to behave in a coherent manner over time in support to this community Very Coherent 7 3.9 Somewhat Coherent 42 23.2 Not Very Coherent 39 21.5 Not At All Coherent 10 5.5 Do Not Know/Cannot Say 55 30.4 Not Applicable (no such actors) 28 15.5 The ability of traditional authorities in this community to help co-ordinate various actors involved in development activities over time Very Coherent 8 4.4 Somewhat Coherent 50 27.6 Not Very Coherent 27 14.9 Not At All Coherent 18 9.9 Do Not Know/Cannot Say 51 28.2 Not Applicable (no such actors) 27 14.9 - 23 - Of those living in locations where they noted local actors, findings were mixed in terms of coherence of the response. It is interesting to note that only one-third of caregivers had made plans for the care and upbringing of their children if they were no longer able to do so. Of concern, figures were especially low for orphans. For those who had made provision, in 12 of the 53 cases, the person who would take on the caregiving role was aged sixty or older. 6.3 Coping Through Diet, Mitigation, and Other Means Respondents were asked whether, over the past year, any homestead member had had to undergo any of the following:  Extreme changes in diet.  Migration.  Seeking loans.  Selling of major assets.  Major changes in homestead expenditure patterns.  Major changes in income strategies.  Child dropping out of school.  Homestead lost a major source of livelihoods.  Loss of inheritance.  Widowed women living in their homestead and dispossession. One-quarter of the homesteads indicated that they had had extreme changes in diet (48 out of 181 homesteads). This was evenly distributed across households in each homestead. The question on which household members in affected households in the homestead had undergone extreme changes in their diets did not work clearly, and for QIMS will need to be directly linked to the table on homestead composition. Over the past year, 14.9% of all interviewed homesteads had had at least one member leave the area, 12.2% had tried to secure a loan, and 6.6% sold major assets in order to cope with their circumstances. One-quarter had undergone ‘major changes in homestead expenditure patterns’, and a similar number had undergone ‘major changes in income strategies’. Reflecting difficulties in coping, 20.4% of all homesteads had had at least one child drop out of school because of an inability to pay for costs associated with education. One-quarter noted the loss of a major source of livelihoods. While half of the homesteads contained at least one widowed woman, only 4 out of 70 had been dispossessed of any land associated with becoming widows. Later in the questionnaire respondents were asked whether they had suffered any problems associated with food in their homesteads. Those with multiple household homesteads were also asked whether this affected the different households differently. A very high three-quarters of the respondents indicated that they were worried that food would run out before they were able to harvest crops, or secure sufficient funds to purchase food. Most of these homesteads had already faced a situation where food had run out, most had had to eat meals that were not considered balanced, and almost three-quarters had had to rely on veld foods. Most had reduced the portions of meals, and half had reduced meals from twice to once a day. - 24 - Almost 40% had skipped meals for at least one entire day. For the most part, these problems affected all households in multiple household homesteads. 6.4 Discipline and Abuse For each homestead, a child was randomly selected aged 2-17, and questions asked about treatment of the child by the caregiver that could be considered supportive or abusive. The World Health Organisation classifications of discipline versus abuse were used (WHO Multi-Country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence Against Women, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland). Essentially, the distinction was made by the World Health Organisation between discipline, which did not demean the person or did not involve physical discipline that could harm the person, and those that did. 6.4.1 Support Respondents were asked whether they had had positive interactions in the week prior to the interview with the selected child as follows:  Read books/looked at pictures - 30.2%  Told stories - 41.3%  Sing songs - 41.9%  Took for an outing - 30.2%  Played with the child - 57.6%  Engaged in naming, counting, drawing with the child - 23.8% 6.4.2 Discipline Respondents were asked whether the child had exhibited behavioural difficulties, and support for these difficulties. Thirteen of the 172 persons who responded to the questions noted that the child had exhibited behavioural difficulties (7.6%). In over half of these cases, the behavioural difficulties were noted as ‘not very severe’. Three of the 13 had received support for their behavioural problems, with mixed results. These same children were noted as having socialisation problems, such as rarely playing or laughing, rarely socialising, being stigmatised, and feeling isolated and depressed. However, only four of the children had received any support in response to these problems. When children mis- behaved, positive discipline behaviours such as talking to the child about what they did was common (55.2%), giving the child something else to do to calm the situation (56.4%), but taking away privileges was less common (11.6%). 6.4.3 Excessive Discipline and Abuse Using World Health Organisation criteria of excessive discipline and abuse (listed in the following figure), respondents were asked about behaviours towards their children. The following is a summary of findings: - 25 - Figure 7: Excessive Discipline and Abuse Beat Child with Tool Over and Over No Slapped Child on Hand, Arm, Leg Yes No Slapped Child on Face, Head, Ears Yes No Hit Child with an Item Such as a Yes Belt Yes No No Slapped on Bottom with a Bare Hand Yes No Shouted, Yelled, Screamed Yes No Shook the Child Yes No 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Physical discipline was relatively common, including 40% using an object to hit a child. However, beating repeatedly was substantially less common. Over 60% of respondents felt that physical discipline was important in proper discipline for a child. 6.4.4 Relationships In the same section, respondents who were currently in a long-term relationship (whether married or not), or who had been in such a relationship at some point in the past two years, were asked a series of questions intended to establish any patterns of abuse. Of the 181 respondents, 120 were in such relationships, or had recently been in such a relationship, and 61 were not. Each of the following are considered to be aspects of gender-based violence, divided into emotional violence and physical violence. - 26 - Table 7: Prevalence of Emotional and Physical Violence (Percentages) Response Often Some- Rarely Never Do Not times Know Emotional Violence Kept you from seeing same sex friends 10.0 14.2 5.0 63.3 7.5 Kept you from contacting your birth family 4.2 5.8 2.5 80.0 7.5 Insists on knowing where you are all the time 21.7 13.3 4.2 53.3 7.5 Ignores you and treats you with indifference 1.7 4.2 2.5 84.2 7.5 Does not trust you with money 6.7 5.8 2.5 75.8 9.2 Gets angry if you speak to someone of the opposite sex 15.8 16.7 5.0 54.2 8.3 Is often suspicious that you are unfaithful 7.6 14.3 1.7 64.7 11.8 Insulted you or made you feel bad about yourself 3.4 8.4 7.6 73.1 7.6 Belittled or humiliated you in front of other people 2.5 4.2 3.4 81.5 8.4 Did things to scare you or intimidate you on purpose 2.5 5.0 3.4 79.8 9.2 Threatened to hurt you or someone you care about 3.4 8.4 0.0 79.0 9.2 Physical Violence Slapped you or threw something at you that could hurt 3.4 6.7 0.8 79.8 9.2 Pushed you, shook you, or threw something at you 2.5 7.6 2.5 78.2 9.2 Hit you with fists or with something else that hurt you 2.5 1.7 1.7 84.9 9.2 Kicked you, dragged you or beat you up 2.5 2.5 1.7 84.0 9.2 Choked or burned you on purpose 0.8 0.8 1.7 86.6 10.1 Threatened to use or actually used a gun, knife of other 0.8 2.5 0.0 86.6 10.1 weapon against you Physically forced you to have sex when you did not want 0.8 1.7 0.0 87.4 10.1 to Threatened you so that you felt you had to have sex, 1.7 1.7 0.0 85.8 10.8 otherwise harmed Ever forced you to do something sexual against your will 1.7 0.8 0.8 85.8 10.8 that you found degrading or humiliating [women only, ever pregnant] hit, slapped, kicked or 2.8 3.7 1.9 82.2 9.3 physically hurt you when you were pregnant For most measures of abuse, the occurrence was quite uncommon. This held for both emotional and physical forms of abuse. In part this may be due to low levels of actual abuse, but it also likely is mixed with the fact that many female homestead heads are married to husbands who do not live in the homestead for most of the year. - 27 - 7 Survey Results: Provision of Impact Mitigation Services, and Relevance, Quality, Timeliness and Comprehensiveness of these Services 7.1 Introduction In this chapter, access to impact mitigation services is considered. Access covers ‘ever’ as well as the past year, and refers to services provided for free. For those with such access, the relevance, quality, timeliness and comprehensiveness of the services is considered. The range of services have been defined by stakeholders in Swaziland, as per the National Minimum Package, as of need to mitigate the impacts of HIV&AIDS on affected homesteads and infected persons. This has been expanded to include services that are inferred in the National Strategic Plan for HIV/AIDS, but not explicitly stated in the National Minimum Package document (e.g., violence). It should also be remembered that the number of persons in need of various services varies. Therefore, the denominator changes across services, and the percentage is derived from this denominator and the numerator of those reached. For each service, the following questions were asked in various sections of the questionnaire: Whether such support was ever received. Whether such support was received in the past year. Who had received the support. Who did not receive the support but needed it. Quality of services received - respondent perception of how good the services were. Relevance of services received - respondent perception of whether the services were of use considering their needs. Comprehensiveness - respondent perception of whether all needs were provided for with regard to a particular service. Timeliness - respondent perception of whether the services were provided when they were needed. 7.2 Access to Grants Respondents were asked whether anyone in their homesteads had received various grants, including the Old Age Grant, the Public Assistance Grant, the Disability Grant, and support from the Young Heroes Project. Of the 181 homesteads, 86 of them had received support via the Old Age Grant. For these 86 homesteads, a total of 104 elderly persons were receiving grant monies, while an additional 17 who were eligible for such services were not receiving them. There was some confusion about the value of the grant, with responses ranging from E100 to E500. Of the 86 who had ever received the grant, all 86 continued to receive the grant monies, even including 6 that did not have any homestead members aged 60 and older. In most cases, Old Age Grants were given to homesteads where the homestead head was aged 60 and older (88.4%). - 28 - None of the respondents indicated that they received funds from the Public Assistance Grant. Two out of 181 had received a disability grant. In both cases, a single disability grant had been issued, despite one containing two disabled orphan children, and the other containing three disabled children. Only 1 out of 181 interviewees had received support from the Young Heroes Project. 7.3 Access to and Need for Services 7.3.1 School Fee Support and Stated Need A very high 60.8% of the homesteads in the survey indicated that at least one child in the homestead had received support from outside for school fees. Of these, virtually all had received such support in the past year. In almost all cases, orphan children had received the support, not other children (whether vulnerable or not). Despite high levels of reach, respondents indicated that many more children were in need of support, both orphan and other vulnerable children, with roughly half of the children in need being reached, mostly vulnerable children, but also some orphans. Respondents who lived in homesteads where the services were received were asked to rate their relevance, timeliness, and comprehensiveness. Findings are summarised in the following table: Figure 8: Relevance, Timeliness and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services 100 90 80 70 DK 60 Not At All 50 Not Very Somewhat 40 Very 30 20 10 0 Relevance Timeliness Comprehensiveness Almost all of the respondents felt that the services were relevant, with most arguing that the services were ‘very relevant’ to their needs. Timeliness, however, was a concern, with over half - 29 - raising concerns in this respect. There were also some concerns about how comprehensive the services had been, indicating that the school fee support was not felt to cover the size of the fees themselves. It is interesting to note that two-thirds of the respondents felt that they had had a role in identifying school fee support as the service they required, with the caregiver of the particular child involved. This generally occurred in community meetings, as well as (in far fewer cases) in discussions with local leaders. 7.3.2 School Materials Support It appears that those who received support for school fees also received support for other school materials (60.2%) when they attended school, and did so in the past year. In most cases, this comprised stationary and books. Because they were able to attend school based on the school fee support, orphans were more likely to have been supported with these materials. However, more children were felt to be in need of support than had received such support. Most respondents felt that the materials provided were of good quality, and relevant to the needs of the children. And, in contrast to the situation with school fee support, which was felt to be a problem, few felt that support for school materials was timely. Community meetings, and meetings with local community leaders, were the most common means of engagement. 7.3.3 Non-Formal Education Support Only one respondent (classified as ‘bereaved vulnerable elderly’) received support for non-formal education. Even with high demand for education support for children, only two homesteads argued that their children needed support with non-formal education, and only three ‘bereaved vulnerable elderly’ were felt to be in need of non-formal education support. 7.3.4 Vocational Training Support Only one homestead had received vocational training support, which covered two children classified as ‘orphan aged 15-17’. Only seven homesteads noted a demand for vocational training. 7.3.5 Food Support Almost half (43.6%) of the homesteads in the survey had received food support to the homestead sometime in the past, of which over 80% received food support in the past year. Of interest, in most cases, this food support targeted orphans within the homestead, and respondents felt that other orphans were still in priority need of services, followed by ‘other children’ and ‘bereaved vulnerable elderly’. Most felt that the food support provided was relevant to the needs of the persons reached. However, very few felt that the service was offered in a timely manner, and there were mixed feelings about the comprehensiveness of the services delivered, with many respondents feeling that the support did not meet all of their needs in that particular area. Most respondents noted that they were involved in the process of determining who should receive the services, almost entirely through community meetings. - 30 - Questions were also asked about food support to children at school. A higher number of homesteads had been reached through school feeding programmes than had been reached through targeting of homesteads. Orphans were heavily targeted in school feeding programmes as well, but most respondents noted that other orphans were in need of school feeding as well. Respondents were satisfied with the quality of services, and found the service of direct relevance to the needs of their schoolchildren. The services were also noted as timely, with most noted as ‘very timely’, and most felt that the services were comprehensive. Questions were also asked about food support to children at public feeding venues (referred to as Neighbourhood Care Points). A much lower proportion had received food support through this mechanism, at 22.1% ever, of which 90% had received such support in the past year. Again, orphans were largely favoured in terms of provision of food support, and were also listed as those most in need (for those who did not receive the services). Most felt that the quality of the food was good, relevant to the needs of the children reached, were offered in a timely manner, and were felt to be comprehensive. 7.3.6 Support for Agricultural Activities Respondents were asked whether agricultural support services had been received and, if so, whether these services had been received in the past year. This referred to any type of agricultural support that would enhance production, improve yields, etc., and including support for crop farming, livestock farming, food gardens, and cash crop production. Just under 20% of the homesteads had received agricultural support services, of which all but one had received support in the past year. Three-quarters of those homesteads which did not receive such support argued that they needed the services. Most felt that the services offers were of good quality, relevant to their needs, and timely. Responses were more mixed, however, in terms of whether the services were comprehensiveness. 7.3.7 Grief Counselling Support Five of the sampled homesteads had received grief counselling support, with services offered to orphans and chronically ill adults aged 15-49, but 19 more needed but did not receive the services, mostly orphans and ‘bereaved vulnerable elderly’. The quality of services offered were rated as of good quality, relevant to the needs of those receiving the services, offered in a timely manner, and comprehensive. 7.3.8 Other Counselling Support Only one homestead had received other counselling support, covering one chronically ill adult aged 15-49. Demand for similar services was quite low, with only five homesteads arguing that such support was required. 7.3.9 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling None of the homesteads in the survey had received support for substance abuse. Demand for services was also low. - 31 - 7.3.10 Home-Based Care Ten of the 181 homesteads had a member who had received home-based care services, almost all of who had received the services in the past year. In 10 cases, services were offered to chronically ill adults, and in 1 case services were offered to disabled persons. In total, 33 persons needed this support, of which 11 received the support, and 22 did not. For those who had received services, the quality was felt to be good, relevant to the needs of those who received the services, but were not felt to have been offered in a timely manner. There was also a concern about the comprehensiveness of these services. 7.3.11 Legal Support Three of the 181 homesteads had received legal support, covering land rights (1) and inheritance (2). An additional three needed the service, but did not receive it. 7.3.12 Income Generation Support Three of the 181 homesteads had received support for income generation activities, with all three having received such support over the past year. An additional 11 needed the service, but did not receive it. 7.3.13 Housing Support Four of the 181 homesteads had received support for improved housing, one of which received this support in the year before the survey. Unfortunately, the demand for such services was not directly measured, but later in the questionnaire housing quality was measured; this has been corrected for the QIMS questionnaire. Out of the 181 homesteads in the survey, 54 were made out of informal materials. 7.3.14 Micro-Credit Support None of the respondents received micro-credit support, but 7 needed the service. 7.3.15 Medical Services for the Chronically Ill Seventeen of the 181 homesteads had been reached with medical services, with all 17 receiving these services in the past year, and 15 of 17 receiving ARVs, and all of them continuing their treatment. 7.3.16 Targeting At the end of the section on relevance, quality, timeliness, and comprehensiveness, a few summary questions were asked about targeting: ‘Overall, considering the services provided, please rate the extent to which you believe that the services reached those most in need in your homestead’. - 32 - And, for those with multiple household homesteads, ‘Overall, considering the services provided, please rate the extent to which you believe that the services reached the households most in need in your homestead’. Findings are summarised in the following table: Table 8: Targeting Response Homesteads that Percentage Had Received at Least One Service Services Well Targeted Very Well Targeted 8 14.0 Somewhat Well Targeted 27 47.4 Not Very Well Targeted 16 28.1 Not At All Well Targeted 6 10.5 Services Reached Right Households in Homestead (only applicable for multiple household homesteads) Very Well Targeted 6 na Somewhat Well Targeted 7 na Not Very Well Targeted 4 na Not At All Well Targeted 4 na na = not applicable, numbers too small. - 33 - 8 Conclusions and Recommendations 8.1 Introduction Given that the QIMS Pilot+ Survey had two objectives – to help finalise the full QIMS protocol and questionnaire, and to provide inputs for the NSP – in this chapter, conclusions around these two objectives are summarised. 8.2 Lessons Learned: Implementation of QIMS A number of lessons were learned in terms of revising the quantitative questionnaire, and in finalising the approach to be used for implementation of QIMS. The lessons learned during the Pilot+ survey implementation process will be incorporated into the final QIMS protocol and questionnaire: QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN  The questionnaire is not too long. By the time the Pilot+ Survey was completed, administration of the questionnaire took around 45 minutes. With additions, the estimated completion time for the QIMS questionnaire itself is estimated at 50-55 minutes.  All sections of the questionnaire worked well. Where changes/improves were noted, these were incorporated into the revised QIMS questionnaire.  Almost all questions worked, with only a few exceptions. Two questions in particular did not work well, one on income status, and another on female control over decision-making in the homestead. For income, self categorisation was employed, and the question appeared too early in the questionnaire, resulting in respondents systematically understated income. A separate enumerator categorisation of levels of poverty was included, and this, as well as employment and earnings data from elsewhere in the questionnaire, allowed the correction of this understatement. For female control over decision-making, many positive responses to this question were in fact simply an artefact resulting from the fact that most homesteads had lost all senior male decision-makers. Other questions had minor problems that have been corrected. o Regarding the questions on abuse, analysis should be done separately for those in de jure female-headed homesteads, as well as male-headed homesteads. It may be that, because of long-term absences of husbands in de facto female-headed homesteads, abuse may be systematically underestimated. However, given that almost all of the respondents indicated that these forms of abuse ‘never’ happened, this hypothesis should be tested. SELECTION OF SAMPLE ENUMERATION AREAS  A minimum of 413 enumeration areas is required for a statistical generalisable nationwide quantitative survey to be approved by CSO. For QIMS, therefore, 420 enumeration areas will be sampled. - 34 -  The CSO must be in charge of sampling, and must approve boundary identification and homestead listing processes. Ideally, a representative from the CSO should attend training and cover boundary identification and homestead listing. In addition, a representative from the CSO should attend initial field activities, covering both the phase of boundary identification, homestead listing, and local authority approval, and the initial implementation of the quantitative questionnaire itself.  