Governments all over the world are taking steps to address the problem of providing adequate and affordable housing to their people. Ogun State Government in Southwest  Nigeria is not left out in this drive, and thus initiated an integrated public housing programme in 2003 with the assumption that the use of  different strategies  by  different organizations  will result in  the provision of adequate housing and  improved quality of life  for different categories of people in  the State.  In view of the fact that the validity of this assumption has not been formally examined, this research therefore aimed at evaluating public housing in Ogun State, Nigeria, with a view to examining the extent to which  the different housing delivery strategies have provided adequate and satisfactory housing and influenced the quality of life of residents of public housing in the State.
Survey  and qualitative research strategies as well as  proportionate and purposive  sampling
techniques were used  in selecting respondents.  Primary data  was obtained  through the
administration of questionnaire  to 90 purposely selected staff members, and oral  interviews with four senior management staff in  four key public housing agencies. In addition, questionnaire and observation schedule were used in obtaining data from 517  housing units  selected from four different housing delivery strategies based on the proportion  of their occurrence in nine  newly constructed  public  housing  estates. The  quantitative  data was  analysed using frequencies, percentages, cross tabulations,  discriminant, principal component  and categorical regression analyses; while the qualitative data was analysed using content analysis. Findings  show  that  the  four public  housing agencies sampled  were rated as having adequate organizational capacity in public housing provision. However, housing provided by the agencies was  rated affordable,  inadequate and not satisfactory by the residents. Although, public housing estates  sampled  lacked  basic  socio-economic  infrastructure, majority of the respondents felt satisfied with life in their current residences. The  study found significant differences  in  socio-economic characteristics of residents and  levels of housing adequacy and satisfaction across the four strategies. Whereas the Core housing strategy  provided housing for low-income earners and  was rated as having provided the most adequate and satisfactory housing, the Turnkey and Public-Private Partnership (PPP)  strategies provided  the least adequate  and  satisfactory  housing respectively  for middle-income earners.  The  Shell strategy which provided housing for high-income class had the  highest proportion of those who felt  satisfied with  life.  Satisfaction with management of housing estates and housing unit attributes among other attributes discriminated between the residents who were satisfied with life and those who were not.    Housing  unit attributes were rated the most adequate and satisfactory while  socio-economic infrastructure and neighbourhood facilities were rated the least adequate and least satisfactory housing attributes.
Findings also show that housing delivery strategies, additional space requirement in the housing
units,  organizational capacity as well as age,  income and  tenure  status  of respondents  among others were  significant predicators of  housing adequacy and residential satisfaction  in the study area.  Residential satisfaction, tenure status, housing adequacy, housing delivery strategies, length of residency, income and age of respondents were factors that influenced satisfaction with life in the  housing  estates.  Although  findings of the study  are  consistent with the findings of prior research; the categorical regression analysis (R2
= 1.000, F=718909256; P=0.000) however shows that adequate housing  (Beta=1.000, F=528886811; P=0.000) was  the strongest predictor of, and closely related to,  residential satisfaction; and that housing adequacy and residential satisfaction have significant influence on satisfaction with life. The  findings  imply  that  the different housing delivery strategies used in public housing perform differently in terms of residents’ perceived adequacy and satisfaction; the levels of housing adequacy and satisfaction  as well as quality of life in public housing   can be enhanced through adequate  provision and maintenance of basic housing infrastructure and neighbourhood facilities;   housing  adequacy  and satisfaction  can be used as    synonymous concept in the evaluation of housings; and  the underlying assumption in public housing in Ogun State is valid.

