Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter Response Project Baseline Survey, Dhading

Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter Response Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter Baseline Survey Project BaselineDhading Survey, Dhading

2016 2016

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDEPENDENT RESEARCHERS (3IR) PVT. LTD.

19thSeptember 2016 BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter Response Project Baseline Survey Dhading

FINAL REPORT

Submitted to CARE Nepal Dhobighat, Lalitpur

Prepared by International Institute of Independent Researchers (3iR) Pvt. Ltd. Anamnagar, Kathmandu

19th September 2016 2

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...... 3 List of Figure ...... 5 List of Tables ...... 6 Acknowledgement ...... 7 Acronyms ...... 8 Team Members ...... 8 Executive Summary ...... 9 Chapter I: Introduction ...... 11 1.1 Background of the study ...... 11 1.2 Emergence of the study ...... 12 1.3 Post Disaster Gender, GBV and Shelter Reconstruction Situation ...... 13 1.3.1 Gender ...... 13 1.3.2 Gender Based Violence (GBV) ...... 14 1.3.3 Shelter ...... 15 1.4 Objective of the Study ...... 17 1.5 Scope of the Study ...... 17 1.6Brief Description of the Study VDCs ...... 19 Chapter II: Study Methodology ...... 20 2.1 Study Methodology ...... 20 2.2 Baseline Study Design ...... 20 2.3 Data Collection and Sampling ...... 21 2.6 Data Analysis ...... 24 2.7 Study Limitations ...... 24 Chapter III: Major Findings and Analysis ...... 25 3.1. Demographic and Household information of HH Respondents ...... 25 3.1.1 Respondent’s Profile ...... 25 3.2Gender ...... 31 3.2.1 Gender ...... 31 Gender Analysis ...... 42 3.2.2Gender Based Violence ...... 44 Gender Based Violence Analysis ...... 50 3.3 Shelter ...... 51 3

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

3.3.1 Safe Shelter Messaging ...... 51 3.3.2 Safe Shelter Messages Necessity ...... 55 3.3.3 Safe Shelter General Awareness Test ...... 56 3.4 Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) ...... 63 Analysis for DRR ...... 66 3.5 Key Indicators of Baseline survey ...... 67 Chapter IV: Summary Conclusion and Recommendation ...... 68 Recommendation on the Relevancy of proposed Project Activities and Result for Gender and GBV ...... 70 Recommendation on the Relevancy of proposed Project Activities and Result for Shelter ...... 71 Annex I: Annex Tables ...... 73 Annex II: Field Photographs ...... 98

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 List of Figure Figure 1: Dhading post-earthquake damage data ...... 11 Figure 2: Baseline Study Area ...... 18 Figure 3: Schematic Representation of Study Design...... 20 Figure 4: Gender of the respondents ...... 25 Figure 5: Mean age of the respondents in years ...... 25 Figure 6: Ethnic composition of the respondents ...... 26 Figure 7: Marital Status of the respondents ...... 27 Figure 8:Education Level of the Respondents ...... 27 Figure 9:Education Level of the male respondents ...... 28 Figure 10:Education Level of the female respondents ...... 28 Figure 11:Family Composition of respondents ...... 29 Figure 12:Gender of the household heads ...... 29 Figure 13:Respondent head of the household ...... 30 Figure 14:Education Level of the household population based on age group and gender ...... 32 Figure 15:Educational Institution of the household population based on age group and gender ...... 32 Figure 16:Daily involvement of household population based on age group and gender ...... 35 Figure 17:Household Income Source based on household head gender ...... 36 Figure 18:Household Expense responsibility beard according to gender of household...... 38 Figure 19:Savings by males and females ...... 39 Figure 20:Access to Income ...... 40 Figure 21:Decision making based on gender of household (1) ...... 41 Figure 22:Decision making based on gender of household (2) ...... 42 Figure 23:Knowledge about GBV ...... 45 Figure 24: Knowledge about Specific GBV issues ...... 46 Figure 25: Local mechanism against GBV ...... 47 Figure 26: Available Mechanism best against GBV ...... 47 Figure 27: Cases reported to duty bearer ...... 48 Figure 28: Cases Filed to Legal Authority ...... 48 Figure 29: Follow up by legal authority ...... 49 Figure 30: Receiving of Safe Shelter Messaging ...... 52 Figure 31:Source of Safe shelter messages Control VDC ...... 52 Figure 32: Quality of Safe Shelter Messages ...... 53 Figure 33: Helpfulness of the messaging ...... 54 Figure 34: Start Rebuilding their homes ...... 55 Figure 35: Apply BBS techniques when rebuilding ...... 55 Figure 36: Reason for not applying BBS techniques while rebuilding ...... 56 Figure 37: Implement BBs if Safe shelter message provided ...... 56 Figure 38: Knowledge about DRR...... 64 Figure 39: Knowledge about types of Disasters ...... 64 Figure 40: Does community has DRR preparedness plan ...... 64 Figure 41: Community has institution to help in disaster ...... 65 5

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 42: Need training on DRR ...... 65 Figure 43: Does the respondent fell vulnerable towards disaster ...... 66 Figure 44: Rate your Vulnerability ...... 66

List of Tables Table 1: Detail sampling technique ...... 21 Table 2: Selected Wards for the Survey ...... 22 Table 3: Weighted sample size calculation and collected samples ...... 22 Table 4: Household sample to be collected from each ward and collected samples ...... 23 Table 5: Vulnerable Population among household respondents ...... 30 Table 6: Labor Permit issued for Dhading ...... 37 Table 7: Type of building that can be made earthquake resilient ...... 57 Table 8: How to make house earthquake resilient ...... 57 Table 9: Materials used for Banding ...... 57 Table 10: Response on use of corner stone and appropriate material in between two stones while constructing the wall ...... 58 Table 11: Knowledge on length and breadth ratio of large room ...... 59 Table 12: Knowledge about building configuration ...... 59 Table 13: Technical Knowledge ...... 60 Table 14:Comparative correct responses percentage of Control and Treatment Group ...... 61 Table 15: Result Chain, Indicators and subsequent reference tables ...... 67

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Acknowledgement

This report on “Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter Response Project - Baseline Survey” is prepared by International Institute of Independent Researchers Pvt. Ltd for CARE Nepal. 3iR is grateful to CARE Nepal for awarding this project in collecting the Baseline data for Gender, GBV and Shelter in earthquake affected district of Dhading. We would like to extend our sincere gratitude to CARE Nepal for the continuous technical support in designing survey tools as well as for their coordination and facilitation during the project period. We also owe special thanks to the experts of CARE Nepal for their much- appreciated understanding, advice and assistance while developing tools of this baseline survey. We would like to acknowledge the constant and thoughtful feedback of Mr. Suraj Shrestha, Ms. Bandana Sharma, Ms. Urmila Simkhada and Ms. Prathibha Rijal throughout the project period.

We extend our heartily gratitude to the Field researchers for their dedicated effort to work under such a challenging situation. Effective coordination from field social mobilizers during field work in the study area is also praiseworthy, without whom the work would have been strenuous. An earnest gratitude also goes to all the respondents for their voluntary participation. 3iR is very thankful to the participants of FGDs and KIIs for their participation despite their hectic schedule.

Finally 3iR express utmost gratitude to Ms. Sumeera Shrestha for guiding us in this endeavor, without whose support this report would not have been possible.

Abhash Shrestha Managing Director 3iR Pvt. Ltd.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Acronyms 3iR : International Institute of Independent Researchers ADB : Asian Development Bank BBB : Building Back Better BBS : Building Back Safer BCT : Brahmin, Chetteri, Thakuri CEDAW : The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women DRR : Disaster Risk Reduction FWLD : Forum for Women, Law and Development FSL : Food, Security and Livelihood GBV : Gender Based Violence GDI : Gender Development Index GoN : Government of Nepal HH : Households I/NGO : International/Non government Organization KAP : Knowledge Attitude and Practice MoHA : Ministry of Home Affairs NPC : National Planning Commission NRA : National Reconstruction Authority NRRF : National Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Fund NEOC : National Emergency Operation Center NFI : Non Food Items ODR : Owner Driven Reconstruction PDNA : Post Disaster Needs Assessment PDRF : Post Disaster Recovery Framework PWD : People With Disabilities SSM : Safe Shelter Messages VDC : Village Development Committee WASH : Water , Sanitation and Hygiene VAW : Violence Against Women

Team Members Sumeera Shrestha : Gender and GBV Expert Abhash Shrestha : Project Coordinator Saral Karki : Assistant Project Coordinator, FGD Supervisor Anita Shrestha : FGD Supervisor Arun Maharjan : Field Team Leader Prakash Giri : Field Team Leader Sudip Luitel : Research Assistant Netra Mainali : Research Assistant Roshan Yadav : Research Assistant Mani Karna : Research Assistant Shekhar Rai : Research Assistant Dilli Raj Neupane : Research Assistant Sunita Kuwar : Research Assistant Anikita Thapa : Research Assistant Manisha Sunwar : Research Assistant

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Executive Summary

The project “Integrated Gender, Gender Based Violence and Shelter Response Project Baseline Survey” in coordination with CARE Nepal was developed in order to identify the baseline scenario regarding Gender, GBV and Shelter of the study area – Dhading. The study aimed to identify the current situation of Gender, Gender Based Violence/Violence Against Women (VAW), Shelter and Disaster Risk Reduction in the study area of six VDCs of Dhading district. The baseline survey utilized the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) model of survey and situational analysis to measure awareness, exposure relevance and participation in relation to the proposed project activities.

The main objective of this project was to prevent and mitigate GBV in targeted area and enable women/ girls to live a dignified life by establishing/strengthening immediate and long term mechanisms against GBV; and to address identified gender inequality gap through capacity building of CARE and partner staff equipping them to mainstream gender responsively across its sectors of operation [i.e. WASH, Shelter, Food Security and livelihoods (FSL)]. In addition the project also integrated a Shelter component and aimed to increase the number of newly built or rebuilt houses that incorporated Build Back Safer (BBS) techniques in (re)construction and will support community Disaster Risk Reduction processes.

The baseline study consulted with representatives of vulnerable groups (women, men, girls, boys, and persons with disabilities and other marginalized groups separately to identify their specific issues. This study also collected information on existing gender roles, relations among family/HH members and analyze in-depth gender and GBV gaps in the project VDCs for designing gender specific interventions.

A total of 365 household samples were collected across the six VDCs. The baseline utilized both quantitative (household Survey) and qualitative (FGD and KIIs) methods of methods collection thus utilizing a mixed approach. All together 30 FGDs and 12 KIIs were collected for the purpose of qualitative data collection.

The local people in the community are aware about the necessity of education for both boys and girls where positively partiality is not done based upon their gender. Access to education institution (private and public) depends upon the income level of the households, where preference for private education is given to boys of the family.

The major income source of household is agriculture and in general both males and females of the family take part in the agriculture work. However the workload of females is observed to be more than males as majority of the household chore is the responsibility of females and they are involved in this work from earlier age than males.

Regarding the expenses responsibility, decision making and saving, females from the study area were observed to be an integral part of the equations. They were observed to be active in all sectors illustrated in this section. But on one of the most important section of property ownership and access to income the female population only had minor contributions. This reflects, that even though females have more responsibilities in regards to sustaining the households, the patriarchal nature of Nepalese Society still over shadows all other responsibilities and life load the females bear in the household.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

GBV in the study area still remains a sensitive topic. Majority of the local community are not aware about GBV as an issue only when probed further were they able to recognize its issues. Being a sensitive topic local people did not open up to discuss about it. During the FGD sessions male were observed to perceive that in their particular community GBV was not an issue when compared to females FGD session the participant reported certain cases such as domestic violence and polygamy as frequent occurrence. Knowledge regarding GBV (in its extreme cases such as rape and physical violence) local people were observed to be aware, however in cases regarding mental harassment, domestic violence and polygamy local people did not relate these issues as GBV. A knowledge gap can be observed in proper understanding of GBV, only the mainstreamed issues which were provided in the posters and banners available in the community were considered as GBV.

Regarding the local mechanism, the women’s and mother’s group were the only mechanism to address the issues regarding GBV. This mechanism was also observed to be effective in certain level only. As the representative of this local groups were the local people who in themselves are not properly aware about GBV are not capable enough to address and tackle the problems of GBV. They still practice dialogue sessions and have an initial aim to come to a compromise between the victim and victimizer rather than following a legal punishment basis system. This is a difficult area to change people perception as the victimizer will be let go easily which also conveys a negative message to the whole community as in future local people will think that GBV related cases are not serious and can be solved easily.

GBV, it knowledge, tackling mechanism and local people attitude is not adequate to properly address the issue. They are contend (both males and females) with the prevailing traditional system of addressing the issue. This cycle must be changed as the study area was observed to be sensitive towards GBV and its impacts.

Regarding Safe shelter messaging, where the baseline was conducted only in three VDCS of Phulkharka, Aaginchowk and Baseri (as the remaining three VDCs had already implemented safe shelter messaging project) a spillover effect was observed. The local people had certain access to safe shelter messaging through VDC office, radio messaging, leaflets and pamphlets. Through these sources people had certain general knowledge about building back safer techniques. As the local people had only limited information regarding BBS various misconception were observed about BBS. They perceived that the BBS would be very expensive and would require more materials which made them feel they would not implement the BBS techniques while reconstructing their houses. The people also requested to provide them with proper awareness sessions regarding BBS. They specifically demanded for training program to the local mason on safe shelter construction techniques.

In the section of DRR it is observed that the community is guided by various misconceptions such as . 41% of the respondents still are not aware about DRR even after they directly affected by the massive earthquake. People who are aware about DRR have confusing beliefs as their community is prepared and have a plan to face disasters in futures. The study area immensely requires DRR focused activities, as they are guided by misconception regarding various topic of DRR, their vulnerability increases itself. After the earthquake the area has observed various landslides and there is no such data on the vulnerability of settlements towards landslides

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Chapter I: Introduction

1.1 Background of the study

On 25th April, 2015 a devastating 7.8 magnitude earthquake stuck Nepal which was followed by a 7.3 magnitude on 12th May 2015. These two massive earthquakes resulted in the loss of 8980 lives with 22,652 people injured and thousands of people displaced from their homes1.

Fourteen districts were declared as the affected districts from the disaster. Among which Dhading was considered one of the most affected district. According to the Government of Nepal, Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Portal June 2015, 678 people have lost the lives and 1218 were reported to be injured in Dhading district. Furthermore Dhading has also suffered massive infrastructure losses as fully damaged 81313 private homes, 2140 classrooms, 69 health facilities and 93 government buildings (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Dhading post-earthquake damage data

Source: GoN, DRR portal, Dhading District.

As Nepal witnessed one of the most destructive earthquakes in recent times, many countries, international organizations, humanitarian organizations, private companies, individuals and co- operation came to aid in the crisis situation. Nearly 15 months have passed since the destruction and as the relief phase has ended, and recovery and reconstruction phase has started. National Reconstruction Authority has been established at central and cluster levels to aid the process. The affected people and community are in the process to return to their daily lives, but still the collapsed buildings and grievance of lost loved ones are yet to be recovered.

1 GoN, MoHA, NEOC, Disaster Data 2068-2072 11

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 1.2 Emergence of the study

It has been understood that after any natural disaster there is always high chance of occurrence of epidemics, conflict and violence. Vulnerable populations such as children, women, elderly and People with disabilities (PWDs) are even more prone to be victimized with these circumstances. CARE Nepal always took utmost priority in taking gender sensitive approach in implementing projects in both these phases.

It is not uncommon for Gender Based Violence/Violence against Women and Girls (GBV/VAW/G) to increase in the aftermath of natural disasters. The survivors are usually women and adolescent boys and girls, whose vulnerability is exacerbated in the chaos of a crisis. Separated from their family and community, they are often at increased risk of exploitation and abuse. Intimate partner violence (IPV) can also rise among crisis-affected populations, as many men who have lost jobs, status and stability take out their frustrations on their partners, Experience from CARE’s own work on gender in emergencies shows that post-emergency situations often tend to be the breeding ground for various forms of violence perpetrated against women and girls in particular but not excluding men and boys, considered to be in a more vulnerable state than men and boys for diverse structural, economic, and social factors, creating an emergency response that is tailored to the differential needs and vulnerabilities of women and girls as well as men and boys, is critical.

Adding further, in the recovery and reconstruction phase, the rebuilding of the damaged houses and infrastructure is in process. These communities will rebuild (some of the affected have already started rebuilding) if not provided proper awareness with the same traditional approach and are destined to be as vulnerable as before the earthquake.

As the need to address these issues has arisen, CARE Nepal has developed Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter Response-Nepal Earthquake Recovery Project to be implemented in Dhading District addressing gender and shelter needs in all sectors. The Gender and GBV components are to be implemented in Phulkharha, Baseri, Aaginchowk , Mulpani, Salayantar and Budathum VDCs of the district, where as the Shelter component is to be implemented only in three VDCs of Phulkharka, Baseri and Aaginchowk.

Before implementing any projects/activities, there is a need to assign a baseline regarding the relevant issues. A baseline provides a situational analysis of the current situation of beneficiaries of the project area, so as the outcome, output and eventually the impact of the project activities can be measured against the baseline status. Thus as solicited by CARE Nepal for conducting Baseline survey for Gender, GBV and Shelter project, International Institute of Independent Researchers (3iR) Pvt. Ltd has commissioned the study.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 1.3 Post Disaster Gender, GBV and Shelter Reconstruction Situation

1.3.1 Gender In Nepal, strong patriarchy is accompanied by the caste system among other issues of economic access, health access, educational access and general traditional social structure which affects the independence and autonomy of women. An individual’s access to resources, opportunities upon social service and political voice overwhelmingly depends upon gender and caste/ethnicity (Save the Children 2016)2. These limitations has always hindered in the potential growth and well-being of women in Nepal.

Women’s role in development lacked recognition in Nepal until the early 1980s. However, attempts of enhancing women’s status began from the Sixth Five Year Plan (1980/81-1984/85) and CEDAW was ratified. The Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare was also established after the Beijing conference and comprehensive attempt were made to increase opportunities of women in education, both formal and non-formal; different economic activities and in population control activities. Similarly, the Seventh Five Year Plan (1985/86-1989/90) and the Eight Five Year Plan (1992/93-1996/97) expanded the activities mentioned in sixth five year plan and made a commitment to involve women in development process. The Ninth Five year plan was more progressive than previous plans which also incorporated the policy of “Creation of a developed society on the basis of women’s empowerment and gender equality through mainstreaming women’s participation in each and every aspect of national development”. The Tenth five year plan (2002-2007), was then made with the objective to create an egalitarian society based upon women’s right by improving GDI (Gender Development Index) and by abolishing discrimination against women in different sphere of social, economic and political arenas (FWLD, 2006)3.

Nepal has made significant progress in promoting gender equality and social inclusion, widespread inequalities persist holding back the country’s process to achieving sustainable peace, development and post-disaster recovery and preparedness. However, in many disasters pre-existing gender inequalities in Nepal were severely exacerbated following the 2015 earthquake. Inequalities among men and women in terms of their ownership of assets and opportunities (both social and political) are defined by age, class, caste/ethnicity, disabilities (mental & physical), geographical locations and other social diversities (ADB 2010)4. Such disparity creates “inequality trap” that runs in vicious cycle and also impacts the resilience of men and women during disaster. Such cycle is hard to break and tends to persist over generations (World Bank 2006)5. However, the new Constitution has clearly envisioned Nepal as an inclusive state and guarantees the right to equality for all its citizens.

In the Tenth Five Year Plan, Government of Nepal (GoN) has mentioned to create egalitarian society based upon women’s right by improving GDI (Gender Development Index) and by abolishing discrimination against women in different sphere of social, economic and political arenas. Similarly, in the 14th Three Year Plan (2016/17-2018/19), the GoN aims for economic prosperity with social justice.