The CSO should be represented on the Reference Group, and should review any reports or report sections on methods and approach, and approve this in writing. The CSO should also reviewing data weighting procedures, and approve these procedures in writing. DATA COLLECTION  The enumeration area boundary demarcation and listing process, coupled with securing permission to conduct the fieldwork from local authorities, will require as much time as the actual survey itself. This is because the enumeration area listing process proved to be extremely time-consuming, and there have been problems with the maps (and place names on the maps) associated with the 2006 census. For these reasons, This has been accommodated in the QIMS Protocol, and these activities will precede field implementation of the QIMS Survey itself. o In follow-up discussions between NERCHA and the consultants, it was concluded that, as most homesteads in almost all rural Swaziland and much of peri-urban Swaziland would likely be eligible for impact mitigation services, a pre-listing would not be necessary. Instead, all homesteads would be eligible for interview, and need would be assessed against having received the services or not. This means that preparation in the field will entail only securing access with local authorities, boundary identification, homestead numbering.  The quality control procedures during data collection (having to report on missing values) worked well and should be repeated for QIMS.  Directing the interview to a senior homestead member worked well: It has resulted in minimum missing values, and the Pilot+ Survey team is of the opinion that the information resulting from these interviews is valid. Internal consistency checks conducted on the Pilot+ Survey data underline this conclusion. However, it is still important to interview a randomly selected second homestead member with a child to secure specific data on gender-based violence, but also to consider inter-homestead variation in opinions.  Levels of co-operation from homesteads during data collection were mostly high and few refusals can be expected for the QIMS Survey. There are, however, a few remote locations where it may be difficult to secure permission to conduct fieldwork, because of suspicions against outsiders. Indeed, one of the twenty enumeration areas in the Pilot+ Survey had this problem. It may therefore be necessary to substitute a few enumeration areas. Protocols for doing so must be developed by the Central Statistical Office.  Ethical protocol needs to be adjusted to emphasise the limitations of the survey. Given the difficult situation facing many of the homesteads in the survey, there was clearly a hope that the conduct of the survey would yield immediate benefits in terms of improved service delivery. This was heightened by the poor rains and rapid price increases that preceded the Pilot+ Survey, but it will likely also be the case for QIMS. As a result, the ethical protocols for Version 21 have been revised to include a stronger statement about the role of the survey, and what can and cannot be expected in this regard. - 35 - DATA ENTRY  Data entry management protocols should be better enforced. Although the planned data entry management protocol was not followed during Pilot+ and no problems were experienced, there should be better enforcement for the full QIMS (should be included in contract conditions of survey team). DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARATION  Standard data analysis processes and data tabulations are needed. This will help ensure that key tables are completed by the organisation that implements the QIMS survey. 8.3 Lessons Learned: NSPIII 8.3.1 Vulnerability The Pilot+ Survey yielded insights into factors that enhanced vulnerability, and the need for IMS. These need consideration during the design of NSPIII. Reduction in social capital: Perhaps the most serious challenge facing homesteads in need of Impact Mitigation Services has been the decline in social capital in Swaziland. Respondents noted the decline in the ability to rely on extended family members, neighbours and friends in recent years, and noted HIV&AIDS as a key problem in this regard. Particular problems arose in terms of securing more than emotional support in times of need, and even this support falls away as problems persist. A sense of isolation, coupled with an increased sense of despair, were consequences of this decline in social capital. Collapse of multi-household homesteads: A number of respondents also noted that historical coping mechanisms associated with homestead structures, migration for employment, and on- farm production, among other issues, are no longer working for homesteads in need of IMS. There appears to be a trend towards the collapse of multiple household homesteads back into a single household homestead, with a reduction in internal homestead coping mechanisms and a consequent straining of relations with other family members who live outside the homestead. Systems of generational knowledge (that is, the transfer of knowledge from one generation to the next) are being rapidly undermined, and the ability of caregivers to properly care for the next generation is being seriously weakened. Coupled with demographic distortions arising from HIV&AIDS, this is yielding generational vulnerability. In such a context, short-term and ‘long- wave’ crises tend to reinforce each other, and confuse the response to the provision of IMS. For the purposes of the QIMS Survey, it is recommended that services covered in the questionnaire include those which are not currently on offer, but may be added. For the design of NSP III, it is recommended that Swaziland considers the following questions:  What does the decline in social capital mean for the types of IMS to be delivered? o Results of the Pilot+ Survey suggests that this is a critical problem, despite not being considered as part of service arenas needing support according to the National Minimum Package, nor mentioned as a serious problem in NSPII. - 36 -  What does the decline in social capital mean for the process (and the importance) of engagement with affected homesteads and households? o Affected homesteads have little influence locally, and few means to ‘recharge’ their social capital with family, friends, neighbours, or the community. Giving these homesteads effective ‘voice’ is essential to ensure that the most vulnerable are reached.  How can one respond to the need to provide for short-term emergency needs in a manner that makes this consistent with meeting longer-term development needs, recognising that the crisis in Swaziland will affect the country for decades to come. o In part this is a matter of how services are provided, with affected homesteads involved in identifying priority services and communities involved in identifying homesteads most in need. Further, it is a matter of recognising the key means of providing services, using clinical, community-based, and supply-oriented approaches, depending on the service. 8.3.2 Supply of and Demand for Impact Mitigation Services Findings suggest that the need for IMS far exceeds current supply. Even in cases where a number of homesteads have received some services, others in the same homesteads were reported to be in need of other services. For most services, quality and relevance were rated quite highly, timeliness rated as more problematic, and comprehensiveness (in terms of who was reached as well as the level of services provided for those in need) also rated as problematic. For some of the services noted in the discussions under IMS, the demand for services appears to far outstrip current supply. This held for services where reach was already quite high, notably school fees, but also held for services such as agricultural services where fewer were reached. However, for some services where more focused targeting might be required, such as counselling, reach is low, but demand is also low. Given these differences, recommendations vary, and the following should be considered when designing NSP III:  Given high demand for services where supply is also high, specifically support for school fees, school materials, food support, school feeding and basic medical services (although it should be noted that the latter was not measured at part of Pilot+), the findings from the Pilot+ Survey suggest that it may make sense to provide these services to the full population, rather than considering targeting of these services. The specific means of doing so, and the costs of doing so, will of course need to be considered. But the costs associated with ‘leakage’, that is, reaching those who do not need the services unnecessarily, are likely to be lower than the costs of targeting those most in need.  For other services, including micro-credit, income generation activity support, agricultural support, and similar areas, it is clear that community-based targeting mechanisms are required to reach in particular need.  For some services, such as medical care for the chronically ill, protection from sexual abuse, protection from violence, counselling for substance abuse, institutional means of identification for targeting are required.  For some services, such as non-formal education, grief and trauma counselling, and legal support, demand is low, but it is likely to be low for reasons unrelated to need. People may - 37 - not feel, for example, that non-formal education is relevant to their lives because of age, or to the lives of their children because they want the child in formal schooling. In these cases, a focus on demand-creation may be warranted. Related to this, findings from the section on violence against children suggests that excessive discipline is not regarded as violence, but rather as warranted in certain situations. In these cases, demand creation is insufficient, as it would also require discussions with communities about what comprises unwarranted discipline, and what should be allowed.  One key gap is housing, where the need is considerable, but supply quite low, and the cost of supply extremely high. This also holds for rural water supply, and improved sanitation. Given the high costs associated with these infrastructural interventions, it is uncertain whether these should be considered as impact mitigation services, and should instead be considered as part of broader infrastructure planning. Given these costs, despite the need, it is probably not possible to incorporate this into NSPIII as a service provision arena. However, this should be discussed during NSPIII design.  While there was considerable satisfaction with the services provided, and few complaints in this regard, it is not clear whether people are satisfied with the mechanisms of homestead identification. It may be that respondents simply accepted what was provided to them, and did not want to challenge how this was done, whatever they thought about the process. For those who had been reached by services, most felt that the services were well targeted, that they were of sufficient quality and, to a lesser extent, that the services offered with sufficiently comprehensive to meet priority needs. There were more concerns associated with the timeliness of the delivery of services (with the exception of food support at school and at neighbourhood care points), and specific concerns about those in need who had not been reached within homesteads. For the design team for NSP III, it would be especially useful to consider impact assessment indicators (associated with evaluation) that are measured through QIMS, so that QIMS can meet the information needs of NSP III. Particular consideration should be given to reference the denominator in objectives, so that the proportion reached refers to those in need, and not always the whole population. 8.3.3 IMS Service Delivery Systems Most respondents felt that their involvement in determining priority IMS, and in identifying those most in need, was satisfactory, with regard to the particular services received. However, there were broader concerns about how services were delivered, and how those in need were identified. Respondents were asked a number of questions about their involvement in identifying priority impact mitigation services, and priority targets. For those who had received varied services, there was satisfaction with their participation in the process, and in what the process yielded. For broad-based services, such as education, food and agricultural support, community meetings were common. For specific services, such as medical support, home-based care, and counselling, meetings with specific authorities were most commonly mentioned. Respondents were satisfied with these mechanisms. However, in more general discussions, concerns were expressed about the delivery of IMS. Concerns included the following: - 38 -  For those who were not registered locally as homesteads in need of support, the majority were not sure why they were not registered (despite believing that they were in need of IMS), nor were they sure why those who had been registered had been selected. There was a perceived lack of transparency in the process. Related to this, there was an interest in ensuring that those homesteads in need of IMS have a greater role in homestead identification.  There were concerns that IMS were determined from outside, and that communities were largely recipients of what was offered, rather than active partners in the process. If affected homesteads themselves are consulted about priority services, the availability of and limitations to service provision, etc., they will be in a much better position to consider who is most in need, and what services are most important to them. While there was a level of satisfaction with what had been delivered, there was nevertheless a recognition that greater involvement in identifying and prioritising IMS might improve services. There were mixed feelings about the coherence of impact mitigation service delivery at the local level, with almost half of the respondents concerned about co-ordination across local actors and between local actors and national ones, and the comprehensiveness of services in terms of being delivered over a sufficient period of time. For the design of NSP III, it is recommended that, within the context of Swazi society and polity (and, in this latter case, the integration of traditional and local authority structures) the team consider the following:  How can homesteads and households in need of IMS play a greater role in identifying those most in need, and prioritising services?  How can the system of IMS delivery be made more coherent and more efficient.  How can problems with ill-timed service delivery, and short-term service delivery in the context of long-term need, be overcome, at least in part?  Given relatively low levels of reach, despite high rates of eligibility, how can NSP III support an improved reach of social welfare transfers? For each of these, those involved in the design of NSPIII need to consider how these can be accomplished. Items for consideration should include, for example, how to operationalise more sustained and more equal community participation, ensuring that those eligible for services play a key role in decision what is provided and who receives services; how to strengthen demand- driven approaches for services that do not need to reach all homesteads; and how to establish levels of need when tendering for various supplies. 8.3.4 Homestead Situation Analysis The Pilot+ Survey results suggest that the following needs consideration for the design of NSPIII: Most of the homesteads listed as eligible for impact mitigation services, and therefore included in the survey, were single household homesteads. In considering why this was the cast with the field team, it was concluded that this was an example of the collapse of social capital networks that had previously helped to cushion homesteads from shocks. These findings are underlined by low levels of social capital found in the survey. For the NSPIII, homesteads that have collapsed into single household homesteads could be considered as an indicator of particular vulnerability. - 39 - Not all children classified as orphans and other vulnerable children are in fact equally vulnerable. Instead, there are children who may be classified as ‘most vulnerable’, because of the particular situations they find themselves in. Orphaned children who have not been moved, who are living with siblings, who are cared for by a relative, for example, tend to be less vulnerable than those who have been moved, where children are distributed across different homesteads, etc. For the NSPIII, Swaziland should consider how to focus on ‘most vulnerable’ children and differentiate between them and other vulnerable children. NSPII correctly notes the problem of high caregiving burdens, and the fact that many caregivers are elderly. These groups should continue to be a focus of attention for NSPIII. - 40 - Annex A: Pilot+ Survey Questionnaire Questionnaire Number: _________________________ VERSION 20 – FINAL – 22/8/08 Quantitative Questionnaire Swaziland: Quality, Relevance and Comprehensiveness of Impact Mitigation Services Survey (QIMS) Prepared by The World Bank Team in Consultation with NERCHA 1) Interview Status (tick only one): Fully Completed ____ - 1 Partially Completed ____ - 2 2) Total number of visits: _________ 3) Household Substitution Status: Sampled Household ____ - 1 Replacement Household ____ - 2 4) Enumerator Self Check (field), print first name: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ 5) Field Supervisor Check (field), print surname: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ 6) # of missing values found by Field Supervisor: ______________________________ 7) Field Supervisor Check of Missing Values, print surname: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ 8) # of unexpected missing values resolved: ___________________ 9) # of unexpected missing values UNresolved: ___________________ 10) Enumerator Review of Missing Values, print surname: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ 11) Field Manager/Study Director Check (field), initial: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ Field Manager/Study Director Check (office), print surname: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ Other Check (field/office), print surname: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ Data Manager Coding of Open-Ended Responses: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ Questionnaire Entry Completed: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ Questionnaire Validation Completed: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ [Enum: Interview a Senior Female in the Homestead or, if appropriate, a Senior Male] [For a Child-Headed Homestead, Interview Senior Child] - 41 - 12) Enumerator Name: ____ ____ - 1 Phumlile Mavuso ____ - 5 Njabuliso Zondi ____ - 2 Laura Simelane ____ - 6 Fikele Gama ____ - 3 Nomfundo Hleta ____ - 7 Wenzile Mthimkhulu ____ - 4 Sifiso Ndwandwe 13) Field Supervisor Name: ____ ____ - 1 Nondumiso Kunene 14) Field Manager Name: ____ ____ - 1 Dambuza Ntshalintshali 15) Survey Manager Name: ____ ____ - 1 Robin Weeks 16) Region: ____ ____ - 1 Hhohho ____ - 3 Lubombo ____ - 2 Manzini ____ - 4 Shiselweni 17) Location: ____ ____ - 1 urban ____ - 2 rural 18) Inkhundla: ____ ____ - 1 Nkhaba ` ____ - 10 Ntondozi ____ - 2 Hhukwini ____ - 11 Manzini South ____ - 3 Mbabane East ____ - 12 Manzini West ____ - 4 Pigg’s Peak ____ - 13 Mtsambama ____ - 5 Mayiwane ____ - 14 Shiselweni ____ - 6 Lobamba ____ - 15 Kubuta ____ - 7 Mahlangatsha ____ - 16 Hlane ____ - 8 Ngwempisi ____ - 17 Nkilongo ____ - 9 Ludzeludze ____ - 18 Siteki 18) EA#/Umphakatsi (rural community)/Zone (urban): ____ ____ - 1 11221 Dlangeni ____ - 11 32216 Lushini ____ - 2 12287 Langeni ____ - 12 32306 Ezikhotheni ____ - 3 11746 Bahloli ____ - 13 31211 Magele ____ - 4 11209 Jubukweni ____ - 14 32301 KaKholwane ____ - 5 12147 Herefords ____ - 15 21223 Lushikishini ____ - 6 11453 Msunduza ____ - 16 21135 Mambatfweni ____ - 7 43516 Emangwaneni ____ - 17 22289 Ntondozi ____ - 8 43243 KaNgcamphalala ____ - 18 22761 Emhlane ____ - 9 43101 Khuphuka ____ - 19 22411 Old Zakhele ____ - 10 44127 Sitsatsaweni ____ - 20 22169 Sibuyeni 19) Homestead Type (main criterion): [tick only one] ____ ____ - 1 orphans in household in the homestead ____ - 2 other vulnerable child - parent in prison ____ - 3 other vulnerable child - disabled child (physically or mentally) ____ - 4 non-orphan child member who is chronically ill in a household in the homestead (bedridden at least 3 months over the past 12) ____ - 5 household in homestead has at least 1 bereaved elderly HH member aged 60+ ____ - 6 homestead where there is at least one child-headed household (orphan or vulnerable) - 42 - 20) Homestead Type (other criteria): [tick up to 3 responses] ____ - 1 orphans in household in the homestead ____ ____ - 2 other vulnerable child - parent in prison ____ ____ - 3 other vulnerable child - disabled child (physically or mentally) ____ ____ - 4 non-orphan child member who is chronically ill in a household in the homestead (bedridden at least 3 months over the past 12) ____ - 5 household in homestead has at least 1 bereaved elderly HH member aged 60+ ____ - 6 homestead where there is at least one child-headed household (orphan or vulnerable) ____ - 7 other (specify): __________________________________ INTRODUCTION Sawubona. Ligama lami ngingu _______________ . Ngisuka enhlanganweni yaka NERCHA (inhlangano lebukete tindzaba letiphatselene nembulalave eSwatini). Ngingulomunye walabenta lucwaningo lwekusita hulumende kutsi abone tinhlelo NERCHA latentako emiphakatsini nekutsi yini langayenta kancono kusita labadzingile kaNgwane. Kulolucwaningo akusiwo onkhe emakhaya lesiwahambelako kodvwa ngulawo lambalwa. Ngiyakwetsembisa kutsi konkhe lesitawukhuluma ngako kutawuba yimfihlo, kungako ngingadzingi kwati ligama lakho nemininingwane yakho. Lomunye longefika emuva kwami ngulongiphetse kutokwenta siciniseko sekutsi sikhulumisene kahle yini. Kukuwe kuba yincenye yalolucwaningo. Unelilungelo lekutsi ungaphendvuli leminye imibuto noma ungimise lapho sewuva ungasakhoni kuchubeka. Uma kwenteka ungakhululeki kuphendvula leminye imibuto ngicela ungatise kute sikhone kuchubekela kulomunye. Kodvwake, ngoba timphedvulo takho timcoka kitsi, ngicela kutsi uma uvuma kuba yincenye yalolucwanigo uyiphendvule yonkhe imibuto ngekwetsembeka nangeliciniso. Ngitawucela kutsi ungiphe sikhatsi sakho. Singachubeka yini 1 yebo 2 Chake Good day. My name is ________________. I am working for Swaziland’s National Emergency Response Council on HIV&AIDS (NERCHA). I am part of a team conducting a survey to help government understand how well we have been doing and what we can do differently to help vulnerable people in Swaziland. We are interviewing persons from randomly-selected homesteads throughout the country. Your homestead has been randomly selected. I assure you that everything you tell me in this interview will be kept completely anonymous and confidential. I do not need to know your name or personal details for this survey and there will not be any way for anyone to link your answers back to you. The only other person from this study who may visit you during or after the interview would be my supervisor, and [s/he] would only visit to make sure that I conducted the interview properly. It is entirely up to you whether you want to take part in this survey. Please note that you have the right to refuse to answer any question or to change your mind at any point in the interview, and stop the interview at that point. If you feel uncomfortable with a question, just let me know and we can skip it. However, because your answers are very important to us, I ask that, if you do agree to be part of this survey, you be completely honest and sincere with me, and answer all the questions. The interview will take less than an hour. 21) May we proceed? ____ - 1 Yes ____ - 2 No _________ [modules to be administered to senior homestead member, ideally a senior female member actively involved in homestead activities] - 43 - MODULE 1. HOMESTEAD CHARACTERISTICS Q# Questions and Enumerator Responses Codes GO TO Sup. Instruments 101 Time Start Time: __________ Finish Time: __________ Total Time: (minutes)______________________ 102 Date of Interview [Day, Month, as a single 4 digit code] ______________________________ 103 Ngubani inhloko yalelikhaya? Male [male head/other senior male Who is the head of this homestead? decision-maker present at least 6 months over the past 12 months] 1 Female de facto [stated male head absent at least 6 months over the past 12 months, and no ‘replacement’ male lives in the homestead] 2 Female de jure [female stated as head] 3 Female child (aged < 18) 4 Male child (aged < 18) 5 104 Wafundza wagcina kabana? none 1 What is the highest level of education of Primary (Grade 1-7) 2 the head of the homestead? Secondary (Form 1-3) 3 High (Form 4-5) 4 Tertiary 5 Non formal 6 105 Uneminyaka lemingakhi? What is the age of the head of the _____________________________________________ homestead? [If do not know, secure or make an estimate.] 