Impact Evaluation of the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme 2010
South Africa, 2010
Get Microdata
Reference ID
ZAF_2010_UISP_v01_M
Producer(s)
Sebastian Martinez, Arianna Legovini, Nandini Krishnan, Aidan Coville
Collection(s)
Created on
Jul 13, 2012
Last modified
Sep 26, 2013
Page views
62150
Downloads
8036
Identification
Survey ID Number
ZAF_2010_UISP_v01_M
Title
Impact Evaluation of the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme 2010
Country/Economy
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| South Africa | ZAF |
Study type
Other Household Survey [hh/oth]
Abstract
In 2004, South African National Department of Human Settlements (NDOHS) launched Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme with the goal to facilitate structured improvements of informal settlements and make beneficiaries' living conditions better.
With the technical assistance from the World Bank, NDOHS conducted a series of impact evaluations to assess the effects of the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme (UISP) interventions in Free State, Limpopo and Gauteng Provinces. The research was designed to reliably identify causal links between the rollout of UISP and the outcomes of interest driven by policy prescriptions (as well as broader concerns) for the program.
The study areas chosen allow for four comparisons. In Limpopo, the design allows for estimating the impact of relocating households from an informal settlement with no services (Eastern Disteneng), to a formalized greenfield site with comprehensive services and supporting community facilities (Extension 44/76). Household level survey data was collected from a sample of 432 households from Extension 44/76 (treatment group) and 726 households in Disteneng (control group).
In Free State, the relative impacts of being provided with a fully serviced stand (Bloemside) to being provided with a partially serviced subsidized house on the site of the original informal dwelling (Grasslands) are compared. By exploiting the phased approach to the study, estimates can also be made on the long-term impacts of being provided with a subsidized home, by comparing Grasslands II residents who have been living in their upgraded homes for three or four years to the neighboring Grasslands III residents who have had their subsidized homes for one to two years. Researchers surveyed 1,014 households: 370 households from Grasslands II, 289 from Grasslands III and 355 from Bloemside.
In Gauteng, the impact of fully upgrading an area compared to a partial upgrade (less than 50% households receiving housing and electricity) can be estimated. The study exploits the phased roll out of Extensions upgrades to compare the extensively upgraded area of Extension 1 (398 household surveyed) to the partially upgraded areas of Extensions 2 and 3 where 905 households were surveyed.
Datasets from Free State and Limpopo provinces are documented here.
With the technical assistance from the World Bank, NDOHS conducted a series of impact evaluations to assess the effects of the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme (UISP) interventions in Free State, Limpopo and Gauteng Provinces. The research was designed to reliably identify causal links between the rollout of UISP and the outcomes of interest driven by policy prescriptions (as well as broader concerns) for the program.
The study areas chosen allow for four comparisons. In Limpopo, the design allows for estimating the impact of relocating households from an informal settlement with no services (Eastern Disteneng), to a formalized greenfield site with comprehensive services and supporting community facilities (Extension 44/76). Household level survey data was collected from a sample of 432 households from Extension 44/76 (treatment group) and 726 households in Disteneng (control group).
In Free State, the relative impacts of being provided with a fully serviced stand (Bloemside) to being provided with a partially serviced subsidized house on the site of the original informal dwelling (Grasslands) are compared. By exploiting the phased approach to the study, estimates can also be made on the long-term impacts of being provided with a subsidized home, by comparing Grasslands II residents who have been living in their upgraded homes for three or four years to the neighboring Grasslands III residents who have had their subsidized homes for one to two years. Researchers surveyed 1,014 households: 370 households from Grasslands II, 289 from Grasslands III and 355 from Bloemside.
In Gauteng, the impact of fully upgrading an area compared to a partial upgrade (less than 50% households receiving housing and electricity) can be estimated. The study exploits the phased roll out of Extensions upgrades to compare the extensively upgraded area of Extension 1 (398 household surveyed) to the partially upgraded areas of Extensions 2 and 3 where 905 households were surveyed.
Datasets from Free State and Limpopo provinces are documented here.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
- Households,
- Individuals.
- Individuals.
Version
Version Description
v01
Edited, anonymous datasets for public distribution.
Edited, anonymous datasets for public distribution.
Scope
Notes
- Household demographic information
- Education
- Economic activity
- Health
- Borrowing, credit and savings
- Microenterprise
- Crime and violence
- Housing and tenure
- Infrastructure and service delivery
- Social capital and community participation
- Satisfaction with municipal services, neighbourhood and local officials
- Living conditions.