2Save The Children. (2016). To The Nepal Earthquake Ensure No One Was Left Behind: A case study on the experience of marginalized groups in humanitarian action. Kathmandu: Save The Children. 3 FWLD. (2006). An Update of Discriminatory Laws in Nepal and Their Impact On Women: A review of the current situation and proposals for change. Kathmandu: Forum for Women, Law and Development (FWLD). 4 ADB. (2010). Overview of Gender Equality and Social Inclusion in Nepal. Kathmandu: Asian Development Bank. 5 World Bank. (2006). World Development Report 2006: Equity and Development. Washington DC: The World Bank. 13

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

In the Post Disaster Need Assessment (PDNA) Key Findings Report Vol A 2015, it is also specifically mentioned that monitoring of protection issues for women accompanied by alternative livelihood will be crucial to reduce pressure on women and mitigate negative mechanism. The report also has elaborated in the promotion of economic engagement for women to build resilience in the long term.

An assessment study in earthquake affected districts carried out in November 2015 by IFRC & REACH has shown that the access and engagement of women with local government agencies and humanitarian agencies were found to have decreased after the earthquake either due to reduced physical access to their services or irresponsiveness of stakeholders. Adding to the disproportionate impact of the disaster upon women, women were also excluded from wide range of disaster management activities. This has overshadowed the role of women in overall decision making in disaster management activities. Hence, there is an urgent need of integrating gender-specific requirements into the earthquake response, as well as ensuring that women take an active and equal role in all relevant aspects of disaster management and rehabilitation.

1.3.2 Gender Based Violence (GBV) GBV is a broadly cutting across classes, races, ages, religions and national boundaries. Women are facing violence at home, work place, market, road, bus, school, campus, hotel, office, law, policy, program, health, business and court and so on. Persistent patriarchy and dominance of Hindu religion and culture has treated women as a second class citizen from the very beginning. Furthermore, Hindu scripture also suggest that fathers, husbands and even sons should control women. Violence against women (in its broadest sense) can occur throughout women’s lives over the course of the lifecycle, irrespective of class, caste/ethnicity, social status, race, nationality or any other defining features (CRDC, 2002).6

Gender-based violence take many forms: 1) Physical abuse for example hitting, slapping/ biting/ shoving, destroying her property, using a weapon/ other objects to threaten or hurt her and denying her access to a health care provider. Sexual violence usually coincides with the physical violence. 2) Psychological/ emotional abuse for example threatening to take the children away from her, the threat could be to leave with the children or to call child protection services, stalking/ harassing her, controlling her time and what she does, isolating her from family/ friends and threatening to hurt someone she cares for. 3) Verbal abuse for example calling her names, other verbal means of attacking her self-esteem and humiliating her in the presence of others. 4) Sexual abuse for example denying sexual intimacy or forcing her into unwanted sexual acts, forcing her to get pregnant or to have an abortion and infecting her with sexually transmitted infections. 5) Spiritual abuse for example belittling her spiritual beliefs and not allowing her to attend the place of worship of her choice. 6) Financial abuse for example limiting access to family finances. 7

In 2015, the Government of Nepal launched the academic year with the slogan “End Gender-Based Violence at School,” and has been raising awareness and taking active steps to address this issue. Under

6 UK.Aid, UNFPA, UN.Women. Gender-based violence in Nepal: Individual, Institutional, legal and policy analyses 2013. 7Saniel S, Gender-based violence: A crucial Challenge for Public Health. Kathmandu university medical journal 2013; 42(2): 179-184 14

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 the leadership of the Ministry of Education, USAID and UNICEF are partnering to support the government in these efforts over a three-year period. The Zero Tolerance initiative intends to counter harmful social norms and practices, and promote non-violent behaviors in schools. According to a survey conducted by UNICEF in 2014, 66% of school-going children in Nepal have experienced physical violence in any form, while 22% have experienced psychological violence by teachers. Similarly, the percentage of children experiencing physical and psychological violence by peers at school is 28% and 15%, respectively. The same survey also found that 12% of children have been victims of sexual violence at school.8

In the context of Dhading before the crisis, population was 336,067 in 2011 where 53% are female and 47% were male (CARE Nepal, 2015). Among the total house hold, female headed households were 27.8%. Among the other various gender issue child marriage is highly prevalent in Dhading and from the total marriage, 1.8 % gets married below the age of 10 where 95% are girls and 5% are boys. Similarly, 11.3% of all total marriage was of 10-14 age groups (20.3% boys, 79.7% girls). In the same way 49% of all marriage was of age group 15-19 yrs. (34% boys, 66% girl). In Dhading 2.3% of total population is identified as disability where 46.8% were male and 53.2% were female, which is well below the international average.9

Reported Cases of GBV in Dhading post-earthquake From 15th July 2015 to 14th July 2016, a total of 446 GBV related complaints were registered in District Police office of Dhading by females and 7 were registered by males. Among the registered complaints by females; 88 complaints were made specifically for GBV, 155 for domestic violence, 31 for Rape, 9 for attempt to rape, 16 for polygamy, 4 for murder, 1 for attempt to murder, 5 regarding Trafficking, 29 cases of suicide and 108 for missing. Regarding the complaints made by males all of them were the complaints against GBV10.

1.3.3 Shelter Government of Nepal (GoN) formed The National Reconstruction Authority (NRA) on 25th December 2015 to guide and facilitate reconstruction process in a planned and timely manner. The Government has also set up a National Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Fund (NRRF) for the large scale construction of collapsed houses and heritage sites. According to the Post-Earthquake Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Measures report published by the Government of Nepal on 1st June 2015, the Government has 40 actions to be completed in a coordinated manner. Some of them are: constructing temporary shelters for the earthquake affected senior citizens, single women, diseased, pregnant and new mothers, disabled, etc.

The Post Disaster Recovery Framework (PDRF) and Post Disaster Need Assessment (PDNA) has encouraged Owner Driven Reconstruction (ODR) enforcing the principle of Build Back Better (BBB). According to Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA), 2015, the reconstruction process must pay maximum attention to the damaged houses which are headed by the female members of the family. As the women members of the households are already heavily involved in household activities, in such cases the reconstruction will only increase their workload to unsustainable levels, like pressure of handling

8 UNICEF, fact sheet: Zero Tolerance; GBV-free schools in Nepal. 2015 9 CARE Rapid gender Analysis for Dhading, 2015. 10 District Police office, Women and Children Department, Dhading

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 household chores, looking after the household members and handling the reconstruction at the same time can be very burdensome for the female’s to cope with.11

Further, according to the same report, the average literacy rate of women is altogether of 45 percent and it is even less in the earthquake affected areas. Thus, this should be considered while developing the construction plan for both permanent and transitional shelter. The skill development and capacity building must be taken in such a way that it will allow partially literate women to manage their money, labor and material purchases as well as administer the reconstruction process.

The NRA has published a five year recovery planned framework named ‘Post Disaster Recovery Framework’ (PDRF) 2016-2020 on May 2016, with the recovery vision of well planned, resilient settlements and a prosperous society. Few of the objectives for reconstruction mentioned in the framework are: to provide shelter on site, maintain and restore local livelihoods, culture and traditions; reconstruct social infrastructure in a disaster resilient manner; promote use of local materials, furnishings the skills of Nepalese craftsman to restore the traditional architecture; promote principles of BBB and ODR; provide specialized assistance to people with special needs and enhance the coping mechanism of the most vulnerable in reconstruction etc. Further the key elements of the reconstruction policy mentioned in the document are: reconstruction of housing, relocation and land use, engaging the community and private sector volunteers, integrating principles of disaster risk reduction and providing financial assistance are some of them12.

According to the information given in the NRA’s Progress Report #2(June 2016), NRA has completed the sampling of the households in all the quake hit areas of the country. Till date altogether of 38150113 numbers of households have been set eligible for housing grants which is to be provided by the government. The associations of commercial and banks have signed an agreement with the NRA to support the households who are eligible for the grants and loans to be provided by the Government of Nepal. The individuals or the households who have signed the grant agreements can visit the banks along with their citizenship certificates and the proof of grant agreements to activate their individual accounts, which according to the statement by the government will be in process within a month.

Dhading, was one of the most damaged district in the earthquake of 2015. According to the Dhading district factsheet, it has been reported that about 98% of the households have been damaged because of the repeated earthquakes and aftershocks, about 82% of the households reported that they feel unsafe under the houses they are currently living in. Among the most affected households 27% of them were recorded to be female-headed households, 6% of them were households only with one member over the age of 18, 12% households were with physically disabled and 2% households reported of being separated and orphaned14.

11Post Disaster Needs Assessment Vol. B: Sector Reports, Government Of Nepal, National Planning Commission, Kathmandu 2015.http://www.npc.gov.np/images/download/PDNA_volume_BFinalVersion.pdf 12Post Disaster Recovery Framework (PDRF) 2016-2020, National reconstruction authority, Government of Nepal, Published on May 2016, http://hrrpnepal.org/media/64624/160513_pdrf-report_final10may.pdf 13 http://nra.gov.np/news/details/146 14Nepal Earthquake Response Dhading District – Factsheet, Shelter recovery assessment, 28 May-3 June 2015. http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/reach_npl_factsheet_dhading_shelterassessment_may2015.pdf

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

According to the Government of Nepal Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Portal June 2015, in Dhading 678 people have lost the lives and 1218 were reported to be injured. Furthermore, Dhading has also suffered massive infrastructure losses as fully damaged 81313 private homes, 2140 classrooms, 69 health facilities and 93 government buildings.15

1.4 Objective of the Study

The main objective of the consultancy is to conduct a baseline study at the project district and VDCs to gain key information relevant to the project. Thus, the study aims to establish the baseline value on the project indicators as provided in the project logical framework for Gender, GBV and Shelter related information. It is conducted to measure awareness, exposure, relevance and participation in relation to program activities, assumptions. The survey will show the changes in terms of adopting new knowledge and technology, attitude, aptitude and readiness for behaviour change. Moreover, it also provides an opportunity for updating context specific situation analysis for gender and social inclusion perspective of the target community and provide for necessary adjustments in the log-frame and setting monitoring indicators. It will also assess the validity of risk and assumption provision during the design of the project. The specific objectives of the base line study at the project VDCs will be to collect baseline information based on the log frame and project documents.

1.5 Scope of the Study The scope of the study was to establish the baseline information on the sector of Gender, GBV, Shelter and GBV through the knowledge, attitude and practice of the local communities of the six target VDCs of Dhading District.

15Disaster Risk Reduction Portal (DRR Portal),Nepal Earthquake 2015 District Profile: Dhading, http://drrportal.gov.np/ndrrip/main.html?id=1 17

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 2: Baseline Study Area

The six VDCs from Dhading district Phulkhark,Baseri, Aaginchowk, Salayantar, Budathum and Mulpani were pre-selected and assigned to conduct the baseline survey. The baseline survey was specifically conducted among the VDCs where CARE Nepal has planned to implement the Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter project.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 1.6Brief Description of the Study VDCs

Salayantar VDC: Salyantar VDC is located at 30kms North-West from Dhading Besi, it is around3-4 four hours driving from Dhading Besi during monsoon season. Among the six VDC Salayantar is the only one which could be accessed by a four wheel jeep during the study period. The VDC’s major ethnic composition comprises mostly of Darai and Kumals. For the purpose of this evaluation study wards 3,5, 7 and 8 were considered for data collection.

Aaginchowk VDC: Aaginchowk VDC is located towards the North- East of Salayantar, which is about 2- 3 hours walk. The major ethnic group observed in the VDC was of BCT ethnic group. For the purpose of this study ward 4 and 6 were considered for data collection.

Phulkharka VDC: Phulkharka VDC lies towards the North-East of Salayantar which is about 4-5 hours walk uphill. It has famous Ganga Jamuna falls, which lies in its ward no.4 Dhandakharka. This village has a good source of water which is currently used for drinking, irrigation and hydroelectricity. The VDC major ethnic composition comprise mostly of Aadibasi/Janjati group. For the purpose of the baseline survey wards 2 and 5 were considered for data collection.

Baseri VDC: Baseri VDC lies to the extreme North of Salayantar which is also about 4-5 hours uphill walk. For the purpose of the survey wards 3 and 5 were considered for data collection. The major ethnic group present in the VDC was observed to from BCT ethnic group. The people of the various settlements are Brahmin and Chhetri in the lower elevation and Ghale and Gurung in the upper elevation.

Mulpani VDC: Mulpani VDC is located on the North-East of Salayantar with a distance of 14Km of earthen road to reach the Mulpani VDC office. As here too the road was blocked by landslide the field team had to travel 4 hours uphill to reach the VDC study area. For the purpose of the study wards 4 and 9 were considered for data collection. The major caste/ethnic group was observed to be of Brahmin and Chetteri followed by Adibasi/Janjati in the VDC.

Budhathum VDC:Budhathum VDC is located towards North of Salayantar which is about 13 Km away by earthen road (jeep/bus) to reach the VDC office or 2-3 hours walk. But during this study due to the occurrence of landslide, motor access was not possible. The local people also reported that during monsoon season the road can rarely be accessed through jeep and bus. For the purpose of the final evaluation wards 4 and 6 were considered for data collection.This VDC consists of mixed caste/ethnic groups like Bramhin, Chettri, Adibasi/Janajatis and Dalits where the majorities were of Newar and Magar ethnic background

Level of Damaged Household in each VDC16 S. VDCs Total Fully Partially Nominal Population Male Female N Buildings Damaged Damaged Damage 1 Salayantar 2295 1943 159 193 11129 5652 5527 2 Budathum 1105 1089 13 3 5249 2564 2685 3 Mulpani 902 898 3 1 5249 2815 2884 4 Baseri 1072 1072 0 0 6322 3119 3200 5 Phulkharka 1133 1132 0 1 6987 3482 3473 6 Aaginchowk Information of Aaginchowk was not available

16 DDRC Records 2015: Survey conducted after the earthquake. 19

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Chapter II: Study Methodology

2.1 Study Methodology

Baseline Study provides information on the situation of various indicators under study. Findings from the baseline study can be utilized to create a strategic plan of action for project implementation as well as measure the impact of the project in the long run. Among various baseline study designs available, Time based baseline design was adopted for this study. This design also allows the reliable and valid evaluation of the project in the long run.

Figure 3: Schematic Representation of Study Design

Intervention Intervention Starts Ends

2016 ABC XYZ year year

Baseline Impact

Pre-intervention Implementation period scenario

This baseline design allows for recording the situation prior to the interventions as well as to assess during implementation situation. The same group of people who have participated in the baseline survey can be approached in later studies to find the changes bought by the interventions. While all the characteristics of the respondents are same, assessing before and after interventions parameters for various indicators will help to determine the actual outcome, output and impact made by the project.

2.2 Baseline Study Design

This baseline study is largely an exploratory study and reflects the current situation of the local communities based upon their knowledge on Gender, GBV and Shelter. The exploratory model focused on the knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) survey with the addition of vulnerability of the community towards the issues of Gender, GBV and Shelter. This design provides the precise situation of the community current situation and helps in guiding CARE Nepal develop activities needed for the community. 20

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

The study is primarily based on both quantitative measurement and qualitative measurement for collection of data. Quantitative measures have been utilized among households who have been identified as the permanent residents of the study area and qualitative measures such as focused group discussions (FGD) and key informant interviews (KII) have been applied to derive real situation analysis of the affected area. FGD and KIIs specifically focused on the issues of gender and GBV where sensitive topics regarding the issues were discussed. Adding further the field staffs were trained to make field note so that their observation could also be incorporated in the study.

2.3 Data Collection and Sampling

The survey has been conducted in Phulkharka, Baseri, Aaginchowk, Mulpani, Salayantar and Budathum VDCs of Dhading district, where the Shelter component is administered in the only three VDCs of Phulkharka, Baseri and Aaginchowk while the remaining components of Gender, GBV and DRR is administered in all six VDCs. The sampling techniques used include Multistage Sampling where in the first phase the sample wards were randomly selected from the implementing VDCs for the project. Then 361 samples were to be collected from sample wards of the six VDCs based upon the total household present in the VDCs17. The 361 households’ samplesare statistically significant at 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error. A total of 365 household samples were collected from the survey for quality assurance four extra questionnaires had been administered.

Table 1: Detail sampling technique 1 District and six Purposively Selected as the implementation area VDCs of project 2 95% confidence STAGE interval and 5% 1 margin of error 361 samples HH to be collected Samples from total HH in study area 3 Sample ward from the VDC randomly selected Providing of List of and list of Household randomly derived based the upon the ethnic composition of the each ward in

each VDC.

4 After the selection of HH ,respondent to be STAGE selected based upon the availability while 2 Respondent administrating the questionnaire with a criteria selection that he/she must be living in the VDC for at least 6 months in the past 12 months

The VDCs are purposively selected by CARE Nepal (as project implementing VDCs) and from Six VDCs (except Salayantar) two wards are randomly selected and 4 wards from Salayantar are randomly selected as the household in Salayantar is the highest, thus the more number of wards. The selected wards represent the entire VDC based upon their ethnic composition and geographical location.

17 The total sample number of household in each VDCs are calculated from the National Household Survey 2011. 21

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Both qualitative and quantitative data has been collected through primary survey. 3iR has collected primary information through i) Review of Documents ii) Structured questionnaire survey iii) Key Informant Interviews iv) Focused Group Discussions and v) Field Observation i) Review of Documents The desk study was a key to build understanding of the project implementation in the study area. This method will also broaden the horizon in assessing Nepal Government current parameters for construction of safer shelter in accordance with the utilization of local resources, Gender and GBV protection inclusion in the reconstructions program. ii) Structured questionnaire survey The household survey is the baseline survey key quantitative data collection technique, where a structured questionnaire was monitored. This method provided quantitative data on the perception (knowledge, attitude and practice) of targeted VDC community on the subject of Gender, GBV and Shelter. The Sampling for the structured questionnaire survey was conducted as following: The randomly selected wards from each VDC with the numbers household are presented below in Table no. 3. Note that the number of Households in Table three is extracted from the household list provided by CARE Nepal from updated database, thus the variation in the data can be seen with census HHs of GoN of 2011. Nonetheless, based upon the weighted values assigned to each VDC remain constant based upon national census.