106 Sewutsetse/ sewutsetfwe yini? Married (male) 1 106a What is the homestead head’s marital Married (female) 2 107 status? Cohabitating/Living in Communion 3 107 Single (never married) 4 107 Divorced/Permanently Separated 5 107 Widowed 6 107 106a [If male headed and male is Monogamous 1 107 married]Unesitsembu yini? Polygamous 2 106b Is the homestead head in a monogamous or polygamous marriage? 106b [If male headed and homestead head is in a polygamous # ___________________________ marriage]Unangakhi webafati? How many wives does the homestead head currently have? 107 Mangakhi emadladla lakhaya? How many households are there in this # ___________________________ homestead? [Enum: 1 is a valid value] MODULE 2: HOUSEHOLD AND HOMESTEAD COMPOSITION Ngicela usichazele kutsi inhloko yelikhaya Male/ Household House- House- Sup Sup Sup ihlobane njani nemalunga alo. Female 1 (main hold 2 hold 3 1 2 3 Please indicate the composition of household HH in members for households (note: all refer to homestead) relationship status to the Homestead Head) [Enum: circle all that apply] [Enum: For each cell, enter a number from 1 or higher for each cell. If none or not applicable, leave cell blank] 201 Inhloko yelidladla 1 - male 1 - male 1 - male Household Head [Enum: Check 2 - female 2 - fem 2 - fem Q103,page 4] - 44 - Ngicela usichazele kutsi inhloko yelikhaya Male/ Household House- House- Sup Sup Sup ihlobane njani nemalunga alo. Female 1 (main hold 2 hold 3 1 2 3 Please indicate the composition of household HH in members for households (note: all refer to homestead) relationship status to the Homestead Head) [Enum: circle all that apply] 202 Lotsetse noma lotsetfwe yinhloko yelidladla 1 - male lengikilo. 2 - female Spouse of Homestead Head 203 Lotsetse noma lotsetfwe yinhloko yelidladla 1 - male 1 - male Spouse of Household Head 2 - fem 2 – fem 204 Bantfwana Belidladla # males Children in each Household # females 204a [For children aged 0-17 in the males household] ______ # O ___ # O ____ # O Kulabantfwana lababafana, bangakhi labashonelwe ngumake, ngubabe noma bobabili batali, bangakhi labadzingile, bangakhi labangakadzingi futsi labanabobobabili batali? _____ # VC __ # VC ___ # VC Of these male children, how many are classified as orphans (having lost their mother, father, or both parents), how many are classified as other vulnerable children, and how many are non- vulnerable/non-orphans? [Enum: 0 is a ____ # non- ____ # _____ # valid value] [SUP: check total VC non VC non VC against 204] 204b [For children aged 0-17 in the females household] ______ # O ___ # O ____ # O Kulabantfwana labamantfombatana, bangakhi labashonelwe ngumake, ngubabe noma bobabili batali, bangakhi labadzingile, bangakhi labangakadzingi futsi labanabo bobabili batali? _____ # VC __ # VC ___ # VC Of these female children, how many are classified as orphans (having lost their mother, father, or both parents), how many are classified as other vulnerable children, and how many are non- vulnerable/non-orphans? [Enum: 0 is a ____ # non- _____ # _____ # valid value] [SUP: check total VC non VC non VC against 204] 205 Kulabana 17 kuya phansi kulelikhaya, bangakhi # males labalashonelwa ngumake, ngubabe noma paternal bobabili? # males Of those aged 0-17 in this homestead, how many maternal have lost their mother, father, or both? [Enum: # males Check against the number of orphans double noted above] # females paternal # females maternal # females double 206 Bangakhi bomnakabo nhloko yelikhaya # Brother of Homestead Head 207 Bangakhi bodzadze wabo nhloko yelikhaya # Sister of Homestead Head 208 Bangakhi bo anti nabo make labancane/khulu # benhlokoyelikhaya Aunt of Homestead Head 209 Bangakhi bo malume nabo babe lomncane/khulu # benhloko yelikhaya Uncle of Homestead Head - 45 - Ngicela usichazele kutsi inhloko yelikhaya Male/ Household House- House- Sup Sup Sup ihlobane njani nemalunga alo. Female 1 (main hold 2 hold 3 1 2 3 Please indicate the composition of household HH in members for households (note: all refer to homestead) relationship status to the Homestead Head) [Enum: circle all that apply] 210 Bangakhi labangakahlobani nenhloko yelikhaya # males kodvwa bahlobene nalamanye emalunga elidladla? # females Non-Relative to Homestead Head (but related to other members of HH) 211 Bangakhi labangakahlobani nenhloko yelikhaya # males kanye nalamanye emalunga alo? Non-Relative to Homestead Head (not related to # females other members of HH) 212 Bangakhi labadzala, labasuka ku60 kuya etulu # males labahlala kulelo nalelo dladla Total Number of Adults in Each Household Aged # females 60+ 213 Bangakhi labadzala, labasuka ku 50 kuya ku 59 # males labahlala kulelo nalelo dladla Total Number of Adults in Each Household Aged # females 50-59 214 Bangakhi labadzala, labasuka ku 18 kuya ku 49 # males labahlala kulelo nalelo dladla Total Number of Adults in Each Household Aged # females 18-49 215 Bangakhi bantfwana sebabonkhe labasukela ku 0 # males kuya ku 5 labahlala kulelo nalelo dladla Total Number of Children in Each Household # females Aged 0-5 215a Bangakhi bantfwana sebabonkhe labasukela ku 6 # males kuya ku 17 labahlala kulelo nalelo dladla Total Number of Children in Each Household # females Aged 6-17 216 Kulabo labaneminyaka lengu 6 kuya ku 17 # males bangakhi labasesikolweni. Of those aged 6-17, how many are currently # females attending school 217 Kulaba labadzala labaneminyaka lengu 60 kuya etulu bangakhi labafelwe madvodza noma bafati, labakhubatekile, labagulako, nalabo # males lesebagule lokungenani tinyanga letintsatfu kulomnyaka. Of those aged 60+ in this homestead, how many are widowed/widowers, are living with disabilities, or are chronically ill, # females having been chronically ill for at least 3 months over the past 12 months 218 Kulaba labadzala labaneminyaka lengu 50 kuya ku 59 bangakhi labafelwe madvodza noma bafati, labakhubatekile, labagulako, # males nalabo lesebagule lokungenani tinyanga letintsatfu kulomnyaka. Of those aged 50-59 in this homestead, how many are widowed/widowers, are living with disabilities, or are chronically ill, # females having been chronically ill for at least 3 months over the past 12 months 219 Kulaba labadzala labaneminyaka lengu 18 kuya ku 49 bangakhi labafelwe madvodza noma bafati, labakhubatekile, labagulako, # males nalabo lesebagule lokungenani tinyanga letintsatfu kulomnyaka. Of those aged18-49 in this homestead, how many are widowed/widowers, are living with disabilities, or are chronically ill, # females having been chronically ill for at least 3 months over the past 12 months - 46 - MODULE 3: HOMESTEAD ORPHAN STATUS A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V Time in HH Same/Other Care Dying Caregiver # Household Step-Child household # Families Education Disability Other HH How long as orphan Caregiver Caregiver Caregiver Orphan # [If �1� Fostered, Children Adopted If Other, Healthy Related Sibling Sibling Side of Family Before Where to N] Parent In HH Type Age Age Sex in # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a Luhlobo lwentsandzane Type of Orphan 1 = maternal 2 = paternal 3 = double b Bulili bakhe Sex of Orphan 1 = male 2 = female c Umnyaka wakhe Age of Orphan (can only be aged 0-17) (if child is < 1 year old, enter ‘0’ for age) d Wakubo leta naye Sibling came to this household 1 = yes 2 = no 3 = no siblings 4 = not applicable e Wakubo lowaya kulelinye lidladla Sibling sent to another HH 1 = yes 2 = no 3 = no siblings f Kukhona lokwasayinwa ekunakekeleni lomntfwana Foster/Adoption Status 1 = fostered 2 = adopted 3 = neither/no formal procedure g Ngumntfwana wababe make lamkhandza noma make weta naye Step Child 1 = step child to mother 2 = step child to father 3 = not applicable h Ukhubatekile emtimbeni noma engcondvweni Physical or mental disability 1=no; 2=yes – mental; 3=yes-physical: blind; 4=yes-physical: deaf/dumb; 5=yes-physica: other i Nihlobene ngekwengati yini Biologically related to the caregiver 1 = yes 2 = no 3 = not applicable if the child is also the caregiver in a CHILD HEADED household j Uhlala khabomake noma khabobabe Orphan living with mother’s side or father’s side of family 1 = mother’s side 2 = father’s side 3 = neither - non-relative k Mingakhi imindeni leletse bantfwana lakhaya Total # of different ‘sending’ families # of families multiple orphans have come from [Enum: only write in blank cell] l Bekamnakekela yini umtali wakhe nakasagula Care for dying parent 1 = yes 2 = no 3 = DK 4 = not applicable m Sikhatsi lasasihleti kulelidladla Length of time in household (in years; if less than one year, indicate 1) n Uke wahlala yini kulelidladla phambilini Lived in household before 1 = yes 2 = no 3 = not applicable o Nangabe ake, sikhatsi lesinganani ahlala njengemntfwana lolahlekelwe batali If yes, how long Time in HH as an orphan (in years; if less than one year, indicate ‘1’) p Ubuya emmangweni munye nani yini Same community 1 = same community 2 = other community q Uyini lommango If other community 1 = urban to rural 2 = rural to urban 3 = urban to urban 4 = rural to rural r Usesimeni lesinjani semphilo lomnakekeli Caregiver healthy or infirm 1 = healthy 2 = sickly 3 = infirm/bedridden s Umnyaka wemnakekeli Age of caregiver 1 = < 18 2 = 18-49 3 = 50-59 4 = 60 or older t Ufundze wagcinaphi umnakekeli Education of caregiver 1 = none 2 = Primary(Gr 1-7) 3 = Secon(Form 1-3) 4 = High (Form 4-5) 5 = Tertiary 6 = Non formal u Linani lebantfwana labanakekelako Total # of children (includes non-orphans AND orphans) Enter ‘0’ if the child is also the caregiver in a CHILD HEADED household. v Kuliphi lidladla Household # Which household does the child live in [Refer to household number in module 2] - 47 - MODULE 4: EMPLOYMENT, INCOME, ASSETS & LOSS, NEEDS Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 401 Mangakhi emalunga alakhaya, lahlala If ‘0’, khona langenisa imali. (lokungenani _____________________ skip to tinyanga letisitfupha kulomnyaka [Enum: 0 is a valid value] 402 lowengcile) How many homestead members, living here, of all ages, currently earn cash income? By cash income, we mean work for pay at least 6 months over the past 12. 401a [If anyone earning cash income] If ‘0’, Kulaba labangenisa imali bangakhi _____________________ skip to labangenisa imali njalonjalo [Enum: 0 is a valid value] 402] (lokungenani kane kulomnyaka lowengcile) Of these, how many contribute cash income on a regular basis? By regular, we mean at least four times over the past year. 401b [If anyone earning cash income] If ‘0’, Kulaba, bangakhi labaneminyaka lesukela _____________________ skip to ku 5 kuya ku 14? [Enum: 0 is a valid value] 402] Of these, how many are aged 5-14? 401c [If any 5-14s earning cash income]Kulaba, bangakhi _____________________ labaneminyaka lesukela ku 5 kuya ku 14 [Enum: 0 is a valid value] labamakethako kunome nguluphi luhlobo? Of these, how many aged 5-14 are working in a street enterprise of any type? 401d [If any 5-14s earning cash income]Kulaba, bangakhi _____________________ labaneminyaka lesukela ku 5 kuya ku 14 [Enum: 0 is a valid value] labasebenta imsebenti lengaba yingoti, ibalimate engcondvweni noma emtimbeni? Of these, how many aged 5-14 are working in a type of paid labour that is dangerous, or potentially dangerous? By dangerous, I mean an activity that could harm them physically or mentally. 402 Kukhona yini longahlali lakhaya loye Yes (multiple household homestead) 1 402a atfumele imali, kudla noma lokunye Yes (single household homestead) 2 404 kwekusita lakhaya lokungenani kane No 3 403 ngemnyaka? Does anyone living away from this homestead regularly contribute cash income (remittances), food or other resources to this homestead? By regular, I mean at least four times a year over the past year? 402a [If regular remittances or yes – shared amongst all households 1 404 resources and the homestead has no - only main household benefits 2 404 multiple households.][Enum:See no – only a single HH other than main one benefits 3 404 Q107 page 4] Kukhona yini kugiyelana no – more than one HH benefits 4 404 kuleto tintfo letitfolakala kulamadladla? Are these contributions shared across households in the homestead? 403 [If no household members 1-2 years 1 403a earning cash income and no 3-4 years 2 403a remittances]Semingakhi iminyaka 3 403a 5+ years kwagcina kutsi kube nalotfumela imali, 4 404 never kudla noma lolunye lusito njalonjalo? How many years ago did anyone contribute cash, food or other resources to this household on a regular basis? - 48 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 403a [If cash income stopped in 403] Contributor passed away 1 Yini tizatfu letenta kutsi ayekele kusita Contributor lost his/her job 2 lakhaya? He/she got married 3 Why did the contributions stop? [tick Illness 4 up to 3 responses] 5 Do not know Other (specify) __________ __________________ 404 Kulenyanga lendlulile benisebentisa bush/fence/other outdoors 1 luhlobo luni lwendlu lencane lakhaya? bucket 2 Over the past month, what has been your unimproved pit latrine 3 homestead’s primary means of human improved pit latrine 4 waste disposal? neighbour’s/public pit latrine 5 flush toilet/flush latrine 6 neighbour’s flush toilet 7 405 Kulomnyaka lowengcile ngabe emanti in-house plumbing 1 ekunatsa beniwatfolaphi? tap in yard 2 Over the past year, what has been your neighbour’s tap 3 homestead’s primary source of drinking community waterpoint 4 water? capped well/protected well 5 protected spring 6 rainwater 7 unprotected dug well 8 unprotected spring 9 tanker truck/cart 10 surface water (river, stream, other) 11 other (specify) ______________________ 12 406 Kukhona yini lakhaya lonendzawo yes - agriculture 1 406a yekulima? yes - grazing 2 406a Does anyone in this homestead have yes - home garden 3 406a access to agricultural fields? [tick up to all no 4 407 3 yes responses] do not know/not certain 5 407 406a [If yes to 406]Kulomnyaka yes 1 407 lowengcile, ngabe nikhonile yini no 2 406b kukhichita sivuno lesenele kondla do not know/not certain 3 407 lelikhaya kulamasimu? Over the past year, have you been able to produce enough food for the homestead’s consumption on this land? 406b [If no to 406a] Yini lokubangele shortage of labour 1 kutsi ningakhoni kukhichita kudla shortage of implements 2 lokwanele? poor rainfall 3 Why have you been unable to produce shortage of seed 4 enough food for the homestead’s shortage of fertilisers 5 consumption? [Tick up to 3 shortage of pestcides 6 responses] 7 shortage of land 8 disputes over land 9 natural disasters other (specify) ______________________ 406c [If yes to 406]Ninciphisile yini yes 1 emasimu enu, noma nashintja tilimo kuya no 2 kuleto letingadzingi umsebenti lomyenti do not know/not certain 3 netimali nobe ke nashintja indlela lebenilima ngayo ngenca yekweswela timali netandla tekusita? Have you reduced the amount of land cultivated, changed the crop to one that requires less labour, or reduced labour or other inputs due to inadequate labour or funds? - 49 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 407 [If any children aged 0-4] Kubantfwana labaneminyaka lesukela eminyakeni lemine kuya phansi bangakhi _________ # registered births labanetitifiketi tekutalwa noma labatibhalisela kanjalo nalabangazange babhalise. _________ # not registered births Of those 0-4, how many have birth certificates/have had their births registered and how many have not? 408 Eminyakeni lendlulile ngabe kukhona yini yes 1 408a kugula noma kushona kwemuntfu no 2 409 lokukhinyabete lelikhaya endleleni lebelitiphilisa ngayo? In recent years, has increased ill health or the premature death of an adult homestead member undermined the ability of your homestead to cope with the socio-economic situation? 408a [If yes to 408] Emnyakeni yes 1 lowengcile ukhona yini loshonile no 2 lakhaya? Over the past year, has any homestead member passed away? 409 Emnyakeni lowengcile mingakhi imingcwabo lebekhona lakhaya ledzinge _______________________________ tindleko letiphuma lakhaya? [Enum: 0 is a valid value] Over the past year, how many funerals have taken place that have required a financial contribution from this homestead? 410 Emnyakeni lotsandza kwengca, ngabe yes 1 sidzingo sekunakekela labaphatsekile no 2 lakhaya sikhinyabetile yini indlela likhaya lelitiphilisa ngayo? In recent years, has the level of care members have had to give to others in this homestead increased to such an extent that it has undermined the ability of your homestead to cope with the socio- economic situation? 411 Emnyakeni lowengcile lelikhaya like yes 1 lahlaselwa yini somiso noma lilunga no 2 lalahlekelwa ngumsebenti, lokutsikamete simo semnotfo walakhaya? Overall, over the past year, has this homestead suffered from any major shocks, such as drought or job loss, other than the above loss of homestead member or rising caregiving burden that affected the economic status of the homestead? 412 Lelikhaya libhalisiwe yini njengelikhaya yes 1 412a lelidzinga lusito? no 2 412b Is this homestead registered as a do not know 3 413 homestead in need of support? 412a [If yes to 412] Kwaba yini sizatfu do not know [circle by itself] 1 sekutsi nikhetfwe? we qualify for selection 2 Why were you selected? other(specify):_____________________ - 50 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 412b [If NO to 412] Kwaba yini sizatfu do not know [circle by itself] 1 sekutsi ningakhetfwa? we have no information about selection process 2 Why were you not selected? [Circle up we were not present during registration 3 to 3 responses] we were overlooked by selection team 4 we do not qualify for selection 5 other (specify)________________________________ 413 Ngabe akhona yini emadladla lakhaya yes 1 413a labhaliswe njenge madladla ladzinga no 2 414 lusito? no (single household homestead) 3 414 Are any of the households in this do not know 4 414 homestead registered as a household in need? 413a [If yes to 413] Kukhona yini yes 1 kulamadladla latfola lusito, lokungenani no 2 kane kuletimnyaka londlulile? Have any do not know 3 of these households received support regularly over the past year? By ‘regularly’, we mean at least four times. 414 Ukhona yini lakhaya lonaloku lokulandzelako? Does anyone in this homestead own any of the following 414a Imfuyo yes 1 any farm animals no 2 do not know 3 414b Lonelibhuku lasebhange? yes 1 hold a bank account no 2 do not know 3 414c Lone moto, Sigulumba, sidududu yes 1 own a motorised vehicle of any type no 2 do not know 3 414d Lonelibhayisikili yes 1 own a bicycle no 2 do not know 3 415 Ngicela ungibekisele linani lelingena no reliable income/< E250 per month 1 lakhaya lingeniswa malunga lokufaka E251-500 2 ekhatsi lokutfunyelwa ngulabangahlali E501-1000 3 lakhaya nelinani lalokukhicitwako? E1001-2000 4 Could you please estimate the average E2001+ 5 monthly income of all members of this homestead, including remittances from outside, and the value of own production. E ___________________________ [Enum: Get the total income of all homestead members with an # income, get a value for in-kind income, and divide the total by the number of all homestead members. Show the calculation] 415a [If more than one household in Household 1 (main homestead) the homestead.See Q107 page 4] Phambilini, utsite emadladla alakhaya ________________________% angu........... Ngicela ungibekiselekutsi lilinye lidladla liba nencenye lenganani ekunbeniseni kudla? Household 2 You noted earlier that you have ____ households in this homestead. If you had ________________________% to provide a breakdown of the monthly income of each of these households, what Household 3 proportion would you say applies for each household? ________________________% [Enum and Supervisor: check proportions when finished to ensure that it approximates 100%] - 51 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 416 [For rural homesteads only. See none 1 418 Q17 page 2] Nincike kanganani quarter 2 416a kulenikutfunyelelwa ngulaba sebenta half 3 416a edolobheni balakhaya.( Kungaba yimali > half 4 416a nobe lokunye). Anikanciki sanhlobo, nincike ngencenye, ngehhafu noma ngetulu kwehhafu yemholo wenu? To what extent, if at all, do you rely on remittances (in cash and in kind) from urban households/household members? Do you rely on such remittances for none of your income, a quarter of your income, half or your income, or more than half of your income? 416a [For rural homesteads only. See none 1 418 Q17 page 2] Eminyakeni lesihlanu quarter 2 416b lengcile, benincike kanganani half 3 416b kulenikutfunyelelwa ngulaba sebenta > half 4 416b edolobheni? (kungaba yimali noma lokunye) Beningakanciki sanhlobo, benincike ngencenye, benincike ngehhafu noma ngetulu kwehhafu yemholo wenu? Five years ago, how reliant were you on remittances (in cash and in kind) from urban households/household members? Did you rely on such remittance for none of your income, a quarter of your income, half of your income, or more than half of your income? 416b Ingabe lelikhaya likhinyabeteke very severe 1 kanganani ngekulahlekelwa ngulolusito? somewhat severe 2 Kabi kakhulu, kakhulu, akukabi kubi not very severe 3 kakhulu noma bekungakubi sanhlobo? not at all severe 4 How severe would you say the loss of this do not know/cannot say 5 support stream has been on your not applicable (416a has lower value than 416) 6 homestead? Would you say it has been ‘very severe’, ‘somewhat severe’, ‘not very severe’, or ‘not at all severe’. 417 [For urban homesteads only See none 1 418 Q17 page 2] Nincike kanganani quarter 2 417a kulenikutfunyelelwa ngulabasemakhaya half 3 417a lenihlobene nabo.