Uganda Joint Programme Evaluation 2015

UGANDA

JOINT PROGRAMME EVALUATION

Drake Rukundo Maiken Mansfeld Ashanut Okille

Final Report

June 2015

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ACT Action by Churches Together ART Anti-Retroviral Therapy BCC Behaviour Change Communication C&D Cooperation and Development CBMES Community Based Monitoring and Evaluations Systems (CBMES) CBO Community Based Organization CHH Child Headed Household CIPA Community Initiative for the prevention of HIV/AIDS in Uganda COU Church of Uganda CSF Civil Society Fund CSO Civil Society Organization DAC District AIDS Committee DANIDA Danish International Development Agency DCA DanChurchAid DAC District AIDS Committee ELCT Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania FBO Faith Based Organisation GBV Gender Based Violence HTC HIV Testing and counselling HURINET Human Rights Network IEC Information, Education and Communication LWF Lutheran World Federation MARP Most at Risk Population MDG Millennium Development Goal MOH Ministry of Health MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTCT Mother to Child Transmission OVC Orphans and Vulnerable Children PEAP Poverty Eradication Action Plan PLHIV People Living with HIV PMTCT Prevention of Mother to Child Transmission PO Programme Officer POZIDEP Pokot Zonal Integrated Development Programme RACA Rakai Counsellors Association RACOBAO Rakai Community Based AIDS Organization RR Regional Representative SAC Sub county AIDS coordination SASA Start Awareness Support Action SGBV Sexual and Gender Based Violence STI Sexually transmitted infections TEDDO Teso Dioceses Development Office TPO Trans-cultural Psychosocial Organization (Uganda) UAC Uganda AIDS Commission UHRC Uganda Human Rights Commission UNAIDS United Nations AIDS Program UNASO Uganda Network of AIDS Support Organizations USAID United States Agency for International Development VSLA Village Savings and Loans Association

i| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ______i Table of Contents ______ii Key Recommendations for Future Action ______iii Executive Summary ______vi

EVALUATION RATIONALE AND METHODOLOGY ...... 1 ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMMES’ RELEVANCE ...... 4 EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLEMENTATION ...... 10 EFFICIENCY OF THE USE OF RESOURCES ...... 21 DCA APPROACHES AND METHODOLOGIES ...... 27 ASSESSMENT OF DCA PARTNERSHIPS ...... 34 SUSTAINABILITY OF PROGRAMMES RESULTS ...... 38 WAY FORWARD ...... 40

ANNEX: 1 ACTIVE CITIZEN PROGRAMME ...... i ANNEX 2: RIGHT TO FOOD AND HUMANITARIAN ACTION PROGRAMME ...... xvii ANNEX 3: HIV/AIDS AND SEXUAL REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND RIGHTS ...... xxiv

LIST OF INFORMANTS - HIV/AIDS/SRHR PROGRAMME EVALUATION ...... LXI

ii| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Key Recommendations for Future Action

Improve the implementation of DCA approaches and methodologies Overall, DCA through its partners has successfully introduced, applied and demonstrated many positive results from its core development approaches and methodologies such as the Community Based Monitoring and Evaluation Systems (CBMES), Farmer Field Schools (FFS), APFS, Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLA), Start Awareness Support Action (SASA!), and CMDRR. Some of the methodologies applied provide good examples of a ‘RBA in action’ (CBMES; SASA!; VSLA in the form of empowerment). However, whilst methodologies like CBMES and VSLA are highly appreciated and good results have been obtained in a short time they are not all fully understood nor implemented consistently by partners. This can partly be explained by the fact that DCA’s partners work in some of the poorest parts of Uganda, and some of the target populations are amongst the chronically poor. As such, their focus until recently has been more on basic needs for survival. Some partners find that the application of a RBA does not easily give direct tangible results like those in service delivery projects. DCA and its partners also need to be aware of possible political interference and/or disruption of some of the groups created using the CBMES and VSLA methodologies and other groups. yet, political interference is not related to the way DCA has implemented the methodologies, but reflects the competitive political climate and also that politicians have realised that these groups have power in communities.

Strengthen partnerships Areas that could be improved in relation to the partnership are how to better foster collaborative learning, working in consortia, and working towards a more ‘equal’ relationship with all partners. More capacity needs to be built to support implementation of methodologies, monitoring and evaluation, targeting and involvement of target groups in programming, M&E and fundraising. While training is conducted, DCA should seek to minimize unnecessary overlap in trainings by better coordination among ACT/other development partners, DCA should also follow-up training in certain methodologies to assess technical gaps that need to be addressed from time to time. In addition, more work is required to explain the partnership policy’s expectations especially to the new partners and also ensure appreciation within all staff at DCA GLRO. Communication between DCA and partners could be strengthened by making sure that bilateral annual meetings are held and documented. DCA should continue with the partner platforms and ‘exposure visits’ to increase synergy, mutual learning and coordination. An annual DCA partner handbook presenting brief sections on partner organisations was mentioned as a way to increase visibility and coordination. The management of consortium may be improved by having more regular meetings between implementing partners, as can the linkages between national organizations working with community/district based organizations under the DCA ‘umbrella’.

Improve synergies The evaluation recommends increasing awareness within DCA on other current and related projects of their partners. In addition, it is recommended for DCA to support and encourage partner organisations to map and interact with organisations in the same district implementing related projects. Partners (with DCA oversight) should further be encouraged to register with their respective district NGO forums. While a lot of work has been done to ensure synergies between partners and within the ACT Forum Uganda, the evaluation notes that DCA could do more to identify and reduce unnecessary overlaps between the DCA and ACT partners in a iii| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

more collaborative fashion, while at the same time take more benefit of projects implemented in the same districts. Joint monitoring trips, joint advocacy activities and joint projects between ACT international partners have recently been introduced and such efforts should be sustained and scaled up where possible. The impact of advocacy at local level could potentially increase if areas of implementation (district and sub county level) were overlapping to a higher extent than what is currently the situation and a strong link to national level partners/organisations is ensured. Furthermore a visual mapping of ACT projects throughout the entire country could possibly be developed.

Increase value for money The evaluation found that DCA could increase value for money could by: Improving synergies and selecting strategic partner, minimising overlaps with ACT partners, having longer project spans, deepening interventions with larger presence in fewer districts; focusing to a higher extent on quality; addressing identified thematic gaps; increase dialogue between project managers and duty bearers; increasing the inclusion of rights holders in programme/project design; implementing specific targeting of key actors/ vulnerable/high risk populations; buying in bulk; utilizing to higher extent change agents such as religious leaders; and introducing the use of IT technology.

Mainstream SRHR in the new DCA country strategy As DCA HQ has decided to close the HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme type by end of 2016 in all countries, DCA GLRO should ensure that SRHR/HIV aspects be integrated in the new country programme for Uganda. Mainstreaming components for future DCA country programme include: Continuing SASA activism to increase the empowerment and participation of women and shifting the power balance in communities; Having training modular on HIV/SRHR for other groups (VSLA, CBMES etc.); Improving the targeting mechanism of members of groups; Maintaining the monitoring of the accessibility and quality of SRHR services for women and girls as part of the CBMES monitoring tool; Supporting women councilors to pass a bye-law regarding the need to protect SRHR; Supporting partners to develop a common advocacy agenda of human rights abuses related to SRHR and SGBV in particular.

Ensure evidence based programming It is strongly recommended for DCA GLRO to initiate further strategic collaborations with established research institutions that are present also in Uganda. Such collaboration would be a clear asset for DCA in terms of being able to document specific impact of projects (including ensuring quality of baseline studies), hereby to significantly improve fundraising potentials and national advocacy and by delivering data and results from the field on less well-documented approaches and interventions, DCA GLRO will contribute directly at global level to fight extreme inequality, save lives and build resilient communities as spelled out in the DCA global strategy 2015 - 2022. Embrace new innovations and private sector partnerships in the country programme DCA is recommended to intensify the sharing of knowledge on innovative approaches/ elements among partners, ACT alliance members and other organisations in DCA’s network. For the Right to Food and Humanitarian Action micro-scale irrigation pumps can turn around farming in dry spells to save crops from unpredictable weather changes. For VSLA, APFS/FFS and CBMES, SMS platform can be used to pass on messages on input supply, prices and host of market information. The use of mobile wallet is another intervention that DCA could look closer at in relation to its VSLA groups. There are opportunities to benefit from business partnership with private sector entities who could provide inputs in bulk rather than individual iv| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

purchases which attract high transaction costs). DCA can also invest in an M&E system to ease reporting and projects monitoring under the new county programme, an example could be MESURE (see www.technobraingroup.com)

Move forward with strategic partners DCA should consider reducing the current partnership portfolio, while establishing new and more strategic partnerships that can result in an increased impact. While this is done it is imperative that DCA ensures a proper exit strategy with partners whom DCA will discontinue the partnership. Suggested criteria for the compiled future DCA partnership portfolio include: partners with a strong thematic expertise in line with the new DCA GLRO country strategy themes and shared values; those that will have approaches and interventions that relate/overlap with other DCA partners; and some partners should have an influential and consistent national presence. DCA should consider initiating a strategic collaboration with an established research institution in order to ensure high quality baselines studies/ evaluations for projects/programmes, and to document specific impact of projects not least as a means to support future fundraising potentials. DCA should further consider partnership with a media organisation or linking partner organisations to media organisations to enhance their visibility as well as have more effective communication strategies and media engagement.The current work with faith based organisations could be scaled up in particular with regards to networks at district/regional levels. There are specific interventions that will also need a partner who can contribute with legal aid and justice, and a network of paralegals. In addition, in order to continue to strengthen the capacity of civil society in the Karamoja and Teso regions, DCA should continue to facilitate collaboration between the national partners and district based CSOs, as part of capacity building and enhancing the profile of the district based CSOs. In addition, DCA should continue to target and strengthen the capacity of district based CSOs that have a wide reach and have the potential to be influential in their regions.

Intensify geographical focus Deepening of interventions at district level in current areas of operation is considered key to improving synergy and impact. While expanding the presence in current intervention districts (i.e. presence in more sub counties with several projects, not necessarily more districts in the same regions), DCA may also seek involvement in a new geographical regions in order to meet needs there, and in order not to become too vulnerable to changing donor priorities, potential conflicts or extreme weather in one corner of Uganda. DCA could consider as a ‘niche’ in the future to focus on empowering citizens in post-conflict areas in Uganda to transition from being recipients of hand outs, to citizens that are aware of their rights and have the capacity to engage with duty bearers for effective service delivery and fulfilment of their rights. DCA has the advantage of utilising flexible funds from its development partners to test out some approaches in other parts of Uganda. Such areas could include Northern Uganda and West Nile whose conditions are similar.

v| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Executive Summary

At the start of 2015, DanChurchAid (DCA) commissioned a joint evaluation for its three programmes in Uganda namely: Active Citizenship; Right to Food and Humanitarian Action as well as HIV/AIDS/Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights (HIV/AIDS/SRHR). This report is an output of this joint evaluation conducted in Uganda between February and April 2015.

Programmes’ Relevance The evaluation deduced that all the three programmes were, to a large extent, appropriately designed to address the structural causes of rights violations, empower citizens and vulnerabilities of rights holders. The DCA programmes are in line with district and national development plans as well as international policies and human rights instruments, and contribute to the strategic goals of DCA, including programme specific goals and goals of the Rights Based Approach and Gender equality as established in the international strategy. The choice of geographical focus (Teso, Karamoja and central and mid-western Uganda) was evaluated as highly relevant because these are some of the poorest parts of Uganda, have been affected by conflict and/ or severely affected by HIV/AIDS/SGBV.

Effectiveness of DCA Approaches and Methodologies Inasmuch as the evaluation took place while programmes had not yet come to a close (most of the projects within the programmes are ending in 2016), the evaluation deduced that implementation was on track and all general programme objectives are on track and most likely to be met within the timeframe. However some specific targets and indicators under some objectives remain behind schedule or could not be assessed due to lack of baseline data.

Within a short period (since 2011/2012) DCA, working through partners, has been successful in applying and demonstrating positive results from its core approaches and methodologies such as CBMES, VSLA, FFS, APFS, DRR, and SASA. It is the assessment of the evaluation that implementing partners are on the right track but more still needs to be done.

The Rights Based Approach (RBA) has empowered rights-holders including specific empowerment and influence/voice of women as monitors, CBOs, political leaders, and at household level. However a few partners still remain inclined to the needs based approach (that they were often used to) though they view the transition to RBA as worthwhile. The evaluation specifically noted the enhanced dialogue between rights-holders and relevant moral and legal duty bearers particularly at district and sub-county level which in many instances fostered better and more respectful relationships. Accountability of duty bearers has also increased as a result of increased community based advocacy, yet it is important to emphasise that greater accountability and responsiveness of duty bearers at district and national level will be required. Specific reference is the need for duty bearers’ better responsiveness to issues raised by CBMES monitors in their advocacy work at the grassroots.

Some legal gaps and barriers impedes the effectiveness of DCA programmes because they are unsupportive of the efforts to uphold the fundamental human rights and justice. Examples at national level include the HIV Prevention and Control bill; Furthermore, DCA has only to a very limited extent been working with legal support systems (e.g. para-legal structures or community level law enforcement mechanisms, supporting court cases, etc), which should be considered a

vi| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

cornerstone of the RBA. Such legal aspects are all crucial to address to a higher extent in the new DCA country programme. In order to enhance relevance and strengthen advocacy at the district level, it is necessary that partners (with DCA oversight) register with their respective district NGO forums in the districts they operate and utilise this as a dialogue platform. This could serve as a feed-in-loop for the grassroots work done by CBMES monitors through their representation by the district NGO forum in district councils.

Efficiency in attaining programme results The implementation of DCA programmes was considered by this evaluation as overall cost- effective in delivery of expected results. In terms of the utilisation of resources, financial resources to implement were relatively adequate. DCA has to a high extent used low cost interventions with high sustainability potential and some DCA partners were implementing own projects that were linked already to what DCA was implementing which most probably have increased efficiency. Some issues of late provision of inputs by partners was reported (seeds etc.) which have hampered efficiency. The evaluation found a large absorptive capacity among partners but also a large spread in the budgeting for salaries and M&E. Some projects were found to have set rather too ambitious targets with emphasis of ‘quantity’ rather than ‘quality’. Most partners demonstrated adherence to DCA strategies in utilisation and reporting against received financial resources with little variations to the contrary, and DCA financial management systems and procedures were considered satisfactory in almost all instances, except for some few procurement issues of partner organisations.

Assessment of DCA Partnerships The partnership approach by DCA has proved both efficient and effective in realization of DCA targets under these programmes. DCA was proactive in building needed capacities for partners to respond to implementation needs in critical aspects. The evaluation applauds the elaboration of the partnership policy for DCA partners which now needs to be fully implemented. The evaluation found that current partners conform to the main criteria of partnerships as described in the DCA partnership policy.

Majority of partners felt that there is an open dialogue, mutual accountability between them and DCA and that DCA gave their organizations added value aside from providing funds to implement projects. Many partners acknowledged the capacity building by DCA as well as the flexibility of DCA, and found that unique. However, the survey findings also pointed out that some partners felt that they did not have the flexibility to use their own methods of work to produce the expected results under the DCA supported programmes because they were required to strictly adhere to the methods outlined in their project proposals. Most partners felt that their network had been enhanced since partnership with DCA was initiated and a vast majority found the partner platforms very useful and very unique to DCA. Mixed replies were noted in terms of the extent to which the relationship with DCA was ’equal’ (an equal and ‘horizontal’ relationship where you view yourself as an equal partner with DCA). This, however, depended much on the particular DCA staff with whom a respective partners was engaged and the length of the history of the partnership. Partners with a longer history with DCA seemed to have the most positive and ‘equal’ views of the partnership.

DCA added value When informants (partners and DCA staff) were asked into the added value of DCA in relation to changes incurred throughout the programmes, the 3 following topics was mentioned vii| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

repeatedly: 1. RBA in action (CBMES; SASA! etc.); 2. Influence through faith based organisations/networks and 3. The DCA Partnership approach.

Sustainability By and large, most elements of the programme are considered sustainable, in particular because of the applied methodologies. Citizens have been empowered and are to a higher extent claiming and monitoring to ensure the demand for rights to the services they deserve get the needed response from duty bearers. To sustain results, there has to be a broader focus on self-reliance and emphasis on the social advantages of being a monitor/volunteer in a group, such as recognition in the community and possible ‘career’ opportunities. DCA is moving towards strategic investments and provision of inputs will end. This will require that groups under APFS/FFS are re-oriented to include critical aspects including bulk seed purchase and farmer-saved seed to be self-reliant in that regard.

Way forward and recommendations (please refer to previous section on Key Recommendations for Future Action)

viii| DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

1 EVALUATION RATIONALE AND METHODOLOGY

1.1 About the Joint Programmes

anChurchAid(DCA) is implementing three thematic programmes with the aim of contributing to the reduction of inequalities and poverty for women and men in Uganda. D These include: Active Citizenship (2012-2016); HIV/AIDS and Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights Programme (2011-2015) and the Right to Food and Humanitarian Action (2012-2016) whose broad focus is described below: a) Active Citizenship Programme focuses on citizen participation and accountable governance through the enhancement of the right to participation of women and other discriminated groups in Karamoja and Teso in ensuring the democratic space for holistic citizen participation. DCA has also strengthened partner organizations to actively play their roles in contributing to this endeavor. b) Right to Food and Humanitarian Action Programme focuses on supporting sustainable access to food and adequate nutrition through production, increased purchasing power, entitlements and enhanced resilience. The program is being implemented in Karamoja and Teso to support marginalised people so that they are increasingly capable of claiming and upholding their right to food and livelihood sustainability. In as far as humanitarian action is concerned; DCA has worked with Lutheran World Federation (LWF) to respond to the needs of refugees from Democratic Republic of Congo (in Rwamwanja settlement) and South Sudan refugees in Adjumani. DCA has also worked with ACT Alliance to respond to the needs of displaced people within the country under the humanitarian action. c) The HIV/AIDS and Sexual Reproductive Health Programme is targeted at advancing a rights based approach to prevent and mitigate the impact of HIV and AIDS. Specifically the programme has worked with duty bearers as well as vulnerable rights holders, especially people living with HIV, young women, girls and fishermen in poor fishing and pastoralist’s communities in the programme area to enable them to claim and fulfill their sexual and reproductive health rights resulting in increased protection from HIV and its impacts.