Table 2: Selected Wards for the Survey VDC/Ward 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total Aginchowk 252 107 139 126 129 261 203 150 89 1456 Baseri 79 88 80 92 122 75 150 134 86 906 Budhathum 263 291 223 320 404 240 274 254 356 2625 Mulpani 83 204 271 146 99 86 264 217 197 1567 Phulkharka 392 419 300 354 332 198 163 282 241 2681 Salayantar 445 564 496 348 415 364 595 968 246 4441 Total 1514 1673 1509 1386 1501 1224 1649 2005 1215 13676

The samples to be collected from each VDC were calculated by providing the weighted average from the total numbers of household in the VDC (Table 3). Table 3: Weighted sample size calculation and collected samples S.N VDCs Total Weighted Sample portion Collected HH Avg. out of 361 Samples HH 1 Phulkharkha 920 15% 55 54 2 Baseri 859 14% 51 54 3 Aginchowk 873 14% 52 52 4 Mulpani 749 12% 45 46 5 Budhathum 866 14% 52 53 6 Salayantar 1791 30% 107 106 Total 6058 100% 361 365 After the selection of the wards, furthermore division of the sample size is conducted based upon the total household available in the selected wards (Based upon table 2). This provides the information on 22

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

the numbers of samples to be collected from each ward which add up to the total samples to be collected from each VDC. Here too the method of weighted average is implemented for the calculation (Table 4). Table 4: Household sample to be collected from each ward and collected samples Ward/total Weighted ward/ Weighted Ward/ Weighted Ward/ Weighted Total VDC HH Value/ total Value/ total Value/ total Value/ HH/ Sample HH Sample HH Sample HH Sample sample 4 32.3% 6 67.7% - - - - 387 Aagnichowk 125 17 261 35 - - - - 52 Collected 19 33 52 3 39.6% 5 60.4% - - - - 202 Baseri 80 21 122 30 - - - - 51 Collected 20 34 54 4 57.1% 6 42.8% - - - - 560 Budathun 320 30 240 22 - - - - 52 Collected 29 24 53 4 42.5% 9 57.4% - - - - 343 Mulpani 146 19 197 26 - - - - 45 Collected 20 26 46 2 55.8% 5 44.2% - - - - 751 Phulkharka 419 31 332 24 - - - - 55 Collected 32 22 54 3 20% 5 16.7% 7 24% 8 39.1% 2474 Salyantar 496 21 415 18 595 25 963 43 107 Collected 21 18 23 44 106

After the calculation of the sample size based on wards, further division of the ward wise samples are conducted based upon the ethnic composition of the ward.

iii) Focused Group Discussion (FGD) For the purpose of qualitative data collection, 5 FGD was conducted in each VDC summing up to the total of 30 FGD for the baseline survey. The FGD was focused on all the three sectors but special preference was allocated for GBV section as, in the household questionnaire only basic queries regarding GBV is asked. As GBV is a sensitive topic, it was decided to better administer GBV related issues in the FGD as it provides a neutral space for expression. The FGD was conducted by experienced FGD conductor where a female conductor led the FDG focused on women and a male conductor for male FGDs. The five FGD in each VDC comprised of the following groups:

• 1st FGD: Heterogeneous group of adult male and female representing the local community, beneficiaries and social groups. • 2nd FGD: Homogenous group of adult female only, representing existing women groups in the community. • 3rd FGD: Homogenous group of adult male only, representing existing social groups (waters users group, Citizen Awareness Centers, Ward Citizen Forum, etc) in the community. • 4th FGD: Homogenous group of adolescent girls only, representing the existing youth group and schools in the community

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

• 5th FGD: Homogenous group of adolescent boys only, representing the existing youth group and schools in the community iv) Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) The KII was conducted with relevant stakeholders, VDC representative, and local community group representative. 3iR conducted 2 KIIs per VDCs where a semi- structured questionnaire was administered. v) Field Observation Direct field observation was done by the assistant project coordinator and research assistants in order to look in firsthand situation on the issues of the three sectors.

2.6 Data Analysis The data collected from field has been entered into computer by experienced data entry operators. The data have been processed and cleaned using SPSS statistical software. Necessary statistical tables have been presented based upon the guidelines of CARE Nepal which are mostly descriptive analysis.

2.7 Study Limitations

The baseline survey didn’t encounter any study limitations as such apart from few of the following:- • The study represents the scenario of the assigned study VDCs and its findings cannot be generalized for other regions. • Time spent on the field was limited, had the study been conducted for longer durations more information could have been derived • There were some cases where the randomly selected households were not available and substitution method was applied

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Chapter III: Major Findings and Analysis

3.1. Demographic and Household information of HH Respondents This section deals with the overall demography, education and socio-economic characteristics of the respondent included in the household survey.

3.1.1 Respondent’s Profile

A. Gender and age of Respondents

Gender and Gender Based Violence (GBV) is central to the study, so it was imperative to have a significant representation of both the genders. The study has a good overall mix of both the genders. The graphical

Figure 4: Gender of the respondents 80% Male Female 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Mulpani Budathum Salayantar Total representation (figure 4) displays a great disparity between the males and females respondents when taking into consideration just the individual VDC’s. However, the total average of the study area shows a significant representation of both the genders. Of the 365 samples collected 53.2% of them were males, and the remaining 46.8% were females.

This ratio of male and female provides a fair representation of both the gender in the baseline process.

Figure 5: Mean age of the respondents in years 54 55 55 51 50 51 51 53 48 45 46 41 36 38

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Mulpani Budathum Salayantar Total VDC

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Similarly, the mean age of the respondents were observed to be 53 years for male and 41 years for female. Among the six VDCs, Mulpani and Aaginchowk recorded the highest mean age at 55 years and Baseri recorder the highest mean age at 48 for females (Figure 5).

Based on field observation it was also reported that most of the population comprised elderly population since, most of the younger generation had migrated to other countries as labor or to Kathmandu for job opportunities after the earthquake.

B. Ethnic composition of respondents

The majority of the respondents were observed to be from Brahmin/Chettri/Thakuri (BCT) group. A total of 45.8% belonged to the BCT ground.

Figure 6: Ethnic composition of the respondents 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Mulpani Budathum Salayantar Total Unidentified Group Others (Brahim/Chettri/Thakuri) Muslim Priviledged Adibasi/Janjati Adibasi/Janjati Dalit

This group was closely followed Adibasi/Janjati group at 24.1%, and the Dalits at 17%. There were 8.8% of respondents belonging to the privileged Adibasi/Janjati group, and 0.5% of the respondents belonging to the Muslim group. Finally, 3.8% of the respondents came from groups that could not be identified.

The graphical representation for six individual VDC’s apart from Salyantar also depicts greater portion of respondents were from the BCT group closely followed by other ethnic group. In Salyantar, Adibasi/Janjati ethnic group comprised of 36.8% of the respondents, followed by privileged Adibasi/Janjati group (Newar) at 20.8%. The otherwise substantial BCT ethnic group then followed at 13.2%, closely followed by the Dalits at 8.5%.

The overall picture of the study areas however, displays a healthy ethnic representation for baseline survey.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

C. Marital Status of the Respondents

A total of 79.5% of the Figure 7: Marital Status of the respondents respondents were 100% married, 14.2% were 90% widow/widower, 3.6% 80% were unmarried, 2.2% 70% lived separately and .5% of 60% the respondents were 50% divorced. 40% 30% Among the male and 20% female respondents, 10% 0% 87.1% of the males were Male Female Total married and 70.8% of the Unmarried Married Divorced Seperated Widow/Widower females were married. It was also observed that 22.2% of the females were widow, and 7.2% of the males were widower. It was also found that 2.2% of the respondents lived separately and 0.5% of the respondents were divorced.

C. Educational Level of the Respondents

Among the total sample it was observed that 56.4% of the respondents were either literate or had received higher education, but the remaining 43.6% reported that they were unable to read and write. Among the 14.2% of respondents who reported that they could read and write majority said that they were simply literate and 12.9% reported that they had studies till primary (up to 5th grade). Only 1.9% of the respondent reported that they had received bachelors and higher level of education.

Figure 8:Education Level of the Respondents 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Mulpani Budathum Salayantar Total Unable to read and write Literate Primary (upto 5th Grade) Secondary (6th & upto SLC) Intermediate/10+2 Bachelors & Above

Mulpani recorded the highest overall literacy level among the six VDC’s; closely followed by Aaginchowk and Salyantar. This observation is intriguing because Salyantar is geographically located in a better position than Mulpani and Aaginchowk in terms of access to roads. However, Mulpani and Aaginchowk have a better literacy rate than Salyantar despite the lack of all-season road. This observation demonstrates that education is not hindered by the lack of road and other facilities.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 9:Education Level of the male respondents Figure 10:Education Level of the female respondents Intermediat Bachelors & Intermediate Bachelors & e/10+2 Above /10+2 Above 7% 2% 7% 2% Secondary Secondary (6th & upto (6th & upto Unabe to SLC) SLC) read and 23% 18% Unabe to write read and 38% write Primary 50% (upto 5th Grade) Primary Literate Literate 12% (upto 5th 17% 11% Grade) 13%

Among the respondents 38% of the males were found to be unable to read and write and 50% of the female respondents were unable to read and write. 17% of the males were literate and 11% of the female respondents were literate. 13% of the male respondents had received primary education and 12% of the female respondents had received primary education. 23% of the males respondents had received secondary education and 18% of female respondent had received secondary level education. 7% of male and female respondents had received intermediate level education and 2% of males and females had received bachelors’ level education.

Though the quantitative data shows a huge gap between the illiteracy level between the males and females, the qualitative analysis showed a rise in awareness that education was required equally by both the genders. The residents of the six VDC’s were keen in sending both male and female child to school. The traditional thought process where only male child deserved education had changed. Not only were the locals aware, but they were also sending their children to schools regardless of the gender. This observation in all of the six VDC’s was a great sign and it brings hope that the illiteracy rate for both male and female will gradually drop.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

D. Family Composition

In the case of family composition, the criteria to be considered a family must be clarified. The baseline survey considered only those members who had stayed with the family using the same kitchen for 6 months with in the past 12 months. Figure 11:Family Composition of respondents Among the 365 233 households surveyed, it 187 176 was recorded that 1497 162 167 people belonged to the 126 122 113 recorded households. Among which the highest age group for male and 50 43 45 38 female was observed to 17 18 be from 20-39 years.

< 1 1-5 6-9 10- 20- 40- > 60 < 1 1-5 6-9 10- 20- 40- > 60 Similarly the average yr 19 39 59 yr 19 39 59 household size was Male Female calculated to be 4.10 members. The male to female ration was observed to be 1.88:2.22.

During the FGD sessions too it was observed that Figure 12:Gender of the household heads though the general awareness of a boys and girls being equal has risen, though the society still has Female certain degree of preference to a male child. It was 28% also observed that some families having female child still wanted a male child. On the other hand the Male families having just female child were satisfied and 72% these families were keen on having a small but happy family.

It was also found that 72% of the household in the six VDC were male headed households and only 28% of them were female headed households (Figure 12).

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

All respondents in Phulkharka were Figure 13:Respondent head of the household household head of their family. 92.6% of Baseri’s respondent were household head, 92.3% of the respondents of Aaginchowk were household heads, 71.7% of Mulpani’s respondents were household heads, 58.5% of Budhathum’s respondents were household heads and finally, 59.4% of Salyantar’s respondents were household heads.

On an average of the total number of respondents 76.4% of the respondents were household heads to their family.

Out of the total population based on the respondent’s family size it was found that a total of 197 individuals belonged to the vulnerable population (Table 5). The details breakdown of the vulnerable population can be observed below:

Table 5: Vulnerable Population among household respondents Vulnerable people Count Over 70 105 Lactating mothers 3 Child Head HH 0 PWD 23 Pregnant women 15 Single women 51 Total 197

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 3.2Gender This section elaborates on the gender roles, relation, power structure and decision making observed in the study area. The topics regarding education, household income (access and control) decision making and participation are covered in this section. Furthermore, this section also identifies the awareness among the respondents about GBV and addresses key issues of GBV with the local mechanism of Tackling GBV issues and the effectiveness of such mechanism.

3.2.1 Gender Severity of disaster upon particular community and their resilience towards disasters is generally shaped by inequality and inequity among gender issues, geography, poverty and social exclusion (International Alert, 2015; Sarah & Maureen, 2013)18. Moreover, the representation of the vulnerable groups’ viz., women, Dalit and ethnic minority in decision making process in humanitarian response is essential to understanding their needs. However, vulnerable and marginalized groups were poorly represented in disaster relief committees post 2015 earthquake thus facing discrimination in allocation and distribution of aid (Save The Children, 2016)19.According to the Post Disaster Need Assessment Report, women are more vulnerable in post-disasters and face high chances of sexual and gender-based violence, human trafficking, child marriage and child labor (NPC, 2015)20. Empowering women also improve their quality of life and ultimately their whole family. Studies show that, in most of the societies, gender gaps have impacts on the basic elements necessary for survival during and post the disaster (López-Carresi, Fordham, Wisner, Kelman, & Gaillard, 2013)21. Lack of basic element impacts vulnerable groups like women and children specifically from the poor and marginalized community.

A. Education

Much of the population in the selected VDC were aware that school education was necessary and no significant difference in the male and female education trend in various age groups from 1 to 39 years was observed. 52% of the male kids from 1-5 years of age were either literate or studied in primary level and 50% of the girls from the same age group were literate or studied in primary level. Only 2.3% of males in the age group 6-9 years were unable to read and write and 2.2% of the females in the same age group were unable to read and write. Rest of the children either were either literate, attended up to primary level or secondary level. For the age group 10-19 years, 1.2% of the males were unable to read and write and 1.6% of the females were unable to read and write. Significant differences were seen in the unable to read and write level in the age group of 20-39. 4.1% of the males were unable to read and write, while 20.6% of the females were unable to read and write. The numbers for unable to read and write increased as the age group increased. The age group 40-59 had 26.9% of unable to read and write males and 73.9% unable to read and write females. Finally, for the people above 60 years 65.1% of the

18International Alert. (2015). Gender and Conflict Sensitivity in the Response to Nepal's 2015 Earthquakes. Kathmandu: International Alert. 19Save The Children. (2016). To The Nepal Earthquake Ensure No One Was Left Behind? A case study on the experience of marginalized groups in humanitarian action. Kathmandu: Save The Children. 20NPC. (2015). Post Disaster Needs Assessment, Volume A: Key Findings. Kathmandu: National Planning Commission, Government of Nepal. 21López-Carresi, A., Fordham, M., Wisner, B., Kelman, I., & Gaillard, J. (2013). Disaster Management: International Lessons in Risk Reduction, Response and Recovery. London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 males were unable to read and write and 97.3% of the females were unable to read and write (Figure 13).

Thus, it was observed that regardless of the gender the unable to read and write rate increased with the increasing group. The reasons for this were lack of awareness of education, and lack of proper schooling facility in the past. The senior citizens were deprived of education when they were young. Among the unable to read and write too it was observed that unable to read and write females were at large compared to the males. The reasons identified for this from the discussions was the attitude towards female education in the past.

Figure 14:Education Level of the household population based on age group and gender 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female < 1 yr 1-5 yrs 6-9 yrs 10-19 yrs 20-39 yrs 40-59yrs > 60 yrs

Bachelors & Above% Intermediate/10+2% Secondary (6th & upto SLC)% Primary (upto 5th Grade)% Literate Unable to Read and Write However, the positives are that the younger generation get education and unable to read and write rate in very low. The older people now have the knowledge and have changed their attitude and perception about education. During the qualitative discussion both males and females were keen on sending their children to school. They were open to the idea of sending both male and female kids to school. The traditional social attitude that girls should not be educated had changed.

Figure 15:Educational Institution of the household population based on age group and gender 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1-5 yrs 6-9 yrs 10-19 yrs 20-39 yrs 40-59yrs > 60 yrs Mean

No institution Public Institution Private institution

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

It was also observed in the six VDC on an average that 9% of the people went to private institutions, 54.3% went to public institutions and 36.7% went to no institutions. (Annex Table 10).The average number of no institutions is on the high side because of the high unable to read and write rate among people of higher age group. On an average 12.3% of males went to private institutions compared to 5.7% of females. 59.2% of the males went to public schools and 49.4% of females went to public schools. (Annex Table 10)

It was also observed among various age groups that there was always more percentage of males enrolled in the private schools compared to the females. In the age group of 5-9 years, 14% of the male children went to private schools as compared to 2.6% of the females. 13% of the males went to private schools and 8.6% of the female went to private schools in the 10-19years age groups. In the 20-39 years age groups 4.8% of the males had attended or were enrolled in private schools, while only 0.4% of the females were enrolled in private schools.

It was observed that though parents were keen to send both children to schools, the male child got the preference when it came to sending them to private schools. Cases such as this were more prevalent in the families that could afford private schools tuition. The disparity of sending males to private and girls to public schools was not observed in the household who could not afford private schools as they said they would “There is a difference between private not be able to afford private schools anyway. Sita Pathak school education and public school. One of Salyantar-7 says “The only discrimination in education can just see the English words they use is seen when the people with more money tend to send and we are unable to understand them.” their children to have quality education to big cities and boarding schools whereas the poor ones just dream about -Niraj Adhikari, Grade 10, Student it because of lack of quality education in the village.” from Mandali HSS, Phulkarka 2, Dhading Through discussions with the adolescent and the parents it was found that the parents as well as the children believed that the quality of education was much better in private schools when compared to public schools, and when it came to sending the children to private schools the males would get the initial preference.

Though few issues still exist regarding education, much of them have been addressed regarding providing equal opportunities to male and females for education, but the quality of education provided remains a topic which needs to be accessed further. Both the male and female children receive education and the residents of the region are well aware of the importance of education for both the male and female children. Januka Devi Pandey of Aaginchowk -4 explained how the trend of education has changed and the issues regarding education and gender gap in education have been brought to light.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Name : Januka Devi Pandey According to Ms. Januka Devi Pandey, the Sex : Female discrimination in education between boys and girls Occupation : Female Medical create the gap between male and female in society. She Volunteer recalls though previously the gap in education between Address : Aagnichowk-4 males and females was huge. However, in recent years Date : 13th August,2016 there is no discrimination between boys and girl in her society and equal opportunity to education is provided. Both boys and girls are encouraged to go to school to study. She says that though there is still little practice of discrimination against the females during menstruation in her society but there is no any discrimination practices in education during this period. She stresses that even the girls who are in menstruation period are encouraged to go school. Furthermore, she claims the common age of girls to get married is above 20 and for the boys is above 25. Early marriage is not so much an issue now days. However there is stillpractice of early marriage in her society.

Another resident of Budathum shares light in a different perspective regarding education

Name : Ranjila Nepali Sex : Female Occupation : Secretary of Shanti Ama Samuha Address : Budathum Date : 16th August,2016

According to Ms.Ranjila Nepali, in her community both male and female are encouraged to study. She added that we not only encourage boys and girls to school but we also encourage them to take higher education. She claims that there is no discrimination practice during menstruation period in her community which majority follows Christianity. She says that menstruation practice is more prevalent in the Hindu community and more cases of discrimination are seen in the Hindu society.

Thus, it was observed two different perspectives to how discrimination against women can persist or not persist based upon the religion. But, irrespective of the discrimination and religion it was observed that both male and female children till they reach adolescent age were given an opportunity for education. However, some comments regarding the availability of mobile phone use among the younger generation verified the increase in the cases of eloping in the study area. As they elope in a young age, the access to education for young female wife once they reach their husbands homes is yet to be measured.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

B. Daily Involvement (Time)

In this baseline, direct employment was not administered among the respondents, rather the major time spent in an average day by each and every member of the family was asked. This technique puts in perspective, what nature of work the population does based upon the age group and their gender. For analysis the gaps and current situation of the study area this methods shades light on the gender roles in the community and their access to opportunities, which provides a clearer picture not only in employment sector of the area but also on areas which are traditionally not considered as employment such as household chores.

Figure 16:Daily involvement of household population based on age group and gender 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 6-9 yrs 10-19 yrs 20-39 yrs 40-59yrs > 60 yrs

Others Household chores Unemployed Education Remittence Private Sector Service Government Service Private Business Livestock Agriculture Most of the selected population in age group 6-9 years and 10-19 years were involved in education. In the age group 6-9 years, 100% of the male children were involved in education and were not involved in other activities. However, for the same age group 93.3% of the female population were involved in education as well but 4.4% involvement in livestock related activity. Though the percentage is small, it does show that females started working at an earlier age than males.

For the age group 10-19 years, 90.1% of the male population were involved in education and 84.5% of females were involved in education. The males of this group were also involved in other sectors such as livestock tending, agriculture, private business, governmental service and private sector service, and none of the males were involved in household activities. On the other hand, though the females in this group were also involved in other activities such as livestock tending, agriculture, and private business, 2.2% of them were also involved in household activities. This puts in perspective that the gender roles and responsibilities starts to differentiate from a young age.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Similarly, with the age group 20-39 years, both males and females were involved in different activities. However, no male were reported to spent majority of their time in household chores while 31.3% of the females were involved in the household activities. The numbers were similar in the 40-59 years and over 60 age groups. In the 40-59 age groups 0.8% of males did household chores compared to 34.1% of the females. Finally, in the age group above 60, 4.8% of the males did household chores along with other activities while 42.5% of females did household chores along with other activities (Figure 16 and Annex Table 11).