( Kungaba yimali nobe 4 417a > half lokunye). Anikanciki sanhlobo, nincike ngencenye, ngehhafu noma ngetulu kwehhafu yemholo wenu? To what extent, if at all, do you rely on remittances (in cash and in kind) from rural households/household members? Do you rely on such remittances for none or your income, a quarter of your income, half or your income, or more than half of your income? - 52 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 417a [For urban homesteads only See none 1 418 Q17 page 2] Eminyakeni lesihlanu quarter 2 417b lengcile, benincike kanganani half 3 417b kulenikutfunyelelwa ngulabasemakhaya > half 4 417b lenihlobene nabo? (kungaba yimali noma lokunye) Beningakanciki sanhlobo, benincike ngencenye, benincike ngehhafu noma ngetulu kwehhafu yemholo wenu? Five years ago, how reliant were you on remittances (in cash and in kind) from rural households/household members? Did you rely on such remittance for none of your income, a quarter of your income, half of your income, or more than half of your income? 417b Ingabe lelikhaya likhinyabeteke very severe 1 kanganani ngekulahlekelwa ngulolusito? somewhat severe 2 Kabi kakhulu, kakhulu, akukabi kubi not very severe 3 kakhulu noma bekungakubi sanhlobo? not at all severe 4 How severe would you say the loss of this do not know/cannot say 5 support stream has been on your 6 not applicable (417a has lower value than 417) homestead? Would you say it has been ‘very severe’, ‘somewhat severe’, ‘not very severe’, or ‘not at all severe’. 418 Ingabe ukhona yini lapha ekhaya loke watfola naku lokulandzelako? At any time, has anyone in this homestead received any of the following? 418a Imbasha yebantfu labadzala old age grant yes (E__________________)/month 1 418ai no 2 418b # 418ai [If ever received an old age yes 1 grant] Ngabe usayitfola yini? no 2 Is this person/are these persons currently do not know 3 receiving such a grant? 418b Lusito loluvela ku hulumende public assistance grant yes (E__________________)/month 1 418bi no 2 418c # 418bi [If ever received a public yes 1 assistance grant] Ingabe usalitfola no 2 yini? do not know 3 Is this person/are these persons currently receiving such a grant? 418c Lusito lwalabakhubatekile disability grant yes (E__________________)/month 1 418ci no 2 418d # 418ci [If ever received a disability yes 1 grant] Ngabe usalutfola yini? no 2 Is this person/are these persons currently do not know 3 receiving such a grant? 418d Ingabe ukhona yini loke watfola lusito kuloluhlelo lwe Young Heroes. yes (E__________________)/month 1 Has anyone in this homestead received no 2 any support from the Young Heroes # Project? - 53 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 419 Ingabe ukhona yini lakhaya lodzinge kwenta naku lokulandzelako: Has anyone in this homestead needed to engage in any of the following strategies: 419a Kulomnyaka lowengcile, lodzinge yes 1 419ai kushinjta kakhulu kudla lakudlako no 2 419b Over the past year, extreme change in diet 419ai Ngumaphi emadladla latsikametekile Household 1 (homestead) 1 kulolushintjo lwekudlla? Household 2 2 Which households in the homestead have Household 3 3 been affected by this extreme change in diet? [Mark all that apply] 419aii Ngumaphi emalunga kuladladla homestead head 1 i latsikametekile kulolushintjo? spouse of homestead head (household 1) 2 Which household members in these spouse of homestead head (household 2) 3 households have been affected by this spouse of homestead head (household 3) 4 extreme change in diet [Mark all that brother of homestead head 5 apply] sister of homestead head 6 aunt of homestead head 7 uncle of homestead head 8 non-relative to homestead head (but related to other household member) 9 non-relative of homestead head (and non-relative to any others) 10 419b Kulomnyaka lowengcile lodzinge kutsi yes 1 ahambe kulendzawo no 2 Over the past year, migration out of the area 419c Kulomnyaka lowengcile lodzinge yes 1 kuboleka imali no 2 Over the past year, accessed credit/loans 419d Kulomnyaka lowengcile lodzinge kutsi yes 1 atsengise lokumcoka kuye njenge, mhlaba, no 2 imoto nalokunye. Over the past year, sold major assets 419e Kulomnyaka lowengcile, kuke kwaba yes 1 khona yini lushintjo ekusebenteni no 2 kwetindleko talakhaya Over the past year, major changes in homestead expenditure patterns 419f Kulomnyaka lowengcile, kuke kwaba yes 1 khona yini lushintjo endleleni no 2 yekungenisa imali. Over the past year, major changes in income strategies 420 Kulomnyaka lowengcile, ukhona yini yes 1 umntfwana lekudzingeke kutsi ayekele no 2 sikolwa ngenca yekweswela imali. Over the past year, has a child had to drop out of school due to a lack of funds? 421 Kulomnyaka lowengcile lelikhaya like yes 1 lalahlekelwa yini yincenye lenkhulu no 2 lebekuyindlela yekutiphilisa Over the past year, has this homestead lost a major source of livelihood? 422 Kuleminyaka lelishumi leyengcile ngabe yes 1 ukhona yini loke walahlekelwa lifa no 2 ngenca yetihlobo ndlela tsite. Over the past ten years, has anyone in this homestead lost their inheritance from relatives for any reason? - 54 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 423 Bakhona yini bafelokati lakhaya? yes 423a Are there any widowed women living in no mod 5 this homestead? 423a [If yes to 423]Kulaba labakhona, ngabe bangakhi labatsatselwe ngenkhani ________________________ umhlaba wekulima noma likhaya? [Enum: 0 is a valid value] How many, if any, of these widowed women were forceably dispossessed of any land, whether the land was for agricultural purposes, was the main residence, etc? MODULE 5: ACCESS TO SERVICES AND TARGETING Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. Ngicela ungatise tintfo letike tatfolwa malunga emndeni mahhala emnyakeni lowengcile etinhlanganweni tangephandle Please indicate which of the following services, if any, have been received by any homestead members ever, and over the past year from outside agencies for free 501 Lusito etimalini tesikolo nalabaludzingako School fee support and targeting 501a Lusito etimalini tesikolwa yes 1 501b School fee support – ever no 2 501e 501b [If yes to 501a] Lusito etimalini tesikolo kulomnyaka lophelile yes (E__________________)/annum 1 501c School fee support - past year [Enum: no 2 501e Estimate total value of support # for all homestead members for the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 501c [If yes to 501b] Ngubani lowatfola orphan 1 lolusito? other vulnerable child 2 School fee support - past year - who other child 3 received (person 1) 501d Ngubani lomunye lowatfola lolusito? orphan 1 School fee support - past year - who other vulnerable child 2 received (person 2) other child 3 501e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga? other vulnerable child 2 School fee support - past year - who did other child 3 NOT receive but needed it 1 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 501f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 School fee support - past year - who did other child 3 NOT receive but needed it 2 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 501g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 School fee support - past year - who did other child 3 NOT receive but needed it 3 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 501h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 School fee support - past year - who did other child 3 NOT receive but needed it 4 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 502 Lusito ngetintfo tesikolwa nalabaludzingako School materials support and targeting - 55 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 502a Lelikhaya lake lalutfola yini lusito yes 1 502b ngetintfo tesikolwa? no 2 502f Has this homestead ever received school materials support – ever? 502b [If yes to 502a] Kwaba lusito lwani? school uniform and/or shoes 1 What material support has the homestead stationary 2 received? [tick up to 3 books 3 responses] other 4 502c [If yes to 502a] Lusito ngetintfo tesikolwa emnyakeni lophelile yes (E__________________)/annum 1 502d School materials support - past year no 2 502f [Enum: Estimate total value of # support for all homestead members for the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 502d [If yes to 502c] Lwatfolwa ngubani? orphan 1 School materials support - past year - who other vulnerable child 2 received (person 1) other child 3 502e Lwatfolwa ngubani lomunye? orphan 1 School materials support - past year - who other vulnerable child 2 received (person 2) other child 3 502f Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga School materials support - past other vulnerable child 2 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 1 other child 3 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 502g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 School materials support - past year - who other child 3 did NOT receive but needed it 2 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 502h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 School materials support - past year - who other child 3 did NOT receive but needed it 3 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 502i Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 School materials support - past year - who other child 3 did NOT receive but needed it 4 (unable to attend school because of lack of support) 503 Lusito ngetemfundvo lengekho esikolweni kungaba nguSebenta Support for non-formal education (Sebenta classes) 503a Lusito ngemfundvo lengekho esikolweni yes 1 503b (Sebenta) no 2 503e Support for non-formal education - ever 503b [If yes to 503a] Lusito emnyakeni lophelile ngemfundvo lengekho esikolweni yes (E__________________)/annum 1 503c (Sebenta) no 2 503e Support for non-formal education - past # year [Enum: Estimate total value of support for all homestead members for the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 503c [If yes to 503b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Support for non-formal education - past other child 3 year - who received 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 - 56 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 503d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Support for non-formal education - past other vulnerable child 2 year - who received 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 503e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga Support for non-formal other vulnerable child 2 education - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 1 (tried to secure non- chronically ill adult 15-49 4 formal education enrolment but unable to bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 do so because of lack of funds to do so/lack disabled adult 6 of support to do so) 503f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Support for non-formal education - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (tried to secure non-formal education bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 enrolment but unable to do so because of disabled adult 6 lack of funds to do so/lack of support to do so) 503g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Support for non-formal education - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (tried to secure non-formal education bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 enrolment but unable to do so because of disabled adult 6 lack of funds to do so/lack of support to do so) 503h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Support for non-formal education - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 4 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (tried to secure non-formal education bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 enrolment but unable to do so because of disabled adult 6 lack of funds to do so/lack of support to do so) 504 Lusito ngemsebenti wetandla Support for vocational education 504a Lusito ngemsebenti wetandla yes 1 504b Support for vocational education - ever no 2 504e 504b [If yes to 504a] Lusito emnyakeni lophelile ngemsebenti wetandla 504c Support for vocational education - past year yes (E__________________)/annum 1 504e [Enum: Estimate total value of no 2 support for all homestead # members for the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 504c [If yes to 504b] Ngubani lowalutfola orphan (aged 15-17) 1 Support for vocational education - past year other vulnerable child (aged 15-17) 2 - who received 1 other child (aged 15-17) 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 504d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan (aged 15-17) 1 Support for vocational education - past year other vulnerable child (aged 15-17) 2 - who received 2 other child (aged 15-17) 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 - 57 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 504e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan (aged 15-17) 1 aludzinga Support for vocational education other vulnerable child (aged 15-17) 2 - past year - who did NOT receive but other child (aged 15-17) 3 needed it 1 (tried to secure vocational chronically ill adult 15-49 4 education enrolment but unable to do so bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 because of lack of funds to do so/lack of disabled adult 6 support to do so) 504f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan (aged 15-17) 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child (aged 15-17) 2 Support for vocational education - past year other child (aged 15-17) 3 - who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (tried to secure vocational education bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 enrolment but unable to do so because of disabled adult 6 lack of funds to do so/lack of support to do so) 504g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan (aged 15-17) 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child (aged 15-17) 2 Support for vocational education - past year other child (aged 15-17) 3 - who did NOT receive but needed it 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (tried to secure vocational education bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 enrolment but unable to do so because of disabled adult 6 lack of funds to do so/lack of support to do so) 504h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan (aged 15-17) 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child (aged 15-17) 2 Support for vocational education - past year other child (aged 15-17) 3 - who did NOT receive but needed it 4 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (tried to secure vocational education bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 enrolment but unable to do so because of disabled adult 6 lack of funds to do so/lack of support to do so) 505 Lusito ngekudla lakhaya Food Support to Homestead 505a Lusito ngekudla lakhaya yes 1 505b Food support – ever no 2 505e 505b [If yes to 505a] Lusito ngekudla lakhaya emnyakeni lophelile 505c yes (E__________________)/annum 1 Food support - past year [Enum: 505e Estimate total value of support no 2 for all homestead members for # the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 505c [If yes to 505b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who received other child 3 (person 1) chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 505d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Food support - past year - who received other vulnerable child 2 (person 2) other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 505e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 1 (tried to secure food chronically ill adult 15-49 4 support but unable to do so because of lack bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 of support to do so) disabled adult 6 - 58 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 505f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 2 (tried to secure food chronically ill adult 15-49 4 support but unable to do so because of lack bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 of support to do so) disabled adult 6 505g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 3 (tried to secure food chronically ill adult 15-49 4 support but unable to do so because of lack bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 of support to do so) disabled adult 6 505h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 4 (tried to secure food chronically ill adult 15-49 4 support but unable to do so because of lack bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 of support to do so) disabled adult 6 506 Lusito ngekudla esikolweni Food Support to Child/ren at School 506a Lusito ngekudla esikolweni yes 1 506b Food support – ever no 2 506e 506b [If yes to 506a] Lusito ngekudla esikolweni emnyakeni lophelile 506c yes (E__________________)/annum 1 Food support - past year [Enum: 506e Estimate total value of support no 2 for all homestead members for # the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 506c [If yes to 506b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who received other child 3 (person 1) 506d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Food support - past year - who received other vulnerable child 2 (person 2) other child 3 506e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 1 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 506f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 2 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 506g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 3 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 506h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 4 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) - 59 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 507 Lusito ngekudla emadladleni asemmangweni Food Support to Child/ren at Public Feeding Place 507a Lusito ngekudla emadladleni yes 1 507b asemmangweni no 2 507e Food support – ever 507b [If yes to 507a] Lusito ngekudla yes 1 507c emadladleni asemmangweni emnyakeni no 2 507e lophelile # Food support - past year [Enum: Record # of recipients.] 507c [If yes to 507b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who received other child 3 (person 1) 507d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Food support - past year - who received other vulnerable child 2 (person 2) other child 3 507e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 1 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 507f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 2 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 507g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 3 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 507h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Food support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 4 (tried to secure food support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 508 Lusito ngetekulima kwanoma nguluphi luhlobo Provision of Agricultural Support (any types) 508a Lusito ngetekulima kwanoma nguluphi yes 1 508b luhlobo no 2 508c Agricultural support – ever 508b [If yes to 508a] Lusito netekulima kwanoma nguluphi luhlobo emnyakeni 509 yes (E__________________)/annum 1 lophelile 508c no 2 Agricultural support - past year [Enum: Estimate total value of support # for all homestead members for the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 508c Bakhona labangalutfolanga lolusito yes 1 kodvwa baludzinga? no 2 Agricultural support - past year - did NOT receive but needed it (tried to secure agricultural support but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) - 60 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 509 Lusito ngekweluleka labaphatseke kabi emoyeni nalabetfukile Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related Support 509a Lusito ngekwluleka labaphatseke kabi yes 1 509b emoyeni nalabetfukile no 2 509e Grief /Trauma Counselling/Related support – ever 509b [If yes to 509a] Lusito ngekweluleka yes 1 509c labaphatseke kabi emoyeni nalabetfukile no 2 509e emnyakeni lophelile # Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related support - past year 509c [If yes to 509b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related support other child 3 - past year - who received 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 509d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related support other vulnerable child 2 - past year - who received 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 509e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 509f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 509g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Grief /Trauma Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 509h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Grief /Trauma Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 4 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 510 Lusito ngetekweluleka emphefumlweni Other Emotional Counselling/Related Support 510a Lusito ngetekweluleka emphefumlweni yes 1 510b Other Emotional Counselling/Related no 2 510e support – ever 510b [If yes to 510a] Lusito yes 1 510c ngetekweluleka emphefumlweni emnyakeni no 2 510e lophelile Other Emotional Counselling/Related # support - past year - 61 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 510c [If yes to 510b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related other child 3 support - past year - who received 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 510d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Other Emotional Counselling/Related other vulnerable child 2 support - past year - who received 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 510e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 510f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 510g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 510h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related - past other child 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 4 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for emotional bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 counselling/related support but unable to disabled adult 6 do so because of lack of support to do so) 511 Lusito ekwelulekeni labasebentisa tidzakamiva Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related 511a Lusito ekwelulekeni labasebentisa yes 1 511b tidzakamiva no 2 511e Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related support – ever 511b [If yes to 511a] Lusito ekwelulekeni yes 1 511c labasebentisa tidzakamiva emnyakeni no 2 511e lophelile # Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related support - past year 511c [If yes to 511b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related other child 3 support - past year - who received 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 511d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related other vulnerable child 2 support - past year - who received 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 - 62 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 511e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related - other child 3 past year - who did NOT receive but chronically ill adult 15-49 4 needed it 1 (perceived a need for substance bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 use/abuse counselling/related support but disabled adult 6 unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 511f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related - other child 3 past year - who did NOT receive but chronically ill adult 15-49 4 needed it 2 (perceived a need for substance bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 use/abuse counselling/related support but disabled adult 6 unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 511g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related - other child 3 past year - who did NOT receive but chronically ill adult 15-49 4 needed it 3 (perceived a need for substance bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 use/abuse counselling/related support but disabled adult 6 unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 511h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Substance Use/Abuse Counselling/Related - other child 3 past year - who did NOT receive