1.2 Evaluation Rationale The joint programme evaluation has been undertaken to: (a) carry out a consolidated evaluation of DCA Great Lakes Regional Office’s current thematic programmes, (i.e. Active Citizenship, Right to Food and Humanitarian Action and HIV and AIDS); (b) utilize the findings, conclusions and recommendations to provide substantial guidance to the design of the future Uganda country programme; and (c) to have those findings feed into the Global Report and to DCA organizational learning. The evaluation notes that the programmes have not yet come to an end (Active Citizenship is 2012-2016; Right to Food is 2012-2016 and HIV/AIDS/SRHR is 2011- 2015). The evaluation can thus not be regarded as a classic final evaluation but a learning assessment of the functionality of the current methodologies and approaches towards the

1 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

likelihood of achieving initially contextualized programme objectives. More importantly, undertaking this process rather ‘pre-maturely’ was to allow for timely entry of recommendations from the evaluation for the design of the planned DCA Uganda country programme that begins on January 1, 2016.

1.3 Methodology The evaluation team adopted a collaborative learning and summative evaluation approach using and interplay of the OECD-DAC criteria and the ‘Most Significant Change’ technique to assess performance and suggest recommendations for going forward. The evaluation laid a strong focus on the assessment of DCA partnerships, an assessment of the functionality of the approach and methodologies in delivery of project results. After an elaboration of an inception report, the consultants were joined by project staff of DCA and together made field visits in Midwestern Uganda, central and eastern Uganda as well as in North eastern districts of Karamoja. Partners not in the sample were reached using an online survey and their reports analysed as part of this evaluation. Using a mixed methods approach both qualitative and quantitative data are being analysed and presented in this evaluation report. The following elements shaped our criteria for selecting the methodology for data collection: i. Analysis of national policies, laws and regulations related to the programme themes as well as project documents to understand the projects contexts, program strategies and logical frameworks as well the project value (in terms of the financial investments); ii. Design of study tools and questionnaires that were used to collect information from duty bearers, rights holders, project officials in face-to-face interviews and focus group discussions; iii. On-line anonymous survey for partners to comment on various aspects of the evaluation and their partnership with DCA; iv. Protracted selection of respondents who possessed the highest possibility of providing information/evidence needed for this evaluation include rights-holders and duty bearers; v. Use of observation, photography and case studies to demonstrate and exemplify information provided by this report; vi. Round-table discussion with DCA partners; meeting with ACT partners; vii. Validation workshop with all partners to de-brief them on findings and solicit their verification of early findings. To ensure validity of the findings the evaluation report will undergo two levels of reviews: first this internal draft report that will be commented upon by DCA technical staff and later a revised draft that will be shared with partners for comment before a final report is submitted.

1.4 Evaluation limitations and how they were mitigated Partners and DCA provided the evaluation team with required data, and the process was well facilitated. Yet, lack of baseline data at programme level presents the greatest limitation for this evaluation. While there were baselines for some projects, no baselines at programme level had been conducted. The lack of baseline data at programme level has in some instances meant that specific indicators of success could not be measured against the starting point (e.g. prevalence of FGM in target areas). Furthermore the lack of a control scenario is also absent and thus complicates the possible influence of other (non-DCA) projects and programmes in the same district/sub-county. However, this was mitigated in some of the programmes by contextual analyses, and some project baselines that were carried out by individual partners. The consultants depended on such contextual studies and analyses before the programmes began, analyses of project baselines, information from key stakeholders and key documents to assess progress since the start of programmes. The assessment of the functionality of approaches and

2 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

methodologies and the quality of DCA partnership with DCA’s partners became the core part of the evaluation at the same time allowing consultants to maximize the benefits of using the most significant change technique. Secondly, given time constraints, it would not have been possible to meet all partners so consultants sent out an on-line questionnaire which enabled the completion of the assessment of DCA partnerships with them. However, some partners were slow in responding to the on-line survey and the response rate was low (11/20) despite several reminders. This was mitigated by corroborating the information from the surveys with qualitative data from various meetings with partners.

3 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

2 ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMMES’ RELEVANCE

2.1 Relevance of Programmes’ Design The DCA programmes were generally appropriately designed to address the structural causes of rights violations, and vulnerabilities of rights holders and contribute to the strategic goals of DCA, including programme specific goals and goals of the Rights Based Approach and Gender equality as established in the DCA international strategy. Below is a summary of the relevance of each the three programmes followed by some commonalities across the three programmes.

Active citizenship DCA’s active citizenship programme responds to key governance challenges of accountability and corruption in Uganda, and its implications on service delivery and human rights at national and local level. The programme is particularly relevant because it focuses on building civic awareness and action at local level for increased transparency and accountability for service delivery, respect for human rights and development. The range of partners (both local level and national) have actions that align to DCA overall goal and objectives, and from evidence seen so far, the partner interventions are able to attain some results in relation to improved accountability and service delivery.

Right to food The programme rightly identified food security as a core problem facing communities in Teso and Karamoja. . However some aspects of programme design could have been done better. For instance, the omission of the livestock aspects under APFS in Karamoja by the implementing partner (and an instance that DCA did not properly follow up) compromised impact in that regard. Overall the programme’s design was sufficient to spur the programmes to their intended objectives.

Humanitarian action DCA has responded accurately to meet the needs of refugees, and partners in the Rwamwanja refugee settlement appreciated DCA especially for including the aspects of working with the host communities. This is something they felt was highly relevant and an eye-opener in future intervention designs under humanitarian action by government, UNHCR and other development partners.

HIV/AIDS/SRHR Addressing SGBV as part of an HIV prevention programme is a major strength of the DCA HIV/SRHR programme and considering the global shift of looking at the field of HIV prevention and care more broadly, DCA have also managed to operationalise SRHR components within their original HIV/AIDS programme. However, in a Uganda context and considering DCA’s approaches and mandate, the consultants find that it would have been relevant to address elimination of mother to child transmission (eMTCT) from an advocacy and rights based perspective to a larger extent that what has so far been conducted under this programme. Furthermore, increasing integration of SRHR within existing HIV/AIDS projects will improve relevance of the programme in the Uganda context. Furthermore, important legal instruments highly contested in the country during the programme period were not all addressed at sufficient

4 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

scale in the programmes, (e.g. anti-homosexuality law, HIV/AIDS prevention and control bill) and legal support in the programme is very limited.

2.2 Relevance of the three programmes’ approaches and methodologies The three DCA programmes target structural causes of rights violations and are considered highly relevant to the current context. The DCA GI-RBA and applied methodologies such as CBMES, VSLA, DRR, APFS/FFS, and SASA!, etc. are highly relevant methods to address the identified structural causes of rights violations. All the three programmes allowed for partners to utilise the core methodologies and apply them to specific concerns of citizens in their target area. As these approaches and methods improve so will their relevance and adaption, since learning and doing is a gradual process. Overall organization of rights holders in community groups was very relevant for collective learning and now forms a basis for eventual networking and spreading availability, access and adequacy to critical services that support livelihoods and advocacy in the next Uganda country programme.

2.3 Alignment to International, National and District Policies The programmes are in line with aspirations of most district development plans, Uganda’s Vision 2040, the National Development Plan (NDP 2010-2015), the National Strategic Plan for HIV/AIDS 2011/12-2014/15 as well as international policies such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The programmes are further aligned with human rights instruments and principles to which Uganda is a signatory: Universal Declaration on Human Rights; Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women; Convention on the Rights of the Child; International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights. Advocacy interventions at national level aim to link issues from the grassroots to the national policy advocacy. Whilst some of the partners, like ACCU, HURINET, UWONET and UDN have been able to engage national institutions like the National Medical Stores, the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, the Ministry of Agriculture and Finance, the Uganda Human Rights Commission, the Uganda Police force, the Ministry of Local Government, as well as Parliament. At district level, the female district councillors trained and supported by UWONET have been able to influence the formulation of byelaws prohibiting Domestic Violence in Napak and Moroto districts. However, more could be done by UWONET to ensure that lessons and results from implementation of the training and other interventions at the grassroots feed into the dialogue and advocacy to improve district and national policy and legislative agenda. 2.4 Geographic focus Overall the programme strategies have correctly identified the most vulnerable and at-risk rights holders. Implementing the programmes in Teso, Karamoja and mid-western and Central Uganda was also considered highly relevant to the current geographic context since this is where the most deserving and vulnerable people reside (higher poverty rates, high prevalence of HIV etc.)

2.5 Synergy Synergies with DCA projects

5 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Several partners mentioned that the partner platforms have greatly facilitated increased knowledge on other projects within DCA. This in turn has allowed for exchange of experiences and taking up new practices and methodologies (CBMES, VSLA, SASA! etc.). More efforts have been introduced by DCA under the time period of evaluation to integrate projects under different DCA programmes reaching the same districts/ sub-counties and also to introduce elements from one programme into other programmes (kitchen gardens for PLHIV etc.; CBMES, VSLA etc.).

However, synergy in the form of advocacy at district or national level as a result of DCA partners joining hands and speaking with one voice were not as significant in the programmes. This may be related to the fact that implementation in the same district and specifically at sub county level of different projects is still relatively scarce (see Table 1, Geographical Overlaps, DCA programmes.) The impact of advocacy at local level could potentially increase if areas of implementation (district and sub county level) were overlapping to a higher extent than what is currently the situation. One example is Katakwi district where both PT1 and PT4 projects are implemented but with little overlap in sub-counties and limited collaboration across the projects (data from field visit). Introducing national level partners such as UNASO is a very relevant initiative to increase advocacy in relation to HIV/AIDS/SRHR at different levels, including at national level and it is very likely that this approach will achieve synergies between projects within the HIV programme. Under the active citizenship programme, deliberate effort was made to ‘match’ partners with relevant policy advocacy experience and expertise at national level, to district level partners. For instance HURINET was linked to district based partners TEDDO and MONARLIP to simplify and provide training in key legislation related to human rights, corruption and governance.1 HURINET was also able to work with DCA district based partners on advocacy for changes in now passed Biotechnology and Bio-Safety Bill, which among others included contentious issues related to use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).

Synergies with projects outside DCA The first step of creating synergies is awareness of projects implemented in the same district and sub-county. Some partner organisations are implementing related projects in the same districts and sub-counties however funded by other development partners than DCA. In such instances it was noted that implementing partners are actively trying to increase synergies, but more should be done in terms of awareness within DCA on other current and related projects of their partners. In addition, active dialogue should be promoted to increase synergy at partner level. It is recommended for DCA to support and encourage partner organisations to map and interact with organisations in the same district implementing related projects. Furthermore, partners (with DCA oversight) should be encouraged to register with their respective district NGO forums to increase synergy.

Table 1. Geographical Overlaps, DCA programmes

Districts Partner and programme Sub-counties (overlapping sub-counties in type in the district bold) Abim UWONET PT1 Operate in district council Amudat COPASCO PT3 all subcounties advocacy ULA/ C&D PT3 Loroo, Katabok, Amudat

1 Legislation included the Public Order Management Act (POMA), Interception of Communication, local government act, Anti Terrorism Act, Access to Information Act and its Regulations and the Draft Civic Education Policy of Uganda 2012

6 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Districts Partner and programme Sub-counties (overlapping sub-counties in type in the district bold) C&D/ HURINET PT4 Loroo, Amudat POZIDEP/REACH PT4 Loroo,Alakas, Kapetawoi, Jumbe, Karita , Amudat UNASO PT4 Advocacy, districtlevel

Amuria COU TEDDO PT1 Morungatuny, Orungo, Wera, Abarlela; Acowa UWONET PT1 Operate in district council SOCADIDO PT3 Obalanga UNASO PT4 Advocacy, districtlevel Kaberamaido COU TEDDO PT4 Otoboi, Bululu, Ochero, Kubululu UNASO PT4 Advocacy, district level

Kamwengye LWF Hum. Action Kamwengye (Rwamwanja)

Katakwi TPO PT4 Magoro COU TEDDO PT1 Ngariam, Ongongoja, Usuk, Katakwi, Magoro UDN PT1 Toroma, Omodoi, Acowa UWONET PT1 Operate in district council UNASO PT4 Advocacy, district level LWF PT 3 Kotido UJCC PT1 Panyangara, Kotido, Kacheri

Lyantonde RACOBAO PT4 Kinuka, Mpudde, Kasagama,Lyantonde town council UNASO PT4 Advocacy, district level + Kinuka, Mpudde, Ksagama, Lyantonde town council Moroto MONARLIP PT1 Rupa, Nadunget UDN PT1 Rupa, Nadunget UJCC PT1 Acholi-inn, Tapac UWONET PT1 Operate in district council C&D/ HURINET PT4 Tapacand Katikikile UNASO PT4 Advocacy, district level Nakapiripirit ACCU PT1 Nabilatuk UWONET PT1 Operate in district council ULA/ C&D PT3 Nakapiripirit T/c Moruita,Lolachat C&D/ HURINET PT4 Mourita and Town Council UNASO PT4 Advocacy, district level Napak MONARLIP PT1 Ngoleriet UDN PT1 Ngoleriet ACCU PT1 Ngoleriet UWONET PT1 Operate in district council ULA/C&D PT3 Lorengecora, Ngoleriet UNASO PT4 Advocacy, district level Pokot, Kenya COPASCO PT3 all subcounties

Rakai RACA PT4 Lwamagwa, Rakai town, Dwaniro, Lwanda,Rwamgwa, ByakaBanda CIPA PT4 CIPA: Kyebe UNASO PT4 Advocacy, district level + Rwamgwa,Dwaniro, Kyebe,lwanda, Byakabanda Rwamanja Refugee settlement (covering many subcounties in designated area provided by Government in west of Kyegegwa district) NATIONAL level HURINET PT1 UNASO PT4

7 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Synergies within ACT Uganda Forum

DCA has been a very active member in the ACT Uganda Forum, and this was acknowledged and repeatedly mentioned in meetings with ACT partners. DCA has been instrumental in efforts to increase synergies and develop common areas of intervention amongst ACT partners.

The evaluation found that while DCA involvement at national level is strong, knowledge of projects funded by other ACT members in the same district are not always known by the DCA partner organisations at district level (as mentioned to the evaluation at the ACT Forum roundtable discussion; and field visits).

Communication gaps are also still present between funding/international partners within the ACT alliance concerning capacity building of partners, where overlapping capacity strengthening initiatives of the same implementing partner have been reported as plentiful (ACT dialogue meeting). Joint monitoring trips and increased dialogue between ACT international partners with same partner organisations have already been introduced and it is recommended to scale up this approach. Furthermore a visual mapping of ACT projects throughout the country could possibly be uploaded and maintained through the ACT forum Uganda at a potential future ACT Uganda country subpage.

District based coordination meetings within ACT may also enhance collaboration and synergy between ACT member organisations at district level however the feasibility of this should be further investigated. The recent employment of an advocacy officer within ACT, hosted by DCA, is an important step to facilitate the current gap between advances at local level advocacy to national level. Concrete results are yet to be seen because of the newness of this employment, however a shared ACT advocacy strategy is now in place and the first joint ACT Uganda project, a climate change advocacy project, has been funded with external resources.

2.6 How did rights holders contribute to the development of the programmes/projects The extent to which rights holders have contributed to the development of the programme and its projects differs from project to project. Some organizations made use of baseline surveys, and others reported very honestly that they only to a limited extent had included rights holders in the design of their projects. In some cases it was clear through conversations in the field that dialogue with rights holders had not been sufficient because activities were not specifically tailored to the views and preferences of the rights holders.

2.7 Evidence based approach to programming and documentation The application of certain evidence based methodologies (SASA!2, VSLA3, FFS etc) is a major advantage of DCA programming and unique for DCA compared to many other NGOs. Yet, the evaluation found that many baseline studies and project evaluations performed within the DCA programmes suffer from inferior quality (e.g. questionnaire from 20 household to represent an entire population in a sub county). Furthermore, in some instances partner staff did not have the capacity to judge what represents a high quality baseline study. Furthermore, practice of having a database of consultants and getting only one quote for a tender was reported during interviews with partner organizations. There is also a gap in data collection analysis and storage

2Start Awareness Support Action! 3 Megan Gash & Kathleen Odell. The Evidence-Based Story of Savings Groups: A Synthesis of Seven Randomized Control Trials. Oct 2013

8 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

of relevant information at some partner organizations, which could ease reporting and increase the correctness of data. 2.8 Thematic gaps The link to legal support (paralegals) was generally missing in all programmes. The value of some indicators were questionable and it is recommended that in the design of the country programme more investment is laid on the programme design not to miss critical intervention aspects (livestock, legal support etc.) and ensure development of SMART indicators.

9 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

3 EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Overall, the evaluation noted that DCA and their implementing partners are on the right track and on progress to meet the programme objectives. Much has been accomplished over a short time. It is early to deduce the level of impact since projects have been implemented for only a couple of years. However, analysis of most project reports showed that the immediate objectives of the three DCA programmes have been met/ or are likely to be reached by the end of the programmes. However there are some specific indicators which are likely not to be achieved within the timeframe, or which could not be measured due to lack of baseline data. Below is an extract of the main issues related to effectiveness for each programme type presented per programme objective.

3.1 Active Citizenship Programme

Overall, the Active Citizenship programme has been able to demonstrate attainment of key results, particularly at district level. Progress on policy making at national level is slow, and influenced by a number of political, social and economic factors, that will take a longer time ( beyond the two year implementation period) for CSOs to influence. Below is specific assessment of progress per planned objective:

Objective 1: Policy, legal and administrative frameworks are reformed to further electoral accountability and the political participation of women and other excluded groups

Overall, policy and legislative change at national level has been slow, mainly because the legislative agenda tends to be determined by political and economic factors that may be beyond the control of the programme. However, partners have taken up invited spaces and positioned themselves for engagement with key institutions. On a positive note, partner capacities improved (or in process) to some extent and there is better and more respectful relationships between CSOs and duty bearers for instance through participation in invited spaces and created spaces. Specifically, partners at national level, HURINET, UJCC, ACCU and UWONET have maintained a consistent presence, engagement and relationship with Parliament on their various legislative agendas. UJCC in particular organized and conducted a meeting in each of the 12 sub-counties of Kotido and Moroto between 15-20 December, 2014 for the purpose of giving the participants the opportunity to discuss and make proposals on electoral and policy reforms. Participants made their proposal and recommendations that UJCC is using for its advocacy on electoral reforms. HURINET has also been consistent in its engagement with the UHRC and the UPF on the situation of human rights. The policy documents developed by UWONET on women’s leadership influenced national policy development i.e. drafting of proposals for Constitutional amendments from a gender perspective and the women’s manifesto 2016-2021.