Chapter 1     INTRODUCTION 
1.0     Background of Study—————-1
1.1    Statement of the Problem ——————–3
1.2    Aim of Study—————–6
1.3    Objectives of Study——————-6
1.4   Justification——————-6
1.5    Scope of Study————–8
1.6    Summary———————8

Chapter 2     THE CONTEXT OF STUDY—————10 
2.0.0 Introduction——————10
2.1.0 Basic Information on the study area———-10
2.1.1 Location and Size of Ogun State————–10
2.1.2 Administrative Setting—————-12
2.1.3 Demographics and Socio-economic Characteristics of Ogun State———-12
2.2.0 Public Housing in Ogun State —————-14
2.2.1 Public Housing in Ogun State: Historical Perspective ———14
2.2.2 The 2003 Ogun State Housing Policy———-16
2.2.3 The Public Housing Programme in Ogun State and its Objectives—-18
2.2.4 Housing Delivery Strategies in the Public Housing Programme——18
(i) Government Aided Core Housing Strategy ——–19
(ii) Turnkey Housing Delivery Strategy—————-21
(iii)Public-Private Partnership Housing Delivery Strategy—-24
(iv)  Shell Stage Housing Delivery Strategy———–26
2.3.0 Public Housing Agencies in Ogun State————28
2.3.1 Ogun State Housing Corporation————–29
2.3.2 Ogun State Property and Investment Corporation————30
2.3.3 Gateway City Development Company Limited——32
2.3.4 Ogun State Ministry of Housing ————-33
2.4 Summary———————–35

Chapter 3    REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE—————36 
3.0. Introduction——————-36
3.1.0 Evaluation Research —————-39
3.1.1 Programme Theory in Evaluation of Social Programmes ————40
3.2.0 Studies in Public Housing——————43
3.3.0 Evaluation of Public Housing ———— 46
3.3.1 Dimensions of Evaluation of Public Housing——-47
3.3.2 Levels of Evaluation of public Housing ———–48
3.4.0 Approaches to Evaluation of Public Housing ———- —- ——–50
3.4.1  Post Occupancy Evaluations—————–51
3.4.2  Satisfaction Studies      —–   ——-55
3.4.3  Evaluation of Quality—————–60
3.4.4  Evaluation of Housing Adequacy————66
(i)Decent Housing——————–69
(ii) Safe Housing————-70
(iii)Healthy Housing——————71
(iv)Accessible Housing—————–74
(v) Affordable Housing—————-74
3.5.0 Methods of Evaluating Public Housing Schemes   ———76
3.6.0 Factors Influencing the Evaluation of Public Housing ————-78
3.7. 0 Housing and Quality of Life—————-80
3.8.0 Summary———————–83

Chapter 4   CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK   ——————85  
4.0.0 Introduction—————-85
4.1.0 Programme Theory and Conceptual Approaches to Evaluation———–86
4.2 The Conceptual Framework of the Study————88
4.3 Summary———————-89
Chapter 5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY————-91
5.0 Introduction——————–91
5.1.0 Research Strategy——————–91
5.2.0    Sample Frame of Housing Units and Public Housing Organisations—-92
5.3.0 Sampling Techniques—————92
5.4.0 Sample Size of Housing Units and Staff Members of Organisations——92
5.5.0 Design of Data Collection Instruments————–94
5.6.0 Data Collection and Data Treatment—————-95
5.6.1 Objective 1———————95
5.6.2 Objective 2——————–97
5.6.3 Objective 3———————98
5.6.4 Objective 4——————-98
5.6.5 Objective 5——————-100
5.7. Data Processing ———————-102
5.8.   Reliability and Validity Tests—————103
5.9 Summary———————–104

Chapter 6    THE ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF PUBLIC HOUSING
AGENCIES———————-106 
6.0.0 Introduction—————–106
6.1.0 Socio-economic Characteristics of the Respondents (Staff)——106
6.2.0 Organizational Characteristics of the Public Housing Agencies ———-110
6.3.0 Organizational Capacity of the Public Housing Agencies———118
6.3.1 Individual Adequacy Scores on Overall Organizational Capacity—119
6.3.2 Contributing Factors to Overall Organisational Capacity—-119
6.3.3 Overall Adequacy of Management Component ————–121
6.3.4 Overall Adequacy of Resource Component ———–122
6.4.0. Adequacy of Organisational Capacity of the Different Organizations——- —–123
6.4.1 Contributing Attributes to Adequacy of organizational Capacity of the
different Organizations———– ————–124
6.4.2 Contributing Attributes to Adequacy of Management Capacity across the
Organisations——- ——–125
6.4.3 Comparison of Organizational Capacity across the Agencies—–127
6.5 Summary———————–129