but chronically ill adult 15-49 4 needed it 4 (perceived a need for substance bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 use/abuse counselling/related support but disabled adult 6 unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 512 Lusito lwekunakekela labagulela emakhaya Home-Based Care for the Chronically Ill 512a Lusito lwekunakekela labagulela yes 1 512b emakhaya no 2 512e Home-based care for the chronically ill – ever 512b [If yes to 512a]Lusito lwekunakekela yes 1 512c labagulela emakhaya emnyakeni lophelile no 2 512e Home-based care for the chronically ill - past year # 512c [If yes to 512b] Ngubani chronically ill child 1 lowalutfola? chronically ill adult 2 Home-based care for the chronically ill - disabled person 3 past year - who received 1 512d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? chronically ill child 1 Home-based care for the chronically ill - chronically ill adult 2 past year - who received 2 disabled person 3 5 512e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa chronically ill child 1 aludzinga chronically ill adult 2 Home-based care for the chronically ill - disabled person 3 past year - who did NOT receive but needed it 1 (perceived a need for home- based care services for the chronically ill but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) - 63 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 512f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito chronically ill child 1 kodvwa aludzinga chronically ill adult 2 Home-based care for the chronically ill - disabled person 3 past year - who did NOT receive but needed it 2 (perceived a need for home- based care services for the chronically ill but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 512g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito chronically ill child 1 kodvwa aludzinga chronically ill adult 2 Home-based care for the chronically ill - disabled person 3 past year - who did NOT receive but needed it 3 (perceived a need for home- based care services for the chronically ill but unable to do so because of lack of support to do so) 513 Lusito ngakutemtsetfo Legal Support (any type) 513a Lusito ngakutemtsetfo yes 1 513b Legal support – ever no 2 513f 513b [If yes to 513a] Lusito 513c ngakutemtsetfo emnyakeni lophelile yes (E__________________)/annum 1 513f Legal support - past year [Enum: no 2 Estimate total value of support for all homestead members for # the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 513c [If yes to 512b] Kwakulusito luni? maintenance 1 Legal support – type land rights 2 abuse/violence 3 inheritance 4 exploitation/related 5 other (specify): _________________________ 513d Ngubani lowalutfola? orphan 1 Legal support - past year - who received 1 other vulnerable child 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 513e Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Legal support - past year - who received 2 other vulnerable child 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 513f Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Legal support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 1 (perceived a need for chronically ill adult 15-49 4 legal support but unable to do so because of bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 lack of support to do so/lack of knowledge disabled adult 6 of support/lack of availability of support) 513g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Legal support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 2 (perceived a need for chronically ill adult 15-49 4 legal support but unable to do so because of bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 lack of support to do so/lack of knowledge disabled adult 6 of support/lack of availability of support) - 64 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 513h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Legal support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 3 (perceived a need for chronically ill adult 15-49 4 legal support but unable to do so because of bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 lack of support to do so/lack of knowledge disabled adult 6 of support/lack of availability of support) 513i Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Legal support - past year - who did NOT other child 3 receive but needed it 4 (perceived a need for chronically ill adult 15-49 4 legal support but unable to do so because of bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 lack of support to do so/lack of knowledge disabled adult 6 of support/lack of availability of support) 514 Kungena kwemali Income generation 514a Lusito ngekungena kwemali yes 1 514b Income generation support – ever no 2 514e 514b Lusito ngekungena kwemali emnyakeni 514c lophelile yes (E__________________)/annum 1 514e Income generation support - past year no 2 [Enum: Estimate total value of # support for all homestead members for the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 514c [If yes to 514b] Ngubani orphan 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child 2 Income generation support - past year - other child 3 who received 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 514d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Income generation support - past year - other vulnerable child 2 who received 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 514e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan aged 15-17 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 Income generation support - past year - other child aged 15-17 3 who did NOT receive but needed it 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for income generation bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 support but unable to do so because of lack disabled adult 6 of support to do so/lack of knowledge of support/lack of availability of support) 514f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan aged 15-17 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 Income generation support - past year - other child aged 15-17 3 who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for income generation bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 support but unable to do so because of lack disabled adult 6 of support to do so/lack of knowledge of support/lack of availability of support) 514g Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan aged 15-17 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 Income generation support - past year - other child aged 15-17 3 who did NOT receive but needed it 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for income generation bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 support but unable to do so because of lack disabled adult 6 of support to do so/lack of knowledge of support/lack of availability of support) - 65 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 514h Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan aged 15-17 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 Income generation support - past year - other child aged 15-17 3 who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 (perceived a need for income generation bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 support but unable to do so because of lack disabled adult 6 of support to do so/lack of knowledge of support/lack of availability of support) 515 Lusito ngetindlu Housing 515a Lusito ngetindlu yes 1 515b Housing support - ever no 2 516 515b Lusito ngetindlu emnyakeni lophelile Housing support - past year [Enum: yes (E__________________)/annum 1 Estimate total value of support no 2 for all homestead members for # the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 516 Kubolekisana nasekutfutfukeni ngase timalini Micro-credit/development finance 516a Lusito ekubolekisaneni nesekutfutfukeni yes 1 516b ngase timalini no 2 516e Micro-credit/development finance - ever 516b [If yes to 516a] Lusito 516c ekubolekisaneni nesekutfutfukeni ngase yes (E__________________)/annum 1 516e timalini no 2 Micro-credit/development finance - past # year [Enum: Estimate total value of support for all homestead members for the past year and record # of recipients. If value unknown, leave blank] 516c [If yes to 516b] Ngubani orphan aged 15-17 1 lowalutfola? other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 Micro-credit/development finance - past other child aged 15-17 3 year - who received 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 516d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan aged 15-17 1 Micro-credit/development finance - past other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 year - who received 2 other child aged 15-17 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 516e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan aged 15-17 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 Micro-credit/development finance - past other child aged 15-17 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 516f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan aged 15-17 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child aged 15-17 2 Micro-credit/development finance - past other child aged 15-17 3 year - who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 bereaved vulnerable elderly 5 disabled adult 6 517 Lusito kutemphilo kulabo labanetifo letingalapheki labanemimnyaka lesuka ku o kuya ku 49 lwamahhala. Bangaba sesibhedlela noma lapho bangatfola imitsi khona. Medical services for the chronically ill aged 0-49 - treatment access (in hospital care and access to medication) for free 517a Lusito kutemphilo kulabo labanetifo yes 1 517b letingalapheki labanemimnyaka lesuka ku no 2 517e o kuya ku 49 lwamahhala Medical services for the chronically ill aged 0-49 – ever - 66 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 517b [If yes to 517a] Lusito kutemphilo kulabo labanetifo yes (E__________________)/annum 1 517c letingalapheki labanemimnyaka lesuka ku no 2 517e o kuya ku 49 lwamahhala emnyakeni # lophelile Medical services for the chronically ill aged 0-49 - past year 517c Ngubani lowalutfola? orphan 1 Medical services for the chronically ill aged other vulnerable child 2 0-49 - who received 1 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 disabled adult 5 517d Ngubani lomunye lowalutfola? orphan 1 Medical services for the chronically ill aged other vulnerable child 2 0-49 - who received 2 other child 3 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 disabled adult 5 517e Ngubani longalutfolanga lolusito kodvwa orphan 1 aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Medical services for the chronically ill aged other child 3 0-49 - who did NOT receive but needed it 1 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 disabled adult 5 517f Ngubani lomunye longalutfolanga lolusito orphan 1 kodvwa aludzinga other vulnerable child 2 Medical services for the chronically ill aged other child 3 0-49 - who did NOT receive but needed it 2 chronically ill adult 15-49 4 disabled adult 5 517g Ngabe lolusito lwalufaka lusito yes 1 517h ngemaphilisi ladzindzibalisa ligciwane le no 2 mod 6 HIV do not know 3 mod 6 Did these medical services include anti- retroviral therapy for HIV? 517h [If yes to 517g] Bangakhi lebebasebentisa lamaphilisi ____ # children emnyakeni londlulile, kubantfwana nalabadzala? ____ # adults How many were on treatment at least sometime over the past year, by adults and children? 517i [If yes to 517g] Kubantfwana < 1 year 1 labanatsa lamaphilisi ekudzindzibalisa 1-2 years 2 ligciwane, lomntfwana sewuwanatse > 2 to < 5 years 3 sikhatsi lesinganani? 5-17 years 4 How many years has the youngest child on ARVs been taking them? 517j [If yes to 517g] yes 1 Kukhona yini lakhaya lobekanatsa no 2 lamaphilisi lowabese uyayekela do not know 3 kuwasebentisa? Has any homestead member who had ever taken ARVs ever stopped taking them. [Enum: excludes no longer taking them due to death] 517k [If yes to 517j] Bangakhi labancane kanye nalabadzala ____ # children lebebanatsa lamaphilisi base bayawayekela? ____ # adults How many children and adults stopped taking the ARVs? 517l [If yes to 517j] Kulaba bangakhi labawayekeliswa kutsi ____ # children kulukhuni kuwatfola nekutsi akapheleli Of these, how many stopped taking the ____ # adults ARVs because of inadequate supply/difficult access? - 67 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 517m [If yes to 517j] Kulaba bangakhi labawayekeliswa kutsi ____ # children abanako kudla lokwanele? Of these, how many stopped taking the ____ # adults ARVs because of lack of food? 517n [If yes to 517j] Kulaba bangakhi labawayekeliswa kutsi ____ # children abita kakhulu (adulile) Of these, how many stopped taking the ____ # adults ARVs because of costs being too high? 517o [If yes to 517j] Kulaba bangakhi labawayekeliswa kutsi ____ # children ababangela lokunye kugula lokutsite noma abaphatsa kabi? ____ # adults Of these, how many stopped taking the ARVs because of side effects? 517p [If yes to 517j] Kulaba bangakhi labawayekeliswa kutsi ____ # children bativa sebaphilile? Of these, how many stopped taking the ____ # adults ARVs because they felt that they had recovered? MODULE 6: RELEVANCE, QUALITY, TIMELINESS, COMPREHENSIVENESS, AND TARGETING Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. Kulolusito lesesikhulume ngalo langenhla ngicela ungikalele kuts, lusezingeni lelinjani, luyahambelana yini netidzingo, lufika ngesikhatsi yini nekutsi lwanele yini? For each service mentioned above, please rate the overall quality of the service or services provided using the following scale: ‘very good quality’, ‘somewhat good quality’, ‘just acceptable quality’, ‘poor quality’, and ‘very poor quality’. If you cannot say, just indicate ‘do not know’. Thereafter, rate the relevance of the service or services provided using the following scale: ‘very relevant’, ‘somewhat relevant’, ‘not very relevant’, or ‘not at all relevant’. If you cannot say, just indicate ‘do not know’. Thereafter, rate the timeliness of the service or services provided using the following scale: ‘very timely’, ‘somewhat timely’, ‘not very timely’, or ‘not at all timely’. If you cannot say, just indicate ‘do not know’. Rate the comprehensiveness of the service or services provided in terms of the extent to which the services fully covered what was needed, partially covered, or did not cover using the following scale: ‘very comprehensive’, ‘somewhat comprehensive’, ‘not very comprehensive’, or ‘not at all comprehensive’. If you cannot say, just indicate ‘do not know’. If you have received multiple services, or more than one person had received services, please give us an ‘average’ of these services. [ENUM: FIRST ENSURE THAT SERVICE HAS BEEN RECIEVED BY COMPARING MODULE 5 TO THIS MODULE.IF A SERVICE HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED BY ANYONE IN THE HOMESTEAD, SKIP THE QUESTION AND LEAVE IT BLANK] 601a Tindleko tesikolwa tiyahambelana nesidzingo yini very relevant 1 school fees (relevance) somewhat relevant 2 not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 601b Tindleko tesikolwa tifika ngesikhatsi yini? very timely 1 school fees (timeliness) somewhat timely 2 not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 601c Tindleko tesikolwa tanele yini? very comprehensive 1 school fees (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 - 68 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 602a Tinfo tesikolwa tisezingeni lelikahle yini? very good quality 1 school materials (quality) somewhat good quality 2 just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 602b Tintfo tesikolwa tiyahambelana nesidzingo yini? very relevant 1 school materials (relevance) somewhat relevant 2 not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 602c Tintfo tesikolwa tifika ngesikhatsi yini? very timely 1 school materials (timeliness) somewhat timely 2 not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 602d Tintfo tesikolwa tanele yini? very comprehensive 1 school materials (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 603a Luhlelo lwemfundvo lengekho esikolweni very good quality 1 lusezingeni lelikahle yini? somewhat good quality 2 non-formal education (quality) just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 603b Luhlelo lwemfundvo lengekho esikolweni very relevant 1 luhambelana netidzingo yini? somewhat relevant 2 non-formal education (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 603c Luhlelo lwemfundvo lengekho esikolweni lufika very timely 1 ngesikhatsi yini? somewhat timely 2 non-formal education (timeliness) not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 603d Luhlelo lwemfundvo lengekho esikolweni lwanele very comprehensive 1 yini? somewhat comprehensive 2 non-formal education (comprehensiveness) not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 604a Imfundvo kutemakhono isezingeni lelikahle yini? very good quality 1 vocational education (quality) somewhat good quality 2 just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 604b Imfundvo kutemakhono iyahambelana yini very relevant 1 netidzingo? somewhat relevant 2 vocational education (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 604c Imfundvo kutemakhono ifika ngesikhatsi yini? very timely 1 vocational education (timeliness) somewhat timely 2 not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 - 69 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 604d Imfundvo kutemakhono beyanele yini? very comprehensive 1 vocational education (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 606a Lusito ngekudla emakhaya lusezingeni lelikahle very good quality 1 yini? somewhat good quality 2 food support to hometead(quality) just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 606b Lusito ngekudla emakhaya luyahambelana yini very relevant 1 netidzingo? somewhat relevant 2 food support to homestead (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 606c Lusito ngekudla emakhaya lufika ngesikhatsi very timely 1 yini? somewhat timely 2 food support to homestead (timeliness) not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 606d Lusito ngekudla emakhaya lwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 food support to homestead (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 607a Lusito ngekudla esikolweni lusezingeni lelikahle very good quality 1 yini? somewhat good quality 2 food support to child/ren at school (quality) just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 607b Lusito ngekudla esikolweni luyahambelana yini very relevant 1 netidzingo? somewhat relevant 2 food support to child/ren at school (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 607c Lusito ngekudla esikolweni lufika ngesikhatsi very timely 1 yini? somewhat timely 2 food support to child/ren at school (timeliness) not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 607d Lusito ngekudla esikolweni lwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 food support to child/ren at school somewhat comprehensive 2 (comprehensiveness) not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 608a Lusito ngekudla emadladleni lusezingeni very good quality 1 lelikahle yini? somewhat good quality 2 Food Support to Child/ren at Public Feeding Place just acceptable quality 3 (quality) poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 608b Lusito ngekudla emadladleni luyahambelana yini very relevant 1 netidzingo? somewhat relevant 2 Food Support to Child/ren at Public Feeding Place not very relevant 3 (relevance) not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 608c Lusito ngekudla emadladleni lufika ngesikhatsi very timely 1 yini? somewhat timely 2 Food Support to Child/ren at Public Feeding Place not very timely 3 (timeliness) not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 - 70 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 608d Lusito ngekudla emadladleni lwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 Food Support to Child/ren at Public Feeding Place somewhat comprehensive 2 (comprehensiveness) not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 609a Lusito ngetekulima lusezingeni lelikahle yini? very good quality 1 Agricultural Support (quality) somewhat good quality 2 just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 609b Lusito ngetekulima luyahambelana netidzingo very relevant 1 yini? somewhat relevant 2 Agricultural Support (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 609c Lusito ngetekulima lufika ngesikhatsi yini? very timely 1 Agricultural Support (timeliness) somewhat timely 2 not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 609d Lusito ngetekulima lwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 Agricultural Support (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 610a Lusito kululeka labo labahlukubetekile emoyeni very good quality 1 nekwetfuka lusezingeni lelikahle yini? somewhat good quality 2 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related support just acceptable quality 3 (quality) poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 610b Lusito kululeka labo labahlukubetekile emoyeni very relevant 1 nekwetfuka luyahambelana netidzingo yini? somewhat relevant 2 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related support not very relevant 3 (relevance) not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 610c Lusito kululeka labo labahlukubetekile emoyeni very timely 1 nekwetfuka lufika ngesikhatsi yini? somewhat timely 2 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related support not very timely 3 (timeliness) not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 610d Lusito kululeka labo labahlukubetekile emoyeni very comprehensive 1 nekwetfuka lwanele yini? somewhat comprehensive 2 Grief/Trauma Counselling/Related support not very comprehensive 3 (comprehensiveness) not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 611a Lolunye lusito lwekweluleka emoyeni lusezingeni very good quality 1 lelikahle yini? somewhat good quality 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related support just acceptable quality 3 (quality) poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 611b Lolunye lusito lwekweluleka emoyeni very relevant 1 luyahambelana yini netidzingo? somewhat relevant 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related support not very relevant 3 (relevance) not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 611c Lolunye lusito lwekweluleka emoyeni lufika very timely 1 ngesikhatsi yini? somewhat timely 2 Other Emotional Counselling/Related support not very timely 3 (timeliness) not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 - 71 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 611d Lolunye lusito lwekweluleka emoyeni lwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 Other Emotional Counselling/Related support somewhat comprehensive 2 (comprehensiveness) not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 612a Kunakekelwa kwalabagula emakhaya kusezingeni very good quality 1 lelikahle yini? somewhat good quality 2 Home-based care services for the chronically ill just acceptable quality 3 (quality) poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 612b Kunakekelwa kwalabagula emakhaya kuhambelana very relevant 1 netidzingo yini? somewhat relevant 2 Home-based care services for the chronically ill not very relevant 3 (relevance) not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 612c Kunakekelwa kwalabagula emakhaya kufika very timely 1 ngesikhatsi yini? somewhat timely 2 Home-based care services for the chronically ill not very timely 3 (timeliness) not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 612d Kunakekelwa kwalabagula emakhaya kwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 Home-based care services for the chronically ill somewhat comprehensive 2 (comprehensiveness) not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 613a Lusito ngakutemtsetfo lusezingeni lelikahle yini? very good quality 1 Legal support (quality) somewhat good quality 2 just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 613b Lusito ngakutemtsetfo luyahambisana netidzingo very relevant 1 yini? somewhat relevant 2 Legal support (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 613c Lusito ngakutemtsetfo lufika ngesikhatsi yini? very timely 1 Legal support (timeliness) somewhat timely 2 not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 613d Lusito ngakutemtsetfo lwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 Legal support (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 613e Ngabe kukhona yini tinyatselo letatsatfwa kusita yes 1 613f letimo lebetidzinga umtsetfo? no 2 614a Legal support - Were any actions taken in response to do not know/do not remember 3 614a these legal needs? 