Earthquake Response District - Factsheet

SHELTER RECOVERY ASSESSMENT, 17-18 MAY 2015 [Population: 304,651* Households: 68,636*] *Based on 2011 Nepal census

Summary Housing Damage

On 25 April 2015, a 7.8 magnitude earthquake struck Nepal with its epicenter in 82% of households reported housing damage 56% of households reported that that they feel , approximately 81 km northwest of the country capital, Kathmandu. as a result of the earthquakes unsafe in the shelter they are currently Another earthquake of magnitude 7.3 followed on 12 May 2015 in . living in REACH, through its partnership with the Global Shelter Cluster, was deployed to Nepal to facilitate the development of a comprehensive shelter and settlements Reported damage by housing typology recovery strategy for the Nepal Shelter Cluster, and establish a baseline for analysis of the recovery process. The data presented in this factsheet is the result Walls mud-bonded brick/stone Walls mud-bonded brick/stone of a stratified, random survey of 122 households, including those with damaged Roof corrugated galvanised iron (CGI) and non-damaged shelters. Findings can be generalised at district level with a 95% Roof slate / tile level of confidence and a 10% margin of error. Housing type prevalence 14% Housing type prevalence 30% 0% Completely destroyed 8% Completely destroyed Demographics 35% Heavy damage / partial collapse 47% Heavy damage / partial collapse 65% Minor-moderate damage 44% Minor-moderate damage Female-headed households 6.0 Average household size 20% 0% No damage 0% No damage Age Distribution 3% Households with only one member over the 0+35+650 8+47+450 49% Male / 51% Female Walls cement-bonded brick/stone Walls reinforced concrete cement (RCC)

5+31+5+4+4 5+31+5+5+4 age of 18 60+ Roof CGI Roof RCC 16% Households who are renting Housing type prevalence 3% Housing type prevalence 46% 18 - 59 12 - 17 9% Households with physically disabled 0% Completely destroyed 0% Completely destroyed 5 - 11 4% Households hosting separated, orphaned 25% Heavy damage / partial collapse 7% Heavy damage / partial collapse 0 - 4 75% Minor-moderate damage 54% Minor-moderate damage 0% No damage 39% No damage Displacement 0+25+750 0+7+5439 66% of households reported that they are not living Reported reasons for displacement Temporary Shelter in the same shelter as before the earthquakes (Respondents could report multiple reasons) Reported emergency shelter needs 84+78+49 Of households that sustained housing damage: 1 min Median travel time from current shelter to original Fear of aftershocks 84% house 1st need 2nd need 3rd need House is damaged 42% reported that they have constructed or are 78% Durable construction materials 55% 67% 51% of households are 10 minutes or more from or destroyed constructing temporary shelters 7% Shelter materials 18% 15% 25% their original house Unsure if house is 49% safe 42% of all households surveyed reported that they Blankets/mats 0% 1% 1% Tools 3% 1% 1% Households that are 10 minutes or more from their original have received material shelter assistance house are predominantly with family in a different Labour 0% 2% 0% community. Intentions of displaced households 0% reported that they have received cash Technical assistance 16% 11% 12% assistance Other 8% 2% 9% Where displaced households are staying 7 days 30 days 62+21+12+2+1+1 Land of damaged house 62% Top types of material shelter assistance received (Respondents could report multiple types)

Open ground 21% 96+12+4+2 Tarpaulins 96% With family in same community 12% 12+82+15 32+44+1014 Blankets and mats 12% With family in different community 2% 12% Return to original house 32% 81% Stay in temporary shelter 44% Other 1% Kitchen sets 4% 1% Move to another shelter 10% Tents 2% Evacuation Centre 1% 5% Don’t know 14% mp man For more information on this factsheet please contact: Page 1/2 Shelter Cluster: [email protected] REACH Initiative: [email protected] Nepal Earthquake Response Bhaktapur District - Factsheet

SHELTER RECOVERY ASSESSMENT, 17-18 MAY 2015 [Population: 304,651* Households: 68,636*] *Based on 2011 Nepal census

Housing Recovery Reported Household Needs

Of households reporting housing damage: Top 4 reported repair / rebuild needs Priority NFI needs Priority household needs (Respondents could report multiple needs) (Respondents’ reported top three needs) (Respondents’ reported top three needs)

8% of households reported that they have started 53+51+48+40 repairing or rebuilding their original house Sand 53% 1st need 2nd need 3rd need 1st need 2nd need 3rd need Blankets/mats 51% 13% 25% ShelterHousing 50% 10% 5% of these 8 households reported that they have 25% Cement 51% Hygiene items 14% 11% 22% Drinking water 23% 13% 5% received support to repair or rebuild Labour 48% Torches 13% 7% 9% EmploymentJobs 8% 12% 12% 62% of households that sustatined housing damage Gas/fuel 8% 13% 16% Wastewater disposal system 6% 4% 6% Bricks 40% reported that they need support to remove debris Kitchen items 6% 26% 9% Food 4% 18% 9%

Female-headed household recovery Access to needed repair / rebuild materials (Due to the small sample size, it should be noted that the information below is not statistically significant) Sand Cement WASH Livelihoods 25% Lots 25% Lots 51% Some 51% Some 17% of households reported that their pre-earthquake Top 5 reported livelihoods prior to earthquakes 9% of female-headed households reported that they 23% None 20% None source of drinking water was damaged (Respondents could report multiple livelihoods) are repairing or rebuilding their original house 2% Don’t know 4% Don’t know 24+51+232 25+51+204 30+27+25+17+13 11% of households reported that their sanitation system 0% of these 2 households reported that they have Subsistence farming 30% Labour Bricks was completely destroyed or heavily damaged received support to repair or rebuild 4% Lots 20% Lots Formal job 27% 77% of households that sustained housing damage 67% Some 43% Some 17% None 33% None Source of drinking water Own a business 25% reported that they need support to remove debris 13% Don’t know 5% Don’t know 4+67+1712 20+42+335 Before 25 April After 12 May Informal job 17% Communication Hazard Protection 32% Private pipe 32% Cash crop farming 13% 28% Municipal tap 19% 18% Spout 16% Top 3 ways of receiving public information Of all assessed households: 22% Other 34% (Respondents could report multiple ways) 71% of households reported a decrease in income

80+62+60 32+28+1822 32+19+1633 immediately after the earthquakes 65% of households feel only partially protected or Television 80% completely unprotected against current weather 23% of households reported a decline in water quality 0% of households reporting a decrease in income condititons said that their income has since been fully restored Radio 62% 29% of households reported a decrease in water quantity 52% of households do not feel protected against of households reporting a decrease in income Word-of-mouth 60% 49% upcoming monsoon season Type of toilet facility said that their income has since been partially restored

49% of households do not feel protected against Before 25 April After 12 May 57% of households reported knowing of someone in the upcoming winter conditions Livestock ownership community who was consulted before aid delivery 61% Flush (septic) 57% 33% of households have experienced damage from 34% Flush (sewer) 31% 37% of households kept livestock prior to the earthquakes past natural hazard(s) Public Services 4% Pit Latrine 2% On average, of these households’ livestock died or were 0% None / Other 10% 7% Reported inability to access to services and primary reason 62+34+40 57+31+210 lost as a result of the earthquakes

Of all assessed households: 11% Households sharing toilet facilities 25% with other households 10% Health services 17% Municipal services 20% Education Facility destroyed in earthquake Lack of documentation Facility destroyed in earthquake 3.2 Average # of households per toilet 3.7 mp man For more information on this factsheet please contact: Page 2/2 Shelter Cluster: [email protected] REACH Initiative: [email protected]