It was observed, the females were involved in jobs outside of house as well as the work inside the house. The males on the other hand were concerned more with jobs outside of home and did very less household chores. The gap was clearly seen that women are subjected to more work than the males. During the discussion sessions with just the males and adolescent boys it was reported that they contributed to household chores just as much. These statements however contradicted during the female group discussions. The females said that though the males contributed but the contribution was bare minimal. It can also been seen that women are subjected to more “Time Poverty” than men. The concept of ‘time poverty’ – whereby some individuals, especially women, do not have enough time for rest and leisure after taking into account the time spent working, whether in the labour market, for domestic work, or for other activities such as fetching water and wood (Blackden and Wodon 2006:6).

Agriculture is observed to be the major employment sector in the study area where most of the independent population (above 19 years) devoted majority of their time. Private business and livestock were also another sector after agriculture which was observed to be popular in the study area, done by both males and females.

C. Household Income

Household income was calculated based on the three major sources of household income starting from the first highest source to the third highest source. The Figure 16 shows the aggregate percentage of the three highest source of income. Here if the respondents had reported only one or two source of income than in other source None is included but for better understanding none section is removed from the figure. It was observed that majority of the households has two source of income and most of the responses in the third highest source recorded no source.

Figure 17:Household Income Source based on household head gender 45.1% 40.3%

23.7% 20.1% 18.6% 9.9% 9.5% 6.5% 7.4% 5.4% 4.9% 2.7% 3.9% 2.0%

Male HH Female HH Agriculture Livestock Private Business Government Service Private Sector Service Remittance Others 36

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

This section is analyzed via the segregation of the respondent’s household by the gender of the household head. In both male headed household and female headed household agriculture was the highest contributor to the income. 40.3% of the income was contributed by agriculture in male headed household and 45.1% of the income was contributed by agriculture in female headed household. Livestock followed as the major source of income in both male and female headed household respectively. 23.7% of the income was contributed by livestock in male headed household, and 20.1% of the income was contributed by livestock in female headed household. While private business followed livestock as the major source of income for male headed household, remittance followed livestock in female headed household. The income of remittance was higher in female headed household than the male headed household. 9.5% of the income was from remittance in the male headed household, and 18.6% of the income was from remittance in female headed household (Figure 17).

It was also observed from the discussions that the tendency to go for foreign employment was higher among the males rather than the females. The females would usually stay behind and look after the family while the males went abroad. The details of the number of males and female issued labour permit for foreign employment in Dhading district can be observed from Table 6.

Table 6: Labor Permit issued for Dhading22 Fiscal Year #Males #Females 2008/09 2376 20 2009/10 3719 58 2010/11 4964 51 2011/12 5340 139 2012/13 6971 362 2013/14 7342 394 2014/15 6984 464 Total 37696 1488

During the FGD session some cases were recorded where there were discrepancies between the male and female pay structure as well. While mostly the pay is same for both female and male for similar kind of jobs sometimes the pay varied. Yamkumari Shrestha from Aaginchowk-5, quoted

“Women and men are not paid equally even in same kind of work.” However, then she quoted “Things were much better than what it was and we get similar pay most time, but sometime we do encounter difference in pay.” Bimala Regmi from Budhathum-4 validated this by saying “Things are better now than how they were. In the past sometimes we got paid just food (Corn), while the males got paid in cash.”

The males too acknowledged the difference in pay at times, but they said there would be small differences in the work they did. Though both male and female would be doing waged agricultural work because males work would be physically demanding they would get paid slightly better than the females.

22 Ministry of Labor and Employment: Labor migration for employment :A status Report for Nepal: 2014/015, Government of Nepal, 2016 37

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

D. Household expense responsibility

Household expenses responsibility depicts the gender roles in the study are regarding the responsibility beard by gender and the nature of the responsibility based on the gender of the household head. This information provides a clear picture on the nature of expenses and the gap on the responsibilities beard, where CARE Nepal can plan its project activities focusing on the responsibility gap. Figure 18:Household Expense responsibility beard according to gender of household 90% Male Female Both 80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH HH Kitchen groceries Educational Agricultural Household Tax Medical Festival Household Livestock Expenses Expenses Expenses Expenses Assets Expenses Expenses

On an average 44.2% of the respondents said males took responsibility in household related expenses in a male headed family. 19% of the respondent said females took responsibility of household expense in a male headed household. 36.8% of the respondents said that both male and female took responsibility in such household. Similarly, 16.7% of the respondents said males took responsibility in household related expenses in a female headed family. 68.8% of the respondent said females took responsibility of household expense in a female headed household. 14.6% of the respondents said that both male and female took responsibility (Annex Table 13). Detail breakdown on the expenses heading based on the household head can be observed in Figure 18.

Breaking down the household responsibilities into subcategories it was seen that in male headed household majority of the respondent said males took the responsibility of the household expenses but was closely followed by responsibility is taken by both males and females as well. Likewise, in the female headed household, the majority of the respondent said that females took more of the responsibility of various expenses categories but the decision making by both male and female is observed to be less when compared to male headed households.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

E. Savings and Access to household Income

It was observed during the FGD sessions Figure 19:Savings by males and females that females were more into savings than 70% the males irrespective of the household Male saving (yes) Female Saving (yes) 59.8% heads. This qualitative information is also 60% backed by the quantitative information 52.5% where in a male headed household it was 50% 45.2% observed that 45.2% of the males said they saved and the other 54.8% said they were 40% not involved in saving. In a female headed household the number of males that did 30% not save was even greater- 82.4% of the 20% 17.6% males said they did not save as opposed to 17.6% of males that said they used to save 10% (Figure 19). However, females would conduct savings whether they were in a 0% male headed household or a female headed Male HH Female HH household. In a male headed household 52.5% of women said they conducted savings and 59.8% of the females said they conducted savings in a female headed household (Annex Table 14).

While the saving percentage of the females are not high either but comparatively they are much better than male savings percentage. One of the main reasons for the savings percentage to be in the fifties is the local income of the region. Since, the income is less and much of the income is spent on livelihood there is no extra money that can be saved. The other reason for low savings percentage is due to lack of access to financial institutions which was mostly available near Salayantar only. However, it has also been seen that females tend to save more than males. Females usually tend to save in various women micro saving groups present in the community and thus have an access to local financial structure that they themselves create. On the other hand there aren’t as many male groups as a result of which males do not have access to make savings.

Ram Kumar Baniya of Phulkharka-2 quotes “We don’t make enough to conduct savings, but women do save more than us because they have their groups. Men on the other hand don’t have such groups.”

This statement was supported by Sitaram Shrestha of Salayantar-7 quoting “Nowadays women are more active and they have a lot of meetings.” He smiles and jokingly looks at others and says “even more than me”. The others laugh but unanimously agree.

Though the males were less involved in saving it was seen that they had more access to the income than the females.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 20:Access to Income 100% High Low None 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Male HH Female HH Male HH Female HH HH income access Male HH income access Female

In a male headed household 78.7% of the male respondent had high access to the income, 18.6% of the respondent said that they had low and 2.7% of the respondent said that had no access to income. Similarly, in the female headed household 52.9% of the males said they had high access to income, 29.4% of males said they had low access to income and 17.6% of the males said they had no access to income. In case of females in male headed household 33.1% of the females said they had high access to household income, 60.8% of the female respondents said they had low access to income and 6.1% of females said they had no access to the household income. Likewise, in a female headed household 50% of the females said they had high access to income, 44.1% of the female respondents said they had low access to household income and 5.9% said they had no access to the household income (Figure 20).

The observation shows that regardless of more savings done by the females, males had more access than the females had in both male headed and female headed household. This information can be related in the above two topic where in the female headed household the responsibility of expenses is beard by female, they tend to save more but their access to income is subsequently less. This disparity regarding the access to income shows the females in the study area do not have financial freedom. They still need to take consent from the male member of the family regarding the financial decisions.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

F. Household decision making

Figure 21:Decision making based on gender of household (1) 80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Male HH Female HH Male HH Female HH Male HH Female HH Male HH Female HH Male HH Female HH Male HH Female HH Decision regarding Decison regarding Decision regarding Decision regarding Responsible for HH Responsible for HH expenses for kids health expenses making savings investments chores decision

Female only Male only Female & Male equally Female support by Male Male support by female

Regarding the decision making in a household it was seen that in a male headed household the decision making procedure was a joint procedure. On the other hand in a female headed household majority of the decision was taken by females. In a male headed household, majority of the respondent (50.6%) said that decision regarding the children’s education was a joint decision. However, in female headed household this decision was mostly (57.8%) taken by the females only. Similarly, decision regarding health, savings, investment, responsibility for household chores and household decision in male headed household was mostly made jointly by both male and females. On the other hand all of the decisions were mostly made by the females in female headed households (Figure 21).

This observation showed that females are an active member of the household regardless of the gender of the household head. On the other hand males alone were not quite active in the decision making process as the females. Though, the numbers point in the direction where females were more active in decision making process, the qualitative analysis showed a contradicting feature. The males and the females during the FGD sessions were vocal about the household decisions being a joint decision these days rather than just an independent decision. The common practice of the past where women had to be the sub-ordinate to the men had changed and women had equal say (if not more) in the decision making process.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 22:Decision making based on gender of household (2) 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Male HH Female Male HH Female Male HH Female Male HH Female Male HH Female Male HH Female Male HH Female HH HH HH HH HH HH HH Decision regarding Responsible for Decision regarding Active part in Decision regarding Major property Decision regarding HH expenses visiting market buy/sell cattles community activities buy/sell house/land owner reconstruction

Female only Male only Femal & Male equally Female support by Male Male support by female

Furthermore, the trend of joint decision making continued in other activities such as decision regarding household expense, responsible for market visits, decision to buy/sell livestock, taking part in community activity, decision regarding buying and selling land and decision regarding reconstruction in male headed household. The trend of females making majority of such decision also continued in the female headed household (Figure 22).

However, though decisions were mostly jointly in most of the cases in male headed household when it came down ownership of property it was males who owned the properties. 80.2% of the respondent said males were the major property owner in male headed household. Surprisingly, even in the female headed household 52.9% of the males were property owner and 40.2% of the respondent said females were the major property owner.

During the discussions too, the females though were aware of the law that they could inherit as well as have ownership were still a bit reluctant to inherit. Tara Sitaula from Aaginchowk-4 says “Our husband won’t give us anything; we don’t expect them to give to our daughters”. The tendency to pass on the ancestral household properties to just the males is still at large in the society.

Gender Analysis The local people in the community are aware about the necessity of education for both boys and girls where positively partiality is not done based upon their gender. Access to education institution (private and public) depends upon the income level of the households, where preference for private education is given to boys of the family.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Thus, even if the data represents that females in the study area are active, aware and responsible to various important role in the community and the households, it can be understood that they are still deprived of economic freedom. This situation remains the core gap in gender, which is blanketed by positive involvement of females in various other sectors.

VDC wise specific observations

• Aaginchowk- People here seemed to be in harmony with the notion of gender equality. Although, gender equality in theory was now a part of the system there still seemed lack of practice in some regards. The daughters were still not given their right to property in some cases according to the FGD findings. However, what was delightful to see in Aaginchowk was men helping women with the household chores and daily activities. Girls were allowed to walk freely but they did agree boys enjoyed more freedom than girls. GBV cases do exist in this region but not as much as the past. One such incident was where a woman was scolded and derogatory remarks were passed at her by a neighbor. The data collected on Gender based violence (GBV) showed the Brahmin and Chettri communities were found to be more aware than Dalit and indigenous communities. The cultural discrimination was observed in this VDC especially in KULPUJA. During our observation we found that issues regarding to menstruations were still at large. Children were not allowed to go to school during menstruation. One of the reasons for this was the school lacked proper hygienic latrines. The superstition where women are blamed as bokshi(witch) was still prevalent in the region. Many issue related to GBV like bokshi claims, rape from own relatives have been filed in Aaginchowk. The women groups seem to be active in this VDC. They try and solve the GBV related cases, and if they are unable to do so and the severity of the cases is high they refer it to the concerned authorities. Sahayatri is one of the organization working for awareness regarding the gender based violence in Aaginchowk. The training on gender based violence is given to community women. Yet, there are cases where women are still unaware of GBV. We even came across a Health Volunteer, who said she had been working as the health volunteer for more than 20 years now but was unaware of the term GBV.

• Phulkharka- The idea of gender equality was accepted within the village, the practicality of it was still in its early phase. The males did very different work than the females. The females were subjected to a lot of household chores than the men. It was also observed in this VDC that during the day there would be number of men sitting in the courtyard and playing cards while females were busy toiling in the field and collecting fodder. GBV cases are still seen but not as much. Males and females can roam about more freely and the neighborhood is friendly. The reach of men was found to be greater in income source than that of women. Talking about the Gender based violence (GBV) it was observed the respondents had very little knowledge of 43

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

laws against GBV. During field observation it was found that not only the females are victim of GBV issues but male are also the victim of it. The cases of women being disloyal to their husband, female married with another person by leaving her husband are some of the issues found in the Phulkharka VDC where male are the victim of GBV issues. People were observed to be aware about Safe Shelter message in the study area, but requested to organize awareness session as in the Mulpani. The respondents reported that trainings are also required for the local masons in BBS as they were planning to reconstruct their damaged house soon.

• Mulpani – The existence of female friendly shelter here has surely contributed to females being empowered in this village. They seemed much more aware about the rules and the issues of GBV than other villages. Females and males often gathered in the FFS and awareness classes were held. These awareness classes have certainly made a difference in this village. Few cases of domestic violence still persist but GBV is on the decline as people are more aware. The knowledge about GBV in the VDC was observed to be minimal. Here too polygamy was one of the major issues regarding GBV, but the acceptance of polygamy by the social structure of the community contributed for low reporting of such cases even in the local mother’s group.

• Budathum – The overall idea of gender equality well accepted here as well. Though the practice of this idea still has a long way to go. Women do claim that things are looking up and changes are happening. One such change could be seen in the pay scale where women would often be paid very less compared to men in the past, but now the pay is the same. GBV issues have decreased and the villagers (budathum-5) say their strict local drinking laws have paved way for this change. Budathum had the most effective mother’s group among the study area; they had developed a mechanism where the local alcohol shops were allowed to be opened after 6 PM. This has contributed in decrease of domestic violence as reported in the FGD. However adolescent boys and girls were reported to elope in early ages of 16 to 19 years in the VDC.

• Baseri – Again the theory of gender equality is accepted but the practicality still in its infancy. Women here are now more aware of gender equality and GBV issues. They should still however do with more awareness. Cases of gender violence were seen but went unreported. The female friendly space (MahilaBhavan) almost non-functional.

• Salyantar – Geographically better placed than the five VDCs Salyantar gets good amount of attention from institutions. The women here are more aware and the men accept the notion of gender equality. They also say that there are times when the women’s group and females have more meetings and gatherings than the male counter-part. Cases of GBV not seen very much however there were cases of multiple marriages seen in this region.

3.2.2Gender Based Violence

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

In a post disaster scenario Gender Based Violence (GBV) becomes more prominent as it is a stressful situation at individual and social level. Violence against women, trafficking, physical, mental violence, sexual abuse and harassments may occur as the social and legal system may be distributed by the disaster. In the baseline study area general awareness regarding GBV and local mechanism to tackle GBV was asked in household level questionnaire survey and more sensitive topics of occurrence of GBV was administered in FGDs and KIIs. Here the analysis is done based upon the gender of the respondent.

A. Knowledge of GBV

Many of the respondents did not know what the Figure 23:Knowledge about GBV term gender based violence was. 49% of the respondents said they knew what the term gender based violence was and 46.2% of the female Yes No respondent said they knew what the term meant. 51.0% 53.8% 49.0% 46.2% The rest 51% of the males and 53.8% of the females said they did not know what the term meant (Figure 23). Even though people did not know the exact term as GBV but it was observed that the local people did understand the feel of GBV. Male Female

However, during the discussions session as the session conductors gradually started defining the term, more people said they knew about it. They started opening up and cases related to gender based violence started surfacing. Even the people who said they knew about GBV would often refer to it as “violence done against women by men.” Such responses were mostly heard in the Baseri VDC adult male/female FGD sessions and FGD session in Phulkharka. The responses from the residents of Salyantar, Aaginchowk, Mulpani and Budathum were different and they seemed to have a better idea of what gender based violence was. Gita Bhandari from Aaginchowk-4says “Gender violence can take place in many forms - from male to female, female to male or even male to male and female to female.” She then questioned “Isn’t that so?” To further enhance the point she was trying to make, she went on to add “Most claims of witchery against women are made by other women.”

It was thus observed that even though the residents were not very familiar with the term, upon introducing them to the term they were able to share their experiences and share stories of the region.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Among the respondents that said they knew what gender based violence was 93.7% of the males and 91.1% of the females respondent by saying domestic violence was a form of GBV. 81.1% of the male respondents and 67.1% of the female respondent said that mental harassment was a form of GBV. 84.2%

Figure 24: Knowledge about Specific GBV issues 100% 90% Male Female 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Yes No Don't Yes No Don't Yes No Don't Yes No Don't Know Know Know Know Domestic Violence Mental Harassment Sexual Abuse Physical Violence

of the males and 63.3% of the females said that sexual abuse was a form of GBV and finally 91.6% of the male respondents and 77.2% of the female respondents said that physical violence was a form of GBV. There were also respondents in a few that said they did not know that a particular type of violence was categorised as GBV.

During the FGD session the session conductor came across some cases of GBV such as:

IPV There are only a few cases of IPV in this region - Women in Phulkharka-2 revealed a case of an old lady, 75, whose husband, 80, threatens her to have sex and that if she didn’t he would remarry. Domestic Most cases of domestic violence don’t often surface in the society. They take place with the Violence household and continue to happen. Mental There are many cases of mental violence where women are often subjected to scolding and Violence offensive comments. Sometimes the comments are also passed to men .A woman was often tortured by a man, who would say offensive things to her. He would often take his cattle’s to her field and when she asked him not to do so, he would start making derogatory comments (in Baseri)and with multiple response by the mother’s group he still continues to do so but it is not informed to the legal authority. Physical Most cases of physical violence involve alcohol. After the consumption of liquor, men and Violence women both tend to be more physically violent as reported in the FGD. Sexual There aren’t any sexual violence cases in recent years. Men and women are more secured Violence within the community and are able to move around safely. Polygamy There were many cases of polygamy seen in the study area. One of the surprising thing seen in the area was polygamy was seen as socially acceptable even when legally it is unacceptable.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

B. Local Mechanism to tackle GBV

A local mechanism as reported by the Figure 25: Local mechanism against GBV respondent was present in the study area to 63.2% address and tackle the issue of GBV. 63.2% of Male Female 51.9% the male respondent said there was a mechanism present in the community and 41.8% 51.9% of the female respondents reported the same which was the local Mother’s Group. 28.4% However, 28.4% males and 41.8% females said there was no such mechanism and 8.4% of males and 6.3% of the females said they did not 8.4% 6.3% know if the mechanisms existed.

The respondent that said that there were local Yes No Don't Know mechanisms mostly referred to the various Local Mechanism against GBV women’s groups. Women’s group and in particular ‘Mother’s group’ was the one most referred to. It took care of various issues in regards to GBV. The women’s group were active and would try to sort out the issues through community mediation relating to GBV first by themselves and only if they were unable to do so, they would then take it to legal bodies.

During field observation and group discussions it was identify that Budathum-4 as the one VDC that looked to have a strong mother’s group. They discouraged the use of alcohol and had even allocated times during which liquor consumption was allowed outside one’s own residence. It still is not the ultimate solution but an effective treatment the residence of Budathum-4 had devised. Similarly, it was also observed that Women’s group were not as effective in Baseri-7. The ward had a female friendly space; however, upon further inquiring about it was observed that it was not used for the purpose it had been established. In Baseri, it was also observed the consumption of alcohol to be a bit high than in other VDC’s. Information from the group discussions Figure 26: Available Mechanism best against GBV revealed that alcohol was sold in shops which 86.7% were very close to school. It was also observed 78.0% Male Female that though people were aware of this trend, not much was being done to control it.