613f Ngabe tanigculisa yini letinyatselo? Kanganani? very satisfied 1 Legal support - How satisfied were you with the somewhat satisfied 2 action/actions taken? Were you ‘very satisfied’, not very satisfied 3 ‘somewhat satisfied’, ‘not very satisfied’, or ‘not at all not at all satisfied 4 satisfied’. If you cannot say, or do not know, please do not know/cannot say 5 just tell me. 614a Tindlela tekwakha imali tisezingeni lelikahle yini? very good quality 1 Income generation (quality) somewhat good quality 2 just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 - 72 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 614b Tindlela tekwakha imali tiyahambelana netidzingo very relevant 1 yini? somewhat relevant 2 Income generation (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 614c Tindlela tekwakha imali tenteka ngesikhatsi yini? very timely 1 Income generation (timeliness) somewhat timely 2 not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 614d Tindlela tekwakha imali tanele yini? very comprehensive 1 Income generation (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 615a Lusito ngetindlu tekuhlala tisezingeni lelikahle yini? very good quality 1 Housing support (quality) somewhat good quality 2 just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 615b Lusito ngetindlu tekuhlala tiyahambelana very relevant 1 netidzingo yini? somewhat relevant 2 Housing support (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 615c Lusito ngetindlu tekuhlala lufika ngesikhatsi yini? very timely 1 Housing support (timeliness) somewhat timely 2 not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 615d Lusito ngetindlu tekuhlala lwanele yini? very comprehensive 1 Housing support (comprehensiveness) somewhat comprehensive 2 not very comprehensive 3 not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 616a Tekwebolekisana nekutfutfuka ngasetimalini very good quality 1 kusezingeni lelikahle yini? somewhat good quality 2 Micro-credit/development finance (quality) just acceptable quality 3 poor quality 4 very poor quality 5 do not know/cannot say 6 616b Tekwebolekisana nekutfutfuka ngasetimalini very relevant 1 kuyahambelana netidzingo yini? somewhat relevant 2 Micro-credit/development finance (relevance) not very relevant 3 not at all relevant 4 do not know/cannot say 5 616c Tekwebolekisana nekutfutfuka ngasetimalini kufika very timely 1 ngesikhatsi yini? somewhat timely 2 Micro-credit/development finance (timeliness) not very timely 3 not at all timely 4 do not know/cannot say 5 616d Tekwebolekisana nekutfutfuka ngasetimalini very comprehensive 1 kwanele yini? somewhat comprehensive 2 Micro-credit/development finance not very comprehensive 3 (comprehensiveness) not at all comprehensive 4 do not know/cannot say 5 617 Ngekubuka kwakho, lolusito luyafika yini very well targeted 1 kulabaludzinga kakhulu lakhaya lakho? somewhat well targeted 2 Overall, considering the services provided, please not very well targeted 3 rate the extent to which you believe that the services not at all well targeted 4 reached those most in need in your homestead. Rate do not know/cannot say 5 this as ‘very well targeted’, ‘somewhat well targeted’, ‘not very well targeted’, ‘not at all well targeted’. - 73 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 618 [If homestead contains more than one very well targeted 1 household.][Enum:see Q107 page 4] somewhat well targeted 2 Ngekubuka kwakho lolusito luyafika yini not very well targeted 3 kulabaludzinga kakhulu kulamadladla not at all well targeted 4 lalakhaya? do not know/cannot say 5 Overall, considering the services provided, please rate the extent to which you believe that the services reached the households most in need in your homestead. Rate this as ‘very well targeted’, ‘somewhat well targeted’, ‘not very well targeted’, ‘not at all well targeted’. MODULE 7: PARTICIPATION Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. Kulele nalelo lusito ngicela usho kutsi kukhona yini walakhaya lobekayincenye yekukhipha tincumo kutsi nguluphi lusito lobeludzingeka nekutsi ngubani lobekaludzinga. Sifuna kwat kutsi loyomuntfu lobkayincenye nguye yini lobedzinga lolusito noma beludzingwa ngulomunye lakhaya? Sitawucela kutsi uphindze usatise nekutsi bobani lebatfweswe lomsebenti wekukhetsa loyo muntfu lamangweninangabe bebakhona? For each service mentioned above, please indicate whether anyone in this homestead was involved in deciding what service was received and in deciding who needed the services or materials, and if so who in the homestead was involved. We want to know: 1) whether anyone was involved and, if yes; 2) whether the person involved was someone who needed the service, or whether it was another homestead member. Thereafter, please tell us whether there were any community consultations, local traditional authority, community level organisations, other local opinion leader, non-governmental, or other involvement in the selection process. [ENUM: FIRST ENSURE THAT SERVICE HAS BEEN RECIEVED BY COMPARING MODULE 5 TO THIS MODULE.IF A SERVICE HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED BY ANYONE IN THE HOMESTEAD, SKIP THE QUESTION AND LEAVE IT BLANK] 701a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 701b setindleko tesikolo? not involved in determining the need for service 2 702a school fees (involvement) do not remember/not certain 3 702a 701b Ngubani lebekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 etindlekweni tesikolwa? caregiver 2 school fees (who involved) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 701c Ummango wawuyincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 yini etindlekweni tesikolwa? local traditional authority 2 school fees (community involvement) [circle community based organisation 3 up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 702a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 702b etintfweni tekufundza? not involved in determining the need for service 2 703a school materials (involvement) do not remember/not certain 3 703a 702b Ngubani lebekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 etintfweni tekufundza? caregiver 2 school materials (who involved) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 702c Umango bewuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 etintfweni tesikolwa local traditional authority 2 school materials (community involvement) community based organisation 3 [circle up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 703a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 703b kutemfundvo lengatfolakali esikolweni? not involved in determining the need for service 2 704a non-formal education (involvement) do not remember/not certain 3 704a 703b Ngubani bekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 kutemfundvo lengatfolakali esikolweni? caregiver 2 non-formal education (who involved) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 - 74 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 703c Umango wawuyincenye yini ekubuketeni community meeting 1 sidzingo kutemfundvo lengatfolakali esikolweni? local traditional authority 2 non-formal education (community involvement) community based organisation 3 [circle up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 704a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 704b elusitweni ngekudla emakhaya? not involved in determining the need for service 2 705a food support to homestead (involvement) do not remember/not certain 3 705a 704b Ngubani lebekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 ngelusito lwekudla emakhaya? caregiver 2 food support to homestead (who involved) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 704c Umango wawuyincenye yini ekubuketeni community meeting 1 sidzingo ngelusito lwekudla emakhaya? local traditional authority 2 food support to homestead (community community based organisation 3 involvement) [circle up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 705a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 705b ekwelulekeni labahlukubetekile emoyeni not involved in determining the need for service 2 706a nalabatfukile? do not remember/not certain 3 706a Grief/trauma counselling(involvement) 705b Ngubani bekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 ekwelulekeni labahlukubetekile emoyeni caregiver 2 nalabatfukile? other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 Grief/trauma counselling (who involved) 705c Umango bewuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 ekwelulekeni labahlukubetekile emoyeni local traditional authority 2 nalabatfukile? community based organisation 3 other local community leader (any) 4 Grief/trauma counselling (community non-governmental organisation 5 involvement) [circle up to 3 responses] political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 706a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 706b ekwelulekeni kwalabahlukubetekile emoyeni? not involved in determining the need for service 2 707a Other emotional counselling/related do not remember/not certain 3 707a (involvement) 706b Ngubani lebekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 ekwelulekeni kwalabahlukubetekile emoyeni? caregiver 2 Other emotional counselling/related (who other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 involved) 706c Umango bewuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 ekwelulekeni kwalabahlukubetekile emoyeni? local traditional authority 2 Other emotional counselling/related (community community based organisation 3 involvement) [circle up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 707a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 707b ekunakekeleni kwalabagulela emakhaya? not involved in determining the need for service 2 708a Home-based care services for the chronically ill do not remember/not certain 3 708a (involvement) 707b Ngubani lebekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 ekunakekeleni kwalabagulela emakhaya? caregiver 2 Home-based care services for the chronically ill other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 (who involved) 707c Umango bewuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 ekunakekeleni kwalabagulela emakhaya? local traditional authority 2 Home-based care services for the chronically ill community based organisation 3 (community involvement) [circle up to 3 other local community leader (any) 4 responses] non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 - 75 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 708a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo selusito involved in determining the need for service 1 708b kutemtsetfo? not involved in determining the need for service 2 709a Legal support(involvement) do not remember/not certain 3 709a 708b Ngubani bekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 kulolusito lwetemtsetfo? caregiver 2 Legal support (who involved) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 708c Umango wawuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 kulolusito lwemtsetfo? local traditional authority 2 Legal support(community involvement) [circle community based organisation 3 up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 709a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo etindleleni involved in determining the need for service 1 709b tekwakha imali? not involved in determining the need for service 2 710a Income generation (involvement) do not remember/not certain 3 710a 709b Ngubani bekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 etindleleni tekwakha imali? caregiver 2 Income generation (who involved) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 709c Umango bewuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 etindleleni tekwakha imali. local traditional authority 2 Income generation (community involvement) community based organisation 3 [circle up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 710a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo elusitweni involved in determining the need for service 1 710b lwetindlu tekuhlala? not involved in determining the need for service 2 711a Housing support (involvement) do not remember/not certain 3 711a 710b Ngubani bekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 elusitweni ngetindlu tekuhlala? caregiver 2 Housing support (who involved) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 710c Umango bewuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 elusitweni ngetindlu tekuhlala? local traditional authority 2 Housing support (community involvement) community based organisation 3 [circle up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 711a Beniyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo involved in determining the need for service 1 711b ekwebolekiseni nasekutfutfukeni ngakutetimali? not involved in determining the need for service 2 712 Micro-credit/development finance (quality) do not remember/not certain 3 712 711b Ngubani bekayincenye ekubuketeni sidzingo person/persons in need of service 1 ekwebolekiseni nasekutfutfukeni ngakutetimali? caregiver 2 Micro-credit/development finance (relevance) other person not in need of service/not caregiver 3 711c Ummango wawuyincenye yini ekubuketeni sidzingo community meeting 1 ekwebolekiseni nasekutfutfukeni ngakutetimali? local traditional authority 2 Micro-credit/development finance (community community based organisation 3 involvement) [circle up to 3 responses] other local community leader (any) 4 non-governmental organisation 5 political leader (non-traditional authority) 6 How ‘coherent’ (logical or consistent) would you rate the response in terms of the following, using the scale ‘very coherent’, ‘somewhat coherent’, ‘not very coherent’, or ‘not at all coherent’. If you do not know, please just let me know 712 Likhono lebantfu bangaphandle ekuchubeni very coherent 1 tinhlelo tekuphalala njalonjalo somewhat coherent 2 The ability of various actors from outside to be not very coherent 3 able to co-ordinate their responses consistently not at all coherent 4 do not know/cannot say 5 not applicable (no such actors) 6 713 Likhono lebantfu bendzawo ekuchubeni tinhlelo very coherent 1 temmango netangephandle. somewhat coherent 2 The ability of local actors to co-ordinate various not very coherent 3 activities, from within the community and from not at all coherent 4 outside do not know/cannot say 5 not applicable (no such actors) 6 - 76 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 714 Likhono lebantfu labehluke kutiphatsa ngendlela very coherent 1 letsite ekuhambeni kwesikhatsi kusita ummango somewhat coherent 2 The ability of different actors to behave in a not very coherent 3 coherent manner over time in support to this not at all coherent 4 community do not know/cannot say 5 not applicable (no such actors) 6 715 Likhono lalabaphetse ummango kusita bantfu very coherent 1 labehlukene ekutfutfukiseni ummango somewhat coherent 2 ngekuhamba kwesikhatsi not very coherent 3 The ability of traditional authorities in this not at all coherent 4 community to help co-ordinate various actors do not know/cannot say 5 involved in development activities over time not applicable (no such actors) 6 MODULE 8: SOCIAL CAPITAL AND LOCAL COPING MECHANISMS Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 801 Sewuhlale sikhatsi lesinganani kulomphakatsi? ____________ years ______ How long have you lived in this all my life 88 chiefdom? do not know 99 802 Akhona yini emalunga lamadzala yes 1 emndeni lawutalwa khona lahlala no 2 edvute kangangoba kulula kuwavakashela? Do any adult members of your birth family live close enough for you to easily visit them? 803 Uvamise kuwabona noma 1+ a week 1 kukhulumisane nawo kanganani, kanye 1+ a month 2 evikini, enyangeni, emnyakeni noma 1+ a year 3 anibonani sanhlobo. hardly ever/never 4 How often do you see or talk to a member of your family of birth? Would you say at least once a week, once a month, once a year, or hardly ever? 804 Nawunenkinga noma udzinga lusito always 1 lwangephandle, esikhatsini lesinyenti sometimes 2 ungetsembela yini kubakini rarely 3 ekusitakaleni? never 4 When you need help or have a serious do not know/not certain 5 problem when you need outside assistance, can you usually rely on members of your birth family for support? Can you rely on them ‘always’, ‘sometimes’, ‘rarely’, ‘never’? 805 Ungatsi bomakhelwane batana kanganani very well 1 kulommango? somewhat well 2 How well would you say that neighbours not very well 3 know each other in this community? not at all well 4 Would you say they know each other do not know/not certain 5 ‘very well’, ‘somewhat well’, ‘not very well’, or ‘not at all well’? 806 Nawungabekisa ungatsi kubambana very strong 1 njengemmango nekuphilelana njengebantu somewhat strong 2 bendzawo, kucinile, kuyaceka noma not very strong 3 akukho sanhlobo? not at all strong 4 If you had to rate the ‘sense of community’ do not know/not certain 5 in this area, that is, how much people feel that they share a common history, and have a common bond, and identify with each other, would you rate it as ‘very strong’, ‘somewhat strong’, ‘not very strong’, or ‘not at all strong’? - 77 - Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 807 Nawungaba nenkinga ledzinga imali completely 1 lokungenani tinyanga letisitfupha partially 2 ungetsembela kanganani etihlobeni very little 3 takho kutsi tikusite? Ngalokuphelele, not at all 4 ngencenye, kancane, ngeke noma awati? do not know/not certain 5 If you had a crisis and needed cash for a sustained period of time, say, for up to 6 months, to what extent would you be able to rely on extended family members? How much would you say that you would be able to rely on them? ‘Completely’, ‘partially’, ‘very little’, or ‘not at all’. 808 Nawungaba nenkinga ledzinga imali completely 1 lokungenani tinyanga letisitfupha partially 2 ungetsembela kanganani kubangani very little 3 noma bomakhelwane bakho kutsi not at all 4 bakusite? Ngalokuphelele, ngencenye, do not know/not certain 5 kancane, ngeke noma awati? If you had a crisis and needed cash for a sustained period of time, say, for up to 6 months, to what extent would you be able to rely on friends or neighbours from outside your homestead? How much would you say that you would be able to rely on them? ‘Completely’, ‘partially’, ‘very little’, or ‘not at all’. 809 Nawungaba nenkinga ledzinga lusito completely 1 ngemandla (umsebenti) lokungenani partially 2 tinyanga letisitfupha ungetsembela very little 3 kanganani etihlobeni takho kutsi not at all 4 tikusite? Ngalokuphelele, ngencenye, do not know/not certain 5 kancane, ngeke noma awati? If you had a crisis and needed labour support for a sustained period of time, say, for up to 6 months, to what extent would you be able to rely on extended family members? How much would you say that you would be able to rely on them? ‘Completely’, ‘partially’, ‘very little’, or ‘not at all’. 810 Nawungaba nenkinga ledzinga lusito completely 1 ngemandla (umsebenti) lokungenani partially 2 tinyanga letisitfupha ungetsembela very little 3 kanganani kubangani noma not at all 4 bomakhelwane bakho kutsi bakusite? do not know/not certain 5 Ngalokuphelele, ngencenye, kancane, ngeke noma awati? If you had a crisis and needed labour support for a sustained period of time, say, for up to 6 months, to what extent would you be able to rely on friends or neighbours? How much would you say that you would be able to rely on them? ‘Completely’, ‘partially’, ‘very little’, or ‘not at all’. Ngicela sicatsanise simo nyalo naleso seminyaka lesihlanu leyengcile kunaku lokulandzelako Compare the current situation with the situation, say, five years ago. Consider the following issues 811 Kukhona kwemalunga emadladla much more common now 1 kwetsembela lakhaya ngetikhatsi somewhat more common now 2 tebumatima somewhat less common now 3 Ability to rely on household members much less common now 4 in this homestead in times of difficulty do not know/not certain 5 - 78 - Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 812 Kukhona kwemalunga emndeni much more common now 1 kwetsembela kulomunye ngetikhatsi somewhat more common now 2 tebumatima. somewhat less common now 3 Ability to rely on other family members much less common now 4 in times of difficulty do not know/not certain 5 813 Kukhona kwetsembela kubangani much more common now 1 nabomakhelwane ngetikhatsi somewhat more common now 2 tebumatima. somewhat less common now 3 Ability to rely on friends/neighbours in much less common now 4 times of difficulty do not know/not certain 5 814 Lizinga besifazane labanalo ekwakheni much more common now 1 tincumo lakhaya. somewhat more common now 2 Degree of influence females have in somewhat less common now 3 decision making in homestead much less common now 4 do not know/not certain 5 Ngicela ungitjele kutsi uyavumelana yini naloku lokulandzelako nekutsi kanganani Please consider whether you ‘strongly agree’, ‘somewhat agree’, ‘somewhat disagree’, or ‘strongly disagree’ with the following statements. If you do not know, please just let me know 815 Bangani nabomakhelwane bayawasita strongly agree 1 lamanye emadladla nakasacala somewhat agree 2 kugulelwa kodvwa uma kugula somewhat disagree 3 kudlanga lolusito bese luyanyamalala. strongly disagree 4 Friends and neighbours help do not know/not certain 5 households with someone ill at the beginning, but if the illness lasts a long time, this support fades away 816 Esikhatsini lesinyenti, imihambo strongly agree 1 yesiSwati yenta kutsi kubelukhuni somewhat agree 2 kutsi besifazane bamelane netinkinga somewhat disagree 3 lababhekana nato. strongly disagree 4 For the most part, cultural factors here do not know/not certain 5 make it more difficult for females to cope with the problems they face 817 Imihambo lefaka ekhatsi iminyaka strongly agree 1 lemibili yenzilo kubesifazane kwenta somewhat agree 2 kutsi bangafinyeleli kuletinye tintfo. somewhat disagree 3 Overall, cultural factors such as the 2 strongly disagree 4 year mourning period for females do not know/not certain 5 symbolised by the mourning gown limits females ability cope 818 Emasiko labukele kwaba lifa egcekela strongly agree 1 phansi besifazane ekumlaneni netintfo somewhat agree 2 letitsite. somewhat disagree 3 Traditional practices around inheritance strongly disagree 4 undermines female ability to cope do not know/not certain 5 819 Kusimama kwetfu lakhaya strongly agree 1 kusekubambisaneni kwetfu somewhat agree 2 ekusebentiseni kwetintfo somewhat disagree 3 ngekuphilelana kulamadladla strongly disagree 4 Our strength is our homestead system, do not know/not certain 5 where we can effectively share resources across households 820 Nawubuka eminyakeni leyengcile, strongly agree 1 ungasho kutsi ka Ngwane kube somewhat agree 2 nekulahleka kwesimilo kubantfu . somewhat disagree 3 lokwentela phansi indlela lesimelana strongly disagree 4 ngayo netinkinga. do not know/not certain 5 In the past few decades, there has been a moral decline in Swaziland that undermines our coping - 79 - Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 821 Eminyakeni lelishumi lelengcile sisindvo strongly agree 1 seligciwane le HIV emphakatsini selenta