Table 6.
Predictors of Receiving Financial Support from Government Slum Improvement Schemes in a Multilevel Logistic Regression Model Using Data from the 2012 NSS
| Predictors | Multivariable findings (N=706, Estimated N=28,635) Odds ratio (CI) |
p-valuea |
|---|---|---|
| Notified | ||
| Yes | - | |
| No | 0.379 (0.246, 0.584) | <0.001 |
| BSDS | ||
| Low (≤30) | - | |
| Medium (31–60) | 1.013 (0.671, 1.529) | 0.951 |
| High (>60) | 0.723 (0.390, 1.341 | 0.304 |
| Number of households in the slum | ||
| <100 | - | |
| 101–300 | 0.933 (0.526,1.655) | 0.814 |
| 301–800 | 1.251 (0.702, 2.228) | 0.447 |
| >800 | 0.854 (0.449, 1.622) | 0.629 |
| Land type | ||
| Public local government | - | |
| Public central government | 0.321 (0.088, 1.166) | 0.084 |
| Private | 0.875 (0.584, 1.312) | 0.519 |
| Other or not known | 0.941 (0.529, 1.674) | 0.836 |
| Slum location | ||
| Central area | - | |
| Fringe area | 1.019 (0.686, 1.515) | 0.925 |
| Type of area surrounding slum | ||
| Residential | - | |
| Commercial | 0.395 (0.129, 1.208) | 0.103 |
| Industrial | 0.699 (0.270–1.811) | 0.461 |
| Other, including more slum settlements | 1.145 (0.770–1.703) | 0.505 |
| Community association for slum improvement | ||
| Yes | - | |
| No | 0.709 (0.457–1.101) | 0.125 |
| Constant | 0.791 (0.366, 1.710) | 0.551 |
| State random effects | ||
| Andhra Pradesh | 1.244 (0.956, 1.618) | 1.000 |
| Bihar | 0.835 (0.516, 1.350) | 1.000 |
| Delhib | - | - |
| Gujarat | 1.131 (0.769, 1.665) | 1.000 |
| Karnataka | 1.638 (1.177, 2.279) | 0.380 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 0.995 (0.743, 1.332) | 1.000 |
| Maharashtra | 0.786 (0.610, 1.014) | 1.000 |
| Orissa | 0.752 (0.447, 1.264) | 1.000 |
| Tamil Nadu | 0.621 (0.422, 0.912) | 1.000 |
| West Bengal | 2.192 (1.638, 2.934) | 0.002 |
| Standard deviation of the random intercept | 0.477 (0.232, 0.980) | - |
| Variation attributable to state variable (intra-class correlation coefficient) | 0.065 | - |
CI=confidence interval
a
p-values for random effects are corrected for multiple comparisons (multiplied by the number of comparisons; capped at 1.00). Confidence intervals for the random effects are corrected to allow multiple comparisons between states (Goldstein and Healy 1995).
b
Delhi slums did not report receiving any financial support in the 2012 NSS.