10 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

number of interventions including media campaign using audio visuals (video) and songs by renowned local artists’4 to enhance civic responsiveness among the rights holders to perform their right to participate in elections. It is difficult to measure the impact of such interventions since the elections will be held in 2016, however, the absence of baseline also makes it difficult to fully understand factors that influence citizens’ participation in electoral processes, hence creating some uncertainty about the effectiveness of the interventions (messaging).

Also UWONET jointly with FOWODE and other organisation under the Women’s Democracy Group5 a consortium of women organisations jointly organised to strengthen grassroots women networking organisations and enhancing the leadership roles of women through mobilisation, civic education, mentorship of young women leadership and also developing a mechanism to enable local women to hold the elected women leaders in higher decision making positions accountable. There is evidence that these women leaders have been active, supported the enactment of bye-laws and been able to influence the agenda of council meetings to incorporate issues related to women’s rights and gender equality. However, the challenge remains harnessing the results so far and using them to foster wider change/shifts in structural causes of gender equality and discrimination against women.

Objective 2: Increased participation and influence of marginalised rights holders, particularly women and other excluded groups in Karamoja and Teso, within the social, political and economic decision-making processes

DCA has been successful in using the Rights Based Approach and CBMES to empower communities and ensure increased awareness creation and their active engagement in monitoring service delivery and demanding for quality service delivery, as well as more transparent and accountable use of public resources. Specifically, empowerment can be attributed to the influence/voice of women and men as monitors in CBMES groups. These groups have in turn been able to influence citizens’ attitudes towards civic action, and in so doing have caught the attention of community based leaders and local political leaders. However, there is still much to do to ensure the shift from the dialogues to action that is indicative of greater accountability and responsiveness of duty bearers. More needs to be done to support the work being done by CBMES whose membership needs training in some critical aspects including report writing, community mobilization and issues-response planning, and advocacy. In addition, partner activities should also seek ensure that the wider citizenry are aware of their rights and understand the need to be more actively engaged in governance processes, including monitoring and seeking accountability for quality service delivery. In so doing, monitoring the quality of service delivery would cease to be a ‘job’ for the community monitors only, and instead become a community owned initiative. Attaining this will require the community monitors, who wield significant influence (power) to exercise accountable leadership and regularly provide feedback and promote participation of the communities that selected them.

Specific examples of partners implementing the CBMES and through this creating the opportunities for participation and influence include ACCU’s interventions during which they fostered collaboration between rights holders and duty bearers, and with support from the CDO and ACDO offices, all community monitors in Napak (25) and Nakapiripirit (26) were involved in

4 http://www.busiweek.com/index1.php?Ctp=2&pI=398&pLv=3&srI=65&spI=103&cI=22 5 Women’s Democracy Group (WDG) is a consortium of five women organizations comprising of Uganda Women’s Network (UWONET), Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE), Women’s Democracy Network-Uganda Chapter (WDN-U); Action for Development (ACFODE) and Centre for Women in Governance (CEWIGO).

11 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

planning and budgeting at the Village, Parish and sub county levels. 4 monitors participated in the district planning conference. 2 budgetary plans were taken up to the district level and these include the rehabilitation of the road leading to Health Centre IV Napak as well as the renovation of Nabilatuk HC 1V. UDN’s work in Napak, Moroto, Nakapriripit enabled communities to generate reports that identified gaps and challenges relating to access, availability and quality of services received by marginalized groups like women, the elderly, youth, people living with disabilities (PLWDs), people living with HIV/AIDS. Between January and December 2014, a total of 197 service delivery and accountability concerns were raised by communities/ CBOs/ Community Based Monitors and submitted to duty bearers at Sub County and district level, out of which 48 commitments were made by the relevant authorities6. According to UDN reports, follow-up meetings were made about the cases raised in Karamoja and Teso Sub region. This has motivated marginalized groups of men and women, to be even more involved in the monitoring work.

Reports from TEDDO state that 900 community representatives of vulnerable groups (PHAS, PWDS, Women, youth) were identified for the training as community based monitors and they gained skills and knowledge that enabled them engage in monitoring of government programs like CDD, primary health care, Rural feeder road, NUSAFII among others and as a result, there is an increase engagement of citizens in monitoring of government programs and holding the duty bearers to account.7 The sensitization also provided a platform for the wider community to gain skills and knowledge on governance processes and knowledge on existing government programs within their locality. The reports further state that through the dialogue meetings, duty bearers are tasked to explain for example budgeting processes and procedures of selecting beneficiaries of certain projects like National Agricultural Advisory and Development Services (NAADS), NUSAF II, Community Driven Development (CDD), restocking etc. “In Orungo and Morungatuny for example duty bearers were held to explain how beneficiaries of the restocking program were selected because vulnerable persons did not actually benefit, which was against the guidelines provided by the Office of the Prime Minister. This made the Local government officials in liaison with OPM to organize a Baaraza meeting to explain to the people what really happened. From the training conducted by UWONET, some CSOs have written proposals and received funding to implement projects. For example, KonyPaco women’s group together with Abim Community United against HIV (ABCUA) in Abim wrote a proposal for an income generating business for women, the funding was given and now the women are reaping from income generated by their grinding mill.

Objective 3: Legal and institutional environment for citizen action and citizen- Government dialogue improved to reduce corruption, increase human rights protection and facilitate citizen action.

Similar to objective one, overall, policy and legislative change at national level has been slow, mainly because the legislative agenda tends to be determined by political and economic factors that may be beyond the control of the programme. However, partners at national level have continued to engage and seek influence in available (‘created’) spaces. This engagement is by the individual partners, and also in partnership for instance through the Civil Society Advocacy Group (CSBAG). In 2014, they prepared a civil society position paper on the 2014/15 National budget proposals, based on the Executives Budget proposals presented in the National Budget Framework Paper FY 2014/15- 2019/20. This was presented in a CS Pre-budget dialogue that

6 They included: Local Councilors, Parish chiefs, Sub county chiefs, LC III and LC V chairpersons, RDCs, CAOs, DISOs, GISOs and area Members of Parliament 7 No specific figures were provided in partner reports.

12 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

was later organized, to share the CS proposals, attended by 2088 people. On 16th May 2014, a team from UDN and other CSOs9 met Mr. Kenneth Mugambe, the Director of the Budget Office in the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, in respect to the FY 2014/15 National Budget, to discuss Civil Society perspectives.

Partners that are specifically promoting anti-corruption at both district and national level, were able to work together, mainly at district level, to report corruption cases and ensure action regarding the same. For instance, the ACCU worked with district based partners in the Karamoja region to convene a bi-annual stakeholders meeting in form of the Health Sectoral Anti-corruption Working Group. This group deliberated on corruption issues within Karamoja’s health sector and created dialogue between the health Ministries departments and agencies, DCA implementing Partners at the national level and the project implementing partners in Ngoleriet and Nabilatuk. Concerns raised by communities through the DCA partners led to the closure of 5 drug shops in Nabilatuk sub county for selling government labeled drugs and established a local linkage to address emerging corruption issues.

Objective 4: Partner organisations are strengthened and capacities enhanced

All partners under the Active citizenship programme reported enhanced capacity in various respects, specifically:  Through skills and knowledge ( through DCA or from national partners to district based partners)  Organisation development support to identify organization questions and required interventions for instance with MONARLIP and UJCC  Support to development of core organization documents like the strategic plan to UWONET  Support to purchase of equipment including vehicles for UDN and office equipment for MONALRIP

Some of the partners, particularly at national level, raised a concern about the limited amounts of funding available from DCA and were of the view that increased funding would allow them increase their engagement with the local partners, and more flexible/emergency advocacy fund would have enhanced their effectiveness further.

3.2 Right to Food Programme Overall, the programme general focus on advancing new farming technologies demonstrated through the APFS/FFS has been effective in laying the foundation for sustainable food security even though these are early steps. It became very interesting to observe emergency of

890 females and 118 males 9Included the Southern and Eastern African Trade, Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI) Uganda, CSBAG, African Youth Development Link (AYDL), the Anti-Corruption Coalition of Uganda (ACCU) etc.

13 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

opportunities for possible linkages (most unintended and indirect) between APFS/FFS with CMDRR (community managed disaster risk reduction) as well as to VSLAs and CBMES. Rights holders were organized in groups after a self-selection exercise under APFS/FFS and in analysis of most groups most of them had begun to adopt aspects like kitchen gardening, preservation of crops for consumption of in the dry spell, use of raised granaries as measures against post-harvest loss. These are critical to CMDRR. Further analysis of membership of VSLAs showed that most rights holders saving were members of APFS/FFS groups. Later-on, leaders of VSLAs and in most cases of APFS/FFS were also members of CBMES which presented an interesting linkage. The downturn of this is that most ‘leaders’ were wearing many hats (taking on many simultaneous responsibilities) which could compromise their performance in the longer term.

Objective 1: Duty bearers are taking appropriate actions to address structural (social, economic, traditional), political and legal barriers to food and nutrition security in the target areas of Teso (Katakwi and Amuria) and Karamoja (Amudat, Nakapiripirit, Moroto, Napak Districts).

DCA through her partners have supported dialogue in the development of contingency plans (although this was more evident in Karamoja than in Teso) as document input into the district development planning process to address local structural, political and other legal barriers to food and nutrition security. District leaders in Nakapiripirit and Amudat particularly appreciated the effort by DCA partners (as opposed to most development partners who bypass them) to engage them and generating information through these plans. Some plans had begun to be implemented nonetheless. For instance as an effort to support CMDRR Amuria sub-county of Obalanga had received tree-seedlings for environmental conservation as part of the implementation of the contingency plans they had submitted. However, due to limitations in local government financing most of the plans still need concrete public investments to see them implemented as would have been desired. In Amudat, the District Community Development Officer disclosed that there is funding as support to Community Development Projects that DCA partners can lobby for to implement these plans and this is an opportunity that should be pursued.

Secondly, sustained effort of DCA partners C&D and ULA have begun to see positive movement (however slow) by duty bearers at the district and national level to address land issues in Karamoja. Two of the four district land boards are now fully constituted (Napak and Moroto) and there is pressure on the other two (Amuria and Nakapiriprit) to find women members of the land boards to ensure theirs are also fully constituted. While this has been ‘action at the top’ there are engagements with areal land committees who are being supported to address land wrangles, grabbing and other complaints complementary to the work of the land boards. ULA has particularly been vocal in district council meetings on the land related challenges and had petitioned the ministry of lands, housing and urban development to constitute the land boards so that they take up their full mandate to act.

Objective 2: Vulnerable rights holders organized to hold duty bearers accountable in relation to support services to realise sustainable food security and livelihoods in target areas in Karamoja and Teso sub-regions.

The CBMES methodology has been a revelation particularly in Teso (as opposed to Karamoja where it has really not taken off) in organizing rights holders to hold their duty bearers accountable for delivery of services. Where CBMES monitors were in place, they added a new impetus in ensuring that provision of services (construction of health units, schools, roads and

14 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

bridges) were done according to standards and value for money. In Teso, the evaluation noted that communities had more confidence in the CBMES monitoring team than the current lower local councils – something that has set them up as exemplary in defending their rights but on the other hand as ‘a threat’ to the political establishments mandated by the law for service delivery oversight. However, it was difficult to register/note any emphasis by CBMES on realization of food security. Their work mostly hinged on service delivery (health, sanitation and education) and more needs to be done to feed these monitors with information (that should be generated by partners from the progress in implementing CMDRR, VSLAs, APFS/FFS) on food security aspects as part of their advocacy.

Objective 3: Vulnerable rights holders in target areas are supported to use available resources in a more effective and efficient manner, always mainstreaming DRR approaches, to achieve sustainable food security and livelihoods.

Group formation and use of methodologies like VSLA, CBMES and APFS/FFS among others were effective in reaching many households in a short time. These approaches were effective also in eliciting wider participation of those rights holders outside the groups who have since joined the groups after ‘learning and noticing a change to those who had been engaged’. APFS/FFS has transformed the thinking (which was based mainly on traditional values) around planting through demonstration plots on planting in rows and using better seed varieties and introducing kitchen gardens- which are critical to CMDRR as well. The efficiency of this methodology has spread to create a new linkage with VSLAs. Almost all rights holders organized in farmer groups have been able to save (and mostly women although men are slowly joining these groups as well). VSLAs has improved the culture of saving with some rights holders noting that they saved under VSLAs for the first time. Pooled and later shared savings have supported rights holders to start small businesses, support children fees and purchase food and animals (mainly goats). This has created economic empowerment among women most of whom hitherto fully depended on their husbands and relatives for sustenance. The situation is better in Teso as compared to Karamoja which faces more prolonged dry seasons. For APFS to be efficient it will be important that aspects of climate change adaptation including: use of small-size irrigation pumps, rainwater harvesting and tree planting be broader part of the implementation of this methodology. The evaluation noted that critical aspects of livestock farming are missing in the APFS implementation and yet they could have been critical to the cattle keeping population of Karamoja. The evaluation advises that under FFS, livestock farming be included as well inasmuch as we are aware of the veterinary service extension that this may demand. Overall, while at infancy the APFS, VSLA remain critical to this program and should continue. Further linkage was also noticed with CBMES. It was evident from the field visits that leaders of VSLAs and APFS/FFS were also part of CBMES monitoring team in Amuria. Respondents to this evaluation made requests for further facilitation in terms of items/facilities to strengthen them in this early phase as they transit to sustain themselves. These included: bicycles (to facilitate CBMES monitoring teams as they have to move 3-5kms to various service delivery points), t-shirts (for the visibility of group members or starting with leaders under various methodologies) and seed inputs (as continued start off support for farmers as they transit from farming/studying at field farmer schools to their own gardens)

It is however important to clarify that partners were able to demonstrate that they understood that DCA will not provide seed input indefinitely and more innovative ways including purchase of seed using VSLA saving could be a better option. This program is encouraged to work further on issues of access to land (especially in Karamoja). There were majority sentiments that widows, orphans, and young people have limited access to land and use (and its fragmentation) remains predominantly a determination of male heads of households. Use of traditional systems

15 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

especially sub-clan leaders (who have a lot of clout over land issues) to address land issues remains critical just as the formal systems (land boards and areal land committees) and this is where CBMES monitors could prove vital in addressing such matters at the community levels. Exposure visits are critical to collaborative learning as they have the capacity to extend critical lessons for instance, an exchange visit by SOCADIDO in Karamoja can provide lessons for APFS from their experiences with FFS.

Objective 4: DCA has facilitated strengthening of partners ‘organisational capacity with the Rights-Based Approach and Gender Equity; as well as supported specific capacity building needs in relation to implementation of sustainable food security and livelihoods projects in target areas of the programme.

Under this objective, DCA undertook organization capacity assessment against which training was designed for partners. It was evident from the evaluation that the focus on rights-based approach has increased not just the awareness of rights among both rights holders and duty bearers but also helped to make the distinction from the needs-based approach that most partners were used to. Capacity building was also provided in areas of report-writing, M&E, financial management and design of strategic plans. To ensure that partners achieve the programme results, DCA organized training on use of the various methodologies and approaches. There has been attempts through training and supporting partners organizational capacities (especially staff training in M&E, reporting and project management) to ensure that they appreciate and embrace fully the rights based approach and gender equity. There were some concerns (although to a very limited scale) about who attended these training sessions. In some instances, DCA partners sent personnel not necessarily implementing the interventions at the grassroots, to attend some training sessions. It is therefore important that DCA partners ensure that staff implementing activities on the ground are prioritized while sending staff to these trainings so that they maximize the benefit of this capacity building as they transfer the knowledge to improve implementation on the ground.

Humanitarian Action DCA was praised by both her partners and Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) for its sustained effort to address the plight of refugees in Rwamwanja and Adjumani Refugee Settlements. Having resisted Cash Transfer Programming OPM has ‘warmed’ to accept this approach thanks to sustained dialogue with LWF and this paves way for the use of this approach going forward. There is need however to sensitize rights holders to not to misappropriate the funds once this approach rolls out in Rwamwanja (for instance by ensuring that recipients discuss with their spouses and members of their families the best way to utilize the cash). Refugees have been empowered to understand and demand their rights but violations continue especially sexual and gender based violence. In this regard there is need to strengthen the link to the justice system by increasing access to legal aid and mobile courts. Work-for-cash initiative is also another important option to economically empower the rights holders but it needs to be managed in a way that it does not disproportionately favor men who are more physically able to benefit from paid public works. Overall there is a lot to do to ensure a transition from relief, resettlement/rehabilitation to development. This will require more government support to provide critical services in health, water and education. DCA through her partners should ensure that there are legal reforms they can push for especially the full decentralization of the refugee problems across the country or more provisions made to support the state ministry budget of disaster preparedness under the Office of the Prime Minister and through district local government planning framework.

16 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

3.4 HIV/AIDS and Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights Programme (HIV/AIDS/SRHR)

The HIV/AIDS/SRHR Programme was evaluated as being overall effective in addressing the key issues that had caused vulnerabilities, stigmatization, and neglect of rights holders both infected and affected by HIV/AIDS. The number of actions taken by duty bearers has increased during the programme period, which in turn has improved service delivery, and to a lesser extent also promoted gender equality and the elimination of harmful practices.

Objective 1: Duty bearers, in particular local governments, traditional and religious institutions are taking actions towards effective service delivery and elimination of harmful practices

Accountability following lobbying activities by CBME groups related to SRHR and HIV include:. Sub country budget improvements for health and HIV/AIDS between 2011 and 2014 have been reported in 5 sub counties where DCA partners implemented projects; improved budgetary allocation to a health centre III; 1 new maternity ward, 1 new placenta pit, accreditation of 3 HC II’s to provide ART; enhanced supply chain management whereby uninterrupted supply of ARVs at 4 HCs II/III; increased outreach by health centres (4 outreach posts established; one motorbike to cover transport in another sub country); appointment of additional (5) health workers in lower level health units; formulation of bylaws in alcohol consumption in at least 2 sub counties; and a midwife attracted to HCIII; installing electric power at a health centre; and upgrading a Health centre II to a Health centre III. These are all important and respectable results over a relatively short time, yet the scale is still limited considering the need. An intensified pressure at district level is thought to enhance accountability of legal duty bearers to a higher extent, and make the programme more cost-efficient. Presence at village, parish and sub county level is high in most projects, whereas only few projects have a strong presence at district level which hampers the effectiveness of advocacy activities (observation at field trips, interview partners and DCA staff, CIPA project evaluation).

