Baseline Survey Bhopal - UN-HABITAT Pakistan

BASELINE SURVEYStatus of water and sanitation in the slums of Bhopal(AIF CIF component of Project Uday)

BASELINE SURVEYStatus of Water and sanitation in the Slums of Bhopal(AIF CIF component of Project Uday)WaterAid India2009

List of AbbreviationsPMU = Project Management UnitPIU = Project Implementation UnitDSC = Design & Supervision ConsultancyWA = WaterAidUNH = United Nations HabitatMIC = Mayor in councilBMC = Bhopal Muncipal CorporationIHHT = Individual Household toiletCT = Community toiletSWM = Solid waste managementExecutive Summary1.0 Background & MethodologyThis is a baseline survey report of the selected slums of Bhopal for interventions under AIF/CIF component ofProject Uday (Urban Water Supply and Environmental Improvement in Madhya Pradesh), an integrated urbaninfrastructure development project. The Project is designed to establish and upgrade essential urbaninfrastructure and services particularly in the areas of potable water supplies, wastewater, drainage and solidwaste management.UN Habitat and Water Aid Australia has entered into a partnership agreement to support the implementationof this project by facilitating the community initiatives. This is a part of UN Habitat's larger programme of Waterfor Asian Cities, which focuses, pro-poor governance, water demand management, increased attention toenvironmental sanitation and income generation for the poor linked to water supply and sanitation. In India theWAC program is implemented in 4 cities of Madhya Pradesh Bhopal, Indore, Gwalior and Jabalpur. The projectaims at facilitating the government of Madhya Pradesh addressing the water and sanitation needs of thecommunities in the slums of 4 cities.2.0 Baseline Survey and Needs AssessmentThe slums have been identified by the PIU/DSC community development staff and participating localpartners on the basis of the MAPPR deficiency matrix analysis, along with reference to the Poverty PocketSituation Analysis (PPSA).Out of an initial listing of priority order slums, a short listing of targeted priority slums was identified andapproved by the MIC, in line with the MAPPR.A baseline survey was recently carried out in the selected slums, the locations of which are shown in map(Appendix-A). This was conducted through collaboration with WaterAID, during January to March 2008. The surveycovered a total of 3035 households which included 3192 families within the households. The survey was conductedthrough a detailed questionnaire and included survey of all the households of the targeted priority slums3.0 Socio-Demographic CharacteristicsThe survey was undertaken in 10 slums of the Bhopal city. Across the slums a total of 3035 households werecovered in which 3192 families were interviewed. The key characteristics are:Caste Structure• 52% of households belonged to general category while nearly 24% belonged to other backward caste(OBC).• 12% of the households were from scheduled caste category and 11% were scheduled tribeAge and Sex Distribution• 37% of the population belongs to the age group of 0-14 years, followed by 15-49 years of age group(57%). Nearly 5% of the surveyed population is found aged 6 years and above. Overall genderdistribution of population indicates 51% of males and 49% of females.vivii

A little more than half of the respondents watch DD/National channel. Majority (95.4%) of the respondents donot read any news paper and the rest of the respondents prefer to read Dainik Bhaskar (1.9%), Dainik Jagaran(1.4%), Raj Express (1.2%) and Nav Bharat (0.1%). Almost 97% of the respondents do not listen to any of theradio channel, while 2% of the respondents prefer to listen FM, Vividh Bharti (1.0%) and Mirchi (0.2%).When the respondents were asked if they are ready to pay for the better water condition in the community, itwas found that almost half of the respondents (51%) were ready to pay and the rest (495) would not like to pay.1.1 Background1BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGYBhopal, the capital city of Madhya Pradesh with a population of 1.43 million (2001), in an area of 284.9 sq km,has the highest urban poverty ratio of 48.4% (199,394) of all Indian states. An estimated 8.81% of Bhopal'spopulation lives in notified slums (2000 figures: PPSA). Over the last few decades, the size of the population hasexpanded, with the decadal growth rate of reaching 34.92% (2001), due mainly to urban bound migrationtrends, which has dramatically increased population in the core areas, existing settlements and newlydeveloped settlements, leading to heavily congested urban and peri-urban areas. This has resulted in a markedupsurge in demand of the inadequately suited infrastructure services, particularly in the areas of potable watersupplies, wastewater, storm water drainage and solid waste management. These urban services have not beendeveloped in line with the demands of the ever expanding urbanization. Urban expansion has been matchedwith requisite industrialization and infrastructure growth, which has put enormous stress on variousinfrastructural service levels and resources, including demand on land, energy, water supply and waste disposalfacilities.Due to lack of planned settlement and shelter for the urban poor, Bhopal has witnessed substantial increase ininformal settlements, notified and non-notified slums especially. BMC is divided into 66 wards, with 209locations notified as slums, along with 171 irregular colonies or un-notified slums, amounting to a total of 380poverty pockets. In the last twenty years; these poverty pockets have become the most service, orinfrastructure deficient, locations of the city.The issue of acute water and sanitation deficiency among all project city dwellers—residential (high, middle,low and slum settlements), commercial and institutional groups is alarming and degrading day by day due tourban slum population explosion, but with support from UN-Habitat & WaterAid with its partner NGOs, ProjectUDAY will be targeting the most marginalized populations, in 40 selected slums in the four major cities ofBhopal, Gwalior, Jabalpur and Indore.1.2 Brief Project DescriptionUN Habitat and Water Aid Australia has entered into a partnership agreement to support the implementationof this project by facilitating the community initiatives. This is a part of UN Habitat's large Water for Asian Citiesprogramme, which focuses, pro-poor governance, water demand management, increased attention toenvironmental sanitation and income generation for the poor linked to water supply and sanitation. In India theWAC program is implemented in 4 cities of Madhya Pradesh Bhopal, Indore, Gwalior and Jabalpur. The projectaims at facilitating the government of Madhya Pradesh addressing the water and sanitation needs of thecommunities in the slums of 4 cities. Its objective is to promote pro poor water and sanitation governance sothat poor have affordable access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities which may improve their healthx1

2and productivity and alleviate poverty through better income generation and livelihood opportunities. Theprogram also focuses on the promotion of urban water demand management and bridging the sanitation gapensuring access to service for all in a particular area in which communities may be involved in both service andmaintenance.Project UDAY (Urban Water Supply and Environmental Improvement in Madhya Pradesh) is an integratedurban infrastructure development project inclusive of institutional strengthening requirements. The Project isdesigned to establish and upgrade essential urban infrastructure and services particularly in the areas ofpotable water supplies, wastewater, drainage and solid waste management.1.3 Project Objectives and Component PartsThe Project will specifically involve providing sustainable basic urban infrastructure and services to all citizensof the Project cities; and ensure the capacity building of the Project cities to plan and manage urban serviceutility provisions in a more effective, transparent and sustainable manner. The Project comprises of thefollowing three component parts:Part A: Urban Infrastructure and Environmental Improvement: is focused on improving and expandingpriority urban water supply and environmental infrastructure and services, inclusive of urban watersupply, sewerage and sanitation, storm water drainage and solid waste management.Part B: Urban Governance, Institutional Development and Public Participation: utilization ofcommunity level funds and designed to increase the awareness and participation of the projectbeneficiaries in project implementation.Part C: Project Implementation Assistance: support during project implementation to the ProjectManagement Unit (PMU) at state level and the Project Implementation Units (PIU's) at city level.1.4 MAPPR ProcessThe MAPPR process has been used to target priority slums for investment based on the poverty andenvironmental infrastructure deficiency matrix, which has included the following primary objectives:• Promoting and supporting the urban planning reforms;• Linking strategic economic development plans, land-use planning and poverty reduction planning;• Capacity building for the Municipal Corporation and Communities;• Developing slum networking programme;• Strengthening community organization;• Providing start-up funds to promote a programme for comprehensive integrated basic needsprovision in targeted priority slums;• Provide demand driven funding for community identified social sector and non-physical initiativesaimed at poverty reduction; and• Converging funds for technical support to urban planning and slum improvement.Through the urban governance, institutional development and promotion of public participation, which isdesigned to increase the awareness and participation of the Project beneficiaries, implementation of Part B ofProject UDAY has been made through the application of the MAPPR approach. Hence, requisite initiativesunder the Community Development component of the Project are to be implemented under the following:• Area Improvement Fund (AIF): aimed at improving the quality of life of the urban disadvantaged groupsand poorly served settlements, with inadequate infrastructure, which will attain integrated slumimprovements through participatory planning; and• Community Initiatives Fund (CIF): for social sector pro-poor initiatives and gender relatedinterventions, inclusive of support for community facilities, education and income generationactivities.• Community Initiatives Fund (CIF): for social sector pro-poor initiatives and gender relatedinterventions, inclusive of support for community facilities, education and income generationactivities.1.5 Area Improvement Fund WorksThe Area Improvement Fund is to be available to the Municipal Corporation for the implementation of aprogramme of area improvements within the framework of the MAPPR, Viable schemes include integratedcommunity managed water supply and sanitation schemes to provide comprehensive basic needs forupgrading of slum and poor settlements.Subsequent allocations under AIF and CIF will be performance-based. This will be according to the monitoringand evaluation of the initial implementation stage; and modified to provide an incentive based approach,dependant on an assessment of performance and to encourage convergence of other programme relatedfunding.1.6 Community Initiatives Fund ActivitiesCIF initiatives will be directed towards training of community registered societies, inclusive of the managementactivities of the established water supply and sanitation schemes. In this way, it is perceived that the overallimplementation of the community development component of the two projects will ensure full levels ofcoordination and proceed without any undue duplication.The Community Initiatives Fund will be made available to communities within the selected slums, as selectedthrough the MAPPR process to finance social sector and non-physical initiatives, which through a communityplanning process, will be identified to meet priority needs of a particular community. Self Help Groups will beprovided with hygiene education to enhance quality of life and make women aware of the importance ofproper hygiene within families. This knowledge will lead to improved behavioral practices by children and thewider family. Women may also be trained as mechanics and masons, which can serve as sources of income.CIF initiatives would generally be implemented in those locations where communities have satisfactorilymobilized under the AIF interventions.It is proposed that Community Initiatives Fund (CIF) interventions should also be implemented through closecoordination with the MPUSP programme, which is considering the setting up a Community Development trust3