Similarly, 86.7% of the male respondents that 11.7% 12.2% 9.8% reported the presence of local mechanism said 1.7% that the local mechanism was the best available mechanism and 78% of the female respondent Yes No Don't Know said the same. The other 11.7% male and 12.2% Avaliable mechanism best female said that the local mechanism was not the best mechanism to address and tackle the cases of GBV as initially they reported that the members who mediate GBV related cases are not as knowledgeable as needed and the GBV offenders were not provided with any punishment rather just left with certain warnings.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

The majority of the respondents said that the local mechanism was the best mechanism available and the discussions validated this. During the discussions it was reported that most of the cases that had surfaced were solved within the community, mostly by women’s groups. The other group that was observed to be active in addressing Gender and Gender Based Violence issue was an NGO Sahayatri Samaj Nepal. The NGO was particularly active in Mulpani-5 and even had Female friendly space established. Here both the genders were found to be aware about gender based violence. They also encourage the girls and women to speak up against violence. Locals from other VDC’s also congregated at Mulpani at times and attended such awareness sessions regarding GBV. Mr. Kamal Thapa Magar, Principle of Mahendra Secondary School, Mulpani-5shares: “There are various programs like awareness programs being conducted in the village from time to time to make the people more knowledge about the outcomes of GBV by Sahaytri Samaj Nepal.”

C. Cases filed and reported at Legal Authorities

68.4% of the male respondent said that Figure 27: Cases reported to duty bearer there were few cases regarding GBV that 68.4% Male Female was reported to the duty bearer (Women 54.4% and Child development Office) and 54.5% of the females responded the 27.8% 22.1% same. 22.1% of the males said GBV cases 17.7% would not be reported and 27.8% of the 9.5% females said GBV cases were not reported. 9.5% of the males and 17.7% of Yes No Don't Know females said they did not know if such cases were reported or not. Report to duty bearer

Adding further, 56.8% of the male and Figure 28: Cases Filed to Legal Authority 43% of the female respondents said that 56.8% Male Female GBV cases were filed to legal authorities. 43.0% 25.3% of the males and 24.1% of the 32.9% females said cases of GBV was not filed to 25.3%24.1% legal authorities and 17.9% of the male 17.9% and 32.9% of the female respondents did not know if cases were filed to the legal authorities. Yes No Don't Know During the discussions session it was found that the residents of the study Cases filed to legal authority areas did know about their legal rights and were aware GBV issues could be taken up to the legal authorities. However, if to the person who were aware did not take cases to the legal authority as they perceived that their social reputation would be hampered. There were a few cases that had been taken to the legal authority where even the legal authorities tried to solve the case with dialogues rather than taking legal actions.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Another issue which was socially accepted in the study area was the practice of polygamy. Various cases of polygamy was also observed during the field survey; however, it was surprising so as to how lightly this issue was taken. One of the reasons why such cases are not reported is that if reported the second wife also gets a legal recognition as the second wife of the man who has committed the polygamy offense. Hence, his wealth is divided among the two wives. This also deters the first wife from filing complaints.

Other reasons for not filing cases were women often considered men as being the one who took care of them. Tara Sitaula from Aaginchowk-4 said “If we complain then who will take care of us. At the end of the day it is the husbands that take care of us.” The lack of economic independence also was a factor that made the women not complains.

Maina Rai, a resident of Baseri-5 got married at the age of 23. Maina has two daughters, and her husband has gone for foreign employment. However, as the years past she stopped hearing from her husband. As, time passed – she raised her daughter herself, and there was no word from her husband. Many years later she now hears that her husband is in Kathmandu and is married to some other women. She now says she does not want to get back with him and is happy in her own life.

When asked if she would lodge a complaint, she responded that she would not. It is a part of her life that is gone now and she doesn’t want to the past to come back and haunt her.

D. Follow up by legal authorities

63.2% of the male and 27.8% of the Figure 29: Follow up by legal authority female respondents said that authorities 63.2% 63.3% followed up on cases that had been filed Male Female with the duty bearers and legal authorities. 8.4% of the males and 8.9% of 27.8% 28.4% the female respondent said that the 8.4% 8.9% authorities did not follow up and 28.4% of the male respondent said they did not Yes No Don't Know know if there was a follow up. Similarly,

63.3% of the female respondents said Follow up by authority they did not know if there was a follow up.

Most of the time authorities often follow up with the males and hence females are unaware if there is a follow up or not. Hence, the rate the females not knowing if there has been a follow up are high than compared to the males.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Attitude to respond the Practicing to report and Having Knowledge GBV Cases to authorozied followup the cases Cases body In In In Male% Female% total% Male% Female% total% Male% Female% total% Knowledge of GBV Domestic Voilence Mental Harrassment Sexual Abuse Physical voilence Local mechanism present to tackle GBV Available mechanis best against GBV Cases filed and reported to duty bearer Cases filed to legal authority Cases followed up by legal authority

Gender Based Violence Analysis GBV in the study area still remains a sensitive topic. Majority of the local community are not aware about GBV as an issue only when probed further were they able to recognize its issues. Being a sensitive topic local people did not open up to discuss about it. During the FGD sessions male were observed to perceive that in their particular community GBV was not an issue when compared to females FGD session the participant reported certain cases such as domestic violence and polygamy as frequent occurrence. Knowledge regarding GBV (in its extreme cases such as rape and physical violence) local people were observed to be aware, however in cases regarding mental harassment, domestic violence and polygamy local people did not relate these issues as GBV. A knowledge gap can be observed in proper understanding of GBV, only the mainstreamed issues which were provided in the posters and banners available in the community were considered as GBV.

Regarding the local mechanism, the women’s and mother’s group were the only mechanism to address the issues regarding GBV. This mechanism was also observed to be effective in certain level only. As the representative of this local groups were the local people who in themselves are not properly aware about GBV and are not capable enough to address and tackle the problems regarding it. As GBV is a broad term, they have limited understanding of it, they are not aware of the legal implication regarding the nature and level of violence and as a whole it is still a sensitive issue in the society. They still practice dialogue sessions and have an initial aim to come to a compromise between the victim and victimizer rather than following a legal punishment basis system. This is a difficult area to change people perception as the victimizer will be let go easily which also conveys a negative message to the whole community as in future local people will think that GBV related cases are not serious and can be solved easily. 50

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Only a handful of GBV related cases are reported to the legal authority when such cases cannot be resolved on the mother’s group or due to the severity nature of the violence. If the case is of criminal nature than it is left to the legal bodies to take actions and if it is not of criminal nature and reported to them even the legal authorities initially resolve it through dialogues between the two parties as reported in the FGD.

GBV occurrence is present in the study area, but due to the social stigma the victim do not know if he/she is being a victim or due to wide spread acceptance of certain GBV cases these are not reported. There still isn’t a concrete data on the frequency and severity on the occurrence of GBV. Until and unless the local people open up and express their understanding of GBV, actual data and the overall scenario on GBV in the study area id difficult to analyze.

Being a patriarchal society, it is clear that the community is dominated by males. As discussed in the earlier sections, women though involved and active in household and community work, their economic dependence upon male limit their well-being. Adding further, as most of the youth participate in foreign employment and only visit the area occasionally, the social system is definite for change. How this scenario will further impact the issue of GBV is still yet to be analysed.

Thus, GBV, it knowledge, tackling mechanism and local people attitude is not adequate to properly address the issue. They are contend (both males and females) with the prevailing traditional system of addressing the issue. This cycle must be changed as the study area was observed to be sensitive towards GBV and its impacts.

3.3 Shelter This Section elaborates on the knowledge level of the local community of Phulkharka, Baseri and Aaginchowk regarding safe shelter. As in the remaining three VDCs another safe shelter messaging has already been conducted thus they are excluded from the baseline research. However, during the survey certain spill over effects is observed from the safe shelter messaging conducted in the implemented VDCs, which is also considered during the baseline survey data collection and analysis.

3.3.1 Safe Shelter Messaging

A. Receiving of Safe Shelter Messaging

Among the respondents it was observed that 57.5% of the total 160 respondents had received safe shelter messages and 28.2% reported to have not received the messages and 13.8 % reported that they did not know if they have received the messages or not (Figure 30). Here in the VDCs it was reported that majority of them had received the messages as the messages were conveyed through radio messages, pamphlets and posters which they had access to when the interventions was carried out to other VDCs.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 30: Receiving of Safe Shelter Messaging 70% 65.4% Yes No Don’t know 57.5% 60% 57.4% 50.0% 50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Total

B. Source of Shelter Messaging

Among the respondents who reported to have received the safe shelter messages as a spill over effect from project implemented in other VDCs, CARE Nepal had disseminated various messages through different sources and methods to inform the local people about the safe shelter. The following section analyses only the responses of the respondents who had reported to have received the safe shelter messages.

Figure 31:Source of Safe shelter messages Control VDC 120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk

Radio Ads Posters Leaflets Awareness Sessions Neighbor/relatives Community Leaders VDC office Development Agencies Others

As it can be observed in figure 31 that the VDCs received most of their messaging from Posters, radio messaging, VDC office and Leaflets. This primary source of messaging had made the VDC population aware about safe shelter and has also contributed in increasing their knowledge regarding the techniques of Building Back Safer (BBS). The recent enrolment process from NRA lead by VDC office has also disseminated the message intensively. Thus, the source of messaging from VDC was on significant proportion. The presence of developing partner on BBS messaging was found considerably insignificant.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

C. Appropriateness and quality of Messages

Based upon the source of the message provided when asked if the only 13.6% of the respondents reported it to be appropriate for them (Annex Table 28). The less appropriateness was that they were aware about the awareness sessions and training program conducted in their neighbouring VDCs and wanted the same programs to be in their community as well. Thus, resulting in less percentage in appropriateness for control VDCs.

Furthermore the respondents also said that the quality of the messages that they received were of good quality at 60.9% and of adequate quality at 27.2%. It was also recorded that 12% of the respondents felt that the quality was of very good as well (Figure 32).

Figure 32: Quality of Safe Shelter Messages 80% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Total 70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Poor Adequate Good Very Good

Respondents from the VDCs also felt that the messages they received from the various sources as mentioned above were of in general of good quality. Thus CARE Nepal should focus it activities in house owner sessions and door to door survey if it is to implement the same activities in the VDCs.

D. Helpfulness of the messaging

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 33: Helpfulness of the messaging 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Better understanding of General Technique Better understanding of Specific Technique Better understanding of Materials Not helped at all Don't Know

Finally in this the respondents were further asked on how the messaging has helped them, where majority of the responses were observed to be in better understanding of General Techniques followed by better understanding of specific techniques for building back safer.

This is however simply the respondent’s perception on what they have felt they have learnt from the messages, their actual knowledge is not tested in this section. Nonetheless, this is a positive reaction where they fell they have learnt something from the session.

When asked if in their community there are Model House/Resource Centre or Training Centre where they can refer to the BBS techniques and discuss their queries. All the respondents from the VDCs reported that they had no such resources made available in their VDC (Annex Table 30).

Analysis for Safe Shelter Messaging

Relevance and Appropriateness of Shelter Messaging

The safe shelter messaging techniques the respondents received through spill over effect from CARE Nepal is observed to be appropriate for the study area. Respondents across all the three VDCs were impressed by the level of effort and dedication that CARE Nepal and partner SAHAS Nepal put in providing the information regarding safe shelter in other VDCs and the baseline VDCs also expected the same level of effort.

Effectiveness of Shelter Messaging

The VDCs though receiving limited shelter messages was also observed to have gained from the information. The spill over effect of the project was observed in these VDCs, where the VDC office also disseminated the information regarding safe shelter. These VDCs now required specific awareness session regarding building back safer techniques. The respondents in FGD session also requested to provide training to mason so that they can build their houses when they start rebuilding. CARE Nepal

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 now should concentrate in these activities as the information from poster, pamphlets and radio messaging have already been received.

3.3.2 Safe Shelter Messages Necessity

A. Level of Damaged House In the study area it was observed that 91.7% of the Figure 34: Start Rebuilding their homes respondents had fully damaged houses the rest had partially damaged house. Yes Among the respondents who reported that their 25% houses were damaged only 25% of them had started rebuilding their houses where as the remaining No 75% reported not to have rebuild their damaged 75% houses (Figure 34). The major reason being for not reconstruction was they were waiting for the financial aid of Rs 200,000/- (US $ 2000) promised by the government in helping the affected people rebuilding

B. Application of BBS Technique while rebuilding

When the respondents were asked if they would apply the knowledge they have received through the safe shelter messages when they would rebuild (or have applied if they have started rebuilding) only 18.1% of the respondents reported that they would implement the BBS techniques

Figure 35: Apply BBS techniques when rebuilding 80% Yes No Don’t know 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Total This attitude about implementation is due to the level of awareness messages VDCs, which was limited. This provided the insight that without dissemination of proper knowledge the local people in the have misconception about BBS. Thus, now it becomes more important for CARE Nepal to provide proper knowledge to the VDCs regarding BBS as this perception towards BBS can result in people building back their houses in the non earthquake resilient traditional system.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

When only asked to the respondents who reported that they would not rebuild using BBS majority from the VDCs reported that it was expensive to build followed by not adequate raw materials to build properly.

Figure 36: Reason for not applying BBS techniques while rebuilding 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Total Don't Know Traditional approach fine More materials More time No trained manpower Expensive Not adequate raw materials

While rating the difficulty level of constructing the BBS house when compared to the traditional approach 74.3% of the respondents reported it was very difficult and 9.4% reported to be somewhat difficult. Only 6.3% and 2.6% reported it to be somewhat easy and very easy respectively (Annex Table 36).

C. Need for Safe Shelter Messages

Out of the 160 respondents the 28.2% (Figure Figure 37: Implement BBs if Safe shelter message provided 30) of the respondents who reported that they don’t have not received the Safe shelter messages know 87.9% reported that they need these messages No 10% 13% and only 1.9% report they don’t need the messages where as 10.2% were unsure if they require it or not (Annex Table 37) . 77% of the Yes respondents who had not reported that they had 77% not received SSM reported that they would implement the BBS techniques if provided the safe shelter messages.

3.3.3 Safe Shelter General Awareness Test A set of 10 questions were devised to analyse the general awareness of the respondents towards BBS, these questions were also administered for both the control and treatment group in the baseline survey. This section clearly shows the knowledge level of the treatment and Control group. In this section the control group responds is 160 respondents and the treatment group respondent is 205.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

1. Response for the type of building that can be made earthquake resistant

Table 7: Type of building that can be made earthquake resilient Stone mud house Pillar Beam, RCC House Timber House VDC Don' t Don' t Don' t Yes No Know Yes No Know Yes No Know Phulkharka 5 49 0 51 3 0 39 15 0 Baseri 12 42 0 53 1 0 35 19 0 Aaginchowkk 9 43 0 46 6 0 39 13 0 Total 26 134 0 150 10 0 113 47 0 Total% 16.3% 83.8% 0.0% 93.8% 6.3% 0.0% 70.6% 29.4% 0.0%

Regarding the type of house which can be made earthquake resilient the correct answer is all the house can be made earthquake resilient. It is observed that Pillar Beam house can be made earthquake resilient is known among the respondents but regarding the stone mud house only 16.3% of the respondents were aware about the information.

In conclusion: In VDC 60% of the respondents know about the materials that can make the house earthquake resilient.

2. Response on knowledge on households to make their house earthquake resistant

Table 8: How to make house earthquake resilient Pressing upper floor beam Horizontal Bands Vertical Bands with wall VDC Don' t Don't Don' t Yes No Know Yes No Know Yes No Know Phulkharka 43 11 0 22 32 0 31 23 0 Baseri 44 10 0 18 36 0 25 29 0 Aaginchowkk 37 15 0 23 29 0 33 19 0 Total 124 36 0 63 97 0 89 71 0 Total% 77.5% 22.5% 0.0% 39.4% 60.6% 0.0% 55.6% 44.4% 0.0%

When asked about how to make the house earthquake resilient where the answers is Yes for all the three options most of the respondents knew horizontal bands were used to make house earthquake resistant. But only 39.4% knew vertical band could also be used.

In conclusion, In the VDCs only 58% of the respondents were aware about all three bands could be used for earthquake resilient buildings.

3. Knowledge on the materials to be used for earthquake resistant buildings

Table 9: Materials used for Banding VDC Reinforced concrete Timber Bamboo

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Don' t Don' t Don't Yes No Know Yes No Know Yes No Know Phulkharka 47 7 0 38 16 0 3 51 0 Baseri 49 5 0 36 18 0 4 50 0 Aaginchowk 42 10 0 36 16 0 1 51 0 Total 138 22 0 110 50 0 8 152 0 Total % 86.3% 13.8% 0.0% 68.8% 31.3% 0.0% 5.0% 95.0% 0.0%

In the materials used for banding it is observed that almost all the respondents know about reinforced concrete and timber is used as materials for banding. But still the use of bamboo is felt not usable for the same purpose.

In conclusion, 53% of the respondents have the knowledge about the materials to be used for banding however the uses of bamboo is still less. As bamboo is traditionally observed to used for temporary purposes the local people still are unsure of it use while constructing permanent houses.

4. Response on use of corner stones and appropriate materials in between two stones while constructing the wall

Table 10: Response on use of corner stone and appropriate material in between two stones while constructing the wall Using corner stone to provide strength to the What material is used to fill the gap in between VDC corner of walls is more outer and inner walls? effective than banding? TRUE FALSE Stones Mud Wood None Don't Know Phulkharka 45 9 36 8 1 6 3 Baseri 50 4 28 12 1 7 6 Aaginchowk 45 7 27 13 3 3 6 Total 140 20 91 33 5 16 15 Total % 87.5% 12.5% 56.9% 20.6% 3.1% 10.0% 9.4%

The statistics presented in the Table 10 shows the knowledge on use of corner stone while constructing the wall. Using of corner stone is traditionally used to provide strength thus, majority of the control as well as treatment respondents was aware about this information.

In conclusion, 87% of the respondents have knowledge about corner stone improves strength of the wall..Furthermore regarding the use of stone to reduce the separation of the wall 0nly 57% of the respondents are aware of this information.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

5. Knowledge on length to breadth ratio and requirement for making room with longer dimensions for stronger house

Table 11: Knowledge on length and breadth ratio of large room Building with inner portion Building with long wall with Building with long wall only wall Buttress

Responses Percentage Responses Percentage Responses Percentage Yes 61.3% Yes 40.0% Yes 38.1% No 15.6% No 22.5% No 41.3% Don’t Know 23.1% Don’t Know 37.5% Don’t Know 20.6%

The communities are more aware on the size of room of the building. They are also aware on the length and breadth ratio too. 61.3% reported that the building with inner partition is safe. This response is verified by the sub-question 3, where 41.3% of respondents mentioned that the building with longer wall (larger length/breadth ration) is not safe.

Similarly, 40% of respondent reported that the building with longer wall can be made earthquake resilient by providing buttress. This type of structure is not in much practice in the community so the less correct responses in this question are observed.

In conclusion At least 41.3% are aware about the proper building style of the rooms.

6. Knowledge about building configuration

In the case of knowledge about building configuration, it can be observed from Table 12 that only the rectangular shape building is considered as a safe building configuration. 68.8%of the respondents reported that the building with rectangular shape is safe. Table 12: Knowledge about building configuration U-Shape Rectangular Shape

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Responses Percentage Responses Percentage Yes 63.1%l Yes 68.8% No 30.6% No 25.6% Don’t 6.3% Don’t Know 5.6%

KnowT- Shape L-Shape

Responses Percentage Responses Percentage Yes 45.0% Yes 52.5% No 48.1% No 40.6% Don’t Know 6.9% Don’t 6.9%

Know

In conclusion, 68.8% of the households are aware on the building configuration (as this percentage of respondents were correct regarding the rectangular shape of building, provided other responses here it is calculated that at least 68.8% are aware of the correct building shape) 7. Knowledge on Connection of wooden roof rafters, gable wall and Depth of 2 storey house

The questions from 8 to 10 are more technical based general knowledge questions regarding earthquake resilient construction. It can be observed that (from Table 13) that the knowledge level of the treatment respondents is higher than that of the control respondents.