 Chapter 7      CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSING PROVIDED BY THE PUBLIC
HOUSING   AGENCIES——————131 
7.0.0 Introduction—————- 131
7.1.0 Overall Housing Attributes ————– —— —–131
7.1.1 Additional Requirements in the Housing Units——-133
7.2.0 Housing Characteristics across the different Delivery Strategies —134
7.2.1 Housing Unit Attributes——————134
7.2.2 Housing Services and Infrastructure————–140
7.2.3 Housing Estate Characteristics and Neighbourhood Facilities–143
7.3.0 Comparative Analysis of Housing Characteristics in the four Delivery
Strategies——————–146
7.4.0 Summary——————–147

Chapter 8      SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESIDENTS OF
PUBLIC HOUSING ESTATES ——————149 
8.0.0 Introduction —————–149
8.1.0 Socio-economic Characteristics of the Respondents in all the Housing Units–149
8.1.1 Socio-economic Characteristics of Residents across different Housing
Delivery Strategies————-153
8.2 Summary———————–160

Chapter 9    ASSESSMENT OF THE ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC HOUSING——-161 
9.0. Introduction——————161
9.1.0 Overall Housing Adequacy—————-161
9.1.2 Contributing Attributes to Overall Housing Adequacy—-162
9.1.3 Adequacy of Housing sub-Components————–163
(i) Adequacy of Housing Unit Attributes————–163
(ii) Adequacy of Housing Services and Infrastructure——–165
(iii) Adequacy of Neighbourhood Facilities———–166
(iv) Adequacy of Management of Facilities in the Housing Estates–166
9.2.0 Housing Adequacy across the different Delivery Strategies——–168
9.2.1 Contributing Attributes to Housing Adequacy across the different Strategies-
————————169
9.3.0 Adequacy Index Housing sub-Components——— 173
9.4.0 Variation in Housing Adequacy————– 176
9.4.1 Factors Influencing Overall Housing Adequacy——-177
9.5.0 Dimensions of Evaluation of Overall Housing Adequacy————-179
9.5.1 Dimensions of Evaluation of Housing Adequacy across the different Strategies
————————–180
(i) The Core Housing Strategy———–180
(ii) The Turnkey Housing Delivery Strategy————-182
(iii) PPP Housing Delivery Strategy————–183
(iv)The Shell Housing Delivery Strategy—————- 185
9.5.2:  Comparison of Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Evaluation across the
Different Strategies————187
9.6 Summary——————-189

Chapter 10    RESIDENTIAL SATISFACTION IN PUBLIC HOUSING ———–192 
10.0.0 Introduction—————192
10.1.0 Evaluation of Residential Satisfaction———–192
10.1.1 Overall Residential Satisfaction————193
10.1.2 Contribution of Housing Attributes to Overall Residential Satisfaction—
—————194
10.1.3 Satisfaction with Housing Sub-Components——195
(i) Satisfaction with Housing Unit Attributes ————–196
(ii)  Satisfaction with Housing Services————197
(iii) Satisfaction with location of Neighbourhood Facilities——-197
(iv) Satisfaction with Socio-economic Environment of housing Estates
——————-198
(v) Satisfaction with Management of Housing Estates——–199
10.2.0 Residential Satisfaction across the different Housing Delivery Strategies–201
10.2.1: Contribution of Housing Attributes to Residential Satisfaction across the
Delivery Strategies——————–202