- Education
- Economic activity
- Health
- Borrowing, credit and savings
- Microenterprise
- Crime and violence
- Housing and tenure
- Infrastructure and service delivery
- Social capital and community participation
- Satisfaction with municipal services, neighbourhood and local officials
- Living conditions.
Coverage
Geographic Coverage
Limpopo, Free State and Gauteng provinces.
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Sebastian Martinez | Inter-American Development Bank |
| Arianna Legovini | World Bank |
| Nandini Krishnan | World Bank |
| Aidan Coville | World Bank |
Producers
| Name |
|---|
| Mulalo Muthige |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name | Abbreviation |
|---|---|
| Spanish Impact Evaluation Fund, World Bank | SIEF |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
Since the intention of this pilot impact evaluation was not to conduct a nationally representative study, the sampling strategy aimed at maximizing the internal validity of the study by ensuring that the control and treatment groups were comparable, where external validity was a secondary consideration. As such, the representivity of the results when scaling up to the provincial or national level needs to be done with care.
Detailed information about sampling methodology is available in "Measuring Success in Human Settlements Development" report (p.31-36) in external resources.
Detailed information about sampling methodology is available in "Measuring Success in Human Settlements Development" report (p.31-36) in external resources.
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2010-03 | 2010-06 |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face [f2f]
Supervision
To ensure accuracy of the data collected, a rigorous quality check and supervision regime was implemented which included the following activities:
- Field visits were conducted by NDOHS and World Bank officials on a weekly basis to ensure field procedures were being followed and data were being collected in a professional and consistent manner;
- Call backs were conducted on a random set of households to independently verify that the information that was collected was correct and accurate;
- Manual quality checks of questionnaires were conducted by field supervisors, project managers, NDOHS and World Bank staff to assess the quality of questionnaires and conduct call backs/follow ups where necessary;
- A rigorous supervision structure was implemented. Field supervisors were in charge of 4-5 field workers, with a provincial coordinator overseeing the field supervisors;
- A sample of 10% captured questionnaires was double-checked for accuracy of the data capturing process.
While a number of challenges were experienced in the field which resulted in non-responses and quality concerns, all of these stringent measures were put in place to ensure the reliability and validity of collected data which supports and improves the confidence of the results that come from these data.
- Field visits were conducted by NDOHS and World Bank officials on a weekly basis to ensure field procedures were being followed and data were being collected in a professional and consistent manner;
- Call backs were conducted on a random set of households to independently verify that the information that was collected was correct and accurate;
- Manual quality checks of questionnaires were conducted by field supervisors, project managers, NDOHS and World Bank staff to assess the quality of questionnaires and conduct call backs/follow ups where necessary;
- A rigorous supervision structure was implemented. Field supervisors were in charge of 4-5 field workers, with a provincial coordinator overseeing the field supervisors;
- A sample of 10% captured questionnaires was double-checked for accuracy of the data capturing process.
While a number of challenges were experienced in the field which resulted in non-responses and quality concerns, all of these stringent measures were put in place to ensure the reliability and validity of collected data which supports and improves the confidence of the results that come from these data.
Data Collectors
| Name |
|---|
| Vari Consulting |
Questionnaires
Questionnaires
Household Questionnaire consisted of 14 modules and required approximately two hours to complete. Trained enumerators administered the questionnaire.
Access policy
Contacts
| Name | Affiliation | |
|---|---|---|
| Aidan Coville | World Bank | acoville@worldbank.org |
Access conditions
Public use files
Citation requirements
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the identification of the primary investigator
- the title of the survey (including country, acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download.
Example:
Sebastian Martinez, Inter-American Development Bank; Arianna Legovini, World Bank; Nandini Krishnan, World Bank; Aidan Coville, World Bank. South Africa - Impact Evaluation of the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme (UISP)2010. Ref. ZAF_2010_UISP_v01_M. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date].
- the identification of the primary investigator
- the title of the survey (including country, acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download.
Example:
Sebastian Martinez, Inter-American Development Bank; Arianna Legovini, World Bank; Nandini Krishnan, World Bank; Aidan Coville, World Bank. South Africa - Impact Evaluation of the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme (UISP)2010. Ref. ZAF_2010_UISP_v01_M. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date].
Disclaimer and copyrights
Disclaimer
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
DDI_ZAF_2010_UISP_v01_M
Producers
| Name | Abbreviation | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Development Data Group | DECDG | The World Bank | Documentation of the DDI |
Date of Metadata Production
2012-05-16
DDI Document version
v01
First version of metadata documentation (May 2012)
First version of metadata documentation (May 2012)