Anecdotal evidence were reported in relation to decreased harmful traditional practices in the target areas such as: early and forced marriage, abduction of girls, “widow inheritance” and “wife sharing” by involving religious and cultural leader in some projects have been reported. Increased dialogue and discussions among religious and traditional institutions against harmful practices was repeatedly documented during field trips and in the documents reviewed. The team met with very proactive and well-informed examples of religious and cultural leaders and their role as ‘change agents’ in the communities is very important and considered very cost- efficient, and it is strongly recommended that DCA with its connection to the faith based networks utilize this channel to an even higher extent.

Objective 2: Rights holders in vulnerable situations, in particular OVC, young women, girls and people living with HIV in target areas are empowered to challenge unequal gender roles, harmful practices, stigma and discrimination that predispose them to HIV infection and further vulnerability

The programme has succeeded to empower targeted rights holders i.e. PLHIV, young girls and women including survivors of SGBV, fisher communities and pastoralists who have become increasingly aware of their rights and responsibilities. In relation to this, all but one DCA PT4 partners answering the questionnaire mentioned that the most significant change of their projects under this programme have been the empowerment of rights holders to claim their

17 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

rights which have resulted in improved service delivery. Other most significant changes reported include revitalizing dormant government structures such as Baraazas, Village Health Team (VHTs) and Health Management committees (HMCs).

The number of active networks of rights holders has increased during the programme implementation. As of April 2015, the following groups have been formed under the DCA PT4 programme: 45 CBMES groups; 5 PLHIV groups; 20 SASA! groups and 161 VSLA groups.

Throughout the field visits the evaluator received numerous anecdotal reports on decreased violence, empowerment, and shift in power balance within the SASA! group member households but more time is needed to allow for changes to occur at community level. Anecdotal cases of increased economical empowerment in VSLA groups were also frequently reported. (see Chapter 5 for more discussion on these specific methodologies). However, some negative unforeseen events related to the DCA supported VSLA groups include: starting up of alcohol brewing of women because of savings/credit in the VSLA groups; and mandatory on site testing of HIV every 3rd month to sustain membership of the group.

The apprenticeship programme is in its current form not a sustainable investment because the partners are paying owners of the shops (bodaboda garage; beauty saloon etc.) for the training of the young people. This element should be re-thought if DCA decides to continue with this, e.g. encourage parents/guardians in VSLA groups to save for the training of their adolescents in vocational skills and provide the link to possible employers etc.

Objective 3: Rights holders in vulnerable situations, in particular OVC, young women, girls, fishermen and people living with HIV in target areas have increased access to information, prevention, care and other support services in relation to HIV and SRHR.

Data from DCA annual reports, focus group discussions, interviews and partner questionnaire imply that access to information, prevention, care and support services in relation to HIV and SRHR have increased as a consequence of CBMES, VSLA and SASA groups in particular.

PT4 partner organisations (n=8) were asked if there had been any changes in the availability, accessibility, affordability, acceptability and quality of HIV/SRHR related services since 2011, of which 100% reported that accessibility and acceptability had increased; 80% that availability to vulnerable populations had increased, and 60% that quality of services had been improved. Fewer reported increased affordability (40%). All partners reported that there was a high possibility that improvements were related to the work of their organisation (HIV specific partner questionnaire).

Yet, the specific extent of the change in access to services attained during the programme is not directly measurable because of missing baseline data for the programme. Below are some examples of the reported increased access to information, prevention, care and support.

Katakwi district reported a significant increase in those who have received an HIV test within the last 12 months and who knew the results between (from 45% to 65% 2012 and 2013) (LQAS report 2013). The potential contribution of DCA supported project in Katakwi to this achievement cannot be determined with the present study design, however considering the activities implemented in the district between 2012-2013 (sensitization, advocacy for HIV testing services and outreach HIV testing of 500+ in 2013) (Annual report TPO 2014) the project may to some extent have contributed positively to such a significant increase. RACA has worked with National Medical Stores to distribute drugs without interruptions to HC IIs and in an operational

18 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

survey carried out by RACA in January 2014 it was found that 82% of rights holders attest to improvement in HIV/AIDS health service delivery. In Lyantonde district the accreditation of two outreach posts was successful after lobbying by RACOBAO. The number of people going for HIV testing in Lyantonde increased from 26,869 in 2012 to 27,171 in 2013 however it is not known to what extent this project have effected the still relatively small increase. Yet in 2012, RACOBAO in partnership with the Lyantonde District Health officer (DHO) mobilised communities for HCT services as a result, 26,859 people accessed HCT compared to 14,941 in 2011. (Lyantonde HMIS reports 2010/2011 and 2011/2012). Two Health Centre IIs were also accredited to provide ART services in Rakai and Lyantonde (annual report PT4 DCA 2012), which may have contributed to increased adherence to ART (95% as opposed to 89% in 2011) (Lyantonde HMIS report, 2011/2012). The specific data on ART uptake as a consequence of the accreditation of the health centres is not available, one of the centres saw a doubling from 21 on ART to 44 on ART over a year, but it is not clear where these people were started on ART. The evaluation identified during the mission that clinics and hospitals have refused a significant number of patients to transfer to another treatment centre at lower level despite their own wish to transfer. This issue of specific rights violation, which significantly hampers access to health services (and adherence to ART), had not yet been addressed by the partners, but is essential to look further into. CIPA in Rakai district has succeeded in mobilising communities to attend reproductive health services, reactivating Health Management Committees, and successful lobbying of the rehabilitation of maternity ward, increased number of health workers at on health centre and ART outreach via motorcycle. Reported effects of this included an increased utilisation of reproductive health services (attendance at maternal health care services in Minziro sub county was 657 in 2012 and 721 in 2013), and increased turn-up of patients at the health centre (from 30 to 50 per day on average). (evaluation COCAP 2013)

The evaluation noted that there was limited specific targeting of Most At Risk Populations (MARPs) especially sex workers; fishermen (in western Uganda) and truck drivers who are critical populations in addressing HIV in Uganda. The progarmme targeting ‘fishing communities’ as a whole, yet fishermen as such were not specifically targeted with interventions, and many sensitizations and other activities etc. occurred when fishermen were out fishing. Self-established groups of fishermen existed in some communities where they meet to discuss market issues for instance, but such groups were not utilized by the partner to introduce sensitizations or initiate discussions on SRHR and HIV. The evaluation also noted some incidents of misconceptions and negative attitudes among DCA partner staff and, legal duty bearers and religious and cultural leaders implementing the sensitization activities. In the effort to reach men more effectively in the programme, which was also a concern of the mid- term review, one of the DCA partner organisations has initiated groups of ‘male champions’. This concept is much appreciated, but the way by which it has been implemented is not ideal: i.e. male champions were specifically targeting only men, but instead held sensitization session for the community as such; and one of the ‘male champions’ was a woman. Furthermore, data from the field implied that there was a big gap in terms of access to justice. Other highly associated issues to SGBV such as alcohol abuse could also have received more attention in the programme.These factors may have limited the impact of the programme in terms of increasing access to information, prevention, care and support in relation to HIV and SRHR.

In some instances the effect of an improvement after advocacy activities has not been documented with reliable data (e.g. specific changes in uptake of ART after accreditation etc.), DCA should prioritise providing reliable documentation with concrete data for all lobby successes. More work will also be needed to represent views of rights-holders in project planning phase (e.g. the preferred places for condom availability; preferred format for

19 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

sensitization etc.). Finally, it should be mentioned that the Ruby Cup (menstrual cup) distribution under this programme is not considered a sustainable investment.

Objective 4: Increased partner collaboration, networking and coordination in relation to advocacy issues and build institutional capacity in RBA, gender and SRHR and HIV.

Participation of DCA and partners in relevant national and sub national networks/alliances have increased during the programme period. DCA participate in the HIV/AIDS self-coordinated entity for international non-government organisations under the Uganda AIDS commission self- coordinated mechanism for HIV/AIDS service provision harmonisation. DCA also participated as a member of the Karamoja social Protection working group that oversees and coordinates HIV and AIDS, GBV and other social protection services in Karamoja.

There were few examples of partners having skewed interventions towards service delivery and where the level of expertise and appreciation of the RBA was insufficient. It has been difficult for some partners to adapt to RBA from the needs-based also because they seem to like giving gifts. Duty bearers also expect ‘gifts’ and service delivery from NGOs.

3.5 DCA added value When informants (partners and DCA staff) were asked into the added value of DCA in relation to changes incurred throughout the programmes, the 3 following topics was mentioned repeatedly: 1. RBA in action (CBMES; SASA! etc.); 2. Influence through faith based organisations/networks (as discusses further under partnership section and also on the way forward) and 3. The DCA Partnership approach supported by the partnership policy now in place.

20 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

4 EFFICIENCY OF THE USE OF RESOURCES

Overall the DCA programmes are largely considered to be cost-effective mainly because of the appropriateness of project design in reaching rights holders through groups, the use of low- costs models and the high potential for sustainability. Most partners adhered to the DCA financing and reporting strategies and benefited from capacity building that DCA provided in financial management and prudence in implementation and cost-saving techniques.

4.1 Assessment of resources utilization

Financial resources to implement were relatively adequate Most partners reported to have received funds as presented in their approved proposals and contractual agreements. The issue pointed to in this regard was that there were instances where partners implemented projects whose outputs can only be realized after a relatively longer time beyond the project. In this regard, it would be more prudent for these organization to receive less proportions of the budget but spread over a longer time than a lot to be spent in a short time. Some partners reported not to have received enough resources to deliver as would have been desired. This in part points to under-resourcing at proposal preparation stage on part of partners. Some partners reportedly did not have sufficiency in human resources to support sustained field work (routine inspection and extension support) which may have hampered efficiency in some aspects. The evaluation recommends that the DCA country programme takes more time to undertake financial needs assessment as part of the planned program baselines so that resource closely match the financial investment require to implement.

Implementation of low cost interventions with high sustainability potential All three programmes have made use of relatively low cost interventions such as establishing community groups, and conducting lobbying and activism with a high potential for generating sustainable changes. Innovative ways of integrating resources into/with other non-DCA work to maximize outcomes Some partners DCA partners were implementing own projects that were much linked already to what DCA was implementing. Some like SOCADIDO used a joint approach with on-going work within their mandate to implement DCA projects and minimised transaction, travel and field operation costs.

Some instances of late provision of inputs It is always efficient if resources are provided in a timely fashion so that they deliver the purpose for which they are intended. However there were instances where farm inputs (specifically seeds to plant under APFS/FFS were provided after the planting season in Teso - and this is something that partners can rectify to ensure that they procure critical inputs and have them delivered on time).

Large spread in staff salaries and budget for baselines and evaluations

21 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

There is a large spread between the proportion of staff salaries out of total project budget (up to 45% (e.g. RACOBAO budget 2012-2015) and a large spread of the budget for final evaluation (up to 34.000.000 UGX) and baseline surveys. It is recommended for DCA to set a reasonable range in terms of the budget for staff salaries, baselines and final evaluations.

High absorptive capacity As seen from Table 2, overall adequate resources were reported by partners, with high levels of absorption; Active citizenship: 96.8%; Right to Food: 103%, and HIV/AIDS/SRHR: 88%). Total absorption capacity: 101.5%.

Table 2: Allocations and Expenditure across the three programmes to date

Total Project Budgets Total Consumption For Absorption PARTNER PROJECT Implementation Including The Period- Dkk (%) Period Admin 2011- 2014

ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP FINANCIAL SPENDING 2011-2014 UDN 2009-2011 342,400.00 219,297.64 64 UDN 2012-2016 998,254.00 850,130.61 85.2 UWONET 2010-2011 1,714,000.00 858,523.63 50.1 UWONET 2013-2016 1,012,645.00 1,761,142.25 173.9 HURINET 2012-2013 83,800.00 83,911.28 100.1 HURINET 2013-2016 592,086.00 532,671.00 90 UJCC 2009-2011 695,500.00 698,714.72 100.5 UJCC 2012-2017 897,490.00 868,925.61 96.8 ACCU 2012 96,876.73 67,882.50 70.1 ACCU 2013-2016 236,992.00 202,441.83 85.4 FOWODE 2013-2014 657,160.00 534,368.89 81.3 UCU 2014- 2015 107,621.00 107,956.40 100.3 MONARLIP 2012-2014 1,126,589.00 888,198.29 78.8 UCAA 2008-2013 392,690.00 382,837.68 97.5 COU-TEDDO -bridging fn 2012 198,609.79 196,771.33 99.1 COU TEDDO GG 2008-2012 1,221,940.00 1,595,342.50 130.6 COU TEDDO GG 2013-2014 790,712.00 702,825.92 88.9 COU-PDR 2011-2015 42,800.00 42,373.46 99 DCA Cross cutting 6-11/12-16 3,986,141.00 5,875,021.89 147.4 Total Spending Active Citizenship 15,194,306.52 16,469,337.43 96.80% 2011-2014 HIV/AIDs FINANCIAL SPENDING 2011-2014 RACA 2011-2014 1,459,173.00 1,471,318.10 100.8 RACA 2014-2016 148,945.07 154,369.45 103.6 CIPA -Kakutu 2008-2010 NA -23,324.93

22 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Total Project Budgets Total Consumption For Absorption PARTNER PROJECT Implementation Including The Period- Dkk (%) Period Admin 2011- 2014

CIPA 2011-2013 1,202,403.00 1,185,010.68 98.6 CIPA 2014-2016 278,660.00 282,999.21 101.6 RACOBAO 2009-2011 1,603,234.50 1,248,536.33 77.9 RACOBAO 2012-2015 1,620,528.00 1,624,277.98 100.2 CCFU 2009-2010 NA -21,983.03 POZIDEP/ REACH 2011-2014 909,895.45 660,647.27 72.6 TPO 2008-2010 NA -76,143.50 TPO 2012- 2014 1,024,502.00 626,366.12 61.1 LWF- Katakwi 2005-2011 224,055.00 241,520.49 107.8 UNASO 2014-2015 211,794.73 214,196.38 101.1 UNERELLA 2013-2014 369,364.00 181,481.62 49.1 COU-TEDDO 2012-2014 959,697.00 773,912.13 80.6

C&D/HURINET/REACH-(EIDHR) 2012-2015 2,522,822.00 1,239,712.42 49.1

DCA Cross cutting 2011-2015 4,608,792.41 5,301,534.34 115 Total Spending HIV/AIDS 2011-2014 17,143,866.16 15,084,431.06 88 RIGHT to FOOD FINANCIAL

SPENDING 2011-2014 - ULA 2011-2013 90,950.00 89,745.38 98.7 ULA 2011-2016 2,278,276.00 2,057,475.03 90.3 SOCADIDO 2010-2011 650,484.89 1,044,471.97 160.6 2012-2016 SOCADIDO 1,044,455.00 1,189,470.84 113.9 (2012-14) OCODI 2012-2016 NA -1,518.79 LWF- Katakwi 2012-2016 1,363,869.00 1,352,377.81 99.2 LWF- Emergency Resp.W-Ug 2012 555,556.00 553,568.29 99.6 LWF Rwamwanja 2012 1,161,763.00 1,086,625.93 93.5 LWF-Adjumani 2014 567,631.00 572,586.11 100.9 LWF - Adjumani S.Sudan 2014 1,000,000.00 436,799.03 43.7 CPAR 2010-2011/12 1,856,879.00 1,850,276.88 99.6 CPAR/C&D/ACTED-KALIP- EU 2012-2013 9,519,446.10 9,413,942.95 98 .9 SSD/ACTED/C&D - ECHO DPIII 2009-2011 435,273.62 475,398.62 109.2 SSD - INCODEP 2009-2010 NA -44,135.36 SSD/ACTED/C&D-DPIV-ECHO 2012-2013 3,738,706.50 4,785,158.48 128 SSD/ACTED/C&D-DPV-ECHO 2013-2014 8,687,370.50 10,933,535.61 125.9 DI 2013 Consortium 2013-2016 4,126,418.00 3,619,837.22 87.7

23 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Total Project Budgets Total Consumption For Absorption PARTNER PROJECT Implementation Including The Period- Dkk (%) Period Admin 2011- 2014

COPACSO 2014- 201,738.87 296,501.24 147 ACT Advocacy 2014 471,808.00 301,402.63 63.9 Right to Food - Cross cutting 2012-2016 3,829,722.00 3,486,516.87 91

TOTAL Spending Right to Food 41,580,347.48 43,500,036.74 103.1% 2011-2014 Grand Total 73,918,520.16 75,053,805.23 101.5

4.2 Cost-effectiveness The total costs for the 3 programmes from 2011 until the end of 2014 including framework funds has been: 75,053,805 DKK of which Active citizenship has spent 16,469,377DKK, Right to food programme has spent 43,500,036 DKK; and HIV/AIDS: 15,084,431 DKK. (see. Table 2 in annex 4). The programmes altogether registered a high absorptive capacity of 101.5%

At project design some projects target were assessed too ambitious and in some cases tended to focus more on quantity (aiming to reach as many rights holders as required by the contract agreements) rather than maximising quality and thus impact. As such, putting a large emphasis on reporting on the reach seems less relevant when implementing a GI-RBA, the evaluation team finds it is more relevant to document changes in availability, accessibility, affordability, acceptability and quality as a result of the reach. In terms of sensitisation activities, issues such as changes in attitude, knowledge and behaviour are important and says more about effectiveness than a simple count of ‘reach’.

Some projects aimed to implement activities/initiatives that demand a long gradual change like community empowerment using CBMES, VSLA and SASA. In this regard, it was too early for the evaluation to assess impact after only 2-3 years of implementation. Implementation of a RBA takes longer time to generate the same results as if the services were delivered directly to beneficiaries and this must be taken into account when considering effectiveness. It is important for DCA to articulate the reasons for an initial higher cost per person reached by the RBA (CBMES, VSLA, Duty bearers’ trainings) which should be viewed in light of the sustainability and multiplier effect of the activities implemented.

In the future, the specific changes obtained and their probability that this is entirely due to an effect of the DCA programme should be better documented allowing for a closer and more accurate evaluation of the cost-effectiveness.

4.3 DCA financial management The rigor of the financial management systems deployed by DCA ensure prudent use of resources. The evaluation noted that where partners were not able to strictly adhere to the financial reporting guidelines, capacity building activities were organized to address related gaps. The evaluation however found examples of consultants being hired at partner organisations without adhering to the procurement guidelines which may also have hampered value for money. DCA should ensure that all partners adhere strictly to procurement

24 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

procedures. The evaluation found that a lot changes on the ground happened over time and some partners reported to having received financial constraints as implementation went on due to emergence of some hidden costs not anticipated during their offer of financial proposals. DCA has been flexible (if there is justification) to adjust in case partners face unanticipated costs that need alterations to initially signed financing agreement.