Table 13: Technical Knowledge Q.No Question Correct Responses Percentage

8 How should wooden roof rafters A wooden wall plate 15.0% be connected

9 What type of gable wall is the Timber and CGI sheet 11.9% safest 10 Depth of 2 storey stone house No, it has different 51.9% foundation be same for all site specifications

In conclusion, the KAP survey reflects that majority of the population in the VDC with the help of spill over effect; the safe shelter messaging has enhanced certain section of their knowledge but are not fully aware about other details regarding building back safer.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Motivated (have attitude) Having Knowledge Practicing for application Cases In In In Male% Female% total% Male% Female% total% Male% Female% total%

Received Self shelter messages 57.50% ------

BBS techniques

Types of buildings (for EQ resistant) _ (average of Table 7)

Types of bands used (for EQ resistant) _ (average of Table 8)

Types materials uses (for EQ resistant) _(average of table 9)

(average of table 9)

(average of table 10)

(average of table 11)

(average of table 12)

(average of table 13)

Table 14:Comparative correct responses percentage of Control and Treatment Group

Question Correct Total responses Responses Q1 a 26 160 Q1 b 150 160 Q1 C 113 160 Q2 a 124 160 61

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Q2 b 63 160 Q2 c 89 160 Q3 a 138 160 Q3 b 110 160

Q3 c 8 160 Q 4 140 160 Q5 91 160 Analysis for Safe Shelter General Awareness Test Q 6 66 160 Q 7 110 160 Knowledge about Building back safer Q 8 24 160 In the study area by the access of certain safe shelter messages Q 9 19 160 52.9% of the control respondents provided the correct answers. Q 10 83 160 Grand Total 1354 2560 Bamboo is not a tradition permanent construction material. It is Percentage 52.9% only used in temporary constructions, thus the local people still have the same notion regarding the durability and strength of bamboo, due to which people still perceive that bamboo is not durable enough for banding purpose.

Most of the correct answers were based upon concrete materials used for reconstruction, which the respondents could refer to the model house available in their VDC. Nonetheless, the ultimate objective of knowledge improvement has been achieved.

Analysis for Shelter

In the study area, due to the earthquake massive destruction to the infrastructure has occurred. Almost all the people are living under temporary shelter. After nearly one and a half year people have still not started to rebuild their houses, as they are still waiting for the financial grant promised by the government.

CARE Nepal with its partner organization SAHAS Nepal had implemented safe shelter awareness sessions in three VDCs where the people have benefited from the knowledge and are positive towards implementing the techniques when they rebuild their houses provided that it is affordable and the resources for constriction are available locally.

In the VDCs where such program has not been implemented, people received certain messages through VDC office, leaflets and radio programs but perceived that it was not adequate for them. They still required specific programs focused to their community where the local people could enhance their knowledge regarding building back safer. In a FGD session in Baseri, people specifically focused on the training sessions be provided to the local masons who will rebuild their houses. They even said that if it was not possible to provide awareness sessions to local people it was alright but training sessions to the local mason is a must. The community requires skilled human resources who have the proper knowledge regarding building back better.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

VDCs through its various recovery projects in the area. The local people expect more from CARE Nepal to help them return to their normal livelihood in the reconstruction phase as well.

Regarding the practice of the BBS techniques, maximum respondents reported that it is too expensive to be implemented in actual practice. The materials needed such as cement and rods are not found locally, it has to be brought from Dhading Besi, which adds up the transportation cost. Even the locally available stone cannot be used as correct size stones needed for corner stones and to fill the gaps between walls are difficult to find. Adding further, time for construction also increases if the BBS techniques are implemented which increases the cost as well. Even so, those who have started rebuilding said that they have used horizontal bands for wall using the debris left from the earthquake. They have adopted the practice where they can afford it and have the required materials to do so. Thus, even with the acquired knowledge and positive attitude towards BBS, these constraints have made it difficult to practically implement the BBS techniques while rebuilding the damaged homes. However, nearly 85% of the respondents have yet to build back their houses, and if all of them will face the same constraint cannot be generalized yet.

3.4 Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)

In the earthquake of 2015 Nepal and its people came to know how vulnerable they were to natural disasters. Being a developing nation Nepal was unequipped to face such adversities during a disaster hence still major reconstruction of damaged infrastructure has still not begun. This situation is a learning phase where Nepal can learn and prepare itself for future disasters. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) is a plan of action where a nation has made a systematic plan for reduction of disaster, plan during a disaster and plan after a disaster. DRR is must be included in the National Plan, Regional Plan and even to the Community level Plan.

This section shed light on the current situation of the study are on how the affected communities have learnt from last year disaster and what mechanism have they placed to face such disaster in future. Here, the knowledge and awareness level of the respondents is measured regarding DRR and the local plan and organization available to help in time of disaster.

A. Knowledge about DRR

In the six VDCs the respondents were asked if they knew about DRR without further probing on the topic. This method generally dictates if the respondents simply know about DRR. Where it was observed that 43% of the respondents reported that they had certain Knowledge about DRR and 41% reported that they had no idea about DRR the remaining 15.9% were not sure if they had idea about DRR or not.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Figure 38: Knowledge about DRR 70% Yes No Don't know 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Phulkharka Baseri Aaginchowk Mulpani Budathum Salayantar Total

Interestingly, the previous three VDCs for Shelter baseline had more positive responses regarding the knowledge about DRR than the remaining VDCs. This was because certain program was conducted in these three VDCs regarding DRR in recent past. Nonetheless, Majority (responses of No and Don’t Know) show that majority of population in the study area were unaware about DRR (Figure 38).

Figure 39: Knowledge about types of Disasters 120% Yes No Don't know 100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% Flood Landslide Earthquake Epidemics Conflict Climate Pollution Drought Change

When asked to those respondents who reported to have idea about DRR on the various types of disasters almost all recognized flood, landslide and earthquake as disaster, but only about of them were able to refer to pollution, conflict and climate change as disaster as well. As landslide, flood and earthquake are more traditional types of disaster whose information is flowed through various medium these options reported higher responses than the more new topics in disaster. However, even the respondents who reported to have knowledge about DRR were unable to recognize all types of disaster. This puts in perspective that people from study are have minimal knowledge reading DRR and Disaster.

B. DRR plan and Institution in the community

Figure 40: Does community has DRR preparedness plan

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

When asked to the respondents who knew about DRR , if their community had disaster preparedness plan Don’t know 5% 69% of the respondents reported that the community Yes did not have any plan and 26% reported that they were 26% aware that the community had a preparedness plan (Figure 40). No 69% During the field survey no such plan was found in any VDCs, the respondents who reported that the community had a plan were mentioning the safe shelter provided in Salayantar and Baseri where they would go if any such disaster occurred. This further back up the information that even if the respondent knew about DRR, they were not familiar with what a preparedness plan actually is.

The respondents were further asked if there were Figure 41: Community has institution to help in disaster institutions present in the community to help them during the occurrence of such disasters, where 58% Don’t know reported that there were no such institutions and 4% Yes 38% reported the presence of institutions. The 38% respondent who said yes regarding the presence of institutions were referring to the NGOs and INGOs No who work in the community in various sectors. Thus 58% there appears to be misconception regarding the availability of institutions to help them during disaster as well (Figure 41).

When asked to the respondents if they require training regarding DRR, than 94% reported that they need training and 5 % reported to not require it. Figure 42: Need training on DRR

No In the field it was observed that the local people have Don’t know 5% a positive perception towards development and 1% humanitarian agencies. They are well aware that such agencies help in times of need and provide them certain benefit. Whether attitude is positive or negative cannot be concluded through this survey. Yes However the preference and eagerness of the 94% community towards the activities of such agencies cannot be neglected.

C. Disaster Vulnerability

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Finally the respondents were asked about how vulnerable they feel towards the disaster that are prone to their area.

Figure 43: Does the respondent fell vulnerable towards Figure 44: Rate your Vulnerability disaster Little Don't Know Don’t know Vulnerable 1% 1% 14% Very No Vulnerable 41% 42% Yes Somewhat Vulnerable 58% 43%

58% of the respondent reported that they feel vulnerable towards natural disasters that are prone to their area and 41% thought they were not vulnerable. Upon asking to the respondent who felt vulnerable to rate their vulnerability, 43% reported that they feel somewhat vulnerable and 42% felt they were very vulnerable.

Even after facing such disaster a year before, it is interesting to observe that 41% of the respondents still don’t feel vulnerable. Is it due to ignorance or acceptance of their situation plays a vital role in success of project activities. As if it is due to ignorance than activities won’t be successful due to the negative attitude prevailing in the community, and it is due to acceptance than community requires such activities to boost up their moral and have a healthy community.

Analysis for DRR

In the section of DRR it is observed that the community is guided by various misconceptions. 41% of the respondents still are not aware about DRR even after they directly affected by the massive earthquake. People who are aware about DRR have confusing beliefs as their community is prepared and have a plan to face disasters in futures.

It is observed that study area in not prepared to face another such disaster. The knowledge level of the community to formulate a plan for disaster was observed to be minimal. In the FGD sessions and household survey it was observed that people were misguided that the development and the humanitarian organization were the institution present in their community to help them during such disaster.

The study area immensely requires DRR focused activities, as they are guided by misconception regarding various topic of DRR, their vulnerability increases itself. After the earthquake, the area has observed various landslides and there is no such data on the vulnerability of settlements towards landslides. A small settlement in Mulpani -4 Swara, where 5-6 household are about to relocate themselves as landslides have started occurring and there were no such institutions to help them relocate to a safer place.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

These situations with even more severity may occur in the future and without any DRR strategy and plan the study area is observed to be vulnerable in this regard.

3.5 Key Indicators of Baseline survey

The key indicators of the baseline survey were based on the objectives of the baseline survey, where the impact and outcome indicators were also developed by 3iR with the approval from CARE Nepal.

Table 15: Result Chain, Indicators and subsequent reference tables S.N Result Chain Impact/Outcome Medium of Reference figure and Baseline Indicator Indicators data source tables Values • % or number change in • Household • Figure 16, Figure 18, • Gender of HH head gender roles across Interview Figure 21, Figure 22, Female 28% Males different time. 72% • Change in power • For change in Identifying structure involvement in existing gender • Change in power of economic activity roles based decision making refer to Annex 1. upon • Change in freedom of Table 11 household and mobility • For change in community • Change in involvement in power of decision level economic activities making refer to • Change in role of men Annex Table 17 and women in shelter design and construction activities Knowledge, • Change in KAP of HH and • Household • Figure • Knowledge about Attitude and community relating to Surveys ,FGD, 23,24,25,26,27,28,29 GBV Male 49% 2. practice of HH GBV/VAW Legal Literature female 46.2%. and community provision understanding review on GBV/VAW legal provisions • Measure in change on the • HH survey • Figure 34 • 75% HH have not type of shelter before started rebuilding Type of Shelter earthquake, during and 25% have 3. of affected HH baseline and after started rebuilding baseline • Change in knowledge • HH survey • Figure 33,38 and • 52.9% have proper Awareness about BBS and DDR with and FGD section 3.3.3 knowledge about level of local focus on vulnerable safe shelter. people and population • 43% have 4. community in knowledge about understanding DRR and 41.1 % do BBS and DDR not Hindrance in • Observed changes in • HH survey • Figure 35 and 36 • 18.1% reported to adopting BBS hindrance points or apply BBS, 66.9% 5. technology percentage reported not apply (based on • Observed changes based BBS techniques needs and upon the various while rebuilding. gaps) vulnerable population • Change in ownership • HH survey • Figure 22 • Refer to Annex Property pattern of women Table 17 property 6. Ownership ownership section. Livelihood • Number of opportunities • HH survey • Reconstruction has • Yet to be observed 7. Opportunities observed from the not been carried out from shelter reconstruction activities reconstruction (The result chain table was developed by 3iR with consolidation with CARE Nepal) 67

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

The baseline survey is done based upon the above mentioned output and outcome with their subsequent indicators.

Chapter IV: Summary Conclusion and Recommendation

In times of natural disaster and its subsequent period the vulnerability of the affected people greatly increases. This increment in vulnerability is even more towards the vulnerable population of women, children, senior citizens and PWDs. These groups of people have limited opportunities, ownership access to economic resources to support recovery. Even after more than a year from the earthquake the affected communities are living under temporary shelters, which show the capacity of recovery of the local communities. CARE Nepal’s Integrated Gender, GBV and Shelter Response Project, has plan to integrated these three issues and help the affected communities in Dhading in mainstreaming the mitigation and prevention of Gender and GBV related issues and disseminate building back safer information to the community.

Nepal has adopted several laws for the establishment of the rights of women in response to international commitments, and the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 includes provisions promoting gender equality and a society free of GBV. There are also many NGOs and other stakeholders that address the gender issues and focus on building capacity among women to address the factors that fuel GBV issues as well as to cope with its consequences. However, this study suggests that awareness and implementation of these laws remain limited in the study area. Also, GBV related cases are not often taken up to the authorities. The existence of patriarchal values and lack of political will to address the deep structural factors foster GBV and enforce its consequences. Women lack control of the social, economic, cultural and political resources of the institutions that shape their lives. These resources are controlled by the privileged gender, classes and castes, which reinforce patriarchal values through these institutions. These values are not just enforced by the men but the by both men and women against women in society.

The study area bore resemblance to the overall Nepali scenario. The local people in the six different VDCs: Aaginchowk, Phulkharka, Baseri, Budhathum, Mulpani and Salyantar were all well aware of the idea of gender equality but both the males and the females agreed the practicality of it was still lacking. However, there had been positive signs in the region – Education was the biggest positive in the region. Both male and female children were sent to schools and education was considered pivotal to both girls and boys. It was also observed males and females observed great deal of freedom for movement. The respondents agreed although males enjoyed the greater deal of freedom for movement, females too have enjoyed this freedom in recent years.

Females were observed to be more involved in saving but regardless of more savings done by the females, males had more access than the females had in both male headed and female headed household. In the female headed household the responsibility of expenses is beard by female, they tend to save more but their access to income is subsequently less. This disparity regarding the access to income shows the females in the study area do not have financial freedom. They still need to take consent from the male member of the family regarding the financial decisions. Thus, even if the data represents that females in

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 the study area are active, aware and responsible to various important role in the community and the households, it can be understood that they are still deprived of economic freedom. This situation remains the core gap in gender, which is blanketed by positive involvement of females in various other sectors

The cases of gender violence have also come down as compared to the past. The females are more aware of gender equality, their rights and males are also more educated and aware about GBV. However, there still are cases of GBV and many of these cases are still not reported for various reasons. The study also highlighted on – though the level of awareness was increasing it still needed to rise for the cases of GBV to be reported to the concerned authority. As with other places of Nepal, patriarchy was prevalent here as well and males had more control over the resources. Findings such as females still not being given their share of properties also surfaced during the study.

Regarding safe shelter messages, people received certain messages through VDC office, leaflets and radio programs but perceived that it was not adequate for them. They still required specific programs focused to their community where the local people could enhance their knowledge regarding building back safer. In a FGD session in Baseri, people specifically focused on the training sessions be provided to the local masons who will rebuild their houses. They even said that if it was not possible to provide awareness sessions to local people it was alright but training sessions to the local mason is a must. The community requires skilled human resources who have the proper knowledge regarding building back better.

The method of dissemination of safe shelter messages was regarded well across the three VDCs. The respondents felt that the quality of the messages were up to par. CARE Nepal has build up goodwill in the VDCs through its various recovery projects in the area. The local people expect more from CARE Nepal to help them return to their normal livelihood in the reconstruction phase as well. 69

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Recommendation on the Relevancy of proposed Project Activities and Result for Gender and GBV

Result 1 Short and long – term mechanisms established to address GBV in the targeted VDCs in Dhading and income generating support provided to GBV survivors and vulnerable population at risk Result 2 CARE and partners’ staff in Dhading applied new knowledge and skills in addressing existing gender gap across all sectors (WASH, Shelter, FSL) Result 3 Men and women in the community and district stakeholders have increased knowledge on gender equality and respond to GBV The proposed activities from Result 1 to 3 are focused on the sector of Gender and GBV. After the field observation all the activities in all the expected results is observed to be relevant. However, some activities and issues can be added for making the project more effective.

➢ The major gap in gender was observed to be economic and financial freedom gap between males and females. Activities focused where females of the community can also have access and control of the finances must be devised. This will in turn decrease the gender gap where females will also have the freedom to take part in other economic activities other than the traditional activity of agriculture. ➢ Women in the community were observed to have access to saving groups, though the control of such saving is decided by both male and female of the household. If men also have access to saving groups, it opens up various other horizons of economic activities and also will contribute in decreasing the household financial control between men and women. 70

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

➢ In the study area rate of males and females going abroad for foreign employment is increasing yearly. After they return, their attitude towards the existing social system will have been change at certain level. This situation could provide an opportunity to decrease gender gap in various sectors or even be the major cause of increase GBV and condition of broken families. Program relating to foreign migrant worker must also be addressed to maintain harmonic community, where both the genders can be benefited. ➢ The existing power structure in the community was mainly represented by males from the society as they held the positions of chairs of Ward Citizen Forum. VDC office and other community level organization. Female representation was observed to be minimal in this sector. Activities regarding leadership training and organizational managements to females can enhance their skills and they can better represent themselves in these platforms. ➢ Most of the GBV activities are focused on GBV survivors, but unless the GBV survivors are properly identified, the numbers will remain minimal. Thus to properly identify the victims of GBV, the local people must initially be made aware about the relevant issues and topic of GBV, and proved them a neutral platform where they can share / report the cases. ➢ The existing mother’s group are not organized enough to single handily tackle and address the cases of GBV in the local community. A separate mechanism must be developed and put in place where they provide information about GBV and place where they can discuss the issues of GBV in their community. This mechanism must be representative where both males and females are present in the committee. ➢ The legal authorities such as Women and Child Development office and Local Police office must also take part in the VDC wise awareness level sessions regarding GBV as each VDC has its different scenario regarding GBV. Where the local mechanism can collaborate with the legal authorities for proper addressing of GBV related cases.

Recommendation on the Relevancy of proposed Project Activities and Result for Shelter

Result 4 Men and women artisans have increased knowledge and skills of earthquake resistant construction techniques Result 5 Men and women responsible for rebuilding or overseeing building of their own homes have increased access to information on BBS and more choices on home design that meet building code; and the communities participate in DRR activities

The proposed project activities for Safe Shelter messaging are relevant to the VDCs based upon the field survey conducted. Thus certain activities need to be added for the project to be more effective:

➢ In the VDCs, the spillover effect is observed in the control VDCs where they have received certain messages regarding safe shelter through the project activities conducted in other VDCs. This situation has created a scenario where the local people of the control VDCs have half knowledge about building back safer. So before they start reconstructing their houses proper knowledge should be provided to them. ➢ The respondents reported that the BBS technique is expensive and even if they want to implement the technique they are unable to do so. This is a major issue for reconstruction process, even if proper knowledge regarding BBS is provided they are not capable to implement it thus making the safe shelter message not as much effective as needed. This issue must be 71

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

address and suitable solutions must be developed so maximum benefit can be achieved through safe shelter messaging.