fund, which would use CIF collectively and look to augment funding through the Trust, for implementation ofCIF work.1.7 Partners in the Project• Government of Madhya Pradesh (Project Uday)• Bhopal Municipal Corporation• UN Habitat• WaterAid• Aarambh• Community2.1 Slum Selection Methodology2BASELINE SURVEY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENTThe slums have been identified by the PIU/DSC community development staff and participating local partnerson the basis of the MAPPR deficiency matrix analysis, along with reference to the Poverty Pocket SituationAnalysis (PPSA). In order to identify the poverty pockets within targeted slums and finalize selection of the mostvulnerable slums, the following basic MAPPR process was adopted:• Majority of population belongs to the Below Poverty Line (BPL) category (having per capita monthlyincome below Rs.522.64 and no household tenure security);• Analysis of the adequacy levels of service provisions under basic water and sanitation infrastructureand related service delivery mechanisms;• Economic vulnerability of the people with special reference to the conditions of women and girlchildren;• Basic environmental situation with regard to water and sanitation that has an immediate and adverseimpact on health and hygiene;• Willingness and basic interest among the inhabitants to participate and contribute for initiating andimplementing identified AIF works and CIF activities;• Keen interest in being trained on vocations that will lead to income generation activities;• Ensuring non-duplication of efforts under the development scheme with regard to other relateddevelopment projects such as MPUSP and JNNURM, etc;• MAPPR deficiency matrix scoring process, refer to Table 2.1 ;• Adopted full consultation and discussion process with government officials and municipal corporationworkers, as well as elected representatives, who are fully familiar with their wards and poverty pocketstherein;2.2 MAPPR Deficiency Matrix and Slum SelectionOut of an initial listing of priority order slums, a short listing of targeted priority slums was identified andapproved by the MIC, in line with the MAPPR. Due consideration of current Project UDAY infrastructuraldevelopment contracts, and proposed future interventions under the various development Projects, focus wasalso given regarding final scope of work in each of the selected slums. The Municipal Corporation has reviewedthe short listing of the selected target slums and after detailed discussions the MIC accorded final approval ofthe 10 slums.45

6Table 2.1: Component-wise Deficiency Matrix CategoriesSector Category (1):Good Category (2):Medium Category (3):Components:Poor / WorseWater Supply 35-50Hrs.per week 25-35 hrs. per week Less than 25 Hrs. per weekWastewater More than 75% 50% or more 25% or lessSanitation/ Toilets household have toilets households have toilets households have toiletsStorm water Pucca drain Pucca drain Kutcha drainDrainage coverage 75% coverage 50% in some lanes onlySolid Waste Weekly at least Weekly at least No formal garbageCollection 3 days 1-2 days collection serviceRoad Access 75% area covered 5o% area covered by 25% or less area with anyby "pucca" road "pucca" or "kutcha' road type of approach road2.3 Baseline Survey of Selected SlumsAA baseline survey was recently carried out in the selected 10 slums. This was conducted through collaborationwith WaterAID, during January to March 2008. The survey covered a total of 3035 households which included3192 families within the households. The survey was conducted through a detailed questionnaire and includedsurvey of all the households of the targeted priority slums, covering the following major aspects:• existing water sources and problems of quantity and quality;• details of household water usage;• common hygiene practices and cultural beliefs;• capacity and willingness of the community to pay towards recurrent costs of operating water andsanitation provisions;• latrine coverage and usage;• gender roles and analysis; and• Existing institutional organizational structures and their present and potential roles.The baseline survey included a gender analysis, highlighting the roles of women and men in relation to waterand sanitation. The project activities will be designed to include women not only as beneficiaries of water andsanitation outputs, but also as integral players in the process. In this way, the strategic role of women in relationto institutions and development activities, within their communities, will be enhanced. The baseline data willbe used as bench marking for future monitoring and evaluation purposes in assessing the impact of the Projectand AIF/CIF interventions.2.4 Data Processing and EntryThe project coordinators along with the research team members have provided inputs at various stages of dataprocessing. After field editing, questionnaires were returned to the main survey office for data processing. Theprocessing operation consisted of office editing, coding of others category open-ended questions, data entry,and editing inconsistencies found by the computer programs.The data entry and validation work of the survey was handled in-house by Sambodhi by using the mostadvanced data analysis package namely CS Pro. Once the data was stored in computer in readable form, thenext task was to eliminate the more obvious errors that had occurred during the data collection, coding andinput stages. An edit program was specified for this purpose. This helped in taking care of missing values, skips,range checks and checks for inconsistency. The edit programme had a set of instructions for the computerpackage used that automatically examine, and draws attention to, any record that appears to have an error in it.In case of pre-coded response choices there was a need to list and develop a coding frame for the various'other” response choices that were offered to respondents whose replies did not fit the codes given.Responses in others category were listed by the investigator after the data have been collected, and thengrouped by theme for the development of an appropriate coding frame. The data was edited before beingpresented as information. This action ensured that the information provided is accurate, complete andconsistent and to ensure these three types of checks were applied namely validity check, range check andconsistency check.2.5 Analysis and Report WritingAfter data processing, data analysis was conducted. Analysis of the data was carried out using the mostadvanced data analysis package namely SPSS. As the study intends to develop a baseline of water andsanitation indicators in slums of Bhopal with respect to certain indicators, the analysis of the survey is guided bythe research objective. The preparation of final report involved following tasks:-a. Developing Data Entry Programmesb. Scrutiny and coding of interview schedulesc. Data entry of the raw datad. Data interpretation and analysise. Report writing2.6 Need AssessmentWaterThe current water situation in the slums surveyed is not very satisfying with 74% of people using thepublic sources to access water. Among whom 84 % use the public stand post to avail water. Therequirement of water in these slums is much more than they are able to get. The findings depict that 83%of people get water between 100-150 L per day when 97% of people require water above 200 L per day.60% of people have to put in half an hour to fetch water and they fetch water 3 times a day spendingalmost one and half hours daily fetching water. 66 % of women have the responsibility to fetch water alongwith other responsibilities to shoulder.Thus as per the findings we assess that there is a dire need to address the issue by providing piped watersupply to these houses. Making water available to them at their door steps to avoid a lot of hassles facedby women during fetching water for their houses. This will also address the issue of safety of women andchildren. The supply provided will see to the minimum requirement of water above 200 L is fulfilled.7