4.4 Increasing value for money The evaluation noted some options that could improve value for money: i. Selecting strategic partners is key to increase value for money. Ensure that DCA has a diverse partnership portfolio. Specific recommendations to a possible future partnership portfolio are provided in this report. ii. Minimizing overlaps with ACT members The evaluation noted that there are programs that are being implemented by DCA and some ACT members in the same districts. As such better collaboration, knowledge sharing even joint visits could be efficient in some cases, if this was explored more. iii. Consider having longer project spans since some overhead and administration naturally decrease over time (for instance when groups are formed and are strengthened, their leadership is able to take up some roles initially spent on with project field spending) iv. Presence at district level should be deepened. The cost-efficiency may be increased if focus on working in as many sub counties as feasible in one district instead of implementing in only few sub counties across several districts. Synergy at district level with several partners operating in the same district should also be sought. v. Focus to a higher extent on quality and measure quality outcomes at project level: e.g. instead of indicator of reaching 5000 RHs a strategy could be to try to reach fewer RHs but then document changes in those people’s knowledge, attitudes and behaviour due to the project. The quality of the reach should be clearly demonstrated and RBA AAAQ indicators could be considered and introduced systematically. vi. Addressing identified thematic gaps can have a great impact on value for money. Consider working with alcohol prevention in areas affected severely by alcohol abuse in the new country programme (affects food security, poverty, HIV/AIDS; GBV; women empowerment). In addition legal aspects and support should also be addressed, as the link to jurisdiction is currently weak. Implementation could be more efficient with use of critical resources for instance paralegal officials to help address some legal capacity gaps that is currently missing but critical to all programmes vii. Implementation could have been more efficient with increased dialogue between project managers and duty bearers. For instance, Amudat district informed the evaluation team that within the district budget resources for community based organizations’ coordination are available under the CDO’s office that DCA partners could have benefited from. viii. Increase inclusion of rights holders in programme/project design in all projects will also greatly increase value for money.

25 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

ix. Specific targeting of key actors/ vulnerable/high risk populations would generate better effectiveness and thus increase efficiency x. Buying in bulk. There are also savings that farmer groups under APFS/FFS and VSLA could have made through partnerships with input suppliers who are able to sell bulk items like seed, hoes, and other products in bulk and in the right qualities rather than each farmer purchasing these on their own. xi. Utilise to higher extent change agents: The utilization of traditional leaders, in particular religious leaders since DCA has a significant added value and connection to such powerful resources. Using change agents is a low cost intervention which has potential to generate a large impact and the evaluation found examples of this in only some projects. xii. Lastly efficiency gains can also be sought by introducing the use of IT especially transmission of information on market prices, weather patterns or service locations for HIV/AIDS services.

26 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

5 DCA APPROACHES AND METHODOLOGIES

As a specific focus of this evaluation, this section looks at the effectiveness of DCA approaches and methodologies and improvements that can be made as DCA transits to a country programme away from the current thematic approach.

5.1 The GI-RBA, results and challenges of implementation The underlying principles of the RBA are the PANEL principles of participation, accountability, non-discrimination and equality, empowerment and legality. Implementation of DCA programmes utilised various approaches and methodologies to reach rights holders with a purpose to empower and participate communities and raise the level of rights awareness to the extent that duty bearers can be held to account for equal and non-discriminatory service provision. The methodologies applied all have included some elements of empowerment, be it financial, mental, intellectual, actual skills etc. Some methodologies also actively sought to increase participation and accountability and ensuring equality. The legal aspects as mentioned before is still weak in the DCA programmes and could be expanded.

While these approaches are relatively new to most partners they have blended well into the rights based approach, the evaluation noted that some of the partners are still inclined to the needs based approach, which they are used to, and which they at times find more appropriate to the needs of their target. DCA’s partners work in some of the poorest parts of Uganda, and some of the target populations are amongst the chronically poor. As such, their focus until recently has been more on basic needs for survival. Some partners find that the application of a RBA does not easily give direct tangible results like those in service delivery projects. This was in particular the case where partner organisations were used to delivering services and the communities also still viewed them as service delivery organisations. In addition, in a discussion with partners, there were mixed views on the difference that RBA actually makes to programming and results. In fact, some partners argued that it is more difficult to use the RBA because partners are more focused on their immediate needs and may therefore not fully appreciate the relevance of RBA at that point in time. Another challenge DCA partners raised about the application of RBA is when duty bearers ‘provide lip service’ and do not take any action on issues raised, which can be discouraging to the rights holders. Determining indicators and measuring change from RBA is another challenge that some partners experienced. Whilst there are a number of stories of citizens engagement and influence, partners experienced that there is no concrete way established by individual partners or DCA to measure how these stories are able to influence the wider context and development trajectory at local and national level. Solutions to this challenge are currently being explored by DCA, its partner UDN and the Danish Institute for Human Rights have developed a concept to pilot the Availability, Accessibility, Acceptability and Quality (AAAQ framework) that seeks to provide a contextual measurement of rights fulfillment by duty bearers. Where RBA has proved to be effective is when it has been used as a core element of the CBMES, this could be because the citizens are able to work with RBA consistently and are therefore able to see the results of engagement on the basis of rights can produce in practice.

27 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Partners also mentioned that when citizens are able to experience the power and influence that knowledge and engagement from the perspective of their rights can have, they are then most likely to continue using it and making the most of their influence to obtain more effective service delivery and accountability for public resources. The results of RBA can thus be seen in the longer-term, as one respondent mentioned, “RBA is a ‘banking approach’.” The evaluation team recommends that DCA invests more in how to set indicators and measure impact of rights based approaches and specifically continue to explore the Availability, Accessibility, Acceptability and Quality (AAAQ) framework. Also invest in a baseline survey at the start of the programme that will be able to inform any M&E framework.

5.2 Community Based Monitoring and Evaluation System (CBMES)

The evaluation noted that so far the adoption of CBMES has been successful and all programmes have set up community monitoring teams all of which are functional buoyed by volunteer members of communities. Some of these volunteer community monitors have used their experience and knowledge about the community’s development needs as a basis on which to seek political leadership, and some have been successful – a positive outcome of this process. Many examples of very good results have been documented already through its implementation across DCA programmes, for specific results summary of effectiveness for each programme in section 3. For detailed information see annexes I, 2 and 3 under each of the programmes.

Because of the positive overlaps between DCA methodologies it became possible that leaders or members of leadership teams under VSLA, SASA and APFS/FFS to become CBMES monitors. The success so far of CBMES is attributed to the appreciation of the rights of rights holders and communities spurred by the RBA. The focus of CBMES is to monitor and evaluate the implementation of government programs in various communities and complement other community accountability mechanisms like Barazas, Village Health Teams and Health and Water Management Committees among others. So far community monitors have recorded success in holding duty bearers accountable in providing services in education, agriculture, health and water sectors. However there are still some challenges that this approach is facing that need to be addressed: i. While community monitors demand respect among communities they serve, some lack the technical skills required to identify highly relevant advocacy issues (e.g. post-violence medical support such as availability of post exposure prophylaxis for HIV;, Effective service delivery models etc.; report writing, and linkages with legal aid service providers. ii. Financial Incentives/ transportation fees in particular are limiting its sustainability. iii. Effectively linking results and observations from CBMES and district level to national level for policy and legislative change. iv. There were instances of political interference in the work of community monitors viewed in some instances as parallel to already existing local government structures yet without that critical political clout. It was interesting to note that inasmuch as this was the case, the locals had more faith in community monitors than in the local government officials when it came to addressing social and service delivery issues at the grassroots. v. The role of CBMES vis-à-vis Barazas, VHT, HMCs etc. was not always clear and this made the CBMES monitors viewed by some duty bearers as a parallel (in some cases illegal) emerging structures. The complementary approach of CBMES to the government established structures was not uniform across projects

28 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

vi. The effects/ changes of successful advocacy initiatives at local level are not always documented by DCA partners.

Overall recommendations CBMES: DCA should maximize the opportunity provided by volunteering community under CBMES and improve its quality as an approach that should continue to contribute to influencing policy at district and national level. i. Successes as well as challenges should be documented and shared with partners ii. Ensure that CBMES complement Baraazas and other government driven accountability systems at the local government iii. Capacity building of monitors–including training community monitors to exercise accountable leadership and regularly provide feedback to communities, capacity building in report writing, community mobilization and issues-response planning, and advocacy. iv. Ensure link to national level advocacy by strategic partnerships and good documentation v. Work of community monitors will need some incentives for their work – some requesting for bicycles to help their mobility, however, this can be addressed by increasing the number of monitors. Incentives should not be financial but can include: T-shirts, caps (not least for visibility issues) and a community monitors’ kit (bag with necessary tools). vi. Invest further in how to define and measure changes from CBMES by for instance utilizing the Accessibility, Availability, Acceptability and Quality (AAAQ) framework, and consider using such specific indicators for the new country programme

5.3 Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLAs)

Community based VSLAs is an approach that builds on creation/production of productive assets and later on the accumulation of savings of rights holders which allows them an opportunity to hold substantial savings they can draw-on to further their livelihoods.

The evaluation noted that overall a good model has been effective, much appreciated and has been able to reach the very poor and demonstrated a high potential to positively influence poverty levels. The majority of the savings were reported spent to cover basic needs (health care incl. transport to collect ARVs, housing, school fees etc.) and to increase food security (live-stock, kitchen gardens etc.), whereas starting small-scale businesses was more rarely reported (focus groups discussions VSLA groups). An extraordinary level of ownership and sense of proudness among member was particularly evident in VSLA groups which had existed for more than 2 years.

Most of the people saving in VSLAs are women and this has also in some cases prompted their male counterparts to save as well. Groups did not exclusively comprise the poorest of the poor. Often the clan leader or other influential persons such as religious leaders were included in the groups. Some groups were self-selected others were identified by the DCA partner organization. Indeed this evaluation found there were large differences between how the VSLA methodology was implemented (e.g. presence of systematic integration of other areas; selection of group members; provision of start-up seeds, goats etc.). Some respondents reported that they would need (more) training in setting up small businesses, others reported that they had dropped out of the group as the share value increased.

Most VSLAs have been created by same members in FFS, APFS, SASA, and CBMES. The VSLA groups in Karamoja have been registered at district level as CBO’s enabling the district to channel resources. The VSLA are also functioning as social safety net system through its emergency funds in case of illness and similar where funds can be released without paying

29 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

interest. Members are also able to obtain loans from the VSLA pool – thereby saving them from the hard option of selling their productive assets in case of emergencies.

However, the approach is still facing some critical challenges that the DCA country program should address:  Large variations in how the groups have been implemented (formation of groups; providing seeds, goats etc; presence of systematic approach to integrating HIV/SRHR)  There are distorted interpretations of how a VSLA should operate and politicians have in some cases distorted the association with cash offerings and hence may compromise the whole idea of saving in some aspects. There is limited capacity among groups in enterprise selection and once sharing of saved funds happens, savers are in some cases ‘lost for options’ on how to best utilise it. This is why in some VSLAs there is a deliberate attempt to ensure that a proportion of saving goes to purchase on input seeds for a subsequent planting season inasmuch as there is liberty to use savings as is the right of each saving rights holder.  Limited male involvement, and not always poorest of the poor  Incidents of dropping out of group because share value increased

Overall recommendations VSLA: The evaluation therefore calls upon DCA partners to ensure that I. Main principles of VSLA are adhered to (for instance formation of groups while prioritizing a focus on most vulnerable populations). II. More training should be undertaken especially in aspects of household resource mobilization; starting up small businesses and enterprise selection and development for right holders. III. If rights holders are excluded from groups because they cannot manage a higher share value, they could be encouraged to form of new groups with smaller share values. IV. Present efforts of integrating HIV/AIDS/SRHR/ into VSLA groups should be continued and DCA V. Partners may consider facilitating a structured replication of groups VI. DCA could explore the use of ”mobile wallets” from Colombia see http://encludesolutions.com/rise-vslas-mobile-money/An innovation of saving using mobile money technologies as opposed to a box which posses a security threat to right holders ’keeping the box’.

5.4 Agro Pastoral Field Schools /Farmer Field Schools (APFS/FFS)

APFS have become centers of community dialogue on matters that relate to household level and community level development (thanks to DCA for going to where people are and not trading centers). APFS/FFS has introduced eggplant, tomato, onion seeds, and cabbages. These vegetable crops are being used for home consumption and sale at the market some for the first time. Evidently the mind-set around farming has improved among rights holders who received training. Slower in Karamoja but happening. FFS have also now been a driver of savings under VSLAs creating a critical forward linkage for most households. VSLAs have in turn led to petty trade in some cases which is critical to household incomes.

The livestock farming aspect was omitted by the implementing partner for the APFS methodology and this was not followed up by DCA. For a population very much engaged in cattle rearing this ought to have been included. Secondly, to complement CMDRR, this FFS ought to have included climate change adaptation aspects to address loss in soil fertility due to

30 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

erosion, overgrazing, bush burning and afforestation. Prolonged drought (in Karamoja) and flooding (in Teso) needs to be addressed through community level climate change adaptation technologies embedded into APFS/FFS. Overall APFS and FFS groups have increased household’s availability to an extended array of crops and some which are short-season and key to resilience of households during droughts and floods. This is why it is important that nutritious crops are emphasized to address current nutrition deficits among children and expectant mothers. The evaluation notes areas where further work should be done to emphasize food security but with early childhood and nutrition aspects in mind.

Overall recommendations APFS/FFS: i. There is need to ensure follow up through group promoters of the level of up-take of technologies. DCA partners should assess the progress of adaptation ‘from the farming school to the household gardens’ and the extent to which the changes have caused a shift in thinking and approach towards farming in a manner that increases farm productivity; ii. Livestock aspects that were lacking under APFS should constitute a broader focus in the next programming; iii. There should be an integration of climate change adaptation into APFS/FFS (including aspects like harvested rain, tree planting, horticulture, and raising the awareness to address bush burning, indiscriminate cutting of trees for charcoal and brick burning) as well as emphasis on nutrition and early childhood development which are critical to health of rights holders; iv. For Karamoja challenges related to land ownership, land use and management persist as the communities embrace agriculture from purely pastoralism. There is now a need to address these land issues using community systems that includes areal land committees and traditional sub clan leaders but at the same time use protracted sensitization and ‘community understanding’ of the impact agriculture will have on pastoralism as complementary rather than competing enterprise on the land. In addition as land continues to be degraded, it is important that APFS/FFS approaches look at options to increase soil fertility especially using organic matter already available. v. Under this program it was noted that that there is little focus/engagement of the young people in agriculture. It is recommended that under the self-selection process in groups formation, there is a deliberate effort to include the youth and encourage them to take up some of the leadership positions in the groups. This could enlist participation of fellow youth vi. Key investments can be made under FFS and APFS to include aspects like - Use of community radios to communicate information (for instance related to weather forecasts for farmers to ready themselves to plant). C&D can explore the option of working with the Meteorological center in Entebbe to improve the functionality of the substation in Karamoja. - More focus on training on reducing post-harvest losses through improvement of storage and drying technologies and demonstrating how they can be used

5.5 Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction (CMDRR)

Teso and Karamoja have faced a blunt of prolonged floods and droughts and acute food shortages making the inclusion of CMDRR very relevant. In an attempt to build resilient communities DCA through her partners implemented CMDRR as an integrated methodology to cushion right holders in terms of extreme climatic conditions and food shortages. CMDRR is

31 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

slowly becoming an integral part of the project work under the Right to Food and Humanitarian Action program. The evaluation notes that this approach has not yet been implemented fully as expected. However in Teso and Karamoja some partners (as part of the requirement of the contract agreement) have supported farmer-groups’ contingency plans but none is being implemented fully especially due to expertise and resource constraints. A case in Obalanga Sub-county Amuria there is only one officer in charge of Production and Marketing who is tasked to implement a tree-planting project for the entire Sub-county. By and large the public sector early warning systems are not making any traceable impact on farming partners and rights holders seemed to have more faith in tradition than the public sector weather forecast information. What was most visible as part of this approach was the use of kitchen gardening learned under APFS/FFS that was widely reported as important in planting short-season crops and preservation/drying of vegetables for consumption during prolonged food shortage.

Overall recommendations CMDDR: i. One of the Partners implementing projects in Teso under the Right to Food Program SOCADIDO introduced a micro-scale irrigation system which has become an eye- opener for irrigation especially during prolonged drought. This and more options to increase irrigation will be critical for disaster risk reduction. Communities have expressed an interest in fuel-efficient stoves, peddling pumps for irrigation, and solar power and these are options to increase communities’ ability to be resilient to these harsh conditions. ii. Still limited faith in the formal weather forecast and instead reliance on ‘traditional myths’. Serious threat posed by climate change contributing to soil erosion and degradation but made worse by charcoal burning, bush fires and indiscriminate tree cutting. it is recommended that APFS/FFS includes climate change adaptation aspects in the next country programme

5.7 Start Awareness Support Action (SASA!)

DCA started implementing the SASA! Approach in 2013 and as of April 2015, 20 groups have been established under the programme. SASA! is an evidence based community mobilization model to increase empowerment of women and decrease SGBV in communities 10.Throughout the field visits the evaluator received numerous anecdotal reports on decreased violence, women and male empowerment, and shift in power balance within the SASA! group-member households. The evaluation found that the implementation of the methodology varied greatly across projects, which can be partly explained by the fact that training in the SASA! approach had only been conducted very recently, and after the implementation of the groups. The methodology is still a newly introduced methodology in DCA, and SASA! groups have not existed long enough to expect diffusion into the community of such change. Furthermore, the ‘multi-exposure approach’ of SASA! has not been fully utilized in any of the groups visited. Increasing presence of the communication messages at different places (e.g. poster at police station; information leaflet at health clinics; street theatre; casual talk by SASA! groups members; group support, home visits etc.) would be required to increase effectiveness. In addition, knowledge of other forms of violence than physical is limited in some groups and men are not as present in the groups as needed, yet men still take the leadership positions when they are there.

10Abramsky et al. Findings from the SASA! Study: a cluster randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of a community mobilization intervention to prevent violence against women and reduce HIV risk in Kampala, Uganda BMC Medicine 2014, 12:122; Nambusi Kyegombe et al. ‘SASA! is the medicine that treats violence’. Qualitative findings on how a community mobilization intervention to prevent violence against women created change in Kampala, Uganda, Global Health Action 2014

32 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Overall recommendations SASA!: i. It is recommended to fully utilize the multi-exposure approach; ii. Increase involvement and inclusion of men in SASA! groups; iii. Go beyond physical violence prevention and support; iv. Additional follow-up training/monitoring of SASA! groups might be necessary; v. DCA and partners should allow time and scale up number of groups and activities to see changes at community level. Increase monitoring of the implementation of the methodology. When partners are confidents with the methodology, the number of groups needs to be scaled up in order to achieve the desired multiplier effect and see specific changes in communities as a whole; vi. It would be highly relevant to consider a baseline survey before introducing SASA! in a new target area, in order to measure specific attitudinal and behavioral changes.

