Over the years there has been a lot of talk about accommodation on farms and somehow it is seen as the problem child of social compliance.  So what do accommodation findings really look like? We decided to do a statistical breakdown:

2 405 findings have been raised on accommodation since 01 April 2020. The total findings on all other requirements raised for this period are 17 673. All types of findings pertaining to accommodation make up 13,6% of all findings, however, the risk-ratings reflect less severe findings overall (Minor and Observation make up 92% of accommodation findings). What is important to note is that these findings also include housing contracts not being adequate, chemical containers found at living quarters, and fire-safety procedures at communal accommodation or accommodation facilities offered/used by labour service providers. Furthermore, it is important to note that the total of these findings does not automatically reflect one finding per producer and that some producers can receive multiple findings on accommodation during one audit if practices deem it necessary. For the period, the findings tallied:

  • 1 624 x Minor
  • 362 x Observation (does not impact risk-rating and no corrective action required)
  • 330 x Major
  • 84 x Recommendations (does not impact risk-rating and no corrective action required)
  • 5 x Critical

Since the majority of findings raised under this category are rated as either Minor (77%) or Observation (15%), producers can still achieve a Platinum status (audit valid for 3 years) if they receive less than 10 findings overall, and no other Major or Critical findings are raised. This essentially means that since 01 April 2020, 92% of all findings related to accommodation did not directly impact a producer’s risk rating, meaning the opportunity still existed to achieve the longest audit validity period of three years.

It is also worthwhile noting that during this period 43 good practices in relation to accommodation were noted during third-party audits. These practices were highlighted as being noteworthy practices that reflect a positive and ‘best practice’ case at a particular farm.

Top 10 Non-compliance Themes:

Actual Finding Descriptions (from most common to least common)


  1. Leaking roofs (including findings on broken ceilings, faulty or exposed electrical wiring in roof/ceiling and roofs not being weatherproof).


contained in 48% of housing findings.
  1. Mould noted inside accommodation facilities (including findings on mould in rooms, kitchens, bathrooms, and ceilings).


contained in 42% of housing findings.
  1. Broken or inadequate toilet facilities (including ineffective pit latrines and unhygienic leaking/faulty sewage systems related to toilets).


contained in 38% of housing findings.
  1. No doors or curtains at toilet or shower/bathing facilities (including broken doors and no doors).


contained in 28% of housing findings.
  1. Safety of occupants at risk due to severe broken infrastructure or structural defaults (including large cracks in walls, exposed electrical wiring at children’s sleeping areas or water sources contaminated due to broken pipes).


contained in 27% of housing findings.
  1. No or inadequate fire-safety equipment at housing facilities.


contained in 26% of housing findings.
  1. No or inadequate drainage system (including sewage exposed to occupants and evidence of hazardous contamination directly into living area).


contained in 26% of housing findings.
  1. Damaged and uneven flooring causing hazards (including holes in floors and exposed structures such as pipes, steel rods etc.).


contained in 20% of housing findings.
  1. Occupants of housing facilities are not aware of emergency or accident procedures (including employees and/or non-employees).


contained in 18% of housing findings.
  1. The housing facilities do not form part of the business health and safety risk-assessments (including no maintenance done since previous audit period, no documented proof of inspections at housing facilities etc.).


contained in 18% of housing findings.


What efforts have been made by SIZA to assist producers with accommodation compliance over the last 3 years?

  • Guideline was updated to assist producers in understanding accommodation requirements more effectively, with best practice examples and guidance.
  • The implementation of ‘Long-term Improvements’ so that producers are not required to spend large financial costs directly following an audit.
  • Accommodation Resolution was issued allowing producers who have spent money on accommodation maintenance and improvements in the 6 months prior to the audit to not receive a finding, and rather only receive an ‘Observation’-rating to remove potential risk-grading change to lower rating.
  • Auditors are trained to group findings together instead of listing housing findings separately. This eliminates the higher number of findings on reports, ensuring a higher audit validity is possible if no other Major or Critical findings are raised under other code requirements.