SanitationSanitation has always been a concern in these slums with 40 % of the families defecating in the open. Thereare 38% of children who defecate in the open and 39% of women go in open for defecation. There are 3% ofpeople using the toilet facility and the existing facility has no separate facility for women.Women have to go to defecate in the open for defecation in order to address this need it is important toconstruct individual household toilets that are single pit and twin pit where the space permits and alsobuild community toilets where there is no space for construction of individual household toilets. Priority inthese slums should be given to individual toilets.Solid waste managementThe situation in these slums where solid waste management is concerned is quite bad. The waste is thrownin the open spoiling the environment of the slums. The spread of diseases and infection are rampant inthese slums due to the prevailing unhygienic conditions. The people are not only ignorant of the negativeimpacts due to unmanaged solid waste but there are no proper facilities provided in these slums to tacklethe solid waste generated in these slums.There are 65.4% of people who throw waste in the open and 16.4 % of people throwing waste on streets.There is no separation of waste at the household level nor there are dustbins provided. There is a need tohandle this issue as it is polluting the immediate environment as well as is a breeding ground for all diseasesin the slums. There is a need to provide facilities for garbage disposal, dustbins should be provided, a pickup facility3SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICSThe present study attempts to develop baseline indicators with respect to water supply, household water usepattern, availability and use of sanitation facilities as well as basic hygiene practices in slums of Bhopal city. Thefollowing chapter delves into basic profile of slums undertaken for the study.3.1 Profile of SlumsThe survey was undertaken in 10 slums of the Bhopal city. Across the slums a total of 3035 households werecovered in which 3192 families were interviewed. Distribution of families across the slums indicates maximumrepresentation from Nai Basti i.e. 22%, followed by Tagore Ward (12%) and Arjun Ward (12%). Slum-wisedistribution of households is represented in the table below (Table 3.1).Table 3.1: Slum-wise distribution of householdsName of the Number of Percent Number of Household PercentSlum families surveyed interviews completedSchool Sector 307 9.6 290 9.6Arjun Ward 396 12.4 345 11.4Sec-2 102 3.2 101 3.3Tagore Ward 372 11.7 370 12.2Mahaveer Basti 220 6.9 200 6.6Nai Basti 704 22.1 672 22.1Sec-1 242 7.6 229 7.5Ambedkar Basti 202 6.3 188 6.2Sec-5 282 8.8 282 9.3Shivaji Ward 365 11.4 358 11.8Total 3192 100.0 3035 100.089

3.2.3 Age-Sex Distribution of HouseholdsThe age and sex composition of the surveyed population is presented in Table 3.6. The age distribution ofslum population of Bhopal shows that nearly 37% of the population belongs to the age group of 0-14 years,followed by 15-49 years of age group (57%). Nearly 5% of the surveyed population is found aged 60 yearsand above. Overall gender distribution of population indicates 51% of males and 49% of females.Table 3.6: Age-Sex Distribution of surveyed households (Values in Percentage)60504053.3Educational Status of Surveyed PopulationAge group (in years) Male Female Total0-4 9.6 10.4 10.05-9 12.3 12.9 12.610-14 14.5 14.7 14.615-19 12.9 12.4 12.620-24 10.2 9.7 9.925-29 7.8 7.7 7.830-34 6.7 6.7 6.735-39 7.1 7.1 7.140-44 4.8 4.5 4.645-49 4.0 3.8 3.950-54 2.9 2.8 2.955-59 1.7 1.6 1.760-64 2.3 2.3 2.365-69 1.4 1.3 1.370+ 1.9 2.0 1.9Total N 42967 41616 84583Percent302010019.913.3Illiterate Primary Middle Secondary HigherSecondary3.2.5 Marital Status Distribution7.24 2.3GraduationMarital status distribution of surveyed population shows that 54% of the population was unmarried ascompared to 42% of married individuals. In addition to this nearly 4% of the population is reported to beseparated or divorced or widowed.Marital Status Distribution3.2.4 Level of Educational AttainmentDistribution of surveyed slum population based on their educational attainment indicates that nearly 20%of the population has completed primary education, while almost 13% have studied up to middle level ofschooling. Only 2% of the population is found to be Graduate. Majority of the population from slumcommunity were reported to be illiterate. Population residing in Tagore Ward is found to be on educationallyhigher side (refer table annexed), where proportion of individuals who have completed higher secondaryand Graduation is higher as compared to the other slum population.Separated,3.7Divorced,0.04 Widow/widower,0.04Unmarried,54.1Married,42.11213

3.2.6 Occupational Pattern and IncomeThe occupational pattern of the surveyed population show that majority of the population (i.e. nearly 22%)earn their income through wage labour. Only 2.4% are engaged in petty business or are running small shops.Followed by this about 2.3% are in private job whereas merely 1% of the population is in government serviceand 1.4% is unemployed. In addition to this around 25% of the population is housewives and 17% of thepopulation is of students.Prvate job2%Ownbusinessshop2%Notmentioned5%Unempoyed1%Occupational PatternSkiledworker1%Pens on0.3% Govt. Job1%Agricuture0.2%Dary0.0%Housewfe26%Desegregation analysis of monthly income at the level of caste category of the household reveals that mostof the households with income greater than Rs.1,500 belongs to general category, followed by OBChouseholds.. Further, relatively lower proportion of OBC and general category households earn less thanRs.1,000 per month.Table 3.8: Distribution of monthly income vis-à-vis caste categoryScheduled Scheduled Other Backward General (%) AverageCaste(%) Tribe (%) Caste (%)Less than Rs.1,000 35.3 29.3 16.3 9.6 16.5Rs.1,000-1,500 35.3 44.1 40.8 36.1 38.0Greater than Rs. 1,500 29.4 26.6 42.9 54.3 45.5Total 377 331 725 1602 3035Student17%Wage labour22%Child Elder23%Analysis of total monthly income of households indicates that nearly 45% of the population have incomemore than Rs.1,500 per month, whereas 38% of the households reported monthly income of Rs,1,000-1,5000 per month.Table 3.7: Distribution of households by monthly incomeMonthly IncomePercentLess than Rs.1,000 16.5Rs.1,000-1,500 38.0Greater than Rs.1,500 45.5Total Households surveyed 30351415

4KEY DETERMINANTS OF WATER SUPPLY SITUATIONWith regard to type of sources of water, it was reported that majority of the respondents (86%) use tap as asource of water and very few use tanker (8%) and other sources. Analysis at the level of slum indicates that,except two slums, in all the slums more than 90% reported tap water as the source of water. The twoexceptions being School Sector and Sector 2, where only 43% and 62% of the households use tap water assource of water, respectively (refer chart given below).Slum wise access to water source4.1 Water Resources and Use Pattern4.1.1 Ownership and Type of Source of Drinking WaterIn the present survey, it was found that almost three fourth (74%) of the interviewed respondents use thesource of water which is public, and used by all the families of that area. Only one third of the respondents(22%) had their personal source of drinking water. Slum wise comparison indicates that Tagore ward hasgreatest number of personal water sources (approx. 60%) while remaining slums procure water from publicsources (refer table annexed).Public73%Private1%Access to drinking water sourceAnyother2% Personal22%Table 4.1: Ownership pattern (values in percentage)Divideamongthemselves2%School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiPersonal 3.4 27.2 20.8 59.2 5.5 6.4 25.3 1.6 19.1 38.8 21.5Share amongthemselves 2.1 1.7 0.3 2.5 4.0 3.9 2.7 0.7 1.1 2.1Public 80.7 69.6 79.2% 40.3 91.5 89.0 70.3 95.7 79.4 58.1 74.4Private Vendor 2.1 1.4 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.5Any other 11.7 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.4 1.5Total Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034%Households10090807060504030201004.1.2 Main Source381272 2 270A.W.1210 1 0 59400 06 3 16 40Out of those households who have reported using different sources for drinking purposes and otherhousehold use, the main source was tap. About 86% of the households reported of using taps as the sourceof drinking water while another 7.5% reported of using tanker for drinking water purpose. At Ambedkarbasti and Arjun ward, the majority of the respondents use tap as the main source of drinking water.Table 4.2: Type of drinking water sources (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiTap 43.4 98.8 61.4 95.1 98.5 89.9 76.9 98.9 81.2 95.0 86.1Tanker 18.3 38.6 3.0 1.5 2.4 20.1 18.1 2.5 7.5Handpump 1.0 0.3 4.0 0.4 1.1 1.2Borewell 0.3 0.9 0.1Well 33.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 3.3Any other 3.8 1.2 1.6 3.6 1.3 1.1 0.4 1.4 1.8Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30342540 2 3190 1Sec-2 T.W. M.B. N.B. Sec-1 A.B. Sec-5Personal Share among themselves Public Private Vendor89709679039581 1S.W.1617