33 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

6 ASSESSMENT OF DCA PARTNERSHIPS

DCA does not implement programmes directly but rather through partners selected after a highly protracted and structured selection process with an elaborate approval criterion. This approach enables implementation to be undertaken by partners with requisite expertise and local presence in most cases. Overall the partners reached through an anonymous on-line survey noted that working with DCA has improved their capacity to implement the three programmes within an environment of open dialogue, mutual accountability and flexibility. The evaluation found that current partners conform to the main criteria of partnerships as described in the DCA partnership policy.

6.1 Specific ratings of partnership with DCA

76% of partners who responded to an online survey (11/20 -55% response rate) appreciated that there is an open dialogue between their organization and DCA while 73% appreciate that there is a mutual respect among them and DCA. However only half (54%) reported that they their organisation had the opportunity to influence the way DCA works. 65% of partners reported DCA had fostered innovation in the way they worked. Overall the majority (74%) of partners appreciated that DCA had added value aside from providing funds for implementation of the various products. This includes capacity building in strategic planning, governance issues, financial management, specific methodologies, and increased networking.

6.2 Collaboration outside specific contractual obligation with DCA

Many partners (45%) reported to often engage with DCA outside their contractual obligation with DCA (figure 1). Only 18.8% reported that they never engage with DCA outside their projects.

Figure 1. Engaging with DCA outside the specific project

6.3

34 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

6.3 General categorization of the partnership with DCA

Results from the survey indicated that there are very mixed replies in terms of the extent to which the relationship with DCA was ’equal’ (An equal and ‘horizontal’ relationship where you view yourself as an equal partner with DCA):

”DCA Uganda staff often use statements such as: This is what DCA wants”

”We are consulted in the programme design of DCA and our issues and plans are always reflected in DCA programme document”

Several partners mentioned that the characterization of the relationship with DCA is depending on the specific person(s) that they collaborate with at DCA. Programme officers who have the direct communication with partners were reported to have different approaches and styles towards partner organization staff.

6.4 Overall rating of the Partnership with DCA

Overall, as seen in the partners who ranked the partnership as having been either good or very good were 73% with only 9% (n=1) rating it as poor and 18% (n=2) rating the relationship as moderate (table 3). The average rating was 4.0 (‘good’) .

Table 3. Overall rating of DCA partnership

6.5 Assessment of capacity strengthening provided by DCA

The rating of the capacity provided by DCA to strengthening their ability to implement the projects showed that 55% rated this as high and 27% as moderate. 9% of the partners (n=1) rated the capacity provided to strengthen their work as very low. But the evaluation went further to analyze the approach in provision of this capacity and whether this approach was participatory and effective to transfer expertise to partners. The majority of partners 9/11 (62%) agreed that they worked with DCA during the capacity building events in a peer to peer working environment.

In addition partners were asked which areas they felt capacity had most been built. The majority of partners reported that they received training on the rights based approach (73%) followed by CBMES (55%). There were also moderate reporting for training on the HAP standard and fundraising as well as governance (all at 36%) and networking with CSOs (45%). It is important to note these responses are not low in absolute terms since the evaluation allowed multiple responses against which a weighted index was imposed.

The survey obtained results of the assessment by partners on the delivery of capacity building. Many partners (45%) noted that the capacity provided was responsive to their capacity needs with an additional 18% noting that the training provided so far has been proactive in responding

35 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

to their technical gaps. However, 27.89% felt that the capacity building has so far either overlapped with training they have received elsewhere or it was irrelevant. Of particular concern are instances where personalities seconded for training by partners were not the ones implementing on the ground. However, this should be the choice of partners and hence not as such the responsibility of DCA. Yet, there were mention of instances where DCA had preselected attendants for workshops that partners did not agree with.

6.6 Conclusions from the results of the partnerships survey and dialogue with partners

Majority of partners felt that there is an open dialogue, mutual accountability between them and DCA and that DCA gave their organizations added value aside from providing funds to implement projects. While most partners felt the relation between DCA and themselves was ‘equal’ there was also a diverse partnership experience with a minority who felt the relationship was a classic ‘donor recipient relationship’ where partners did what DCA wanted. It was evident from the survey that partners with a longer history with DCA seemed to have the most positive views of the partnership. In addition, the rating depended on the quality of relationships that partners had with particular staff within DCA with whom they corresponded.

The evaluation noted that the partnership platform now guided by a partnership policy has been critical in creating space for dialogue among DCA partners and strengthening the faith based network. Generally, partners responded in affirmative that capacity built and resources provided by DCA added value to them and helped them to better implement their programmes. The majority also reported institutional strengthening of their organizations with increased technical, programmatic and financial management capacity since initiating partnership with DCA. The extensive training of partners in methodologies was repeatedly mentioned during interviews and in the survey with partners. The evaluation however finds that more capacity strengthening is needed to support the implementation of all methodologies and the targeting and involvement of target groups in programming. Partners mentioned capacity gaps in particular in relation to monitoring and evaluation, and fundraising.

Some partner organisations felt that DCA should be more flexible and have a stronger focus on results vs. activity. Some partners were concerned that DCA was too preoccupied with the specific activities which should be implemented according to the project plan allowing little room for changing activities yet reaching the same goal/target. Furthermore, it was mentioned that the feedback from national (ex UNERELLA+) to district level partner organisations (DCA partner on the ground) have so far been absent. DCA decided to discontinue the partnership with UNERELLA+ on this basis.

The RBA approach was very much appreciated as well as reaching rights holders through organized groups and partners appreciated the uniqueness and appropriateness of DCA RBA approach.

Consortia partnerships were at times characterized as having very limited coordination, especially at management level, in the respective organizations. The budget for consortia meetings and planning was according to partners not used in an optimal way, neither was the communication flow between DCA and consortia partners.

Most partners found the partnership platform very useful and very unique to DCA and one that presented an opportunity for further collaboration and peer learning, yet, there are some missed opportunities in relation to synergy creation, because partners are not yet fully aware of each

36 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

others added values. Some noted that engagements are only limited to short meetings and often-times partners are too busy to allow time to engage further on the ground. In addition to the findings above (from the survey), findings from meetings with partners also indicated that DCA’s added value and/or niche lies in four possible key aspects: i. Being able to support/empower communities that have been through difficult and traumatic experiences in conflict and in many instances have lost faith in the role of Government, and work with them to transform into active citizens, knowledgeable about their rights and able to engage with duty bearers for effective and responsive service delivery. ii. Supporting the mobilization of citizens into active civic groups/formations at community that can in the long run contribute to a more active and engagement citizenry iii. Supporting the critical role that faith based institutions can and should play in providing awareness, mobilising citizens and being advocate for a just society in which the rights of all, particularly the vulnerable and marginalised are given due regard. iv. Testing and utilising community based approaches( in isolation and/or in combination) that are empowering, cost efficient, easily adoptable and have been proven to lead to greater accountability, improved service delivery and contributed to more accountable leadership in the communities and at political level.

Overall recommendations on strengthening partnerships

I. Enforce the Partnership approach: Ensure that all DCA GLRO staff have been trained in the DCA partnership policy and the DCA approach to partnerships. When recruiting new staff for DCA the skills set should include experiences in working in a participatory approach. When discussing the value of adding new partners, partners should be involved in such discussions in accordance with the DCA partnership policy. II. Communication could be strengthened by making sure that bilateral annual meetings are held, documented and that the partnership policy is discussed at bilateral level III. Synergies: Ensure strong linkages between national partner organisations and those working at community/district level. An annual partner handbook of partner organisations could further contribute to increasing synergies IV. The composition and management of consortium should also be strengthened especially more frequent meetings and dialogue, and DCA should facilitate collaboration also at Executive Director level. Roles of the respective partners in the implementation of the project should be clear from the beginning and described in an MoU. V. Handling emerging/issues: DCA should in such instances focus more on results instead of actual activity VI. Continue partner platforms, and increase ownership among partners by making more room for agenda setting, and requiring budgeting in projects for the partnership platforms VII. Capacity strengthening of partners is needed/requested in particular with regards to: methodologies, targeting and involvement of target groups in programming, monitoring and evaluation, and fundraising. But ensure that training will not unnecessarily overlap with training they have received recently elsewhere.

37 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

7 SUSTAINABILITY OF PROGRAMMES RESULTS

7.1 Overall assessment of sustainability

By and large, most elements of the programme are considered sustainable, in particular the applied methodologies CBMES, VSLA, APFS/FFS, CMDRR, and SASA! Citizens have been empowered and are to a larger extent claiming and monitoring to demand for rights to the services they deserve and to achieve the needed accountability and response from duty bearers. Empowerment of rights holders, including specific empowerment and influence/voice of women as monitors, CBOs, political leaders, and at household level is an important result for effectiveness of methodologies but also for sustainability.

The evaluation finds that the level of ownership witnessed in most groups, their own repeated sentiment about the relevance of the groups and their desire to continue the groups even after the end of the project in question points to a high sustainability potential. This is supported also in the literature where a recent study found that 92 percent of more than 300 VSLA groups across 6 countries have remained active for four years after the end of NGO support11.

7.2 Key recommendations in relation to sustainability i. The country program should build on what has been achieved and deepen the interventions (rather than spreading) to increase effectiveness and sustainability while shifting the focus more to quality than quantity also to increase efficiency and sustainability. ii. To sustain results, partners will have to keep the community volunteers engaged. There will have to be a broader focus on self-reliance and emphasis on the social advantages of being a monitor/volunteer in a group, such as recognition in the community and possible ‘career’ opportunities, instead of reliance on facilitation. CBMES groups risk collapse if motivation lies in transport allowances or other financial incentives that are not sustainably available. More importantly, investment in CBMES has the potential for longer term sustainability, if it helps to change attitudes and gets ‘ALL citizens’ to be monitors, as opposed to it being a ‘job’ for the community monitors. iii. Likewise, instead of providing transportation for duty bearers (e.g. police in the event of a SGVB emergency), and lunches to motivate duty bearers to come for dialogue meetings, DCA and partners should strive to make government and other duty bearers

11Megan Gash and Kathleen Odell. The Evidence-Based Story of Savings Groups: A Synthesis of Seven Randomized Control Trials. Sep 2013.

38 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

aware and responsible for providing appropriate remuneration and cover transportation costs, while acknowledging their areas of responsibilities. iv. There other interventions that DCA partners are implementing that could help sustain interventions under their partnership with DCA. DCA partners like SOCADIDO have undertaken their own evaluation of the project and it will be interesting if such evaluation reports are shared (with say partners implementing APFS/FSS in Karamoja). In this regard sharing evaluation results across partner organizations in terms of the sustainability of groups in the field is important. v. DCA is moving towards strategic investments and provision of inputs will end. This will require that groups under APFS/FFS are re-oriented to include critical aspects including bulk seed purchase and farmer-saved seed to be self-reliant in that regard. However it is important to note that challenges related to land remain a stiff challenge for farming in Teso and Karamoja (including land grabbing, deforestation and decline in soil fertility); vi. A lot of work needs to be done to target the youth through apprenticeship/vocational training. However in its current form it was not found a sustainable investment. The project financed a tutor to take in students for training in motor repairs, at beauty saloons etc and there was no clear plan for the sustainability of such payments. The concept should be re-thought if DCA decides to continue with this approach e.g. how parents/caretakers in VSLA groups may be encouraged to save for funding their children’s vocational training ; vii. The Ruby Cup distribution is also not a sustainable investment, yet DCA may explore if menstrual cup firms might be interested in providing the cups at a subsidized price for testing out a market price etc. viii. The programme has worked to revitalize existing, but in many cases dormant structures, such as Health Management Committees (HMCs), Village Health Teams (VHT), School Management Committees (SMCs), Baraza’s, Sub country AIDS committees (SACs) and District AIDS committees (DACs). This is considered very important for sustainability and should continue and be scaled up

39 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

8 WAY FORWARD

The DCA joint evaluation concluded while as there are variances in performance, overall all the three DCA programmes are on track. Evaluation results may be used to improve performance of the last period of the current thematic programmes as well as to inform the development of the new DCA country programme. DCA is called upon to start a protracted process to prepare partners from a shift from the current thematic approach into the next country programme approach. The evaluation recommends to Improve the implementation of DCA approaches and methodologies; Improve synergies; Increase value for money; intensify geographical focus; Move forward with strategic partners and strengthen partnerships; Mainstream SRHR in the new DCA country strategy; Ensure Evidence Based Programming and Embrace new innovations and private sector partnerships in the country programme. This chapter sums up recommendations on the way forward for the planned DCA country programme.

8.1 Improve the implementation of DCA approaches and methodologies Overall, DCA through its partners has successfully introduced, applied and demonstrated many positive results from its core development approaches and methodologies such as the Community Based Monitoring and Evaluation Systems (CBMES), Farmer Field Schools (FFS), APFS, Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLA), Start Awareness Support Action (SASA!), and CMDRR. Some of the methodologies applied provide good examples of a ‘RBA in action’ (CBMES; SASA!; VSLA in the form of empowerment). Group formation and use of methodologies have been effective in rallying rights holders around activities that unleash their productivity, create social cohesive community networks and keep rights holders together. These need time to fully reach their potential.

However, whilst methodologies like CBMES and VSLA are highly appreciated and good results have been obtained in a short time they are not all fully understood nor implemented consistently by partners. This can partly be explained by the fact that DCA’s partners work in some of the poorest parts of Uganda, and some of the target populations are amongst the chronically poor. As such, their focus until recently has been more on basic needs for survival. To improve the implementation of DCA approaches and methodologies some issues need to be addressed: (For specific recommendations related to each of the methodologies see section 5 of this report.)

i. Training and retraining of partners in methodologies is also necessary to ensure correct understanding and implementation. ii. Some partners find that the application of a RBA does not easily give direct tangible results like those in service delivery projects. DCA and its partners also need to be aware of possible political interference and/or disruption of some of the groups created using the CBMES and VSLA methodologies and other groups. yet, political interference is not related to the way DCA has implemented the methodologies, but reflects the competitive political climate politicians and also that politicians have realised that these groups have power in communities.

40 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

iii. The focus should remain on addressing the vulnerabilities that still face the poorest in community including the challenges to access land (especially the youth in the refugee settlement and in Karamoja, the widows, and divorced women) as this is key in addressing the core causes of poverty and exclusion. Social and cultural barriers to women’s rights remain and could be addressed more effectively by balancing the support to political leadership with more engagement at community level with traditional and other leaders about the importance of gender equality for the whole community. The work on building women’s leadership should therefore also consider fostering dialogues and the use of collaborative leadership to address the structural and cultural causes of gender inequality. Links to VSLA and women’s economic empowerment may also be useful. iv. The new country program will need to do more on collaborative learning, exposure visits for partners and linking successes to further advocacy for scaling-up. For instance policy and legislation change is still limited though some partners have taken up invited spaces and positioned themselves for engagement with key duty bearers. CBMES groups need capacity building that can be proceeded by a capacity needs assessment so that their work is well documented and that the leadership of these groups can muscle the tough debates within district and local councils. For this process to be more effective, better and more respective relationships will be needed between them and duty bearers (and not being viewed as a new parallel structure that duplicates work of political leaders in local councils but rather a complementary establishment). v. DCA should maximize the opportunities from the collaborate framework within the ACT forum to share best practices on implementation of methodologies/approaches at partner platform meetings. In return there is a lot ACT members are able to learn from DCA (already there is interest in CBMES) and these collaborations are key to the DCA visibility. vi. Overall for gender equality there is a need to continue with the emphasis on supporting women’s rights and women’s participation on the one hand, and then also balancing it with more interventions that seek more male engagement and support for women’s rights and gender equality vii. It will be important to strengthen the overlap of CBMES and VSLA/FFS/SASA! group participants which would increase information flow from rights holders to community based organisations and duty bearers as well. The evaluation noted that VSLAs could be strengthened and sustained by steering the use of saving better through training on enterprise selection and options in income generating activities that group members can be engaged. viii. Households in the programme areas remain very poor and as they begin to embrace methods of farming through the application of technologies learned at APFS/FFS this will require combination of strategies that ensure they access land, input seed and markets. Strategic collaborations with the private sector will be critical in this regard. Groups can engage private entities to supply inputs and save rights holders the transaction costs of seeking these critical supplies individually. ix. More focus should be laid on strengthening the overlaps and ‘forward and backward’ linkages between them to maximize the benefit for rights holders. For instance improved harvests from APFS/FFS could support more savings under VSLA and in turn support organized/bulk purchase of inputs for farmers. Secondly APFS/FFS can concentrate more on more short-season nutritious crops that are drought resistant which is critical for DRR. Thirdly as community monitors move on to other roles (some into political office) they can be expeditiously replaced from a pool of leaders under various methodologies like SASA to ensure continuity in grassroots advocacy and accountability.

41 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

x. Lastly as DCA moves to support the progression of refugees from relief to rehabilitation/resettlement to development, there is now acceptation to move forward with Cash Transfer Programming. Specific focus should be put on providing support to DCA partner, LWF, to successful implement the Re-Hope Strategy and the new tripartite agreement by positioning DCA to better collaborate with Office of the Prime Minister and UNHCR in the Rwamwanja refugee settlement and Adjumani. xi. Caution however, should be taken as there are unhelpful instances of political interferences trying in some instance to use these groups formed under various methodologies for political gain. This may increase as Uganda goes into an election period in early 2016.

8.2 Improve synergies The evaluation recommends increasing awareness within DCA on other current and related projects of their partners. In addition, it is recommended for DCA to support and encourage partner organisations to map and interact with organisations in the same district implementing related projects. Partners (with DCA oversight) should further be encouraged to register with their respective district NGO forums. While a lot of work has been done to ensure synergies between partners and within the ACT Forum Uganda, the evaluation notes that DCA could do more to identify and reduce unnecessary overlaps between the DCA and ACT partners in a more collaborative fashion, while at the same time take more benefit of projects implemented in the same districts. Joint monitoring trips, joint advocacy activities and joint projects between ACT international partners have recently been introduced and such efforts should be sustained and scaled up where possible. The impact of advocacy at local level could potentially increase if areas of implementation (district and sub county level) were overlapping to a higher extent than what is currently the situation and a strong link to national level partners/organisations is ensured. Furthermore a visual mapping of ACT projects throughout the entire country could possibly be developed.