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex I: Annex Tables Annex Table 1: Gender of the respondents Gender Male Female Total Count Row N Count Row N Count Row N % % % Phulkharka 40 74.1% 14 25.9% 54 100.0% Baseri 40 74.1% 14 25.9% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 35 67.3% 17 32.7% 52 100.0% VDC Mulpani 25 54.3% 21 45.7% 46 100.0% Budathum 21 39.6% 32 60.4% 53 100.0% Salayantar 33 31.1% 73 68.9% 106 100.0% Total 194 53.2% 171 46.8% 365 100.0%

Annex Table 2: Ethnicity of the respondents Specific Ethnic Group Privileged Others Dalit Adibasi/Janjati Muslim Unidentified Group Total Adibasi/Janjati (Brahim/Chettri/Thakuri) Row N Row N Row Row N Row N Count % Count % Count N % Count % Count Row N % Count % Count Row N % Phulkharka 13 24.1% 4 7.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 37 68.5% 0 0.0% 54 100.0%

Baseri 2 3.7% 21 38.9% 2 3.7% 0 0.0% 29 53.7% 0 0.0% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 11 21.2% 0 0.0% 1 1.9% 0 0.0% 40 76.9% 0 0.0% 52 100.0% VDC Mulpani 6 13.0% 24 52.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 16 34.8% 0 0.0% 46 100.0% Budathum 21 39.6% 0 0.0% 7 13.2 0 0.0% 25 47.2% 0 0.0% 53 100.0% % Salayantar 9 8.5% 39 36.8% 22 20.8 2 1.9% 20 18.9% 14 13.2% 106 100.0% % Total 62 17.0% 88 24.1% 32 8.8% 2 .5% 167 45.8% 14 3.8% 365 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 3: Martial Status of Respondents based on Gender Gender Male Female Total Column Column Column Count N % Count N % Count N % Unmarried 4 2.1% 9 5.3% 13 3.6% Married 169 87.1% 121 70.8% 290 79.5%

Marital Divorced 2 1.0% 0 0.0% 2 .5% Status Separated 5 2.6% 3 1.8% 8 2.2% Widow/Widower 14 7.2% 38 22.2% 52 14.2% Total 194 100.0% 171 100.0% 365 100.0%

Annex Table 4: Educational Level of the respondents Education Level Not able to read Primary (upto Secondary (6th Bachelors & and write Literate 5th Grade) & upto SLC) Intermediate/10+2 Above Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Row Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Count Row N % Count N % Count % Phulkharka 28 51.9% 6 11.1% 9 16.7% 9 16.7% 2 3.7% 0 0.0% 54 100.0% Baseri 32 59.3% 9 16.7% 3 5.6% 6 11.1% 3 5.6% 1 1.9% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 21 40.4% 13 25.0% 2 3.8% 6 11.5% 7 13.5% 3 5.8% 52 100.0% VDC Mulpani 16 34.8% 7 15.2% 7 15.2% 13 28.3% 2 4.3% 1 2.2% 46 100.0%

Budathum 18 34.0% 5 9.4% 12 22.6% 17 32.1% 1 1.9% 0 0.0% 53 100.0% Salayantar 44 41.5% 12 11.3% 14 13.2% 24 22.6% 10 9.4% 2 1.9% 106 100.0% Total 159 43.6% 52 14.2% 47 12.9% 75 20.5% 25 6.8% 7 1.9% 365 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 5: Educational Level of the respondents based on Gender Gender Male Female Total Column Column Column Count N % Count N % Count N % Unable to read and Write 73 37.6% 86 50.3% 159 43.6%

Literate 34 17.5% 18 10.5% 52 14.2% Primary (upto 5th Grade) 26 13.4% 21 12.3% 47 12.9% Education Secondary (6th & upto SLC) 44 22.7% 31 18.1% 75 20.5% Level Intermediate/10+2 13 6.7% 12 7.0% 25 6.8% Bachelors & Above 4 2.1% 3 1.8% 7 1.9%

Total 194 100.0% 171 100.0% 365 100.0%

Annex Table 6: Respondent Head of Household Respondent Head of household Yes No Row N Row N Count % Count % Phulkharka 54 100.0% 0 0.0%

Baseri 50 92.6% 4 7.4% Aaginchowk 48 92.3% 4 7.7% VDC Mulpani 33 71.7% 13 28.3% Budathum 31 58.5% 22 41.5% Salayantar 63 59.4% 43 40.6% Total 279 76.4% 86 23.6%

Annex Table 7: Gender of Head of Household Gender of HH Head Male Female Row N Row N Count % Count % Phulkharka 39 72.2% 15 27.8% Baseri 43 79.6% 11 20.4% Aaginchowk 38 73.1% 14 26.9% VDC Mulpani 35 76.1% 11 23.9% Budathum 32 60.4% 21 39.6%

Salayantar 76 71.7% 30 28.3%

Total 263 72.1% 102 27.9%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 8: Family composition of respondents Gender Age Group Count < 1 yr 15 1-5 52 6-9 43 Male 10-19 161 20-39 173 40-59 124 > 60 119 < 1 yr 17 1-5 38 6-9 46 Female 10-19 189 20-39 228 40-59 177 > 60 115 Total 1497 Average HH size 4.10 Male portion 1.88 Female Portion 2.22

Annex Table 9: Education level of the household population based on age group and gender Illiterate Literate Primary (upto 5th Secondary (6th & Intermediate/10 Bachelors & Age Grade)% upto SLC)% +2% Above% Gender Group Cou Cou Coun Coun Coun Row Coun nt Row % nt Row % t Row % t Row % t % t Row % Male 17 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% < 1 yr Female 18 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Male 24 48.0% 4 8.0% 22 44.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1-5 yrs Female 19 50.0% 4 10.5% 15 39.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Male 1 2.3% 8 18.6% 34 79.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6-9 yrs Female 1 2.2% 1 2.2% 41 91.1% 0 4.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10-19 Male 2 1.2% 3 1.9% 40 24.7% 91 56.2% 26 16.0% 0 0.0% yrs Female 3 1.6% 0 0.0% 39 20.9% 113 60.4% 29 15.5% 3 1.6% 20-39 Male 7 4.1% 11 6.5% 31 18.2% 62 36.5% 41 24.1% 18 10.6% yrs Female 48 20.6% 24 10.3% 36 15.5% 68 29.2% 38 16.3% 19 8.2% 40- Male 32 26.9% 21 17.6% 20 16.8% 33 27.7% 11 9.2% 2 1.7% 59yrs Female 130 73.9% 29 16.5% 6 3.4% 9 5.1% 2 1.1% 0 0.0% Male 82 65.1% 24 19.0% 7 5.6% 10 7.9% 1 0.8% 2 1.6% > 60 yrs Female 110 97.3% 2 1.8% 0 0.0% 1.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 10: Institution for education of the household population based on age group and gender Private institution Public Institution No institution Age Group Gender Count Row % Count Row % Count Row % Male 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 17 100.0% < 1 yr Female 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 18 100.0% Male 7 14.0% 19 38.0% 24 48.0% 1-5 yrs Female 1 2.6% 17 44.7% 20 52.6% Male 17 39.5% 26 60.5% 0 0.0% 6-9 yrs Female 10 22.2% 34 75.6% 1 2.2% Male 21 13.0% 140 86.4% 1 0.6% 10-19 yrs Female 16 8.6% 165 88.2% 6 3.2% Male 8 4.8% 141 84.4% 18 10.8% 20-39 yrs Female 1 0.4% 165 70.8% 67 28.8% Male 2 1.6% 78 63.9% 42 34.4% 40-59yrs Female 1 0.6% 25 14.2% 150 85.2% Male 1 0.8% 28 22.2% 97 77.0% > 60 yrs Female 0 0.0% 3 2.7% 110 97.3%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 11: Daily Involvement of household population based on age group and gender G Private Private Government Unemplo Household Less than 3 e Agriculture Livestock Sector Remittance Education Others Business Service yed chores years old Age n Service Group d Co Co Coun Cou Row Coun Row Cou Row Coun Row Cou Row Row Cou Row Row Coun e Row % Row % un un Count Row % t nt % t % nt % t % nt % % nt % % t r t t 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100. M 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 17 0% 0 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100. < 1 yr F 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 18 0% 0 0.0% 0.0 0.0 50.0 12.0 0.0 38.0 M 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 % 0 % 25 % 6 % 0 % 19 % 0 0.0% 1-5 0.0 0.0 39.5 5.3 2.6 52.6 yrs F 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 % 0 % 15 % 2 % 1 % 20 % 0 0.0% 0.0 0.0 100. 0.0 0.0 0.0 M 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 % 0 % 43 0% 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 0.0% 6-9 0.0 0.0 93.3 2.2 0.0 0.0 yrs F 0 0.0% 2 4.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 % 0 % 42 % 1 % 0 % 0 % 0 0.0% 1.9 0.0 90.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 M 9 5.6% 2 1.2% 1 0.6% 1 0.6% 3 % 0 % 146 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 0.0% 10- 1.1 0.0 84.5 2.1 7.5 0.0 19 yrs F 5 2.7% 4 2.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 % 0 % 158 % 4 % 14 % 0 % 0 0.0% 13.8 10.2 14.4 3.6 10.2 6.6 0.0 0.0 M 54 32.3% 11 6.6% 23 % 17 % 24 % 6 % 17 % 11 % 0 % 0 % 4 2.4% 20- 2.6 0.0 9.4 2.1 31.3 0.0 39 yrs F 85 36.5% 21 9.0% 15 6.4% 5 2.1% 6 % 0 % 22 % 5 % 73 % 0 % 1 0.4% 18.9 13.9 9.8 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.0 M 59 48.4% 6 4.9% 23 % 17 % 12 % 1 % 0 % 1 % 1 % 0 % 2 1.6% 40- 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.7 34.1 0.0 59yrs F 88 50.0% 20 11.4% 2 1.1% 1 0.6% 1 % 0 % 0 % 3 % 60 % 0 % 1 0.6% 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.8 4.8 0.0 M 80 63.5% 3 2.4% 10 7.9% 8 5.6% 1 % 1 % 0 % 1 % 6 % 0 % 17 13.5% > 60 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.5 0.0 yrs F 40 35.4% 10 8.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 48 % 0 % 15 13.3%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 12: Household Income source based upon Household Head Gender Private Private Government Agriculture Livestock Sector Remittance Others Household Head Business Service Service Row% 40.3% 23.7% 9.9% 6.5% 7.4% 9.5% 2.7% Male HH Count 224 132 55 36 41 53 15 Row% 45.1% 20.1% 5.4% 3.9% 4.9% 18.6% 2.0% Female HH Count 92 41 11 8 10 38 4

Annex Table 13: Household Expenses beard according to gender of household Sex of HH Head Male Female Count Column N % Count Column N % Male 104 39.5% 10 9.8% Kitchen & Female 78 29.7% 80 78.4% groceries Both 81 30.8% 12 11.8%

Male 114 43.3% 20 19.6% Educational Female 51 19.4% 67 65.7% Expenses Both 98 37.3% 15 14.7%

Male 114 43.3% 16 15.7% Agricultural Female 52 19.8% 73 71.6% Expenses Both 97 36.9% 13 12.7%

Male 132 50.2% 24 23.5% Household Female 41 15.6% 65 63.7% Tax Both 90 34.2% 13 12.7%

Male 116 44.1% 16 15.7% Medical Female 46 17.5% 70 68.6% Expenses Both 101 38.4% 16 15.7%

Male 118 44.9% 18 17.6% Festival Female 49 18.6% 68 66.7% Expenses Both 96 36.5% 16 15.7%

Male 124 47.1% 17 16.7% Household Assets Female 38 14.4% 67 65.7% Expenses Both 101 38.4% 18 17.6%

Male 109 41.4% 15 14.7% Livestock Female 44 16.7% 71 69.6% Expenses Both 110 41.8% 16 15.7%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 14: Saving of Male and Female of Household Sex of HH Head Male Female Column Column Count N % Count N % Yes 119 45.2% 18 17.6% Savings No 144 54.8% 84 82.4% by Male Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Yes 138 52.5% 61 59.8% Savings by No 125 47.5% 41 40.2% Female Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0%

Annex Table 15: Household Income Access Based on the gender of Household Head Sex of HH Head Male Female Count Column N % Count Column N % None 7 2.7% 18 17.6% HH income Low 49 18.6% 30 29.4% access High 207 78.7% 54 52.9% Male Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% None 16 6.1% 6 5.9% HH income Low 160 60.8% 45 44.1% access High 87 33.1% 51 50.0% Female Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0%

Annex Table 16: Household Income Control Based on the gender of Household Head Sex of HH Head Male Female Count Column N % Count Column N % None 7 2.7% 22 21.6% HH income Low 60 22.8% 36 35.3% control High 196 74.5% 44 43.1% Male Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% None 16 6.1% 5 4.9% HH income Low 183 69.6% 49 48.0% control High 64 24.3% 48 47.1% Female Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 17: Decision making Based on Gender of Household Sex of HH Head Male Female Count Column N % Count Column N % Female only 34 12.9% 59 57.8% Male only 80 30.4% 10 9.8% Decision regarding Female & Male equally 133 50.6% 27 26.5% expenses for Female support by Male 5 1.9% 4 3.9% kids Male support by female 11 4.2% 2 2.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 36 13.7% 53 52.0% Male only 74 28.1% 10 9.8% Decision regarding Female & Male equally 135 51.3% 31 30.4% health Female support by Male 8 3.0% 7 6.9% expenses Male support by female 10 3.8% 1 1.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 36 13.7% 47 46.1% Male only 64 24.3% 11 10.8% Decision regarding Female& Male equally 147 55.9% 35 34.3% making Female support by Male 7 2.7% 8 7.8% savings Male support by female 9 3.4% 1 1.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 22 8.4% 36 35.3% Male only 79 30.0% 16 15.7% Decision Female& Male equally 144 54.8% 42 41.2% regarding investments Female support by Male 6 2.3% 7 6.9% Male support by female 12 4.6% 1 1.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 110 41.8% 81 79.4% Male only 34 12.9% 6 5.9% Responsible Female& Male equally 111 42.2% 13 12.7% for HH chores Female support by Male 6 2.3% 2 2.0% Male support by female 2 .8% 0 0.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 38 14.4% 57 55.9% Male only 86 32.7% 15 14.7% Responsible Female& Male equally 122 46.4% 22 21.6% for HH decision Female support by Male 8 3.0% 6 5.9% Male support by female 9 3.4% 2 2.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 52 19.8% 68 66.7% Decision Male only 66 25.1% 8 7.8% regarding HH expenses Female& Male equally 129 49.0% 21 20.6% Female support by Male 6 2.3% 4 3.9%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Sex of HH Head Male Female Count Column N % Count Column N % Male support by female 10 3.8% 1 1.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 65 24.7% 68 66.7% Male only 80 30.4% 11 10.8% Responsible Female& Male equally 107 40.7% 20 19.6% for visiting market Female support by Male 6 2.3% 2 2.0% Male support by female 5 1.9% 1 1.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 37 14.1% 61 59.8% Male only 65 24.7% 7 6.9% Decision Female& Male equally 144 54.8% 27 26.5% regarding buy/sell cattle Female support by Male 9 3.4% 5 4.9% Male support by female 8 3.0% 2 2.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 58 22.1% 74 72.5% Male only 79 30.0% 6 5.9% Active part in Female& Male equally 120 45.6% 21 20.6% community activities Female support by Male 2 .8% 1 1.0% Male support by female 4 1.5% 0 0.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 13 4.9% 33 32.4% Male only 86 32.7% 23 22.5% Decision regarding Female& Male equally 142 54.0% 40 39.2% buy/sell Female support by Male 10 3.8% 2 2.0% house/land Male support by female 12 4.6% 4 3.9% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 22 8.4% 41 40.2% Male only 211 80.2% 54 52.9% Major Female& Male equally 29 11.0% 7 6.9% property owner Female support by Male 1 .4% 0 0.0% Male support by female 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Female only 11 4.2% 36 35.3% Male only 89 33.8% 18 17.6% Decision Female& Male equally 144 54.8% 43 42.2% regarding reconstruction Female support by Male 7 2.7% 4 3.9% Male support by female 12 4.6% 1 1.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 18: Participation in various community groups based on gender of the household head. Sex of HH Head Male Female Count Column N % Count Column N % Male only Participation 55 20.9% 8 7.8% Female only participation 18 6.8% 10 9.8% Forest user Both participation 8 3.0% 2 2.0% group Not involvement 182 69.2% 82 80.4% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 31 11.8% 5 4.9% Female only participation 14 5.3% 9 8.8% Water user Both participation 7 2.7% 1 1.0% group Not involvement 211 80.2% 87 85.3% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 3 1.1% 2 2.0% Female only participation 99 37.6% 36 35.3% Mother's group Both participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Not involvement 161 61.2% 64 62.7% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 15 5.7% 1 1.0% Female only participation 8 3.0% 2 2.0% Youth Both participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% club/group Not involvement 240 91.3% 99 97.1% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 10 3.8% 1 1.0% Female only participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Conservation Both participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% committee/group Not involvement 253 96.2% 101 99.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 7 2.7% 0 0.0% Female only participation 3 1.1% 1 1.0% Local Peace Both participation 1 .4% 0 0.0% committee Not involvement 252 95.8% 101 99.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 5 1.9% 0 0.0%

Citizen Female only participation 0 0.0% 1 1.0% Awareness Both participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% center Not involvement 258 98.1% 101 99.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 11 4.2% 2 2.0%

School Female only participation 1 .4% 0 0.0% Management Both participation 2 .8% 0 0.0% Committee Not involvement 249 94.7% 100 98.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Sex of HH Head Male Female Count Column N % Count Column N % Male only Participation 17 6.5% 1 1.0% Female only participation 43 16.3% 20 19.6% Micro Credit Both participation 8 3.0% 1 1.0% Group Not involvement 195 74.1% 80 78.4% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 1 .4% 0 0.0% Female only participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Tourism Both participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Association Not involvement 262 99.6% 102 100.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 7 2.7% 0 0.0% Female only participation 2 .8% 0 0.0% VDC council Both participation 3 1.1% 0 0.0% Not involvement 251 95.4% 102 100.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 10 3.8% 0 0.0% Female only participation 3 1.1% 0 0.0% Ward Citizen Both participation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% forum Not involvement 250 95.1% 102 100.0% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0% Male only Participation 15 5.7% 2 2.0% Female only participation 49 18.6% 34 33.3% Others Both participation 9 3.4% 1 1.0% Not involvement 190 72.2% 65 63.7% Total 263 100.0% 102 100.0%

Annex Table 19: Knowledge about GBV Gender Male Female Total Cou Column N Column Column nt % Count N % Count N % Yes 95 49.0% 79 46.2% 174 47.7%

Knowledge No 60 30.9% 72 42.1% 132 36.2% about GBV Don't Know 39 20.1% 20 11.7% 59 16.2% Total 194 100.0% 171 100.0% 365 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 20: Knowledge about Specific GBV issues Gender Male Female Total Column Column Count N % Count N % Count Column N % Yes 89 93.7% 72 91.1% 161 92.5%

Domestic No 4 4.2% 5 6.3% 9 5.2% Violence Don't Know 2 2.1% 2 2.5% 4 2.3% Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0% Yes 77 81.1% 53 67.1% 130 74.7%

Mental No 10 10.5% 15 19.0% 25 14.4% Harassment Don't Know 8 8.4% 11 13.9% 19 10.9% Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0% Yes 80 84.2% 50 63.3% 130 74.7%

Sexual No 9 9.5% 17 21.5% 26 14.9% Abuse Don't Know 6 6.3% 12 15.2% 18 10.3% Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0%

Yes 87 91.6% 61 77.2% 148 85.1%

Physical No 5 5.3% 11 13.9% 16 9.2% Violence Don't Know 3 3.2% 7 8.9% 10 5.7% Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0%

Annex Table 21: Local Mechanism Present in the Community to tackle GBV cases Gender Male Female Total

Count Column N % Count Column N % Count Column N % Yes 60 63.2% 41 51.9% 101 58.0%

Local No 27 28.4% 33 41.8% 60 34.5% Mechanism Don't Know 8 8.4% 5 6.3% 13 7.5%

Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 22: Available Local GBV mechanism best Gender Male Female Total

Count Column N % Count Column N % Count Column N % Yes 52 86.7% 32 78.0% 84 83.2%

Mentioned No 7 11.7% 5 12.2% 12 11.9% mechanism best Don't Know 1 1.7% 4 9.8% 5 5.0% Total 60 100.0% 41 100.0% 101 100.0%