10.3: Satisfaction with Housing sub-Components in all the Strategies—-209
10.3.1 Satisfaction with Housing sub-components across the Different Strategies
—————–211
10.4 Variation in Satisfaction with housing sub-components——214
10.4.1 Variation in Satisfaction across Socio-economic characteristics of
Respondents———————-214
10.4.2 Factors affecting Residential Satisfaction in all the Housing Estates——-215
10.5 Dimensions of Evaluation of Residential Satisfaction in all the Housing Estates——–219
10.5 .1: Dimensions of Evaluation of Residential Satisfaction across the different
Strategies.———————-220
(i)Core Housing Delivery Strategy———— ———-220
(ii) The Turnkey Housing Delivery Strategy———–222
(iii) The Public-Private Partnership Housing Delivery Strategy—— 224
(iv)The Shell Housing Delivery Strategy——– —— 226
10.5.2 Comparison of Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Evaluation across the
Different Strategies————- ——228
10.6 Summary——————–230

Chapter 11 SATISFACTION WITH LIFE IN PUBLIC HOUSING ………………….233
11.1.1 Satisfaction with Life in all the   Housing Estates——- 233
11.1.2: Satisfaction with Life across the different housing Delivery Strategies—234
11.2.0 Variation in Satisfaction with Life in all the Housing Estates——- —–237
11.2.1: Factors Affecting Satisfaction with Life in all the Housing Estates——-237
11.2.2 Discriminants of Satisfaction with life in all the Housing Estates———-243
11.3. Summary———————243

Chapter 12 SYNTHESIS, SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS——-245 
12.0. Introduction——————–245
12.1. Overview of Research —————245
12.2: Summary of Key Findings——————-247
12.3 Synthesis of Key Issues Arising from the Study————250
12.4 Implications of Study Findings ————-257
12.5 Areas for further Study————–260
12.6 Concluding Remarks——————261
REFERENCES———————262