4.1.3 Availability of WaterWhile analyzing the findings on water availability in the area, it is found that there is a clear gap between therequirement and actual availability of water in the slums. As per the findings majority of households (83%)reported availability of water between 100-150L per day while majority of them (97%) had requirements ofmore than 200L per day.4.1.4 Time Spent in Fetching WaterNearly 60% of the households spend about half an hour each day to fetch water for their use while 30% ofthe household spend about an hour each day on the same. Also 60% of the households require collectingwater more than three times a day. This reflects the amount of work pressure female folks in the slums mighthave as they are the ones who are responsible for household chores.% of Population706050403020100Water Requirement per day65.231.52>200 Lt. 200-350 Lt. >350 Lt.Water (in Ltr.)454035302520151050Actual Availability of Water43.840.8124.350 Lt. 100 Lt. 150 Lt. > 350 Lt.Water (in Ltr.)Desegregated analysis at the level of slums indicates the households in Shivaji Ward spend least time infetching water where nearly 37% of household spend less than 15 min while nearly 40% have to spend 30min or less to arrange for household water. Other slums have more or less similar trend with regard to timeloss and majority falls in the range of 15-30 min.Table 4.5: Total time taken to fill water for the whole day (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti Basti 1hr 11.4 3.2 0.3 4.0 2.5 2.1 0.8 2.5Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 303418Table 4.3: Water requirement per day (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti Basti>200 Lt. 16.6 13.6 45.5 41.6 35.2 15.5 37.6 44.1 69.1 34.1 31.5200-350 Lt. 78.6 82.1 52.5 57.6 58.8 84.0 61.2 54.8 30.2 64.6 66.2>350 Lt. 4.8 4.3 2.0 0.8 6.0 0.4 1.3 1.1 0.7 1.4 2.0Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Slum wise comparison shows that Sector 1 and Sector 5 have comparatively less availability of water whichin turn is reflected in their consumption pattern. More than two-third of the households have reportedwater consumption of less than 100 L.Table 4.4: Actual availability of water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti Basti>200 Lt. 16.6 13.6 45.5 41.6 35.2 15.5 37.6 44.1 69.1 34.1 31.550 Lt. 9.3 26.7 2.0 1.9 34.7 2.7 1.7 33.0 4.6 19.6 12.0100 Lt. 36.9 48.7 61.4 46.5 29.6 25.6 75.5 24.5 75.9 36.3 42.9150 Lt. 49.0 19.7 36.6 47.8 27.1 66.5 21.8 38.3 16.7 39.9 40.8>350 Lt. 4.8 4.9 3.8 8.5 5.2 0.8 4.3 2.9 4.2 4.3Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Table 4.6: Number of times they have to go to fetch water (values in percentage)4.1.5 Availability of WaterSchool Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti Basti1-3 times 33.8 17.4 65.3 78.9 23.6 18.2 50.7 19.7 71.6 49.4 40.23-5 times 53.8 53.0 34.7 20.5 39.2 77.7 48.5 51.1 28.4 41.6 49.05-7 times 12.4 29.6 0.5 37.2 4.2 0.9 29.3 8.9 10.8Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034With respect to availability of water in the surveyed area, it is found that majority of the households (99%)have to procure/fetch water in the morning. The trend is same irrespective of slums. With regard to theduration of water availability it is reported that more than three-fourth of households gets water for onlyless than an hour in a day. It was found that at Nai basti, comparatively a larger proportion of the householdsget water for 1-3 hours.19

Table 4.7: Availability of water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiMorning 96.2 99.7 100.0 100.0 97.0 98.4 99.1 100.5 100.7 99.4 99.0Afternoon 25.2 0.9 0.5 5.5 1.8 1.3 3.9 3.9Evening 10.3 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.4 1.1 1.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Table 4.8: Duration of water availability (values in percentage)4.1.7 Perception of Safe Water SourcesFurther with regard to safety of water sources, overall it was reported that nearly 60% of the householdconsider that the present source of water is not safe and there is felt need to address the issue of unsafedrinking water sources. Slum-wise analysis indicates that more than two-third of the households fromSchool Sector, Nai Basti, Ambedkar Basti and Shivaji Ward reported to have the unsafe sources. It was foundthat at Tagore ward and at sector 5, comparatively a larger proportion of the respondents find the source ofwater safe for the children and women.Safety of Water SourcesSchool Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiLess than 1 hr 63.8 100.9 73.3 92.2 92.5 54.8 96.5 96.8 95.4 76.5 80.61-3 hrs 14.1 2.0 26.7 9.7 8.0 40.3 3.9 3.2 4.6 21.2 16.53-5 hrs 26.2 0.3 0.5 5.7 2.8 4.2More than 12 hrs 0.1 1.1 0.2Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Unsafe58%Safe42%4.1.6 Distribution of Roles and Responsibility within familyIt is generally observed that household chores are mostly the responsibility of female folks. In line withthe general trend the same was observed in the present study. More than 65% of the householdsreported that the female members of the family have the responsibility of collecting water for thehousehold. It is reported that in almost 60% of the cases specifically wives within the household have tobear the burden.Mother1%Responsibility for Water CollectionDaughter6%Son3% Waterman0% Head of HH30%Table 4.9: Safety of water sources for women and children (values in percentage)4.2.1 Access related ProblemsSchool Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 21.0 43.8 62.4 76.5 43.7 25.1 41.5 28.2 76.6 23.7 41.6No 79.0 56.2 37.6 23.5 56.3 74.9 58.1 71.8 23.4 76.3 58.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30344.2 Difficulties Faced for Water AccessibilityWife60%One of the major problems observed in water availability is access. As water availability varies from seasonto season and hence problem of availability also varies accordingly. Nearly 43% of the households reportedthat there are no water related problems almost six months. Slum wise comparison indicated MahaveerBasti, Sector I and Ambedkar Basti having comparatively no problems of water for at least six months whileSchool Sector I reported to have problem of water for nine months.2021

Table 4.10: Number of Months in a year when there is no problem of water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti Basti3 months 49.0 46.4 4.3 20.6 1.6 1.3 23.4 33.8 17.76 months 41.1 46.9 46.6 36 77.4 36 88.2 76.6 14.9 54 42.99 months 13.4 9.3 55.4 58.9 3.0 71.3 10.9 87.9 20.4 38.8Whole year 1.7 3.8 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.8Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Table 4.11: Wait for water collection (values in percentage)4.2.2 Alternative Source of WaterFurther to this it was found that during summer season when water availability is least, thealternate sources available for majority of the households (77%) are Tankers. Slum wisecomparisons reflect that the trend is same except for two slums namely School Sector and ArjunWard where dependency on tankers during summer seasons is approximately 41.4% and 41.7%respectively. More than half of the households at School ward reported using Well as alternatesource of water.Safety of Water SourcesSchool Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 81.4 74.5 79.2 43.8 85.9 73.5 78.6 93.6 83.7 33.6 69.6No 18.6 25.5 20.8 56.2 14.1 26.5 21.4 6.4 16.3 66.5 30.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Borewell4%Anyother9%Well10%Table 4.12: Number of times problems faced to access water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiOnce in a month 4.8 2.9 31.7 42.4 1.0 1.5 7.9 2.1 36.5 22.1 14.1Once in a week 90.7 95.1 66.3 57.3 96.0 98.2 91.3 97.9 62.8 77.9 84.7Once in a day 4.5 2.0 2.0 0.3 3.0 0.3 0.9 0.7 1.2Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Around 69% of the respondents reported that they have to wait in queues for collection of water. Even slumwise comparisons inferred the same as majority reported for waiting in queues. The only exception is atShivaji Ward where only 33% households reported for not waiting in queues for procuring water.Regarding frequency of occurrence problem, majority (85%) of the households reported facing any problemonce in a week. About 66%, 57% and 63% of the households from Sector 2, Tagore ward and Sector 5respectively reported to face the water related problem once in a week while other seven slums had morethan 90% households reporting same.Tanker77%Table 4.13: Alternative source during summers (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiWell 51.4 0.9 21.8 12.4 3.0 6.0 5.7 7.4 3.5 3.1 10.3Tanker 41.4 41.7 78.2 85.2 82.4 89.3 92.5 63.8 94.7 85.7 76.7Borewell 0.3 15.4 2.2 2.0 3.1 1.7 9.6 0.4 0.8 3.7Any other 6.9 42.0 0.3 12.6 1.6 19.1 1.4 10.3 9.2Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30344.3 Payment of Bill to Access WaterRegarding payment of bills for accessing the services, majority (83%) of households reported non-paymenttowards such bills. Slum wise comparisons also indicate similar trend, the only exception being Tagore Wardwhere about 54% of the households reported payment of bills against accessing water services.2223