Annex Table 23: GBV cases reported to Duty Bearers Gender Male Female Total

Count Column N % Count Column N % Count Column N % Yes 65 68.4% 43 54.4% 108 62.1% Report to No 21 22.1% 22 27.8% 43 24.7% duty bearer Don't Know 9 9.5% 14 17.7% 23 13.2% Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0%

Annex Table 24: GBV cases filed at Legal Authority Gender Male Female Total

Count Column N % Count Column N % Count Column N % Yes 54 56.8% 34 43.0% 88 50.6% Cases No 24 25.3% 19 24.1% 43 24.7% filed to legal Don't Know 17 17.9% 26 32.9% 43 24.7% authority Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0%

Annex Table 25: Follow Up on GBV cases by the legal authority Gender Male Female Total

Count Column N % Count Column N % Count Column N % Yes 60 63.2% 22 27.8% 82 47.1% No 8 8.4% 7 8.9% 15 8.6% Follow up by Don't Know 27 28.4% 50 63.3% 77 44.3% authority Total 95 100.0% 79 100.0% 174 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Annex Table 26: Receiving of Safe Shelter Messaging Received Safe shelter message Yes No Don't Know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 31 57.4% 13 24.1% 10 18.5% 54 100.0% Baseri 27 50.0% 20 37.0% 7 13.0% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 34 65.4% 13 25.0% 5 9.6% 52 100.0%

VDC Mulpani 35 76.1% 9 19.6% 2 4.3% 46 100.0% Budathum 47 88.7% 5 9.4% 1 1.9% 53 100.0% Salayantar 85 80.2% 21 19.8% 0 0.0% 106 100.0% Total 259 71.0% 81 22.2% 25 6.8% 365 100.0%

Annex Table 27: Source of Safe Shelter Messaging Source of SSM Awareness Neighbor/re Community Developme Radio Ads Posters Leaflets Sessions latives Leaders VDC office nt Agencies Others Total Co Row Co Row Co Row Co Row Co Row Co Row Co Row Co Row Co Row Co Row N unt N % unt N % unt N % unt N % unt N % unt N % unt N % unt N % unt N % unt % 74.2 96.8 61.3 67.7 61.3 90.3 16.1 100.0 Phulkharka 23 30 19 0 0.0% 21 19 28 5 0 0.0% 31 % % % % % % % % 63.0 88.9 70.4 66.7 63.0 74.1 100.0 Baseri 17 24 19 1 3.7% 18 17 20 1 3.7% 1 3.7% 27 % % % % % % % 58.8 85.3 47.1 58.8 58.8 73.5 11.8 100.0 Aaginchowk 20 29 16 0 0.0% 20 20 25 4 3 8.8% 34 % % % % % % % % 57.1 40.0 100.0 22.9 22.9 97.1 11.4 100.0 VDC Mulpani 20 14 3 8.6% 35 8 0 0.0% 8 34 4 35 % % % % % % % % 48.9 23.4 100.0 48.9 23.4 95.7 12.8 100.0 Budathum 23 11 4 8.5% 47 23 1 2.1% 11 45 6 47 % % % % % % % % 44.7 60.0 17.6 100.0 28.2 16.5 100. 100.0 Salayantar 38 51 15 85 24 7 8.2% 14 85 3 3.5% 85 % % % % % % 0% % 54.4 61.4 29.3 64.9 44.0 24.7 40.9 67.2 100.0 Total 141 159 76 168 114 64 106 174 17 6.6% 259 % % % % % % % % %

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 28: Appropriateness of Safe Shelter Messaging Message Appropriate Yes No Total Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 4 12.9% 27 87.1% 31 100.0% Baseri 2 7.4% 25 92.6% 27 100.0% Aaginchowk 7 20.6% 27 79.4% 34 100.0% VDC Mulpani 32 91.4% 3 8.6% 35 100.0%

Budathum 47 100.0% 0 0.0% 47 100.0% Salayantar 83 97.6% 2 2.4% 85 100.0% Total 175 67.6% 84 32.4% 259 100.0%

Annex Table 29: Rating of Safe Shelter Messaging Message ratings Poor Adequate Good Very Good Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 0 0.0% 8 25.8% 21 67.7% 2 6.5% 31 100.0%

Baseri 0 0.0% 4 14.8% 19 70.4% 4 14.8% 27 100.0%

Aaginchowk 0 0.0% 13 38.2% 16 47.1% 5 14.7% 34 100.0%

VDC Mulpani 0 0.0% 9 25.7% 22 62.9% 4 11.4% 35 100.0% Budathum 0 0.0% 6 12.8% 27 57.4% 14 29.8% 47 100.0%

Salayantar 0 0.0% 14 16.5% 61 71.8% 10 11.8% 85 100.0%

Total 0 0.0% 54 20.8% 166 64.1% 39 15.1% 259 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 30: Model House, resource center or training center present in the VDC Model house, RC, TC Yes No Don't Know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 0 0.0% 28 90.3% 3 9.7% 31 100.0% Baseri 0 0.0% 25 92.6% 2 7.4% 27 100.0% Aaginchowk 0 0.0% 30 88.2% 4 11.8% 34 100.0% VDC Mulpani 32 91.4% 3 8.6% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%

Budathum 37 78.7% 8 17.0% 2 4.3% 47 100.0% Salayantar 68 80.0% 12 14.1% 5 5.9% 85 100.0% Total 137 52.9% 106 40.9% 16 6.2% 259 100.0%

Annex Table 31: Helpfulness of Safe Shelter Messaging Message helped in Better understanding of Better Better General understanding of understanding of Technique Specific Technique Materials Not helped at all Don't Know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 24 77.4% 19 61.3% 15 48.4% 1 3.2% 3 9.7% 31 100.0% Baseri 23 85.2% 20 74.1% 19 70.4% 1 3.7% 2 7.4% 27 100.0% Aaginchow 29 85.3% 24 70.6% 24 70.6% 0 0.0% 1 2.9% 34 100.0% k VD Mulpani 26 74.3% 19 54.3% 6 17.1% 0 0.0% 2 5.7% 35 100.0% C Budathum 22 46.8% 34 72.3% 12 25.5% 3 6.4% 1 2.1% 47 100.0% Salayantar 51 60.0% 42 49.4% 21 24.7% 9 10.6% 1 1.2% 85 100.0% Total 175 67.6% 158 61.0% 97 37.5% 14 5.4% 10 3.9% 259 100.0%

Annex Table 32: Level of Damage of House Level of damage Partially damaged Partially damaged Fully Damaged but unlivable but livable Not Damaged Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 52 96.3% 1 1.9% 1 1.9% 0 0.0% 54 100.0% Baseri 53 98.1% 0 0.0% 1 1.9% 0 0.0% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 42 80.8% 7 13.5% 3 5.8% 0 0.0% 52 100.0% VDC Mulpani 43 93.5% 2 4.3% 1 2.2% 0 0.0% 46 100.0%

Budathum 44 83.0% 7 13.2% 2 3.8% 0 0.0% 53 100.0% Salayantar 85 80.2% 3 2.8% 17 16.0% 1 .9% 106 100.0% Total 319 87.4% 20 5.5% 25 6.8% 1 .3% 365 100.0%

Annex Table 33: Start Rebuilding Damaged House Started Rebuilding Yes No Total Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 11 20.4% 43 79.6% 54 100.0%

Baseri 13 24.1% 41 75.9% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 17 32.7% 35 67.3% 52 100.0% VDC Mulpani 2 4.3% 44 95.7% 46 100.0% Budathum 2 3.8% 51 96.2% 53 100.0% Salayantar 15 14.3% 90 85.7% 105 100.0%

Total 60 16.5% 304 83.5% 364 100.0% Annex Table 34: Apply Building Back Safer Techniques while rebuilding damaged house Implement BBS techniques Yes No Don't Know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 8 14.8% 37 68.5% 9 16.7% 54 100.0% Baseri 8 14.8% 39 72.2% 7 13.0% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 13 25.0% 31 59.6% 8 15.4% 52 100.0% VDC Mulpani 19 41.3% 21 45.7% 6 13.0% 46 100.0%

Budathum 22 41.5% 25 47.2% 6 11.3% 53 100.0% Salayantar 44 41.9% 45 42.9% 16 15.2% 105 100.0% Total 114 31.3% 198 54.4% 52 14.3% 364 100.0%

Annex Table 35: Reasons for not applying BBS techniques Reason for not implementing BBS Not adequate No trained Traditional raw materials Expensive manpower More time More materials approach fine Don't Know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Coun Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % t % Phulkharka 23 50.0% 34 73.9% 19 41.3% 25 54.3% 25 54.3% 4 8.7% 10 21.7% 46 100.0 % Baseri 26 56.5% 36 78.3% 26 56.5% 25 54.3% 23 50.0% 1 2.2% 7 15.2% 46 100.0 % Aaginchowk 15 38.5% 32 82.1% 11 28.2% 15 38.5% 18 46.2% 1 2.6% 3 7.7% 39 100.0 % VDC Mulpani 9 33.3% 19 70.4% 1 3.7% 2 7.4% 2 7.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 27 100.0 % Budathum 3 9.7% 29 93.5% 0 0.0% 4 12.9% 2 6.5% 0 0.0% 1 3.2% 31 100.0 % Salayantar 3 5.0% 48 80.0% 1 1.7% 3 5.0% 5 8.3% 0 0.0% 11 18.3% 60 100.0 % Total 79 31.7% 198 79.5% 58 23.3% 74 29.7% 75 30.1% 6 2.4% 32 12.9% 249 100.0 %

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 36: Difficulty level of Implementing BBS techniques when compared to traditional approach Difficult to implement BBS Same as Very Difficult Somewhat Difficult traditional Somewhat easy Very Easy Don't Know Total approach Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 40 74.1% 5 9.3% 0 0.0% 3 5.6% 0 0.0% 6 11.1% 54 100.0% Baseri 45 83.3% 6 11.1% 0 0.0% 1 1.9% 0 0.0% 2 3.7% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 34 65.4% 4 7.7% 0 0.0% 6 11.5% 4 7.7% 4 7.7% 52 100.0%

VDC Mulpani 29 63.0% 7 15.2% 0 0.0% 5 10.9% 3 6.5% 2 4.3% 46 100.0% Budathum 37 69.8% 11 20.8% 0 0.0% 3 5.7% 1 1.9% 1 1.9% 53 100.0% Salayantar 70 66.7% 17 16.2% 0 0.0% 8 7.6% 1 1.0% 9 8.6% 105 100.0% Total 255 70.1% 50 13.7% 0 0.0% 26 7.1% 9 2.5% 24 6.6% 364 100.0%

Annex Table 37: Need for Safe Shelter Messaging Need safe shelter message Yes No Don't Know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 21 95.5% 0 0.0% 1 4.5% 22 100.0% Baseri 25 96.2% 0 0.0% 1 3.8% 26 100.0% Aaginchowk 13 72.2% 1 5.6% 4 22.2% 18 100.0% VDC Mulpani 11 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 11 100.0%

Budathum 6 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6 100.0% Salayantar 20 95.2% 1 4.8% 0 0.0% 21 100.0% Total 96 92.3% 2 1.9% 6 5.8% 104 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 38: Types of Safe Shelter Message required Type of Safe shelter messaging needed Info on use Assess to House Awareness Training establish Social of local technical owners Others Don't Know session program TC, RC awareness resources advisor orientation Co Row N Co Row N Co Row N Co Row N Co Row Co Row N Cou Row N Cou Row N Cou Row unt % unt % unt % unt % unt N % unt % nt % nt % nt N % 14.3 Phulkharka 13 61.9% 12 57.1% 13 61.9% 11 52.4% 12 57.1% 10 47.6% 13 61.9% 0 0.0% 3 % Baseri 13 52.0% 16 64.0% 16 64.0% 16 64.0% 12 48.0% 9 36.0% 11 44.0% 0 0.0% 2 8.0%

Aaginchowk 10 76.9% 11 84.6% 10 76.9% 8 61.5% 10 76.9% 8 61.5% 11 84.6% 0 0.0% 1 7.7% 18.2 Mulpani 1 9.1% 6 54.5% 2 18.2% 1 9.1% 1 9.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 VDC % 16.7 Budathum 1 16.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 33.3% 1 16.7% 2 33.3% 2 33.3% 0 0.0% 1 % Salayantar 6 30.0% 7 35.0% 7 35.0% 6 30.0% 1 5.0% 6 30.0% 12 60.0% 0 0.0% 1 5.0% 10.4 Total 44 45.8% 52 54.2% 48 50.0% 44 45.8% 37 38.5% 35 36.5% 49 51.0% 0 0.0% 10 %

Annex Table 39: Implementation of BBS if provided Safe Shelter Messaging With awareness will implement Yes No Don't Know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 16 76.2% 2 9.5% 3 14.3% 21 100.0% Baseri 23 92.0% 1 4.0% 1 4.0% 25 100.0% Aaginchowk 8 61.5% 2 15.4% 3 23.1% 13 100.0%

VDC Mulpani 10 90.9% 0 0.0% 1 9.1% 11 100.0% Budathum 5 83.3% 1 16.7% 0 0.0% 6 100.0% Salayantar 14 70.0% 0 0.0% 6 30.0% 20 100.0% Total 76 79.2% 6 6.3% 14 14.6% 96 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 40: Knowledge about DRR Knowledge about DRR Yes No Don't know Total Count Row N % Count Row N % Count Row N % Count Row N % Phulkharka 26 48.1% 11 20.4% 17 31.5% 54 100.0% Baseri 20 37.0% 18 33.3% 16 29.6% 54 100.0% Aaginchowk 33 63.5% 11 21.2% 8 15.4% 52 100.0% VDC Mulpani 18 39.1% 22 47.8% 6 13.0% 46 100.0%

Budathum 21 39.6% 27 50.9% 5 9.4% 53 100.0% Salayantar 39 36.8% 61 57.5% 6 5.7% 106 100.0% Total 157 43.0% 150 41.1% 58 15.9% 365 100.0%

Annex Table 41: Knowledge about the types of DRR Drought Flood Landslide Earthquake Epidemics Conflict Climate Change Pollution Respo Column Column Column Column Column Colum Colu Colu nse Count Count Count Count Count Count Count Count % % % % % n % mn % mn % Yes 152 98.1% 152 98.1% 154 99.4% 111 71.6% 65 41.9% 91 58.7% 66 42.6% 129 83.2%

No 1 .6% 2 1.3% 1 .6% 32 20.6% 64 41.3% 32 20.6% 66 42.6% 16 10.3% Don't 2 1.3% 1 .6% 0 0.0% 12 7.7% 26 16.8% 32 20.6% 23 14.8% 10 6.5% know Total 155 100% 155 100% 155 100% 155 100% 155 100% 155 100% 155 100% 155 100%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 42: Community has DRR preparedness Plan Response preparedness plan Yes No Don't know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 8 30.8% 16 61.5% 2 7.7% 26 100.0% Baseri 4 20.0% 15 75.0% 1 5.0% 20 100.0% Aaginchowk 13 39.4% 19 57.6% 1 3.0% 33 100.0% VDC Mulpani 6 33.3% 11 61.1% 1 5.6% 18 100.0%

Budathum 3 14.3% 17 81.0% 1 4.8% 21 100.0% Salayantar 7 18.4% 30 78.9% 1 2.6% 38 100.0% Total 41 26.3% 108 69.2% 7 4.5% 156 100.0%

Annex Table 43: Community has institutions to help in disaster Institutions to help Yes No Don't know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 14 53.8% 11 42.3% 1 3.8% 26 100.0%

Baseri 7 35.0% 11 55.0% 2 10.0% 20 100.0% Aaginchowk 14 42.4% 18 54.5% 1 3.0% 33 100.0% VDC Mulpani 8 44.4% 10 55.6% 0 0.0% 18 100.0% Budathum 7 33.3% 13 61.9% 1 4.8% 21 100.0%

Salayantar 10 26.3% 27 71.1% 1 2.6% 38 100.0% Total 60 38.5% 90 57.7% 6 3.8% 156 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 44: Community Need Awareness and Training Sessions Need training program Don't Yes No know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 22 84.6% 3 11.5% 1 3.8% 26 100.0% Baseri 20 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 20 100.0% Aaginchowk 32 97.0% 0 0.0% 1 3.0% 33 100.0%

VDC Mulpani 17 94.4% 1 5.6% 0 0.0% 18 100.0% Budathum 20 95.3% 1 4.8% 0 0.0% 21 100.0% Salayantar 36 94.7% 2 5.3% 0 0.0% 38 100.0% Total 146 93.6% 7 4.5% 2 1.3% 156 100.0%

Annex Table 45: Feel Vulnerable towards various disasters Feel vulnerable Yes No Don't know Total Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 11 42.3% 15 57.7% 0 0.0% 26 100.0%

Baseri 8 40.0% 12 60.0% 0 0.0% 20 100.0% Aaginchowk 17 51.5% 15 45.5% 1 3.0% 33 100.0% VDC Mulpani 14 77.8% 3 16.7% 1 5.6% 18 100.0% Budathum 17 81.0% 4 19.0% 0 0.0% 21 100.0%

Salayantar 22 59.5% 15 40.5% 0 0.0% 37 100.0% Total 89 57.4% 64 41.3% 2 1.3% 155 100.0%

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016 Annex Table 46: Rate your Vulnerability Rate vulnerability Somewhat Very Vulnerable Little Vulnerable Don't Know Total Vulnerable Row N Row N Row N Row N Row N Count % Count % Count % Count % Count % Phulkharka 7 70.0% 3 30.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10 100.0% Baseri 4 50.0% 4 50.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 8 100.0% Aaginchowk 10 58.8% 6 35.3% 1 5.9% 0 0.0% 17 100.0%

VDC Mulpani 6 42.9% 5 35.7% 3 21.4% 0 0.0% 14 100.0% Budathum 4 23.5% 10 58.8% 3 17.6% 0 0.0% 17 100.0% Salayantar 6 27.3% 10 45.5% 5 22.7% 1 4.5% 22 100.0% Total 37 42.0% 38 43.2% 12 13.6% 1 1.1% 88 100.0%

Annex II: Field Photographs

Team Photo in Salyantar-7 Enumerators at work in Enumerators at work in Aaginchowk-4 Aaginchowk-6

Women carrying heavy load and Conducting household surveys, Women usually collect grass and walking difficult terrain, Phulkharka- Aaginchowk-6 fodder, then climb all the way up 2 with the load. Baseri-3

Conducting household surveys, Conducting household surveys, FGD Session(Male) in Aaginchowk-6 Phulkarkha-9 Phulkharka-9 BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

FGD session (Female only)in FGD session(adolescent female) FGD session (adolescent males) Phulkharka-2 in Phulkharka-2 Phulkharka-2

FGD session (Female Only) Mulpani- FGD session (Adolescent KII session with the Vice Principle of 4 females) – Budathum-4 Baseri-7

KII session at Baseri-7 FGD session (Males only) FGD session (female only) Mulpani- Salyantar-7 4

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Awareness signs about GBV were Female Friendly Space set up by Women going downhill carrying seen in the study area Sahayatri in Mulpani-4 heavy load, Baseri-7

FGD session (Mixed group) Baseri-7 KII with a volunteer in KII being conducted in Mulpani-4 Aaginchowk-6

Local health posts with awareness Awareness sign regarding GBV Female Friendly space in Mulpani-4 signs in Mulpani-4

100

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

Model house for rehabilitation of Reconstruction work @ CARE Shelter banner @Salyantar 7 Vulnerable at Salyantar 7 Salyantar 7

Women doing household work Partially damaged house used Public banner for awareness at for living @Budathum 6 Salayantar 8

Public awareness banner Mulpani Note @ premises of Model Interview with respondents Home Budathum 4 @Mulpani 9

101

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDEPENDENT RESEARCHERS (3IR) PVT. LTD ANAMNAGAR WWW.3IR.COM.NP

102

BASELINE SURVEY: GENDER, GBV AND SHELTER- DHADING August 2016

103