8.3 Increasing value for money The evaluation found that DCA could increase value for money by: Improving synergies and selecting strategic partner, minimising overlaps with ACT partners, having longer project spans, deepening interventions with larger presence in fewer districts; focusing to a higher extent on quality; addressing identified thematic gaps; increase dialogue between project managers and duty bearers; increasing the inclusion of rights holders in programme/project design; implementing specific targeting of key actors/ vulnerable/high risk populations; buying in bulk; utilizing to higher extent change agents such as religious leaders; and introducing the use of IT technology. Refer to section 4 in this draft for detailed recommendations related to cost- efficiency.

8.6 Future partnership portfolio The evaluation noted that as DCA makes the transition to a full country programme away from the thematic approach, it should consider reducing the current partnership portfolio, while establishing new and more strategic partnerships to deepen impact. But while this happens, DCA should ensure a proper exit strategy with partners whom DCA will discontinue the partnership (linking up with other donors, fundraising capacity, future use in DCA as consultants etc.) and ensure ACT alliance coordination in the (de)-selection of partners.

DCA should consider initiating a strategic collaboration with an established research institution in order to ensure high quality baselines studies/ evaluations for projects/programmes, and to document specific impact of projects not least as a means to support future fundraising

42 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

potentials. DCA should further consider partnership with a media organisation or linking partner organisations to media organisations to enhance their visibility as well as have more effective communication strategies and media engagement. The current work with faith-based organisations could be scaled up in particular with regards to networks at district/regional levels. There are specific interventions that will also need a partner who can contribute with legal aid and justice, and a network of paralegals. In addition, in order to continue to strengthen the capacity of civil society in the Karamoja and Teso regions, DCA should continue to facilitate collaboration between the national partners and district based CSOs, as part of capacity building and enhancing the profile of the district based CSOs including in regions where civil society is not yet so vibrant. In addition, DCA should continue to target and strengthen the capacity of district based CSOs that have a wide reach and have the potential to be influential in their regions. The evaluation suggests the following criteria for developing the future DCA partnership portfolio in addition to the criteria listed in the DCA partnership policy: i. All partners should have a strong thematic expertise in line with new DCA GLRO country strategy themes and shared values ii. All partners should be able to contribute to at least one of the identified added values of DCA including demonstrable expertise/willingness to implement RBA; iii. Partners’ areas of implementation should overlap geographically with other DCA partners iv. Some partners should have an influential and consistent national presence v. Some partners should have Influence through faith-based channels, preferably also at district/regional level vi. Some partner(s) can contribute with legal aid and justice, and a network of paralegals vii. Some partner(s) have a strong research-based foundation (e.g. research institution) viii. Some partner(s) can contribute to communicate DCA results and support advocacy for DCA partners at the national level while contributing to overall visibility (media partner).

8.7 Shaping the next DCA Country Programme

Intensify geographical focus The evaluation found the current areas of implementation relevant for the implementation of the DCA programmes. Considering the thematic areas of DCA and their mandate, the evaluation team suggest the following criteria for the choice of future geographical scope of the DCA programme: 1. Areas where Uganda’s most vulnerable poor reside; 2. Post conflict or conflict stricken areas and 3. Areas faced with extreme climatic conditions.

Deepening of interventions at district level in current areas of operation is considered key to improving synergy and impact. While expanding the presence in current intervention districts (i.e. presence in more sub counties with several projects, not necessarily more districts in the same regions), DCA may also seek involvement in a new geographical regions in order to meet needs there, and in order not to become too vulnerable to changing donor priorities, potential conflicts or extreme weather in one corner of Uganda. DCA could consider as a ‘niche’ in the future to focus on empowering citizens in post-conflict areas in Uganda to transition from being recipients of hand outs, to citizens that are aware of their rights and have the capacity to engage with duty bearers for effective service delivery and fulfilment of their rights. DCA has the advantage of utilising flexible funds from its framework agreement with Danida to test out some

43 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

approaches in other parts of Uganda than those currently supported by external donors. Such areas could include Northern Uganda and West Nile whose conditions are similar

Ensuring Evidence Based Programming Evaluations will overall only get as good as a baseline study, why it is highly recommended to increase efforts to document accurate and valid baseline data before the project is initiated. This might require a higher budget allocation to baseline studies than what is presently the norm and/or initiating strategic partnerships with research-based institutions. In any case, the procurement of capable consultants needs to be strengthened. Establishing simple information management system where relevant data or information is stored for easy and consistent use in reporting and proposal writing would be relevant for DCA and partners. DCA has direct access through its projects on the ground to further boost the research evidence base and thus strengthen the legitimacy of the organization, its advocacy work and fundraising possibilities. At present DCA GLRO collaborate with the Institute of Human Rights in Denmark however it is strongly recommended for DCA GLRO to initiate further strategic collaborations with established research institutions that are present also in Uganda. Such collaboration would be a clear asset for DCA in terms of being able to document specific impact of projects (including ensuring quality of baseline studies), hereby to significantly improve fundraising potentials and national advocacy and by delivering data and results from the field on less well- documented approaches and interventions, DCA GLRO will contribute directly at global level to fight extreme inequality, save lives and build resilient communities as spelled out in the DCA global strategy 2015 - 2022.

Options for Mainstreaming SRHR into the new DCA country programme The DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR Programme will be phased out as required by DCA HQ by the end of 2016, however key aspects of this programme can sensibly be integrated into the new DCA country programme. Specific suggestions for SRHR mainstreaming components in the new country programme includes:  Broaden the approach towards women empowerment so that efforts to empower women starts at the household level, and this could be initiated through continuation of the SASA! methodology.  Include SRHR/HIV aspects into the training modular of CBMES; VSLA and other groups and ensure sensible targeting mechanism of members (e.g. ensure representation of SGBV survivors, PLHIV ect. in CBMES groups; target PLHIV for APFS/FFS to benefit from short season crops and nutritious crops e.g. through kitchen gardens).  The CBMES tool should include monitoring the adequacy and responsiveness of systems and institutions to SRHR and SGBV. Mainstream monitoring the accessibility and quality of SRHR services for women and girls as part of the CBMES monitoring tool. This will allow for the community monitors to regularly track progress in this regard and identify any areas for improvement and or advocacy in good time. SRHR issues will through this also consistently be part of the agenda of community dialogue meetings, offering an opportunity to create greater awareness amongst citizens, as well as obtain accountability from duty bearers

44 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

 Continue revitalizing existing, but in many cases dormant structures, such as Health Management Committees (HMCs), Village Health teams (VHT), as well as Sub-country and District AIDS Committees (SACs/DACs).  Support women councillors to pass a byelaw regarding the need to protect SRHR, and that councils invest/prioritise women’s and girls SRHR in the district budget and programmes. The councilors can then also specifically monitor (with other CSOs) the effective usage of these resources by local government officials.  Support partners to develop a common advocacy agenda (at sub-county, district and national level) for effective implementation of key SRHR related legislation like the FGM Act and the SGBV Act, all of which have been enacted into law, but their implementation remains inconsistent. The common advocacy could be undertaken by a group of CSOs either under the umbrella of UWONET, or as a coalition of other SGBV and SRHR organisations like the SRHR Alliance. The responsibility for the formation of such a Coalition would lie with UWONET. In the alternative, an appropriate national partner who understands these issues beyond legal analysis, and who is willing to engage fully on these should be explored. For instance, FIDA (U)  Under Humanitarian Action it will be important to ensure that a sustainable sensible targeting mechanisms of members is made so that PLHIV are part of the self-selection criteria in the refugee settlements.  At the broader level, it is important to ensure the continuation of the work on sensitization and empowerment of girls in school settings, but gradually shift this education responsibility to trained teachers. Where political and cultural leaders are identified to pass on information on community development, strategic messages should be handed to them to improve their communication in relation to HIV/AIDS.

As the county programme is designed and implemented, there will be need for technical capacity/support in SRHR at DCA Country office at critical steps: i.e. the extent to which HIV/SRHR aspects have been integrated in the country programme design, when approving project and when monitoring larger/key projects with mainstreaming component.

Embrace new innovations and private sector partnerships in the country programme It is conventional wisdom that NGOs have a specific moral mandate to test out new and emerging solutions in the field and document and potentially scale up to national level if they are found effective. The DCA programmes have included innovative elements/ideas, but to a rather limited extent and with limited documentation of its effectiveness/acceptability so far and the follow-up plan is not clear. DCA is recommended to  Intensify the sharing of knowledge on innovative approaches/ elements among partners, ACT alliance members and other organisations in DCA’s network. (ICCO has used some innovative approaches: flying food etc.)  For the Right to Food and Humanitarian Action micro-scale irrigation pumps can turn around farming in dry spells to save crops from unpredictable weather changes (for instance there were just 6 days of rain in Rwamwanja between January 1 and March 18).  For VSLA, APFS/FFS and CBMES, SMS platform can be used to pass on messages. Organizations like info-trade are able to reach farmers with input supply, prices and host of market information and has used approach to great effect over the years (see www.infotradeuganda.com). DCA can forge a partnership with them. The use of mobile wallet is another intervention that DCA could look closer at in relation to its VSLA groups http://encludesolutions.com/rise-vslas-mobile-money/An

45 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

 There are opportunities to benefit from business partnership with private sector entities who could provide inputs in bulk rather than individual purchases which attract high transaction costs).  DCA can also invest in an M&E system to ease reporting and projects monitoring under the new county programme preferably with support of an easy to use M&E software like MESURE (see www.technobraingroup.com)

Illustrative Design of the Uganda DCA Country Programme The evaluation advises that DCA country programme would be better designed if it adopted an all-round approach to Active Citizenship, Right to Food and Humanitarian Action. As shown in the figure below the heart of the programme will be already tested approaches and methodologies (GI-RBA, CBMES, SASA!, VSLA, CMDDR; LRRD; FFS, and evidence based programming) whose implementation and improvement will have the potential to generate outcomes including gender equality (current PT1 and PT4), civic engagement (current PT1), justice and accountability (current PT1), social economic empowerment (current PT3, PT4) and humanitarian action. This will be a departure from the structured vertical approach that will keep the programmes apart rather than see them as being driven by the same approaches to deliver different results. The evaluation is of the view that this systems thinking would bring about a structure change from ‘vertical’ layout where programmes were separate and stand alone to a cohesive and fused modular with all the programmes contributing towards the same overall objectives mentioned in the DCA international strategy: saving lives, building resilient communities and reducing inequalities within communities in the programme areas.

Figure 3.Conceptualisation of the design for the DCA Country Programme

46 | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

ANNEX: 1 ACTIVE CITIZEN PROGRAMME

1. INTRODUCTION

The Goal of the Active Citizenship Programme is formulated as follows:

“The right to participation of women and other discriminated groups in Karamoja and Teso and the democratic space for citizen participation are enhanced for furthering equitable development”

The programme has the following specific objectives:  Policy, legal and administrative frameworks are reformed to further electoral accountability and the political participation of women and other excluded groups  Increased participation and influence of marginalised rights holders, particularly women and other excluded groups in Karamoja and Teso, within the social, political and economic decision-making processes  Legal and institutional environment for citizen action and citizen-Government dialogue improved to reduce corruption, increase human rights protection and facilitate citizen action.  Partner organisations are strengthened and capacities enhanced

The DCA active citizenship programme supports nine (9) CSO partners namely, Uganda Debt Network (UDN), Uganda Women’s Network (UWONET), Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE), Human Rights Network (HURINET), Anti-Corruption Coalition Uganda (ACCU), Uganda Joint Christian Council (UJCC), Uganda Christian University (UCU),Moroto, Nakapiripirit Religious Leaders Initiative for Peace (MONRALIP) and Church of Uganda- Teso Dioceses Planning and Development Office (C.O.U TEDDO). During the evaluation, the consultant obtained information on the core criteria of OECD-DAC evaluation (Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Sustainability and Way Forward), as well as lessons learned that then informed the recommendations. The recommendations were also informed by a brief analysis of key issues in the context of governance and development in Uganda. Data was obtained from both secondary and primary sources of data. The secondary sources of data include DCA and partners’ programme reports, as well as studies on the human rights and governance situation. The primary data was obtained from a variety of respondents including DCA staff, Executive Directors and programmes officers of partner organisations, representatives of targeted duty bearers at national and local level, community members, community monitors, women councilors and women CBO groups in Karamoja. The consultant specifically had in-depth meetings with four of the partners (UDN, UJCC, MONARLIP and HURINET), and then used the secondary data to analyze progress made by the remaining five partners. Limitation was mainly lack of baseline data to provide a basis for measuring impact, however, a preliminary context analysis informed the design and a review of DCA and partner reports also showed that DCA and partners invested time to regularly review developments in the context.

i | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

2. RELEVANCE OF THE PROGRAMME

Relevance of thematic programmes to identified needs and context Uganda has had impressive achievements in reducing income poverty as only 20% of the population live below the national poverty line of 56 cents a day12 and the 2013 MDG report13 states that the while the goal of halving the number of people living beyond one USD a day has been achieved. However, while the sustained economic growth has led to poverty reduction it has at the same time lead to an increase in inequality14 and increasing concerns about social inclusion.15 The Gini index has risen by 6 percentage points from 0.37 in 92/93 to 0.43 in 09/1016. The increase in inequality is between women and men, between rural and urban, but also significantly between regions. The highest percentage of the population in Uganda living below the poverty line is in Northern Eastern Uganda (75.8%) and 40.4% in Mid Northern Uganda, as compared to the Central (13.6%) and Western parts (25%)17. Women remain the poorest, with limited power, influence and voice, and yet are critical to economic growth because of their dominant participation in small-scale agriculture and small businesses.

Uganda’s development is guided by the NDP, and in the draft NDP II, the section on lessons learned from NDP I mentions that one of the key challenges that affected the implementation of NDP I was “Weak public sector management, including a weak decentralized public service delivery system, procurement delays and corruption, limited involvement of non-state actors in planning and implementation of the plan and limited integration of cross-cutting issues in sectoral plans, programmes and projects, key of these being gender, environment, Nutrition and HIV/AIDS. This is due to lack of synergies and coherence across sectors and local governments on what priorities to take on”18. Effective implementation of the NDP therefore needs a strong and effective public sector especially at local level for its implementation and for broader economic growth. In addition, various studies make the link between poor governance, corruption and poor service delivery and development in Uganda, and Transparency International’s perception index of corruption for 201419 ranks Uganda as 142 out of 175 countries. CSO interventions that seek to address corruption, promote accountability and effective use of resources available for development, particularly at local level, are important. Addressing corruption and accountability at national level is a lot more complex because of the political networks, however, evidence from the work of CSOs, and analysts point to the possibilities that still exist for influence of change and demand for service delivery and effective implementation of Government programmes at local level. Corruption at that level is easier to detect and there is greater appetite by governance institutions to address it at that level.

12DFID Uganda ”Operational Plan 2011-16” Updated December 2014 p.18 13 “Millennium Development Goals. Report for Uganda, 2013”. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, September 2013 14According to the Uganda Bureau of Statistic’s Household Survey for 2012/13 http://www.ubos.org/onlinefiles/uploads/ubos/UNHS_12_13/2012_13%20UNHS%20Final%20Report.pdf (Visited 22.02.2015) 15See “Inclusion Matters: The Foundation for Shared Prosperity” World Bank, 2013. Social inclusion is described as a process of improving the ability, opportunity and dignity of people, disadvantaged on the basis of their identity, to take part in society. 16“EU-Joint Programming in Uganda” Draft, January 2015 17Householdsurvey 18NDP II Draft, p. xiii 19http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results (visited 16.02.2015) ii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

At national level, interventions are required to ensure effective implementation of these transparency and accountability policies and legislation. In addition, the effectiveness of Debt is set to be around 33% of GDP, which is relatively low and it decreased dramatically due to a HIPC initiative between 2004 and 2008. According to officials in the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFED) the on-going and foreseen infrastructure investments will increase the debt levels, but keep it within the manageable margin by not exceeding 50%. This is an area that also requires regular monitoring to ensure that the debt is managed effectively.

DCA’s active citizenship programme responds to this context and is relevant because it focuses on building civic awareness and action at local level for increased transparency and accountability for service delivery and development. The range of partners (both local level and national) compliments this need and from evidence seen so far, seems to be addressing these core issues. It should also be noted that Uganda’s civic space is narrowing and according to Freedom House 2014 report20; Uganda is characterised as ‘Partly free’. Noteworthy, Uganda’s political rights rating declined from 5 to 6 “due to the continued, repeated harassment and arrest of prominent opposition leaders, the passage of the Public Order Management Bill to further restrict opposition and civil society activity, and new evidence of the limited space for alternative voices within the ruling National Resistance Movement”.

Gender equality remains a major challenge and the need to address gender equality in order to attain good governance and ensure overall development cannot be understated. Uganda has made commendable progress in establishing policy, legal and institutional frameworks for advancing gender equality including the Constitution as well as ratification of international and regional treaties that recognize the rights of women. However, according to CEDAW, there are still a number of laws that have not been aligned to the Governments’ international commitments including the Marriage and Divorce Bill, which would have provided a legal framework to guarantee women’s rights in the domestic arena, including the right to property ( which is critical to women’s economic empowerment) which was withdrawn under intense political pressure and national debate, as well as strong and vocal objections from religious and cultural leaders. The other key challenges to gender equality and promotion of women’s rights include social attitudes and the “persistence of patriarchal attitudes and deep-rooted stereotypes regarding the roles, responsibilities and identities of women and men in all spheres of life.”21

These perpetuate discrimination against women and are reflected in the disadvantageous and unequal status in many areas, including in education, public life, decision-making, marriage and family relations, and the persistence of violence against women and harmful traditional practices. In particular, Sexual and Gender Based Violence (SGBV) in Uganda shows no sign of abating.22

The challenge of culture remains a challenge in both the Teso and Karamoja regions, and is further exacerbated by high levels of poverty and the unintended effects of disarmament on gender relations in the Karamoja region. Key challenges for gender equality therefore remain

20https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FIW%202014%20Scores%20-%20Countries%20and%20Territories.pdf (visited 16.02.2015)

21 CEDAW committee report on Uganda 2010

22 CEDOVIP and DfID study, iii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

addressing the structural and cultural factors, addressing the gaps in the legal and policy framework, as well as ensuring that Government is accountable for effectively implementing legislation and policy, and that existing opportunities like affirmative action, programmes for women, are maximally utilized by women and men to ensure gender equality. DCA partners mainly address the challenges of maximizing opportunities for political representation and the legal and policy framework. There does, however need to be greater effort at strategizing around the social and cultural factors.