somewhat agree 2 emakhaya lamanyenti angakhoni somewhat disagree 3 kumelana nesimo. strongly disagree 4 In the past decade or so, the impacts of do not know/not certain 5 HIV&AIDS on our communities has been so severe that many of our homesteads simply cannot cope any more 822 Emnyakeni lowengcile sisindvo strongly agree 1 sekwenyuka kwentsengo yekudla somewhat agree 2 nemafutsa etimoto sesente emakhaya somewhat disagree 3 lamanyenti angakhoni kumelana netimo. strongly disagree 4 In the past year or so, the impacts of food do not know/not certain 5 and fuel price rises has been such that many of our homesteads simply cannot cope any more 823 Eminyakeni leyengcile lizinga letemphilo strongly agree 1 nemnotfo lakhaya liyehla ngenca somewhat agree 2 yekugula kanye nekuhamba noma somewhat disagree 3 kulahlekelwa bantfu lebebalusito. strongly disagree 4 Over the past few years, our homestead do not know/not certain 5 has become poorer due to the loss of human resources and chronic illness 824 Eminyakeni lemiblwa leyengcile lizinga strongly agree 1 lemphilo lakhaya liyehla ngenca somewhat agree 2 yekulahlekelwa yimisebenti kwemalunga. somewhat disagree 3 Over the past few years, our homestead strongly disagree 4 has become poorer due to the loss of jobs do not know/not certain 5 825 Indlela yelisiko lekutsatsa sitsembu strongly agree 1 imcoka ekuvikeleni bantfu ekwehleni somewhat agree 2 kwelizinga lemnotfo ngoba lolusito somewhat disagree 3 lwakha budlelwane kubantfu. The system strongly disagree 4 of polygyny has been important in do not know/not certain 5 protecting us from economic decline, because it strengthens our social systems 826 Sitsembu sentela phansi indlela bomake strongly agree 1 labatsetfwe ngayo kumelana nesimo somewhat agree 2 lesiletfwa yi HIV. somewhat disagree 3 The system of polygamy has weakened strongly disagree 4 the ability of married women to cope with do not know/not certain 5 the situation we all face in Swaziland due to HIV&AIDS 827 Kuchutjwa kwendlela yekulobola strongly agree 1 kumcoka ngoba kuvikela besifazane somewhat agree 2 etintfweni letimbi emangweni netemnotfo somewhat disagree 3 letiletswa yi HIV. strongly disagree 4 The continuation of the system of bride do not know/not certain 5 price has an important positive impact on protecting women from the negative impacts on the society and economy due to HIV&AIDS 828 Ngenca ye HIV sidzingo sekutsi strongly agree 1 bantfwana bafake emandla kakhulu somewhat agree 2 ekusebenteni lakhaya kute kungene imali. somewhat disagree 3 Because of HIV&AIDS,children have had strongly disagree 4 to contribute more labour to generate do not know/not certain 5 homestead income for many homesteads here 829 Lendlela lekutfolakala ngayo lusito strongly agree 1 lwangaphandle kusita emakhaya somewhat agree 2 sekwentele phansi indlela bantfu somewhat disagree 3 bebakhona kwetsembela kulabanye strongly disagree 4 phambilini. do not know/not certain 5 The way in which interventions to support not true - interventions do not come from outside 6 homesteads have come from outside has undermined the extent to which we used to be able to rely on one another - 80 - Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 830 Lendlela lekutfolakala ngayo lusito strongly agree 1 lwangaphandle noma etinhlanganweni somewhat agree 2 sekwenta kutsi bantfu lamangweni somewhat disagree 3 bangasafuni kusita emangweni. strongly disagree 4 The way in which interventions to do not know/not certain 5 support homesteads have come from not true - interventions do not come from outside 6 outside has weakened the willingness of local people to help in the community 831 Kunelusito loluchamuka ngaphandle strongly agree 1 lolucondziswa kubantfu kungakabi somewhat agree 2 nekukhulumisan emangweni lokubese somewhat disagree 3 kubanga kungevani kahle. strongly disagree 4 There are some interventions here that do not know/not certain 5 target need based on outside criteria, not true - no such interventions 6 and this causes conflict 832 Liningi lwelusito lwangephandle strongly agree 1 luvame kuletsa lusito lesinalo somewhat agree 2 kunaloku lesikudzingile. somewhat disagree 3 Most interventions by outside agencies strongly disagree 4 here are based on what they have to do not know/not certain 5 offer, not based on what we need not true - no such interventions 6 833 Igogo centre isebenta kahle lamangweni. strongly agree 1 The kaGogo centre system works well in somewhat agree 2 this community somewhat disagree 3 strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no kaGogo system here 6 834 Igogo centre isebenta kahle lamangweni strongly agree 1 ekuboneni labo laba dzinge lusito somewhat agree 2 kakhulu. somewhat disagree 3 The kaGogo system of listing those most in strongly disagree 4 need of assistance is quite effective do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no kaGogo system here 6 835 Igogo centre isebenta kahle kuchuba strongly agree 1 tinhlelo letiphakanyiswa ngumango. somewhat agree 2 The kaGogo system is an effective centre somewhat disagree 3 for co-ordinating community initiatives strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no kaGogo system here 6 836 Emadladla asemangweni ebantfwana strongly agree 1 ekuboneni labo labadzingile. somewhat agree 2 The neighbourhood care point (NCP) somewhat disagree 3 system is quite effective in targeting those strongly disagree 4 most in need do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no NCP here 6 837 Lokwentela phansi letinhlelo leticondze strongly agree 1 kusita kutsi kute kahle lusito lwemali somewhat agree 2 noma lokunye nje kulabo labatimisele somewhat disagree 3 ngekusita emangweni. strongly disagree 4 One of the main weaknesses in impact do not know/not certain 5 mitigation activities is that there is no clear financial or material support to caregivers to allow them to volunteer in their communities 838 Lokungasita indlela lusito loluchutjwa strongly agree 1 ngayo emadladleni nakulabagulela somewhat agree 2 emakhaya kugcugcutela lalabasitako somewhat disagree 3 kutsi bangene kulentinhlelo tekusita. strongly disagree 4 The most effective way to provide local do not know/not certain 5 support through NCP’s and home based care is to encourage local caregivers to provide impact mitigation services - 81 - Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 839 Inkinga yebantfwana bendlunkhulu strongly agree 1 iyandza kulommango. somewhat agree 2 The problem of ‘children of the somewhat disagree 3 community’ is worsening strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 840 Lenye yetinkinga letivetwe yi HIV strongly agree 1 kulahleka kwelwati lebeluye lusuke somewhat agree 2 esitukulwaneni luye kulesinye. somewhat disagree 3 One of the main impacts of HIV&AIDS strongly disagree 4 has been the loss of generational do not know/not certain 5 knowledge from parents to their children 841 Inchubo yemakhaya ivumela kutsi strongly agree 1 lamanye emadladla ahlupheke kakhulu somewhat agree 2 kunalamanye ngenca yeticu tsite. somewhat disagree 3 The homestead system allows some strongly disagree 4 households in the homestead to suffer do not know/not certain 5 more than others, because they may be stigmatised 842 Indlela lekukhetfwa ngayo tindlela strongly agree 1 tekusita tivame kuvela kulababntfu somewhat agree 2 bemmango labangati kahle ngesimo somewhat disagree 3 sekweswela ngako lolusito alufiki strongly disagree 4 lapho ludzingeke khona. do not know/not certain 5 Selection criteria of aid services often not applicable - no local involvement 6 come from those in the community who know little about the situation of the poor, and this mis-directs resources 843 Indlela lekukhetfwa ngayo tindlela strongly agree 1 tekusita tivumela kutsi bantfu somewhat agree 2 bangaphandle labafuna kusita somewhat disagree 3 bangakhoni kusita lapho kudzingeke strongly disagree 4 khona. do not know/not certain 5 Selection criteria of aid services that allows not applicable - no outside resources 6 outsiders who know little about the situation of the poor in this community helps to mis-direct resources 844 Akusilo kuphela lwati lolusuka strongly agree 1 esitukulwaneni kuya kulesinye somewhat agree 2 lolulahlekile ngence ye HIV kodwva somewhat disagree 3 nesimilo lesihle lebesihlanganisa sive. strongly disagree 4 It is not only generational knowledge from do not know/not certain 5 parents to children that has been lost due to HIV&AIDS, but moral values that used to strengthen Swazi society has also declined 845 Liningi lemaSwati selilahlekelwa strongly agree 1 litsemba kulesimo lesesikhona. somewhat agree 2 More and more, Swazis are falling into somewhat disagree 3 a situation of hopelessness strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 846 Bancane betfu labangatsi lolusito strongly agree 1 labalutfolako lwabo, sesemukela loko somewhat agree 2 lesinikwe kona. somewhat disagree 3 Few of us that are receiving services can strongly disagree 4 really claim them as our own -- we do not know/not certain 5 simply receive what is offered not applicable - not receive services 6 847 Inkinga lenkhulu lesibhekene nayo strongly agree 1 kutsi lolusito aluti njalonjalo somewhat agree 2 nangetikhatsi letihlelekile. somewhat disagree 3 One of the main problems we face is the strongly disagree 4 inconsistency and irregularity of do not know/not certain 5 services offered not applicable - not receive services 6 - 82 - Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 848 Tinhlelo tekusita tangaphandle aenetisi strongly agree 1 kahle tidzingo talabo labadzingile somewhat agree 2 emmangweni. somewhat disagree 3 Overall, services that are determined strongly disagree 4 from outside do not serve the needs of do not know/not certain 5 the most needy in this community not applicable - services not offered 6 849 Empeleni kusimo sekwemukele loko strongly agree 1 lesinikwa kona kunekufuna loko somewhat agree 2 lesikudzingako. somewhat disagree 3 It really is a situation of ‘accepting strongly disagree 4 services offered’, not ‘demanding do not know/not certain 5 services we need’ not applicable - services not offered 6 850 Liningi letfu linelitsemba lelincane strongly agree 1 ngelikusasa. somewhat agree 2 Most of us have little hope for the somewhat disagree 3 future strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 851 Liningi lemadvodza leselitsetse liba strongly agree 1 nelidladla lelishende lalo. somewhat agree 2 Many married men in Swaziland somewhat disagree 3 maintain a separate household for a strongly disagree 4 woman they are not married to, but do not know/not certain 5 have a long-term relationship with 852 SKIP ALL i QUESTIONS FROM 852a to 852g IF THERE IS ONLY ONE HOUSEHOLD Emnyakeni lowengcile ukhona yini lakhaya loke waba kunasi simo Over the year, has anyone in this homestead been in the following situation: 852a Wakhatsateka kutsi kudla yes 1 852ai kutawuphela ningakayitfoli imali no 2 852b yekutsenga lokunye noma ningakavuni?Worried that food would run out before we got money to buy food, or that we would run out before we were able to harvest 852ai [If yes to 853a] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla some of them 2 noma lamanye Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 852b Nabhekana nesimo lapho kudla kwaphela yes 1 852bi sangabi nalenye indlela yekutfola no 2 852c lokunye? Faced a situation where food ran out and we did not have any way to get more 852bi [If yes to 853b] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla some of them 2 noma lamanye Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 852c Nabhekana nesimo lapho singakhoni yes 1 852ci kudla, kudla lokunemaseko lamtsatfu? no 2 852d Faced a situation where we could not eat balanced meals that included at least some meat 852ci [If yes to 852c] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla some of them 2 noma lamanye Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 852d Nabhekana nesimo lapho satsembela yes 1 852di khona kakhulu ekudleni lokunchutfwa no 2 852e emasimini. Faced a situation where we had to rely heavily on veld foods - 83 - Q# Questions & Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO TO Sup. 852di [If yes to 852d] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla some of them 2 noma lamanye Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 852e Nabhekana nesimo sekungadli ekuseni, yes 1 852ei emini nantsambama? no 2 852f Faced a situation where we had to reduce the number of meals we had 852ei [If yes to 852e] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla some of them 2 noma lamanye Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 852f Nabhekana nesimo lapho kwadzingeka yes 1 852fi kutsi ninciphise lizinga lekudla? no 2 852g Faced a situation where we had to eat inadequate portions of food with each meal 852fi [If yes to 852f] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla some of them 2 noma lamanye Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 852g Nabhekana nesimo lapho khona kute yes 1 852gi lowadla lilanga lonkhe ngoba bekute no 2 mod 9 kudla noma imali yekukutsenga noma sivuno? Faced a situation where no one in the household ate for at least one entire day because we had no food and could not afford to purchase/could not harvest 852gi [If yes to 852g] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla some of them 2 noma lamanye Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? - 84 - MODULE 9: DISCIPLINE, STIGMA, RELATED For this module, randomly select from all senior females in all households in the homestead caring for at least one child aged 2-17. If there is only one household in the homestead, continue the interview with the senior female respondent, but only if they are looking after at least one child aged 2-17. Adult Females Aged 18 Child Listing and Older Caregiving for at least one Child Aged 2-17 How many adult females live in this homestead aged 18 and older WHO ARE HERE NOW AND NOT ALREADY BEING INTERVIEWED? Person 1: Of these, who is the oldest person in this age range who is listed as a caregiver? [age] Person 2: Of these, who is the next oldest person in this age range who is listed as a caregiver? [age] Person 3: Of these, who is the next oldest person in this age range who is listed as a caregiver? [age] Person 4: Of these, who is the next oldest person in this age range who is listed as a caregiver? [age] Person 5: Of these, who is the next oldest person in this age range who is listed as a caregiver? [age] # of eligible Last 2 digits of questionnaire number adults 00- 05- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95- 04 09 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 99 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 4 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Once the woman is selected, do a listing of the children she is a caregiver for. Child Listing Children aged 2-17 How many children are you the main caregiver for in this household aged 2-17? Child 1: Of these, who is the oldest child in this age range? [age] Child 2: Of these, who is the next oldest child in this age range? [age] Child 3: Of these, who is the next oldest child in this age range? [age] # of eligible Last 2 digits of questionnaire number children 00- 05- 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85- 90- 95- 04 09 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 99 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 900) Age of child selected: ____________ [ONLY aged 2-17] ____ 901) Sex of child selected: ____ - 1 male ____ - 2 female ____ 902) Child status of child selected: ____ ____ - 1 non-orphan ____ - 3 paternal orphan ____ - 2 maternal orphan ____ - 4 double orphan - 85 - 903) [Enum: Begin with yesterday, then move to the day before, etc. Be sure to indicate the day of the week in row 2.] Ngitotsandza kukubuta ngendlela labekadla ngayo lomntfwana kuleliviki leselengcile lokusho kutsi kulamalanga lasikhombisa lengcile: We would like to ask you a few questions about this child’s eating habits over the past week. Please consider her/his consumption patterns over the past seven days as follows: [Supervisor: Tally the number of ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses per row and enter relevant numbers in your column.] Type Yester- Today Today Today Today Today Today Sup day Minus Minus Minus Minus Minus Minus (Total) 2 3 4 5 6 7 Day of the # # # Week (M,Tu,W, Yes No DK Th,F,Sa, Su) Kudla 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes kwasekuseni 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No Eat Breakfast 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK Kudla kwasemini 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes Eat Lunch 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK Kudla 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes kwantsambama 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No Eat Dinner 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK Kudla inyama 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes noma inhlanti 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No Eat Meat and/or 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK Fish Kudla tibhidvo 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes (emabhontjisi) 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No Eat Vegetables 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK (inc. legumes) Kudla lokunika 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes emandla 2 – No 2 – No 2 – No 2 – No 2 – No 2 – No 2 – No Eat Carbohydrates 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK (e.g., potatoes, cassava, maize) Kudla titselo 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes 1 - Yes Eat Fruit 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 2 - No 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK 3 - DK Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 904 Ngitawutsandza kukubuta imibuto lemibalwa nga....... lomntfwana lomnakekelako, nganaku lokulandzelako: We would like to first ask you a few questions about __________, the child you are looking after. Please consider the following: 904a [If any no’s in 903] Evikini lelengcile ukhonile yini yes 1 kumnika kudla kanye ngelilanga ngenca yekweswela imali no 2 noma kudla? Over the past week, were you able to feed this child only one meal on at least one day because of the lack of food/lack of funds to buy food? 905 Kulamalanga lamatsatfu lengcile, ukhona yini lakhaya loneminyaka lengu 15 noma ngutulu loke wahlanganyela nalomntfwana kunaku lokulandzelako? Over the past three days, did you or any other household member aged 15 or older engage with this child in any of the following ways? 905a Bafundza tincwadzi noma babuka titfombe yes 1 read books or look at picture books no 2 do not know/not certain 3 905b Amcocele tindzaba yes 1 tell stories to him/her no 2 do not know/not certain 3 - 86 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 905c Amhlabelele tingoma yes 1 sing songs with him/her no 2 do not know/not certain 3 905d Bahamba bavakasha baphuma ekhaya yes 1 take him/her outside the homestead for an outing no 2 do not know/not certain 3 905e Wadlala naye yes 1 play with him/her no 2 do not know/not certain 3 905f Abenesikhatsi naye, betsa tintfo, babale noma badvwebe yes 1 spend time with him/her, naming, counting, and/or drawing no 2 things do not know/not certain 3 906 Ngabe lomntfwana uke waba nabo yini bulukhuni ekutiphatseni yes 1 906a kwakhe asahleti kulelikhaya? no 2 907 Has this child had any behavioural difficulties while living in this household? 906a [If yes to 906] Ungabuchaza kanjani lobumatima very severe 1 balomntfwana, bekulukhuni kakhulu, bekulukhuni, somewhat severe 2 bekungelukhuni kangako, bekungelukhuni sanhlobo. not very severe 3 How severe would you rate these behavioural difficulties? Would not at all severe 4 you rate them ‘very severe’, ‘somewhat severe’, ‘not very severe’, do not know/cannot say 5 or ‘not at all severe’. 906b [If yes to 906] Walutfola yini lusito lomntfwana kulobo yes 1 906c bumatima? no 2 907 Has this child ever received any support in response to these do not know/not certain 3 907 behavioural difficulties? 906c [If yes to 906b] Ungatsi wasitakala kanganani very successful 1 lomntfwana? somewhat successful 2 How successful would you rate this support in helping to only a little successful 3 overcome these behavioural difficulties? Would you rate them not at all successful 4 ‘very successful’, ‘somewhat successful’, ‘only a little successful’, do not know/not certain 5 or ‘not at all successful’. 906d [If yes to 906b] Ungatsi lolusito lwasita nhlangotsi tonkhe very comprehensive 1 yini ebumatimeni balomntfwana? somewhat comprehensive 2 How comprehensive would you rate this support in helping to not very comprehensive 3 overcome these behavioural difficulties? Would you rate them not at all comprehensive 4 ‘very comprehensive’, ‘somewhat comprehensive’, ‘not very do not know/not certain 5 comprehensive’, or ‘not at all comprehensive. 907 Lomtfwana uke waba yini kunati timo letilandzelako? Has this child ever been in any of the following situations? 907a Angavamisi kudlala noma kuhleka yes 1 child rarely plays, rarely laughs no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 907b Angavamisi kuhlanganyela nala banye bantfwana yes 1 child rarely socialises with other children no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 907c Abekwe sicu ngulabanye bantfwana yes 1 child is stigmatised by other children no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 907d Abekwe sicu bantfu labadzala yes 1 child is stigmatised by adults no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 907e Ativele ayedvwa nekutse angakanakekeleki emoyeni yes 1 child seems isolated, depressed no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 908 [If yes to 907a, b, c, d, or e] Wake walutfola yini yes 1 908a lusito kuloku lahlangabetene nako? no 2 909 Has this child ever received any support in response to any of do not know/cannot say 3 909 these? - 87 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 908a [If yes to 908] Lwaba yimphumelelo kanganani lolusito? very successful 1 How successful would you rate this support in helping to somewhat successful 2 overcome these issues? Would you rate them ‘very successful’, only a little successful 3 ‘somewhat successful’, ‘only a little successful’, or ‘not at all not at all successful 4 successful’. do not know/not certain 5 908b [If yes to 908] Belwanele yini lolusito nhlangotsi tonkhe? very comprehensive 1 How comprehensive would you rate this support in helping to somewhat comprehensive 2 overcome these issues? Would you rate them ‘very com- not very comprehensive 3 prehensive’, ‘somewhat comprehensive’, ‘not very not at all comprehensive 4 comprehensive’, or ‘not at all comprehensive. do not know/not certain 5 Bonkhe bantfu labadzala banendlela yekufundzisa bantfwana indlela yekutiphatsa kahle noma bacondzise kutiphatsa lokubi. 