If bill is payed to access waterTable 4.14: Billing for access to water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 15.9 25.5 19.8 45.4 6.0 0.9 21.0 10.3 28.5 17.1No 84.1 74.5 80.2 54.6 94.0 99. 79.0 100.0 89.7 71.5 82.9Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Amount of water bill paid< Rs. 50 71.7 78.4 25.0 18.5 91.7 66.7 52.1 69.0 89.2 56.3Rs. 50-100 17.4 20.5 70.0 66.1 8.3 33.3 18.8 17.2 5.9 33.5Rs. 100-200 6.5 1.1 13.7 0.0 0.0 6.3 3.4 2.9 6.6> Rs. 200 4.3 5.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 22.9 10.3 3.9Number 46 88 20 168 12 6 48 29 102 519Way to pay billEvery Day 6.5 2.4 8.3 0.0 1.5Weekly 60.9 2.3 1.2 33.3 4.2 3.4 4.9 8.1Monthly 52.2 100.0 110.0 98.2 125.0 100.0 68.8 82.8 97.1 91.7Any other 21.7 5.0 8.3 0.0 27.1 13.8 1.0 5.8Number 46 88 20 168 12 6 48 29 102 5194.4.2 Water Purification MeasuresOverall, about 62% of the households reported not taking any measures for purifying the water. The trend issame for each slum and the only exception being Sector 1 where about 89% of the respondents reportedtaking measures for water purification.Table 4.16: If there are measures taken for water purification (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 15.9 20.9 86.1 51.1 27.6 36.2 88.6 8.5 65.6 18.4 38.3No 84.1 79.1 13.9 48.9 72.4 63.8 11.4 91.5 34.4 81.6 61.7Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30344.4.3 Perception of Community on Present Water ConditionThe study also tried to take the perception of the households on quality of the available water. Majority ofthe respondents (84%) felt that the water is normal. However, about 46% of respondents from AmbedkarBasti and 53% from Mahaveer Basti reported for water to sweet/tasty.Quality of waterOut of the households who paid bills, it was observed that more than fifty percent of the households (56%)paid less than Rs. 50/- while 34% of the households paid bill of Rs.50-100/- per days. Regarding frequency ofpayment, it was reported that majority of the respondents (91.7%) paid bills on monthly basis.0% 1%4.4 Water and Hygiene4.4.1 Awareness about the cleanliness and purification of water13%3%Bitter/HardNormalAbout 62% of the households reported accumulation of water near the source of drinking water. Slum wisecomparison also reflected on the same, the only exception being Sector 2 where only 5% of the householdsreported water logging around the source of drinking water.Sweet/TastyNot worth drinkingDon’t KnowTable 4.15: If bad water accumulates near the main source of water (values in percentage)83%School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 89.3 84.9 5.0 27.3 92.5 85.9 10.5 94.7 19.5 53.6 61.6No 10.7 15.1 95.0 72.7 7.5 14.1 89.5 5.3 80.5 46.4 38.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Table 4.17: Quality of drinking water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiBitter/Hard 2.8 2.3 2.0 2.2 4.5 3.1 4.4 3.9 1.4 2.7Normal 96.2 61.8 94.1 95.7 42.2 95.8 94.8 50.0 81.2 98.0 84.3Sweet/Tasty 0.7 35.9 3.0 1.9 52.8 0.9 0.9 46.3 16.0 0.6 12.6Not worth drinking0.3 1.0 0.3 0.5 0.1 3.7 0.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30342425

4.5 Drinking Water Details4.5.1 Use of Different Sources of WaterAbout 91% of the households reported that same water source is used for both drinking as well ashousehold purpose. Comparison across the slums also indicated the similar inference, the only exceptionbeing Sector 2 from where 54% of the households indicated of availability of different sources for differentuses.Table 4.18: If water is different for drinking and other HH purposes (values in percentage)Odour: Majority of the respondents (82%) reported no foul smell from the water they use fordrinking purpose. The same is reported in all the slums, while only Nai Basti has highest proportionof respondents reporting foul smell from the drinking water. About 48% from Nai Basti reported ofbad odour from the water they have been using for drinking purpose.4.6 Disposal of Household Waste WaterMost of the households (99%) reported disposing off used/waste water in open or open drainages. Thistrend is uniform irrespective of slums undertaken for the study.School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiDisposal of used HH waterYes 2.4 2.0 53.5 3.8 7.5 6.8 6.6 1.1 21.6 13.4 8.9No 97.5 98 46.5 96.2 92.5 93.1 93.4 98.9 78.4 86.6 91.1Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30340%In open4.5.2 Quality of Water46%Kitchen gardenColour: The respondents were enquired about the physical appearance of water which they use. Out of totalresponses more than 66% reported the water to be normal and worth drinking while about 21% reported itto be dirty. The response from Shivaji ward was different from the overall trend where about 58% of therespondents reported water to be dirty while only 41% ratified it to be normal. The response from Sector 5was also mixed where 46% of the respondents felt water to be normal while remaining were apprehensiveabout the quality and colour and gave a mixed response.53%1%Open drainagesClosed drainageSewageColor of drinking waterTable 4.19: Color and Odour of drinking water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiClean/normaland Worth 24.1 94.8 67.3 62.4 91.0 71.7 86.9 91.0 46.1 40.5 66.1DrinkingDirty/muddy 73.8 2.9 15.8 17.6 7.5 1.9 3.9 4.8 24.8 58.4 20.8and yellowSometimesclean and 0.3 10.9 0.5 0.3 9.2 23.0 3.3sometimes dirtyNumber 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Odour of drinking waterYes 3.4 4.1 2.0 21.9 10.6 48.2 7.0 4.8 3.2 7.5 16.9No 95.9 95.9 98.0 77.6 88.4 51.5 93.0 95.2 95.7 89.4 82.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30344.7 Provision of Meter systemTable 3.20: Disposal of used HH waste water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiIn open 35.2 55.4 26.8 56.8 93.3 2.2 39.4 3. 52.0 46.4Kitchen garden 0.3 0.9 2.4 1.5 0.7 2.6 0.5 1.1 1.1 1.2Open drainages 64.1 43.5 100.0 70.8 41.2 5.4 95.2 60.1 95.0 45.8 52.1Sewage 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 1.1 0.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034The study also tried to find the perception of community on the meter system taken up for supplying waterat household level. About 93% of the respondents reported not having meters and same is reported for eachof the studied slums. Tagore ward reported for the highest number of meters where 17% of the householdshave meters for water supply services. Out of 81 respondents having meters 84% reported it be useful whileremaining felt it to be not of much use.2627

If meter is installedTable 4.21: HH having meters installed for availing water (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 0.3 0.6 17.0 1.0 0.3 0.5 2.1 1.1 2.7No 90.3 95.1 100.0 83.0 92.0 99.1 100.0 98.9 97.5 76.8 92.7Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034If meter is usefulYes 95.2 100.0 75.0 85.2No 100.0 100.0 4.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 25.0 14.8Number 1 2 0 63 2 2 0 1 6 4 81Consumption of water according to meter (in Rupees)< Rs.50 14.3 100.0 50.0 16.0Rs.50-100 100.0 100.0 58.7 100.0 50.0 25.0 64.2Rs.100-200 20.6 16.0>Rs.200 4.8 3.7Number 1 2 0 63 2 2 0 1 6 4 81Out of 81 households reporting possession of meter, 57% had paid Rs. 50-100/- as per consumptionwhile 16% of the households have reported payment of less than Rs. 50/-.USE OF TOILETS & INFLUENCE ON PERSONAL HYGIENE5.1 Ownership of ToiletsIt has been found that 55.5% of the families have their own toilet facility whereas approximately 40% of thefamilies go for open defecation. Nearly 3% of the families use the public place for the defecation, whereasonly 0.6% was found to be paying for the defecation in public space. A very large proportion of thehouseholds in the school sector, Mahaveer basti and in Ambedkar basti does not have their own toilet andthus go in open for defecation.% Households100806040200Slumwise toilet ownership908477806969 6962595650 4836402831201418 201813100 1 0 0 2 1 3 50 2 02 580 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 000 0 1 1 1 131S. S. A. W. Sec-2 T. W. M. B. N. B. Sec-1 A. B. Sec-5 S. W. Total5Own Community Toilet Public Toilet Public with payment In open5.2 Places for DefecationAlmost 50% of the children under five years age go to toilet for defecation, whereas a considerableproportion of children, which is around 39% under five years of age, defecate in open space. Public toiletsare used by only 2.8% of the under five age group children.Table 5.1 Place where Children under five go for DefecationToilet Public toilet Drainage In open50.72.8 7.9 38.6Number=3034, figures in %2829