APPENDICES———————288 
Appendix 1:  Ogun State in Context of Nigeria ———-288
Appendix 2: Floor Plans of Core Housing Units———-289
Appendix 3:  Floor Plan of Turnkey Housing Unit in OLokota Housing Estate ——–289
Appendix 4: Floor Plan of Typical Housing Unit in the PPP Strategy———–290
Appendix 5: Floor Plan of Typical Housing Unit in the Shell Strategy———-290
Appendix 6:  Variables for Assessing Organizational Capacity ———291
Appendix 7: Housing Attributes——————-292
Appendix 8: Housing Adequacy Variables—————-293
Appendix 9: Residential Satisfaction and Satisfaction with Life Variables——295
Appendix 10: Survey Questionnaire (Staff of Public Housing Agencies) ——-297
Appendix 11: Interview Guide———————300
Appendix12: Housing Unit Survey Questionnaire—————-301
Appendix 13: Observation Schedule————–307
Appendix 14: Reliability Test of Scale of Measurement of Staff Survey Questionnaire——–309
Appendix 15: Reliability Test of Scale for Measurement for Housing Adequacy——-310
Appendix 16: Reliability Test of Scale for Measurement for Residential Satisfaction and
Satisfaction with life—————-311
Appendix 17: Number of Persons per Room————–312
Appendix 18: Layouts of Media Village and OGD Housing Estates Asero, Abeokuta ———-313
Appendix 19: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of Dimensions of Housing Adequacy  Evaluation in All the Housing Estates (Model Summary)——–314
Appendix 20: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of Dimensions of Housing Adequacy
Evaluation in the Core Housing Estates (Model Summary)——–315
Appendix 21: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of housing adequacy
evaluation in the Turnkey housing estates (Model Summary)————316
Appendix 22: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of housing adequacy
evaluation in the  PPP housing estate (Model Summary) ——317
Appendix 23: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of housing adequacy
evaluation in the Shell housing estates (Model Summary)——318
Appendix 24:  Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of Residential
Satisfaction in all the housing estates (Model Summary) ——–319
Appendix 25: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of Residential Satisfaction evaluation in
the Shell housing estates (Model Summary)————–320
Appendix 26:  Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of Residential
Satisfaction evaluation in the Turnkey housing estates (Model Summary) ——–321
Appendix 27:   Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of residential
Satisfaction evaluation in the PPP housing estates (Model Summary) –322
Appendix 28: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of Residential
Satisfaction evaluation in the Shell housing estates (Model Summary)———-323
Appendix 29:  Discriminant Analysis of Satisfaction with Life in Housings Estates– 324
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: The Population Distribution across Local Government   Areas in Ogun State——–14
Table 2.2:  Planned and Completed Housing Units by the OSHC ——–30
Table 2.3: Planned and Completed Housing Units by OPIC. ————–32
Table 2.4: Planned and Completed Housing Units by the GCDCL——–33
Table 2.5: Planned and Completed Housing Schemes by the MOH——-34
Table 5.1: Sample Size of Housing Units for Each Housing Delivery Strategy———–93
Table 5.2: Distribution of Questionnaires to Residents of Housing units according to
Housing Delivery Strategies ——————102
Table 6.1: Average Monthly Income of Respondents————-107
Table 6.2:  Highest Educational Qualification of Respondents——- —107
Table 6.3: Areas of Specialization of Respondents—————-108
Table 6.4: Designation of Respondents——————–109
Table 6.5: Organizational Characteristics—————–118
Table 6.6: Individual Score on Overall Organizational Capacity——–119
Table 6.7: Contributing Components to Overall Organizational Capacity——120
Table 6.8: Individual Scores on Adequacy of Management Capacity————122
Table 6.9: Individuals’ Scores on Adequacy of Resources Capacity ————122
Table 6.10: Contributing Attributes to Organizational Capacity across the Organizations—–125
Table 6.11: Adequacy Indices of Organizational Capacity of the four
Organizations——————127
Table 7.1: Additional Requirements in the Housing Units —————134
Table 7.2: Housing Typology————–134
Table 7.3: Sizes of Housing Units—————–135
Table: 7.4 Additional Spatial Requirements in the Housing Units across the Strategies———136
Table 7.5: Mode of Acquisition of Housing Units—————–136
Table 7.6: Evaluation of Housing Acquisition Process————137
Table 7.7 Evaluation of Cost of Housing—————–138
Table 7.8: Descriptive Statistics of Occupancy Ratio ———–139
Table 7.9: Mode of Water Supply in Housing Units ————-141
Table 7.10: Source of Power Supply to Housing Units ———142
Tables 7.11: Refuse Collection and Disposal from Housing Units——143
Table 7.12: Housing Estate Characteristics and Facilities across the Housing Delivery
Strategies———————–145
Table 8.1: Respondents’ Sex————–153
Table 8.2 Age Grouping of Respondents——————153
Table 8.3: Marital Status of Respondents——————154
Table 8.4: Educational Attainment of Respondents—————155
Table 8.5: Employment Sector of Respondents———-155
Table 8.6: Personal Average Monthly Income of Respondents———-156
Table 8.7: Length of Residency in the Housing Estate———–157
Table 8.8: Type of Tenure—————–157
Table 8.9: Household Sizes of Respondents————–158
Table 9.1: Overall Housing Adequacy ——————–162
Table 9.2: Contribution of   Housing Attributes to Housing Adequacy ———163
Table 9.3:  Adequacy of Housing Unit Attributes—————-164
Table 9.4:  Adequacy of Housing Services and Infrastructure———–165
Table 9.5: Adequacy of Neighbourhood Facilities—————166
Table 9.6: Adequacy of Management of Facilities —————167
Table 9.7: Contributing Attributes to Housing adequacy across the Delivery Strategies——-170
Table 9.8:- Sub-Components Adequacy Indices——————174
Table 9.9: Adequacy Indices Housing Sub-components across the different Housing Delivery
Strategies ———————–174
Table 9.10: Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Overall Housing Adequacy——-178
Table 9.11: Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in all the Housing Estates–180
Table 9.12: Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the Core Housing Strategy——181
Table 9.13: Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the Turnkey Strategy—-183
Table 9.14: Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the PPP Strategy———184
Table 9.15: Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the Shell Strategy ——-186
Table 9.16: Summary of Result of Factor Analysis on Housing Adequacy across the Strategies
——————–188
Table 10.1 Overall Residential Satisfaction in all the housing estates————193
Table 10.2: Contribution of Housing Attributes to overall Residential Satisfaction—–195
Table 10.3: Satisfaction with Housing Unit Attribute————-196
Table 10.4: Satisfaction with Housing Unit Services————-197
Table 10.5: Satisfaction with location of Neighbourhood Facilities – ———–198
Table 10.6: Satisfaction with Socio-Economic Environment of Housing Estates——-199
Table 10.7: Satisfaction with Management of Housing Estates– ——-200
Table 10.8: Contribution of Housing Attributes to Residential Satisfaction—–204
Table 10.9: Satisfaction Indices of Housing sub-Components———–210
Table 10.10: Satisfaction Indices across Housing Delivery Strategies———–212
Table 10.11:  Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Residential Satisfaction in all the Housing  Estates————————216
Table 10.12: Alternative Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Residential Satisfaction in all  the Housing Estates without housing adequacy as  a predictor————218
Table 10.13: Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in all the Housing Estates- -220
Table 10.14: Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in the Core housing Estates 221
Table 10.15: Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in all Turnkey Housing
Estates—————-223
Table 10.16: Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in the PPP Housing Estate–225
Table10.17: Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in the Shell Housing Estate-227
Table 10.18: Summary of Result of Factor Analysis on Residential Satisfaction across the
Strategies ———————-229
Table 11.1: Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Satisfaction with Life in all the Housing
Estate——————239
Table 11.2: Discriminant Analysis of Satisfaction with life in all the Housing Estates ——–241
Table 11.3: Structure Matrix of Discriminant Analysis of Satisfaction with Life——–242

 LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure 2.1: Map of Ogun State Showing the Local Government Areas———–11
Figure 3.1:  Components of a typical Programme Impact Theory——- 42
Figure 3.2 Basic Logic Model————–42
Figure 3.3: Quality Of Life: A System Model————-81
Figure 4.1: The Theoretical and Conceptual Framework of the study ————90
Figure 6.1: Age Group of Respondents————107
Figure 6.2: Years of Experience of Respondents———-110
Figure 6.3: Organizational Structure of the Ogun State Housing Corporation————111
Figure 6.4: Organizational Structure of the Ogun State Property and Investment Company
(OPIC) and Gateway City Development Company Limited (GCDCL)——–112
Figure 6.5: Organizational Structure of the Ogun Sate Ministry of Housing—–113
Figure 6.6 Adequacy of Organizational Capacity across the Organizations——124
Figure 7.1: Housing Typology———————-132
Figure 7.2: Sizes of Dwelling Units—————-132
Figure 8.1: Age Groups of Respondents——————–150
Figure 8.2: Personal Average Monthly Income (Naira) ———–151
Figure 8.3: Household Sizes—————-152
Figure 8.4: Tenure Types——————-152
Figure 9.1: Individual Housing Adequacy Rating across the Delivery Strategies——–169
Figure 10.1: Residential Satisfaction Across Housing Delivery Strategies——-202
Figure 11.1: Residents’ Satisfaction with Life In public Housing——–234
Figure: 11.2: Satisfaction with life across the different housing delivery Strategies—–235

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS 
Plat 1:  View of the Core Housing Estate—————–21
Plate 2: View of the Media Village, Abeokuta at Commissioning——-23
Plate 3: Typical two-bed room semi-detached house in the Media Village, Abeokuta ———-23
Plate 4: Three Bed room Bungalow in the Presidential Mandate Housing Scheme constructed
with burnt bricks——————–24
Plate 5: Typical Detached 3-bed room bungalow in the OGD-Sparklight Estate, Ibafo———26
Plate 6: View of unoccupied housing units in the OGD-Sparklight Estate, Ibafo——–26
Plate 7: View of unoccupied housing units in the OGD-Sparklight Estate, Ibafo——–27
Plate 8: Occupied Housing Units in the OSHC Estate, Ota—————-28