909 Ngitakunika tindlela letingasentjetiswa kufundzisa loku. Ngicela kwati kutsi ikhona yini kuletindlela lenike nayisebentisa kuletinyanga letintsatfu letengcile. All adults use certain ways to teach children the right behaviours or to address what they feel is a behavioural problem. I will now read various methods that may be used, and I want you to tell me if you or anyone in your household has used this method with this child in the past 3 months 909a Wamukwa tintfo letitsite lebekadlala ngato atitsandza noma yes 1 wamalela kutsi aphume endlini no 2 took away privileges, forbade something the child liked, or did not do not know/cannot say 3 allow the child to leave the house 909b Wamchazela kutsi lalakwenta kwakukabi ngani yes 1 explained why the behaviour was wrong no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909c Wamkhuhlutisa lomntfwana yes 1 shook the child no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909d Wamtsetsisa noma wamemeta nawukhuluma naye yes 1 shouted, yelled at or screamed at the child no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909e Wamnika umsebenti langawenta yes 1 gave the child something else to do no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909f Wamshaya ngemphama etibunu spanked, hit or slapped the child yes 1 on the bottom with a bare hand no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909g Kumshaya ngemphama atibunu noma kuphi emtimbeni ngentfo yes 1 lefana nelibhande, luswati namani lenye lecinile hit the child on no 2 the bottom or elsewhere on the body with something like a belt, do not know/cannot say 3 hairbrush, stick or other hard object 909h Wambita ngesilima, ngelivila noma ngaliphi lelinye ligama yes 1 called the child stupid, lazy, or another name like that no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909j Wamshaya ngemphama ebusweni, enhloko noma etindlebeni yes 1 hit or slapped the child on the face, head or ears no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909k Wamshaya esandleni, emkhonweneni nase mlenteni yes 1 hit or slapped the child on the hand, arm, or leg no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909l Wamshaya ngentfo letsite ngekuphindza phindza yes 1 beat the child with an implement over and over no 2 do not know/cannot say 3 909m Uyakholelwa yini kutsi kuze ukhulise umntfwana kudzinga yes 1 umjezise ? no 2 Do you believe that, in order to bring this child up, you need to do not know/cannot say 3 physically punish him/her? 909n Mayelana nalomntfwana lesikhuluma ngaye ukhona yini lomunye yes 1 longamnakekela? no 2 Finally, with regard to the child that we have been discussing, has another caregiver been identified to care for this child in case you are unable to do so - 88 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 909ni [If yes to 940] Unangakhi nyalo? How old is this person right now? _______________ years [if do not know, indicate 99] Njengoba ngishito ekucaleni leminye yalemibuto itsintsana nawe kuphela. Ngicela uphendvule yonkhe lemibuto ngeliciniso nangesicinisek. Nakunemibuto longakhululeki kuyiphendvula ngicela ungitjele sitokhona kuchubekela kulomunye. Lemibuto iphatselene nalo vana naye nyalo noma loyo lotsandza kwehlukana naye lokungenani eminyakeni lemibili leyengcile. As noted earlier, some of the questions we are asking are quite personal. We would ask that you answer all questions truthfully and honestly. If you feel that you do not want to answer a question, please just tell me so, and I will skip it and move on. The questions refer to your current or most recent partner/spouse over the past 2 years. [Enum: If the respondent is unmarried, and does not have a current long-term partner, ask her/him to answer these questions with regard to a previous ‘serious’ partner over the past 2 years. If a widow or no serious relationship over the past 2 years leave blank and go to 912][Enum: Ensure that only respondent and no-one else is present in the room] 910 Kulokuvana kwenu nicabana kanganani? often 1 In your relationship, how frequently would you say you quarrel? sometimes 2 Would you say ‘often’, ‘sometimes’, or ‘rarely/never’? will not say/rarely/never 3 Uma bantfu lababili batsandzana bavamise kubambisana ebumnandzini nase lusizini. Ngitawutsandza kukubuta ngekutsi lolovana naye nyalo niphatsana njani. Uma kukhona losiphatamisako ngingayishintja lenkhulumo. Sebentisa, Kakhulu, ngalesinye sikhatsi, akukavami, akwenteki When two people become a couple, they usually share both good and bad moments. I would now like to ask you some questions about your most recent relationship and how your spouse/partner treats you. If anyone interrupts us, I will change the topic of conversation. In your relationship, has your most recent spouse/partner ever tried to do any of the following, using a scale from ‘often’, ‘sometimes’, ‘rarely’, or ‘never’. If you ‘do not know’, please just let me know 910a Angakuvumeli kutsi ubone bangani lobulili bunye nabo often 1 kept you from seeing same-sex friends sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/ will not say 5 910b Angakuvumeli uchumane netihlobo takho often 1 kept you from contacting your birth family sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910c Afune kwati lapho ungakhona ngaso sonkhe sikhatsi often 1 insists on knowing where you are all the time sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910d Akucwaye noma akuphatse ngendlela lengakhombi kutsi often 1 niyatsandzana sometimes 2 ignores you and treats you with indifference rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910e Akakwetsembi ngemali often 1 does not trust you with money sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910f Akhubeke uma ukhulumisa longasibo bulili bunye naywe often 1 gets angry if you speak to someone of the opposite sex sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910g Ukuzindlela kutsi awuketsembeki often 1 is often suspicious that you are unfaithful sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 - 89 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 910h Wakwetfuka noma wakwenta wativa utenyanya often 1 insulted you or made you feel bad about yourself sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910j Wakwenta wativa umncane noma wabukisa ngawe often 1 embikwebantfu belittled or humiliated you in front of other sometimes 2 people rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910k Wenta tinfo kukutfusa noma kukwesabisa (ngendlela lakubuka often 1 ngayo, latsetsa ngayo, wabulala tintfo) sometimes 2 did things to scare or intimidate you on purpose (by the way they rarely 3 looked at you, by yelling at you, by smashing things, etc.) never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910l Wasongela kukulimata noma loyo lodvute nawe often 1 threatened to hurt you or someone you care about sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910m Wakushaya ngemphama noma wakujikijela ngentfo often 1 lengakulimata slapped you or threw something at you that could sometimes 2 hurt rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910n Wakufuca, wakukhuhlutisa noma wakujikijela ngentfo often 1 pushed you, shook you, or threw something at you sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910o Wakushaya ngetibhakela noma ngentfo lengakulimata often 1 hit you with fists or with something else that could hurt you sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910p Wakukhahlela, wakuhudvula noma wakushaya often 1 kicked you, dragged you or beat you up sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910q Wakwekhama noma wakushisa ngemabomu often 1 choked or burned you on purpose sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910r Wasonga kusebentisa noma wasebentisa sibhamu, umukhwa often 1 noma lesinye silimato kuwe sometimes 2 threatened to use or actually used a gun, knife or other weapon rarely 3 against you never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910s Wakuphocelela kutsi ulale naye ngenkhani often 1 physically forced you to have sex when you did not want to sometimes 2 rarely 3 never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910t Wakusongela waze weva ngatsi kumele ulale naye ngoba wesaba often 1 lokungahle kukuvelele sometimes 2 threatened you so that you felt you had to have sex because you rarely 3 were afraid of what might be done if you refused never 4 do not know/will not say 5 - 90 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 910u Wakuphocelela kutsi wente lutfo loluphetselene netelicansi often 1 lokwakwenta weva ungaphatseki kahle sometimes 2 ever forced you to do something sexual against your will that you rarely 3 found degrading or humiliating never 4 do not know/will not say 5 910v [only for those who have ever been pregnant] often 1 Wakushaya, wakuwatsa ngemphama, wakukhahlela noma sometimes 2 wakulimata nawukhulelwe rarely 3 hit, slapped, kicked or physically hurt you when you were never 4 pregnant do not know/will not say 5 911 [If yes to ANY ‘often’ or ‘sometimes’ to any yes 1 911a response in 910] no 2 912 Uke walutfola yini lusito mayelana naloku? do not know/cannot say 3 912 Have you ever received any support in response to any of these? 911a [If yes to 911] very successful 1 Lwaba yimphumelelo kanganani lolusito? somewhat successful 2 How successful would you rate this support in helping to only a little successful 3 overcome these issues? Would you rate them ‘very successful’, not at all successful 4 ‘somewhat successful’, ‘only a little successful’, or ‘not at all do not know/not certain 5 successful’. 911b [If yes to 911] very comprehensive 1 Belwanele yini lolusito? somewhat comprehensive 2 How comprehensive would you rate this support in helping to not very comprehensive 3 overcome these issues? Would you rate them ‘very not at all comprehensive 4 comprehensive’, ‘somewhat comprehensive’, ‘not very do not know/not certain 5 comprehensive’, or ‘not at all comprehensive. 912 Inchubo yalakhaya ibanga kutsi lamanye emadladla ahlupheke strongly agree 1 kakhulu kunalamanye somewhat agree 2 The homestead system allows some households in the homestead somewhat disagree 3 to suffer more than others, because they may be stigmatised strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 913 Eminyakeni leyengcile, umtfwalo wekunakekela kubo make strongly agree 1 labafana nami sewenyuke kakhulu somewhat agree 2 Over the past few years, the caregiving burden for women like somewhat disagree 3 myself has worsened significantly strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 914 Lomtfwalo wekunakekela sewente kwaba lukhuni kutsi strongly agree 1 singetama kufuna indlela yekwakha imali somewhat agree 2 The increased caregiving burden has meant that women such as somewhat disagree 3 myself have little time to try and earn incomes strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not applicable - no increased caregiving burden 6 915 Kukhula kweligciwane le HIV likhulise kubandlululana lakhaya strongly agree 1 The rise in HIV&AIDS has increased stigma within this homestead somewhat agree 2 somewhat disagree 3 strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not applicable - no impact of HIV&AIDS here 6 916 Ngenca yalendlela lelikhaya lelingilo, kulukhuni kutsi bomake strongly agree 1 emadladleni langakemi kahle babhekane netinkinga letibahlaselako somewhat agree 2 Because of the structure of homesteads, it is difficult for women in somewhat disagree 3 disadvantaged households in the homestead to overcome the problems strongly disagree 4 they face do not know/not certain 5 917 Tinhlelo letihlose kusita, atisebentisi kahle loko lokukhona strongly agree 1 ngoba atibuketi tindzaba tebulili somewhat agree 2 Overall, targeting of impact mitigation services mis-directs somewhat disagree 3 resources because it does not account for gender factors strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 - 91 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO SKIP QUESTIONS 918 to 935 IF THERE IS ONLY ONE HOUSEHOLD 918 Kusima kwetfu kulakhaya, siyakhona kubambisana ngetintfo strongly agree 1 lakhaya somewhat agree 2 Our strength is our homestead system, where we can effectively somewhat disagree 3 share resources across households strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 919 Nawubuka eminyakeni leyengcile, ungasho yini kutsi kaNgwane strongly agree 1 kube nekulahleka kwesimilo kubantfu . lokwentela phansi indlela somewhat agree 2 lesimelana ngayo netinkinga somewhat disagree 3 In the past few decades, there has been a moral decline in strongly disagree 4 Swaziland that undermines our coping do not know/not certain 5 920 Eminyakeni lelishumi lelengcile sisindvo seligciwane le HIV strongly agree 1 emphakatsini selenta emakhaya lamanyenti angakhoni kumelana somewhat agree 2 nesimo somewhat disagree 3 In the past decade or so, the impacts of HIV&AIDS on our strongly disagree 4 communities has been so severe that many of our homesteads do not know/not certain 5 simply cannot cope any more 921 Indlela yelisiko lekutsatsa sitsembu imcoka ekuvikeleni bantfu strongly agree 1 ekwehleni kwelizinga lemnotfo ngoba lolusito lwakha budlelwane somewhat agree 2 kubantfu somewhat disagree 3 The system of polygyny has been important in protecting us from strongly disagree 4 economic decline, because it strengthens our social systems do not know/not certain 5 922 Sitsembu sentela phansi indlela bomake labatsetfwe ngayo strongly agree 1 kumelana nesimo lesiletfwa yi HIV somewhat agree 2 The system of polygamy has weakened the ability of married somewhat disagree 3 women to cope with the situation we all face in Swaziland due to strongly disagree 4 HIV&AIDS do not know/not certain 5 923 Kuchutjwa kwendlela yekulobola kumcoka ngoba kuvikela strongly agree 1 besifazane etintfweni letimbi emangweni netemnotfo letiletswa somewhat agree 2 ngumbulalave somewhat disagree 3 The continuation of the system of bride price has an important strongly disagree 4 positive impact on protecting women from the negative impacts do not know/not certain 5 on the society and economy due to HIV&AIDS 924 Ngenca yembulalave sidzingo sekutsi bantfwana bayosebenta strongly agree 1 senyukile Because of HIV&AIDS, the situation of children having somewhat agree 2 to go to work to help with homestead income has worsened somewhat disagree 3 strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 925 Lendlela lekutfolakala ngayo lusito lwangaphandle kusita emakhaya strongly agree 1 sekwentele phansi indlela bantfu bebakhona kwetsembela kulabanye somewhat agree 2 phambilini somewhat disagree 3 The way in which interventions to support homesteads have come strongly disagree 4 from outside have undermined the extent to which we used to be able do not know/not certain 5 to rely on one another not true - interventions do not come from outside 6 926 Lendlela lekutfolakala ngayo lusito lwangaphandle noma strongly agree 1 etinhlanganweni sekwenta kutsi bantfu lamangweni bangasafuni somewhat agree 2 kusita emangweni somewhat disagree 3 The way in which interventions to support homesteads have come strongly disagree 4 from outside has weakened the willingness of local people to help do not know/not certain 5 in the community not true - interventions do not come from outside 6 927 Kunelusito loluchamuka ngaphandle lolucondziswa kubantfu strongly agree 1 kungakabi nekukhulumisan emangweni lokubese kubanga somewhat agree 2 kungevani kahle somewhat disagree 3 There are some interventions here that target based on outside strongly disagree 4 criteria, and this causes conflict do not know/not certain 5 not true - no such interventions 6 - 92 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 928 Liningi lwelusito lwangephandle luvame kuletsa lusito lesinalo strongly agree 1 kunaloku lesikudzingile somewhat agree 2 Most interventions by outside agencies here are based on what somewhat disagree 3 they have to offer, not based on what we need strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not true - no such interventions 6 929 Igogo centre isebenta kahle lamangweni The kaGogo centre strongly agree 1 system works well in this community somewhat agree 2 somewhat disagree 3 strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no kaGogo system here 6 930 Igogo centre isebenta kahle lamangweni ekuboneni labo laba strongly agree 1 dzinge lusito kakhulu somewhat agree 2 The kaGogo system of listing those most in need of assistance if somewhat disagree 3 quite effective in targeting those most in need strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no kaGogo system here 6 931 Igogo centre isebenta kahle kuchuba tinhlelo letiphakanyiswa strongly agree 1 ngumango somewhat agree 2 The kaGogo system of providing a formal and physical centre for somewhat disagree 3 co-ordinating communities initiatives is effective in helping to co- strongly disagree 4 ordinate community initiatives do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no kaGogo system here 6 932 Emadladla asemangweni ebantfwana ekunoneni labo labadzingile strongly agree 1 The neighbourhood care point system is quite effective in targeting somewhat agree 2 those most in need somewhat disagree 3 strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not relevant - no kaGogo system here 6 933 Lolusito lolutfolakala ngaphandle alusiti kakhulu linyenti strongly agree 1 lalabadzingile emangweni. somewhat agree 2 Overall, services that are determined from outside do not serve the somewhat disagree 3 needs of the most needy in this community strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not applicable - services not offered 6 934 Kusimo sekumukela loko lesinikwa kona kunekufuna strongly agree 1 lesikudzingako. somewhat agree 2 It really is a situation of ‘accepting services offered’, not somewhat disagree 3 ‘demanding services we need’ strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not applicable - services not offered 6 935 Liningi lemadvodza lelitsetse ka Ngwane livama kuba nelidladla strongly agree 1 eceleni lelishende Many married men in Swaziland maintain a somewhat agree 2 separate household for a woman they are not married to, but have somewhat disagree 3 a long-term relationship with strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 ASK ALL 936 Bancane betfu lebamukelako labangatsi lelebakumukelako kabo, strongly agree 1 siyemukela nje loko lesesinikwe kona somewhat agree 2 Few of us that are receiving services can really claim them as our somewhat disagree 3 own -- we simply receive what is offered strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 not applicable - not receive 6 services - 93 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 937 Inkinga lenkhulu lesihlangana nayo kutsi lolusito alufiki strongly agree 1 ngesikhatsi nekutsi asati luta nini? somewhat agree 2 One of the main problems we face is the inconsistency and somewhat disagree 3 irregularity of services offered strongly disagree 4 do not know/not certain 5 Go to not applicable - not receive 6 940 services 938 Nawubuka lolusito loluletfwako, ungasho yini kutsi lwafika yini very well targeted 1 lapho lwaludzingeke khona kakhulu kulelikhaya? somewhat well targeted 2 Overall, considering the services provided, please rate the extent to not very well targeted 3 which you believe that the services reached those most in need in not at all well targeted 4 your homestead. Rate this as ‘very well targeted’, ‘somewhat well do not know/cannot say 5 targeted’, ‘not very well targeted’, ‘not at all well targeted’. 939 [If homestead contains more than one household] very well targeted 1 Nawubuka lolusito loluletfwako, ungasho yini kutsi lwafika yini somewhat well targeted 2 lapho lwaludzingeke khona kakhulu kulelidladla? not very well targeted 3 Overall, considering the services provided, please rate the extent not at all well targeted 4 to which you believe that the services reached the households most do not know/cannot say 5 in need in your homestead. Rate this as ‘very well targeted’, ‘somewhat well targeted’, ‘not very well targeted’, ‘not at all well targeted’. 942 SKIP ALL i QUESTIONS FROM 942a to 942g IF THERE IS ONLY ONE HOUSEHOLD Over the year, has anyone in this HOUSEHOLD been in the following situation: 942a Wakhatsateka kutsi kudla kutawuphela ningakayitfoli imali yes 1 942ai yekutsenga lokunye noma ningakavuni? no 2 942b Worried that food would run out before we got money to buy food, or that we would run out before we were able to harvest 942ai [If yes to 942a] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla noma lamanye some of them 2 Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 942b Nabhekana nesimo lapho kudla kwaphela sangabi nalenye indlela yes 1 942bi yekutfola lokunye? no 2 942c Faced a situation where food ran out and we did not have any way to get more 942bi [If yes to 942b] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla noma lamanye some of them 2 Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 942c Nabhekana nesimo lapho singakhoni kudla, kudla yes 1 942ci lokunemaseko lamtsatsatfu? no 2 942d Faced a situation where we could not eat balanced meals that included at least some meat 942ci [If yes to 942c] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla noma lamanye some of them 2 Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? Nabhekana nesimo sekungadli ekuseni, emini nantsambama? 942d Nabhekana nesimo lapho satsembela khona kakhulu ekudleni yes 1 942di lokunchutfwa emasimini. no 2 942e Faced a situation where we had to rely heavily on veld foods 942di [If yes to 942d] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla noma lamanye some of them 2 Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 942e Nabhekana nesimo sekungadli ekuseni, emini nantsambama? yes 1 942ei Faced a situation where we had to reduce the number of meals we no 2 942f had 942ei [If yes to 942e] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla noma lamanye some of them 2 Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? - 94 - Q# Questions and Enumerator Instructions Responses Codes GO Sup. TO 942f Nabhekana nesimo lapho kwadzingeka kutsi ninciphise lizinga yes 1 942fi lekudla? no 2 942g Faced a situation where we had to eat inadequate portions of food with each meal 942fi [If yes to 942f] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla noma lamanye some of them 2 Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? 942g Nabhekana nesimo lapho khona kute lowadla lilanga lonkhe yes 1 942gi ngoba bekute kudla noma imali lekukutsenga? no 2 mod Faced a situation where no one in the household ate for at least one 10 entire day because we had no food and could not afford to purchase/could not harvest 942gi [If yes to 942g] all of them 1 Lesimo sibe kuwo wonkhe emadladla noma lamanye some of them 2 Did this affect all households in the homestead, or just some of them? MODULE 10: CLOSING QUESTIONS Kukhona Longakusho noma longafuna kukubuta singakaphetsi? Do you have any final comments to make before we close? Any questions of your own? End of interview. Thank the person for their cooperation. Record finish time. Circle level of co- operation below. If there are any responses that you think are unreliable, write under "comments" which questions and why you think that they are unreliable. - 95 - 1001) Sengigcina nje, kukhona yini indlela yekuphalala lengasita ekutseni lelikhaya lingagcini nje ngekumelana nesimo kuphela kodvwa liphindze litfutfuke. As a final question, are there any interventions that would have a significant impact on the ability of your homestead to recover from just coping to moving towards growth and recovery? ____ ____ - 1 yes [go to 1001a] ____ - 2 no/DK [finish interview] 1001a) [If yes to 1001] Kungaba yini lolosito? What would the two most important interventions be? [Enum: tick 1 to 2 responses] ____ - 1 legal support ____ - 6 material support ____ ____ - 2 land (agriculture) ____ - 7 psychosocial support ____ ____ - 3 socialisation ____ - 8 financial support ____ - 4 education ____ - 9 housing ____ - 5 medical support ____ - 10 other___________________ 1002) [Enum: Rate the homestead in terms of poverty categories as follows:] ____ ____ - 1 not vulnerable (and not at risk) ____ - 2 not vulnerable (but at risk of vulnerability in future) ____ - 3 somewhat vulnerable to poverty ____ - 4 vulnerable to poverty ____ - 5 very vulnerable ____ - 6 destitute ____ - 7 most vulnerable (no longer in the cash economy) 1003) Indicate the materials used for the main structure on the property: ____ ____ - 1 informal materials ____ - 2 formal materials 1004) Rate the seriousness of hygiene and environmental sanitation challenges at the household: ____ ____ - 1 very serious ____ - 3 not very serious ____ - 2 somewhat serious ____ - 4 not at all serious 1004) Level of co-operation ____ ____ - 1 high ____ - 2 medium ____ - 3 low PLEASE RECORD THE FINISH TIME: __________________ [Enum: Please transfer answer to Q101, page 4 and calculate total time] - 96 -