Table 5.2 Place where Women go for DefecationToilet at home 58.2Public toilet 2.5In open 39.4Number=3034Figures in %Approximately 58% of the women have the toilet facilities at their home, where as 2.5% of women uses thepublic toilets while 39% of women go for open defecation. A very less proportion of women in the schoolsector, Mahaveer basti and Ambedkar basti go for defecation in open (refer to the chart given below)% Hous eholds10080604020076.916.96.262.35.3 Types of Toilet36.283.213.9Place where women go for defecation7721.427.669.849.148.5Around 77% of the families where found to have toilets with septic tank facilities where as around 18% of thefamilies have the open pit toilets. Only 2.3% of the families were found to have toilets joint with the sewagesystem. It was found that at Ambedkar basti all the families have the septic tank toilet. It was also found thatat Nai basti, comparatively a very large proportion of the families have open pits foe the defecation.Table 5.3 Types of Toilet (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiJoint with 5.0 3.7 6.3 0.8 4.4 1.1 3.3 0.6 3.6 2.3sewage systemOpen pit 15.0 0.5 4.9 79.8 1.6 0.6 9.1 17.9Septic tank 80.0 94.7 85.0 92.7 91.1 19.1 85.9 100.0 94.9 86.4 76.8toiletAny other 1.1 8.8 1.6 4.4 9.2 3.9 0.9 3.0Number 20 187 80 246 45 262 184 24 178 110 133689.59.619.71.4 3 1.6 2.5 2.4 0.9 0.579.863.831.2590.858.27.81.4 2.5S. S. A. W. Sec-2 T. W. M. B. N. B. Sec-1 A. B. Sec-5 S. W. TotalToilet at homePublic toiletIn open39.45.4 Toilet UsageWith respect to accessibility of available toilet facility almost 29% of the households mentioned that toiletfacility is available near to their house.If toilet facility nearbyTable 5.4: Toilet availability and its usage (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 11.7 60.0 9.9 53.2 22.6 23.5 16.2 18.6 19.1 31.0 29.3No 88.3 40.0 90.1 46.8 77.4 76.5 83.8 81.4 80.9 69.0 70.7Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034If it is used by others or notYes 5.9 13.0 90.0 21.8 8.9 3.8 78.4 20.0 55.6 13.5 19.4No 94.1 87.0 10.0 78.2 91.1 96.2 21.6 80.0 44.4 86.5 80.6Number 34 207 10 197 45 158 37 35 54 111 888Number of Families Using the Same Toilet< 2 50.0 77.0 53.6 73.6 77.8 56.9 77.9 87.5 69.7 31.3 63.72-4 50.0 23.0 44.9 25.0 22.2 41.2 21.4 12.5 27.0 64.6 34.74-5 1.4 1.4 2.0 0.7 0.8 2.1 0.7>5 2.5 2.1 1.0Number 2 27 9 43 4 6 29 7 30 15 172It was found that in nearly 19% of the cases same toilets are used by more than one family. Almost 64%families reported that the toilets are shared by two families, where as nearly 35% of the toilets are shared bytwo to four families. Approximately 1% of the toilets are used by more than five families. It was found that atShivaji ward, comparatively a lesser proportion of the respondentds said that the toilet is used by less thantwo families.5.5 Usage of community/public toiletsMajority of the families which is around 83.2% of the total surveyed, found that there are no separatecommunity toilet facilities for men and women, where as only 0.3 % found to be separate for both thegender.Table 5.5 Separate toilet facility (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 2.0 4.5 0.2 0.4 0.4No 100.0 98.0 95.5 100.0 100.0 99.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.6 99.6Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30343031

Majority of the respondent do not have any idea when the toilets are cleaned. Only 1.4 responded that theirtoilets are cleaned everyday whereas 0.5% of the families responded that toilets are cleaned fortnightly.Almost 98% of the families responded that they are not aware about the person who cleans the toilet.Table 5.6 Time when the Toilet is cleaned (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiEvery day 3.6 11.1 - 1.4Fortnightly - 1.8 0.5Not aware 100.0 96.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 88.9 100.0 - 100.0 98.2 98.1Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034MC sweeperTable 5.7 Person who Cleans the Toilet (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiBy the people 1.8 1.8of the communityAppointed bycommunityNot aware 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 98.2Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Table 5.8 Paid Individuals to Clean Community Toilet (values in percentage)Table 5.9 Payment to avail toilet facility (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 2.3 16.7 2.5No 100.0 97.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 83.3 97.5Number 21 43 5 1 2 2 6 80Only 2% of the population indicates that the electricity is available in the toilets. Only 2.5% of thefamilies responded that they do the payment to avail the toilet facilities whereas 97.5% do not pay forthe facility. 13.7% of the families responded that the community toilets can be used in day or nightwhere as 21.1 % of the families went against the idea and said that they can not be used at any time.Table 5.10 Community Toilet Safe for Women (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 12.5 8.6 66.7 25.0 33.3 17.5No 87.5 91.4 33.3 75.0 100.0 100.0 66.7 82.5Number 8 35 6 4 2 2 6 6325.5 % of the families felt that the community toilets are not safe for the women where as only 5.4% ofthe families don't feel the same. The rest of the respondents did not have any idea about this.5.6 Problems Faced due to Absence of Toilet FacilitySchool Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiProblems Due to Absence of ToiletsWoman 1.4 0.6 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.9 5.0 0.8 1.3Man 0.9 0.7 1.1 1.8 0.6 0.6Male Child 0.7 0.5 1.1 0.2Female Child 0.6 0.1Unadministeredmale worker 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.1Unadministeredfemale worker 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1Not aware 97.6 98.3 99.0 99.2 99.0 97.6 99.1 97.3 93.3 97.8 97.7Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Percentage35302520151050Diarrhoea Stomach ache Unclean area PersonalproblemsProblems/AilmentsDon't know/ NoresponseIt was found that a number of different types of people such as women, men, male child, female child, unadministeredmale and female workers clean the toilet by taking money. However most of the familieswhich is around 97.5% of total, have no idea about who cleans the community toilet by taking money.Diarrhea, Stomach and un-cleanliness were found to be the problems due to absence of toilet facility. 23.9%and 22.4% of the respondent agreed that due to absence of toilet facilities, diarrhea and stomachache arethe major ailments respectively, where as approximately 30% of the families consider it as a main reason forun-cleanliness. 91.2% of the respondent feel that their toilet dose not troubles them or their neighbourswhere as 8.8% agrees that that the toilet really creates problem to them or their neighbours.3233

34Table 5.11: Does Toilet Facility Troubles you or your neighbor (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 16.7 0.5 1.3 1.5 6.0 16.5 26.8 11.8 3.3 8.8No 83.3 99.5 98.7 98.5 94.0 83.5 73.2 100.0 88.2 96.7 91.2Number 36 211 76 199 50 303 149 36 136 272 1468Some of the problems faced due to toilet by the families are the accumulation of sewer water around thehouse or water draining in the drainage system and roads. Around 9% found the sewer water around thehouse as the major problem where as around 5% found that sewer water drains in the drainage system androads is the major problem.Table 5.12 Problems faced due to toilet facilities nearby (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiAccumulationof sewer water 14.5 4.8 31.8 3.6 8.8around housesSewer water indrainage system 12.7 4.8 3.6 4.9and roadsProblem due 4.8 0.5to bad smellNumber 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30345.7 Personal HygieneAlmost 98% of the respondents wash their hands before eating. Nearly 70% wash hands after going totoilet. Comparatively a very less proportion (4%) of the respondents wash their hands after cleaning thefecal matter of their animals.Table 5.13: Time when the hands are washed (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiBefore eating 98.3 99.4 100.0 98.9 95.5 97.2 99.6 97.3 98.9 97.2 98.1After cleaningthe fecal matter 4.5 3.8 2.0 6.5 1.0 8.9 0.4 0.7 1.1 4.0of animalsAfter cleaningthe defecation 16.6 27.8 93.1 55.4 18.1 40.9 79.0 18.1 94.3 3.6 41.1of childrenAfter going toilet 43.4 66.4 97.0 76.2 64.3 84.8 95.2 59.6 96.8 26.0 70.2Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Table 5.14: Medium with which hands are washed (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiWith soap 86.6 94.5 97.0 98.6 71.4 68.2 96.1 67.6 98.9 97.5 86.2With mud 9.7 4.3 2.0 0.8 21.6 6.3 3.1 29.3 0.6 6.5Only water 2.1 1.2 1.0 0.5 0.5 24.3 0.9 0.4 5.9With ash 21.4 0.9 3.0 0.8 7.0 2.2 19.2 3.2 0.7 1.7 5.2Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Table 5.15: Bathing practices (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiEveryday 67.9 88.1 4.0 79.5 73.4 40.6 10.9 52.7 24.5 95.0 57.7Once in two days 30.7 11.9 96.0 20.3 26.1 58.9 89.1 46.8 74.8 4.5 41.8Once in a week 1.4 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.5Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Majority (86.2%) of the respondents use soaps to wash their hands. The rest of the respondents prefer towash their hands with mud (6.5%), only with water (5.9%) and with ash (5.2%). It was found that around 58%of the respondents take bath every day. Almost 94% of the respondents cover the water and the food itemsand keep it at an elevated place. Only 6% of the respondents do not cover the water and food item at theirhome. It was found that in the school sector, comparatively a higher (23.4%) proportion of the respondentskeep their food items uncovered.Table 5.16: How the water and food is kept at home (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiCovered and put over a slab76.6 97.7 95.0 98.9 98.5 94.5 84.7 97.9 97.5 97.294.0Uncovered 23.4 2.3 5.0 1.1 1.5 5.5 15.3 2.1 2.5 2.8 6.0Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 303435

5.8 Hygiene and its effects on healthIt was found that nearly 14% of the respondents had somebody in their family suffering from malaria in lastmonth. Nearly 5% responded that their family member suffered from stomach worm. Comparatively a veryless proportion of the respondents or their family members suffered from diarrhea last month. It was foundthat at Shivaji ward, a higher proportion of the respondents had anybody suffering from malaria in theirfamily last month.Table 5.17: Disease in family during last month (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiMalaria 15.2 14.5 2.0 10.5 19.6 18.0 0.4 14.9 7.4 26.8 14.5Dengue 6.2 0.9 0.3 1.5 4.3 1.1 0.7 2.8 2.2Jaundice 6.9 1.2 1.0 6.2 4.5 11.0 0.4 1.1 0.7 0.8 4.6Stomach worms 0.3 1.2 0.3 1.5 19.2 1.1 1.4 4.8Itching 2.4 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.5 2.4 2.5 0.8 1.3Infection 0.7 1.7 1.1 1.5 2.2 1.7 1.1 4.3 0.3 1.6Diarrhea 0.7 1.1 0.3 0.9 0.4 0.6 0.4Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034It was found that the majority (93.8%) of the respondents spend not more than 500 Rs for the medicines permonth in their family. A very less proportion of the respondents (0.5%) spend more than 1000 Rs per monthon their medicines. In sector 2 and sector 1, a higher proportion of the respondents spend 500-1000Rs ontheir medicines per month.Table 5.18: Money spent on medicines per month (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti Basti< Rs 500 95.8 95.0 83.8 96.4 95.7 94.3 78.4 99.2 93.5 97.7 93.8Rs 500-1000 3.8 4.3 15.2 2.9 4.3 5.0 20.2 6.5 1.4 5.6Rs 1000-1500 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.0 0.5 1.4 0.0 0.9 0.5Any other 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.1Number 265 302 99 306 186 559 218 132 276 352 2695Table 5.19: Place where they go for their treatment (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiGovernmenthospital 97.2 82.0 71.3 67.0 81.9 81.1 68.6 93.1 86.5 89.9 82.1Private hospital 2.4 17.4 28.7 23.2 17.6 10.0 31.0 6.9 13.5 8.7 14.4Vaidh 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2HH remedy 0.3 0.3 9.7 8.8 1.1 3.3Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 30345.9 Knowledge about O.R.SAlmost 67% of the respondents use ORS when it is required, and 34% never use ORS as a remedy. It wasfound that nearly 63% of the respondents knew how to make ORS, while the rest did not know about it.If O.R.S. is usedTable 5.20: Knowledge about ORS (values in percentage)School Arjun Sector Tagore Maha Nai Sector Ambed Sector Shivaji Ave-Sector Ward -2 Ward veer Basti -1 kar -5 Ward rageBasti BastiYes 46.2 56.2 97.0 78.1 41.2 69.6 96.5 10.1 95.7 67.9 66.5No 53.8 43.8 3.0 21.9 58.8 30.4 3.5 89.8 4.3 32.2 33.5If know how to prepare O.R.SYes 45.2 64.9 96.0 76.2 46.7 49.3 100.0 13.3 87.9 67.3 62.7No 54.7 35.1 4.0 23.8 53.3 50.7 86.7 12.0 32.7 37.3Number 290 345 101 370 199 672 229 188 282 358 3034Nearly 82% of the respondents go to government hospitals for the treatment if there is anybody unwellin their family. Almost 14% go to private hospitals. A very less proportion of the respondents (3.5%)prefer to go to either vaidya or find a cure by household remedies.3637

6SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE MANAGEMENT6.1 Volume of Waste generatedIt was found that almost three fourth of the survey respondents had less than 1.5 Kg of waste generated perday in their home. Almost 21.0 % of the households generate solid waste between 1.5 to 2 Kg. as revealed bythe statistics, a very less proportion of the households generate more than 2 Kg of waste.6.2 Disposal of Solid WasteTable 6.1: Amount of waste generated per dayParticularAmount of solid waste generated per dayPercent2.5 Kg 0.4Total 3034It was observed that majority (91%) of the households interviewed do not follow the practice of segregatingthe biodegradable and non-biodegradable wastes at their home.Table 6.2: Separation and disposal of house HoldParticularIf the HH solid waste is segregated on the basisof Bio and non-biodegradabilityPercentYes 8.9No 91.1Disposal of wasteCollected from home 14.7Dustbin of MCD 2.8Thrown in the streets 16.4A large proportion (65.4%) of the households disposes the household waste in open places whereas a verysmall percentage of respondents throw the waste either in the streets (16.4%) or it is collected from home(14.7%). It was found that comparatively a very less proportion of the respondents in Nai basti collect thewaste in open places. Comparatively in a large proportion of the households of Nai basti, the waste iscollected from home (refer to the chart given below).% Househol ds12010080604020090.34.54.166.79873.886.951.532.432.724.626.32018.616.45.714.75.23.2 6.52.3 1 1 1.9 51 1.2 1.1 0.5 1 3.30.33.93.5 3.60.4 0 0.5 0.5 1.1 0 1.1 0.6 0 2.80.40.79065.49563.1 65.4S. S. A. W. Sec-2 T. W. M. B. N. B. Sec-1 A. B. Sec-5 S. W. TotalCollected from homeThrown in the streetsDrained in the drainage systemsDisposal of solid wasteDustbin of MCDCollected in open spacesWhen they were asked whether they pay to dispose the solid waste or not, it was found that the almost98% of the respondents do not pay and dispose it off themselves. Moreover, it was found that a largeproportion (76.2%) of the respondents is not ready to pay for this purpose.Table 6.3: Payment for disposal of HH wasteParticularDo you pay for solid waste disposalPercentYes 1.6No 98.4Are you ready to pay for it in the futureYes 23.8No 76.2Total 3034It was observed that almost 26% of the respondents have an unclean and polluted environment near theirresidence. Nearly 74% told that their surrounding is clean.Table 6.4: Perception of the environment in slumsParticularIf your surrounding area is unclean or pollutedPercentYes 25.8No 74.2Total 30343839

7SOCIAL COMMUNITIES AND EXPOSURE TO MASS MEDIA7.1 Social ActivitiesThe survey findings show that a very small percentage of the respondents are associated with any club or acommunity club. Majority (92.1%) of the respondents was not associated with any organization or anynetwork.Table 7.1: Association with any organization or networkParticularPercentOrganization/Network or association that you have joinedClub 3.7Community club 2.3Social Organization 1.6Self Help Groups 0.3Local club 0.1Not associated with any organization or network 92.1Total 3034It was observed that 72% of the respondents admit that the decisions in the group are taken by the head ofthe head. Almost 28% of the respondents said that the decision is taken up collectively by all the membersof the group. It was found that in majority of the households i.e. almost 80%, the decision is taken by thehead of family, while in rest of the families the decision is taken according to what the majority of membersagree to.ParticularTable 7.2: Decision makingWho takes the decision in a groupPercentHead of the group 72.2Collective decision 28.2Who takes the decision in the familyWith the consultation of the head 79.8With the majority 20.2Total 3034When they were asked that whether any member of their family has ever joined any organization to work forthe betterment of the community, it was found that in 88% of the families no member of the family has everjoined any community/ network for welfare.Table 7.3: Any member has joined any group or associationParticularIf any of the family member has joined any group ororganization to work for the communityPercentYes 7.8No 92.3Total 3034When there is any water related problem comes up, nearly 60% of the respondents directly complain tothe government office and around 20% of the respondents find out the solution through contribution ofall the members of the community.Table 7.4: Complains with regards to water related problemsParticular7.2 Source of Health Related InformationPercentProblem related to water supply dealt by the communityComplain in government office 59.2Take action after consultation 6.9Find out solution after cooperation 20.4Any other 6.9Don't Know 6.8Total 3034A considerable proportion of the respondents, i.e. nearly 53% acquire information related togovernment policies and programs through TV/Radio/cable, and almost 30% gather the informationthrough social workers or their neighbours. Majority of the respondents mentioned that there is noplace in the community where the social or political groups or organizations meet. Almost 11% of therespondents had no information regarding this.Table 7.5: Information on government policies and programsParticularSource of information about govt. prog (eg TSC, HIV etc)PercentNews Paper/Posters/ 5.1TV/Radio/Cable 53.4Social Workers/ Neighbours 27.9Don't Know 13.6Availability of place where the social or political groups meetYes 1.8No 86.8Don't Know 11.3Total 30344041

It was found in the survey that a little more than half of the respondents watch DD/National channel. Almost35.0% of the respondents do not watch any channel. Further, majority (95.4%) of the respondents do notread any news paper and the rest of the respondents prefer to read Dainik Bhaskar (1.9%), Dainik Jagaran(1.4%), Raj Express (1.2%) and Nav Bharat (0.1%). Almost 97% of the respondents do not listen to any of theradio channel, while 2% of the respondents prefer to listen FM, Vividh Bharti (1.0%) and Mirchi (0.2%).7.3 Willingness to PayParticularTable 7.6: Source of informationChannel that is watched very oftenPercentDD/National 53.2Nothing Fixed 3.5Sab TV 0.1NDTV 5.5Discovery 0.8Zee TV 0.7Star Plus 0.8None 35.3News paper that is read regularlyRaj Express 1.2Dainik Jagaran 1.4Dainik Bhaskar 1.9Nav Bharat 0.1None 95.4Radio channel that is heard very oftenFM 2.1Mirchi 0.2Vividh Bharti 1.0Prasar Bharti 0.0None 96.7Total 3034When the respondents were asked if they are ready to pay for the better water condition in the community,it was found that almost half of the respondents (51%) were ready to pay and the rest (495) would not liketo pay.When they were asked the amount that they would agree to pay, most (91.4%) of them replied that theywould pay maximum up to Rs 50/-. Nearly 4.0% of the respondents were ready to pay up to Rs 100/-.Table 7.7: Willingness to pay for better water systemParticularPercentIf ready to pay for the better water systemYes 50.8No 49.2Total 3034Amount they are ready to pay for the better water systemRs 1-50 91.4Rs 51-100 3.8Rs 101-200 1.0Rs 201-400 0.5Rs 401-600 0.8Total 1540When the respondents were asked if they are ready to pay for the new connection of water or not, almosthalf of the respondents replied that they are ready to pay. It was found that majority (93.8%) of therespondents did not agreed to pay mare than Rs 100/.Table 7.8: Willingness to pay for the connection of waterParticularPercentAre you ready to pay for the new connection for waterYes 53.0No 47.0Total 3034If yes, how much you are ready to payRs. 1-100 93.8Rs. 101-200 1.9Rs. 201-400 0.8Rs. 401-600 1.4Rs. 601-800 0.1Rs. 801-999 0.2Total 1608Majority (95.9%) of the survey respondents was not ready to pay for the connection of water for the wholecommunity, and among those who are ready to pay; nearly 90.0% are not willing to pay more than 100 Rs. Avery little (6.4%) proportion of the respondents are ready to pay more than 100 Rs.4243

44Table 7.9: Willingness to pay for new connection for whole communityParticularPercentAre you ready to pay for the new connection of water forthe whole communityYes 4.1No 95.9Total 3034If Yes, how much they are ready to payRs.1-100 89.6Rs.101-200 3.2Rs.201-300 1.6Rs.301- highest 1.6Total 125When the respondents were asked if they are willing to pay for the betterment of the drainage system, it wasfound that majority of the respondents (94.8%) were reluctant to pay. Among those who were ready to pay,nearly 94.0% were not willing to pay more than Rs 100.Table 7.10: Willingness to pay for drainage facilityParticularPercentIf you are willing to pay for the better drainage systemYes 5.1No 94.8Total 3034If yes how much they are ready to payRs. 1-100 94.3Rs. 101-200 0.6Rs. 301- highest 0.6Total 157It was found that almost 95% of the respondents were not willing to pay for the betterment of the disposalsystem of waste. Majority of the respondents who were willing to pay did not want to pay more than Rs 50.Table 7.11: Willingness to pay for the disposal of wasteParticularPercentAre you willing to pay for the overall waste disposal ofthe communityYes 4.9No 95.1Total 3034If yes, how much they are willing to payRs. 1-50 93.3Rs. 51-100 1.3Rs. 101-200 1.3Total 150When the respondents were asked that whether they would like to pay for community toilet or not, it wasfound that the majority (98.5%) of the respondents were not willing to pay and among those who werewilling to pay, nearly 78.0% were not willing to pay more than Rs 50.Table 7.12: Willingness to pay for the community toiletParticularPercentAre you willing to pay for the community toiletYes 1.5No 98.5Total 3034If yes, how much you are willing to payRs. 1-50 78.3Rs. 51-100 4.3Rs. 101-200 13.0Rs. 201-300 2.2Rs. 301-400 2.2Total 46When the respondents were asked if they are ready to pay for the vocational training, it was found thatthe majority (88.4%) of them were not willing to pay. Among those who were willing to pay, almost all ofthem were reluctant to pay more than 100 Rs.Table 7.13: Willingness to share the cost of toiletParticularWilling to have a personal toiletPercentYes 29.5No 70.5Would you like to share the amount of money thatwould cost to make a toiletYes 61.5No 38.5Total 3034If yes, then how much would you like to spentRs.1-100 58.7Rs.101-200 23.2Rs.201-300 4.3Rs.301-400 3.8Rs.401-500 6.7Rs.501-highest 3.3Total 55245

It was found that almost 71.0% of the respondents did not want a personal toilet. It was also found thatalmost 62% of the respondents were willing to share the cost of the toilet. Among those who would like topay, nearly 59.0% were willing to pay more than 100 Rs.Table 7.14: Willingness to pay for vocational trainingParticularPercentAre you willing to pay for vocational trainingYes 11.4No 88.6Total 3034If yes, then how muchRs.1-100 99.7Rs.401-500 0.3Rs.501-highest 0.0Total 34546

Programme Contact PersonsProgramme Contact PersonsChief ExecutivePrivate Bag 1, MitchamVictoria – 3132, AustraliaTel: +61-3-98721732Fax: +61-3-9872 1132Email: watercharity@yvw.com.auChief ExecutiveWaterAid india1st Floor, Nursery School BuildingC-3, Nelson Mandela MargVasant Kunj, New Delhi - 110070Tel: +91-11-46084400Fax: +91-11-46084411Email: wai@wateraidindia.orgRegional ManagerWaterAid IndiaRegional Office WestE-7/799, Arera ColonyBhopal - 462016Madhya PradeshTel: +91-755-4294724, 4294317Email: wairow@wateraidindia.orgProject DirectorUrban Water Supply &Environmental ImprovementProject (Project UDAY),Urban Development Department (UADD)2nd Floor, Beej Bhawan, Arera Hills,Bhopal - 462011 Madhya PradeshTel: +91-755-2762825Fax: +91-755-2763868Email: uwseip@yahoo.comChiefWater and Sanitation Section IIWater, Sanitation and Infrastructure BranchUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme(UN-HABITAT)P.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, KenyaTel: 254-20-7623060, 7625082Fax: 254-20-7623588Email: andre.dzikus@unhabitat.orgChief Technical Advisor, South AsiaWater for Asian Cities ProgrammeUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme(UN-HABITAT)Pulchok, P.O. Box - 107Kathmandu, NepalTel: 977 1 5542816Fax: 977 1 5539877Email: roshan.shrestha@unhabitat.org.npChief Technical AdvisorWater for Asian Cities ProgrammeUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme(UN-HABITAT)E-1/191, Arera ColonyBhopal -462016, Madhya Pradesh, IndiaTel:+91-755-4233804/ 2460835Fax.:+91-755-4291440Email: nandi.pradeep@gmail.comDISCLAIMERThe designations employed and presentation of material in this pulication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoeveron the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities,or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers of boundaries of regarding its economic system or degree of development, theanalysis, conclusion and recommendations of the report do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Humansettlements programme (UN-HABITAT), the Governing Council of UN-HABITAT or its Member States.Excerpts may be reproduced without authorization, on condition that the source is indicated.