Alignment to international, national and district policies and recommendations and human rights instruments and principles

Uganda is signatory to key international and regional human rights instruments like the ICCPR, ECOSOC, as well as CEDAW, the Maputo Declaration and other instruments on gender equality. These are translated into national legislation through the Constitution and other enabling legislation. All DCAprogrammes seek to promote human rights, gender equality, transparency and accountability and good governance, with the ultimate desire to contribute tosocio-economic development for citizens. The programmes are aligned to the National Development Plan (NDP) and also contribute to the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). All partners engage with duty bearer sat either and/or)national, district, sub- county and community levels, and have sought to align their activities to the district development plan. They also aim to make use of Government structures at local and national level including local government planning cycles, utilize the councilsessions to enact bye laws, be part of district sector working groups , and engaging with members of parliament and government ministries at national level.

Assessment of the programmes’ design in relation to what they set out to achieve The Active Citizenship programmewas informed by a context analysis that identified the priority issues including the need for more active citizen engagement, the need to address corruption in service delivery, and enhance the participation of marginalized groups in political leadership and electoral processes. The one area that is not reflected in the current programme design is the importance of the media and concerns related to media freedoms. The design also recognizes the importance of linking the local (community) to the national level, and ensuring that advocacy is evidence based. This is in turn reflected in the choice of partners that seeks to have ‘a mix’ of community based and national level partners. The programme design is therefore responsive to the context analysis and there is a clear link and logic in the design in relation to planned objectives and results.

Synergies (with other DCA projects under the same programme and/or with other DCA projects under another programme, and7or with projects outside DCA) Synergies have been built, mainly through engagement during the partnership forums, as well as deliberate action by DCA staff to identify appropriate partners that could add value to the skill sets in the partnership. There have however been some missed opportunities where DCA could have facilitated greater ‘bi-lateral’ engagement between the partners for instance, more discussion and possibly joint strategy between ULA and MONARLIP on land rights concerns in Karamoja, or between UWONET and UJCC to identify areas of commonality in the Marriage and Divorce Bill.

Added value of DCA in relation to this programme DCA’s added value and/or niche lies in four possible key aspects: v. Being able to support/empower communities that have been through difficult and traumatic experiences in conflict and in many instances have lost faith in the role of iv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Government, and work with them to transform into active citizens, knowledgeable about their rights and able to engage with duty bearers for effective and responsive service delivery. vi. Supporting the mobilization of citizens into active civic groups/formations at community that can in the long run contribute to a more active and engagement citizenry vii. Supporting the critical role that faith based institutions can and should play in providing awareness, mobilising citizens and being advocate for a just society in which the rights of all, particularly the vulnerable and marginalised are given due regard. viii. Testing and utilising community based approaches( in isolation and/or in combination) that are empowering, cost efficient, easily adoptable and have been proven to lead to greater accountability, improved service delivery and contributed to more accountable leadership in the communities and at political level.

Other possible unique aspects that are being tried but have not necessarily yielded the intended results (yet) are:  the link between community activism and advocacy and national level policy change.  Grooming the results of increased female representation in political and community structures and utilsing this to promote more collaborative leadership and foster change in the wider social cultural attitudes that hinder women’s rights and gender equality.

3. EFFECTIVENESS OF PROGRAMME

Main programme results against LFA for the programme

A Policy, legal and administrative frameworks are reformed to further electoral accountability and the political participation of women and other excluded groups

Overall, policy and legislative change at national level has been slow, mainly because the legislative agenda tends to be determined by political and economic factors that may be beyond the control of the programme. However, partners at national level, HURINET, UJCC and UWONET have maintained a consistent presence, engagement and relationship with Parliament on their various legislative agendas.UJCC in particular organized and conducted a meeting in each of the 12 sub-counties of Kotido and Moroto between 15-20 December, 2014 for the purpose of giving the participants to the opportunity to discuss and make proposals on electoral and policy reforms. Participants made their proposal and recommendations that UJCC is using for its advocacy on electoral reforms. HURINET has also been consistent in its engagement with the UHRC and the UPF on the situation of human rights.The policy documents developed by UWONET on women’s leadership influenced national policy development i.e. drafting of proposals for Constitutional amendments from a gender perspective and the women’s manifesto 2016-2021.

At district level, DCA partners (TEDDO, MONARLIP, UJCC, UWONET and FOWODE) have continued to empower the citizens in Teso and Karamoja to become increasingly conscious and know their constitutional and civil rights to actively participate in electoral governance using a number of interventions including media campaign using audio visuals (video) and songs by renowned local artists’23 to enhance civic responsiveness among the rights holders to perform their right to participate in elections. It is difficult to measure the impact of such interventions since the elections will be held in 2016, however, the absence of baseline also makes it difficult

23 http://www.busiweek.com/index1.php?Ctp=2&pI=398&pLv=3&srI=65&spI=103&cI=22 v | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

to fully understand factors that influence citizens’ participation in electoral processes, hence creating some uncertainty about the effectiveness of the interventions (messaging). Also UWONET jointly with FOWODE and other organisation under the Women’s Democracy Group24 a consortium of women organisation jointly organised to strengthen grassroots women networking organisations and enhancing the leadership roles of women through mobilisation, civic education, mentorship of young women leadership and also developing a mechanism to enable local women to hold the elected women leaders in higher decision making positions accountable. There is evidence that these women leaders have been active, supported the enactment of bye-laws and been able to influence the agenda of council meetings to incorporate issues related to women’s rights and gender equality. However, the challenge remains harnessing the results so far and using them to foster wider change/shifts in structural causes of gender equality and discrimination against women.  Increased participation and influence of marginalised rights holders, particularly women and other excluded groups in Karamoja and Teso, within the social, political and economic decision-making processes

There were significant achievements under this objective, with partners implementing the CBMES andthrough this creating the opportunities for participation and influence. For instance, through ACCU’s interventions during which they fostered collaboration between rights holders and duty bearers, and with support from the CDO and ACDO offices, all community monitors in Napak (25) and Nakapiripirit (26) were involved in planning and budgeting at the Village, Parish and sub county levels. 4 monitors participated in the district planning conference. 2 budgetary plans were taken up to the district level and these include the rehabilitation of the road leading to Health Centre IV Napakas well as the renovation of Nabilatuk HC 1V. UDN’s work in Napak, Moroto,Nakapriripit enabled communities to generate reports that identified gaps and challenges relating to access, availability and quality of services received by marginalized groups like women, the elderly, youth, people living with disabilities (PLWDs), people living with HIV/AIDS. Between January and December 2014, a total of 197 service delivery and accountability concerns were raised by communities/ CBOs/ Community Based Monitors and submitted to duty bearers at Sub County and district level, out of which 48 commitments were made by the relevant authorities25. According to UDN reports, follow-up meetings were made about the cases raised in Karamoja and Teso Sub region.This has motivated marginalized groups of men and women, to be even more involved in the monitoring work.

Reports from TEDDO state that 90 community representatives of vulnerable groups (PHAS, PWDS, Women, youth) were identified for the training as community based monitors and they gained skills and knowledge that enabled them engage in monitoring of government programs like CDD, primary health care, Rural feeder road, NUSAFII among others and as a result, there is a percentage increase in the number of people to participate in monitoring of government programs and challenge the duty bearers. The sensitization also provided platform for the wider community to gain skills and knowledge on governance processes and knowledge on existing government programs within their locality. The reports further state that through the dialogue meetings, duty bearers are tasked to explain for example budgeting processes and procedures of selecting beneficiaries of certain projects like NAADS, NUSAF11, CDD, restocking etc. “In Orungo and Morungatuny for example duty bearers were held to explain how beneficiaries of

24 Women’s Democracy Group (WDG) is a consortium of five women organizations comprising of Uganda Women’s Network (UWONET), Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE), Women’s Democracy Network-Uganda Chapter (WDN-U); Action for Development (ACFODE) and Centre for Women in Governance (CEWIGO).

25 They included: Local Councilors, Parish chiefs, Sub county chiefs, LC III and LC V chairpersons, RDCs, CAOs, DISOs, GISOs and area Members of Parliament vi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

the restocking program were selected because vulnerable persons did not actually benefit which was against the guidelines provided by the Office of the Prime Minister. This made the Local government officials in liaison with OPM to organize a Baraza meeting to explain to the people what really happened. From the training conducted by UWONET, some CSOs have written proposals and received funding to implement projects. For example, KonyPaco women’s group together with Abim Community United against HIV (ABCUA) in Abim wrote a proposal for an income generating business for women, the funding was given and now the women are reaping from income generated by their grinding mill.  Legal and institutional environment for citizen action and citizen-Government dialogue improved to reduce corruption, increase human rights protection and facilitate citizen action.

Similar to objective one, overall, policy and legislative change at national level has been slow, mainly because the legislative agenda tends to be determined by political and economic factors that may be beyond the control of the programme. However, partners at national level have continued to engage and seek influence in available (‘created’) spaces. This engagement is by the individual partners, and also in partnership for instance throughCSBAG. In 2014, they prepared a CS position paper on the 2014/15 National budget proposals, based on the Executives Budget proposals presented in the National Budget Framework Paper FY 2014/15- 2019/20. This was presented in a CS Pre-budget dialogue that was later organized, to share the CS proposals, attended by 20826 people. On 16th May 2014, a team from UDN and other CSOs27 met Mr. Kenneth Mugambe, the Director of the Budget Office in the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development, in respect to the FY 2014/15 National Budget, to discuss Civil Society perspectives.

At local level, community monitors are active for instance,UDN, MONARLIP and FOWODE trained community monitors, members of school and health management committees, parish development committees, religious and opinion leaders in gender budget literacy and analysis. These trainings have played significant roles in empowering citizens to engage effectively in demanding for improved social service delivery and better performance from Government institutions through dialogue and community meetings.  Partner organisations are strengthened and capacities enhanced All partners under the Active citizenship programme reported enhanced capacity in various respects, specifically:  Through skills and knowledge ( through DCA or from national partners to district based partners)  Organisation development support to identify organization questions and required interventions for instance with MONARLIP and UJCC  Support to development of core organization documents like the strategic plan to UWONET  Support to purchase of equipment including vehicles for UDN and office equipment for MONALRIP Some of the partners, particularly at national level, raised a concern about the limited amounts of funding available from DCA and were of the view that increased funding that would allow

2690 females and 118 males

27Included the Southern and Eastern African Trade, Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI) Uganda, CSBAG, African Youth Development Link (AYDL), the Anti-Corruption Coalition of Uganda (ACCU) etc. vii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

them increase their engagement with the local partners, and more flexible/emergency advocacy fund would have enhanced their effectiveness further.

Un-intended effects (positive and negative) as a result of implementation of the programme

There are three unintended results that should be highlighted and possibly further analysed: i. The CBMES system as an opportunity to groom accountable leaders at community and politicallevels: Some former community based monitors have used their experience and knowledge of community needs and concerns to form the basis of campaigns in which they have successfully sought political office at mainly district and sub-county level. The question that DCA should explore is whether the former community monitors turned political leaders are exercising a ‘different and more accountable’ type of political leadership. In addition, the programme could explore how to best support such leaders be effective in the challenging political contexts in which they operate. ii. Leadership and accountability of community monitors: The community monitors are an influential a group and can choose to exercise this influence for community good or personal interests. The issue for the programme to explore is how to ensure that the community monitors are accountable to the citizen selected them, and will utilize the power, influence and space that they have to promote public good. One avenue could be to review the training curriculum and incorporate aspects of leadership (can draw on UWONET’s experience in this regard). iii. Increased positioning vis a vis influence: A number of the partners in the active citizenship programme have established relationships with duty bearers at various levels and have been provided spaces in various Government forums and meetings( at sub- county, district and national level) to make presentations and share their views. Other partners like UJCC have a more ‘official’ placement through the Parliamentary Liaison officer. The challenge for these partners is to use this positioning for influence, and to set results that focus on the changes resulting from the positioning i.e. what have they been able to influence.

4. EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT BY DCA

The Capacity Building Approach This entails supporting partner CSOs holistically. Under this approach, in addition to the funding for programme implementation, DCA also provides partners with OD related advise/ support, as well as feedback and discussion on programming. OD related advise and support includes support to strategic planning processes, reviews, OCAs, among others. During the period of support, CSO partners have direct and regular engagement with the Programme Officers. In some instances, DCA identified a partner with potential like MONARLIP, and has ‘accompanied’ it and enabled it stabilize and start reaping results.

Recommendation: to ensure that DCA staff have the requisite technical capacity to provide effective OD support. Should consider building staff capacity in that area and/or retaining/outsourcing when required. The capacity building should be over a period of time to enable staff learn and apply the practice.

The Partnership Approach DCA has invested a lot in the partnership approach and has captured these aspirations in the Partnership policy. Partners were generally pleased with the DCA approach to partnership and viii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

they described DCA as open to discussion, understanding and supportive. There were however some concerns expressed about the fact that the partnership is more programme driven because of the nature of support and as a result, discussions tend to focus on programme project impact, as opposed to the overall development of the organization. The other concern related to the entry point for communication between DCA staff and the partners, there have been instances where DCA staff communicate directory with programme staff as opposed to going through the organisation’s chief executive. A core tool for the partnership approach is the partnership forums that are held twice a year. All partners considered the partnership platforms to be relevant because they provide an opportunity for networking amongst the partners, as well as interaction with DCA. They also serve as a forum for joint learning. However, it was also pointed out that these platforms have not been maximally utilized because the agenda tends to be really tight, and thus limits time for horizontal networking and learning what the various partners are engaged in.

Some of DCA’s partners work on similar and/or complimentary issues. For instance MONARLIP community dialogues have identified land rights as a key concern, and so they could benefit from working more closely with ULA on such issues. In such examples, DCA can play a more proactive role in facilitate networking and opportunities for joint action. Another example for engagement was the advocacy on the MAD Bill where UWONET was more or less pitted against UJCC, both partners of DCA. In such an instance, perhaps DCA could have facilitated a discussion in which even though the organisations agreed to disagree on specific issues, they could have expressed this disagreement in a more respectful manner that also provided space for further dialogue on the issues.

Recommendations: i. Provide more time for horizontal networking during the partner platforms ii. Compile a partner profile handbook iii. DCA to make deliberate effort to foster horizontal linkages on specific issues/areas of concern

5. IMPACT OF THE PROGRAMME

Overall, the programme has contributed reduction in to poverty and inequalities (especially gender) at local levels and has had impact in relation to capacity development of partner organizations that DCA worked with and through.) The contributions have been through the following key results/changes  Better( improved) quality service delivery  More responsive duty bearers at community, sub-county and district level  More aware and actively engaged citizens, through community dialogues and participation in created spaces like the Barazas, Village Health Teams(VHTs) and School Management Committees (SMCs)  Emerging leadership at community and political level  Better and more respectful relationships( they appreciate and value each-others’ roles better) between CSOs and duty bearers at district and national level  Rejuvenating government systems and structures like Baraza, Parish Development Committees (PDCs) and VHTs.  Increased number of women in community and political leadership at sub-country and district level, and their increasing capacity to influence discussions in council to specific gender needs ix | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

 Formation of ‘created spaces’ through the community dialogues, where citizens are ‘in charge’ and taking the lead in engaging with duty bearers on specific concerns related to service delivery and accountability for public resources.

6. CROSS CUTTING ISSUES – APPROACHES AND METHODOLOGIES

The Community Based Monitoring and Evaluation System (CBMES) The CBMES is an approach that ultimately seeks to engage citizens in monitoring the effective use of resources in a structured and systematic manner. First introduced in Uganda in early 2000 by the Uganda Debt Network (UDN), the tool has been tested with various communities in different parts of the country and over the years has demonstrated the ability to positively influence civic awareness and action for greater accountability for quality service delivery at community level. The CBMES approach has four key steps; (i) identification of community monitors by community members. This is done during a community meeting and is preceded by discussions about human rights and why citizens should play an active role in monitoring the use of public (their) resources (ii) training and equipping the community monitors with the necessary monitoring tools. The training is carried out over three weeks and is comprehensive. It covers rights (RBA), local government planning processes and advocacy. The training is practical and involves the trainers working with the monitors to conduct monitoring and develop an advocacy plan. (iii) Convening community dialogues as a way to facilitate community participation, provide a forum for community monitors to report to their communities about findings, as well as a platform for citizens to engage with duty bearers on specific concerns about service delivery (iv) follow up meetings/engagement with targeted duty bearers.

The CBMES approach therefore seeks to create civic awareness, and stimulate consciousness through information sharing and ultimately serve as a vehicle for civic action. The role of the community monitors is therefore to be a catalyst in this regard- not to replace the role of citizens in the action, but to provide information that can be used for collective civic action.

The results from the use of the CBMES approach are many and are captured in DCA partner reports. Changes range from halting road works and getting contractors to rebuild roads in the Teso region, and successfully advocating for the construction of a new unit for a health center II in Rupa sub-county in Moroto district. In addition to results relating to the quality of service delivery, the CBMES monitors have also been engaged in promoting civic action and responsibility for instance the go-back-to-school campaign for Rupa primary school in Moroto, where community monitors were actively engaged in convincing parents to ensure that they send their children to school. This particular action has had mixed results, however it can serve as a model is other influential stakeholders are engaged in the campaign.

During meetings with MONARLIP, it was pointed out that the findings from the CBMES have also been used to inform discussions during the Barazas, which are State structures aimed at promoting accountability for effective service delivery. MONRALIP has also invested resources to support the convening of Barazas because they are a forum that is attended by the entire district leadership, and therefore presentation opportunity to provide feedback and influence actions of technical officers at district level.

The CBMES has also enhanced profile of some individual community monitors and created the opportunity for leadership to emerge. For instance in the Teso region, where UDN has been operating for a while, some LCV chairpersons and other political leaders evolved through the x | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

structures of the CBMES. The community dialogues provide a ‘created space’ for community participation. Created, because it is about civil society determining the agenda and calling on duty bearers to engage with them. The unique characteristics are (i) called by the community (ii) facilitated/managed by the community (iii) based on the agenda of the community monitors (iv) selected duty bearers are invited to participate (iv) held at community level.

The challenges: During meetings with partners, the presentation of the link between CBMES and VSLA seemed to focus more as a way of sustaining the CBMES activities. However, it is more than this and should be looked at as contributing to widening the space for CSO organizing, creating opportunity for further engagement and benefit from economic empowerment programmes. Should be careful that the money focus should not distract the partners from the fundamentals of CBMES. Introducing CBMES may also require clear roles and responsibilities, as well as incorporate basic training on how effective VSLA groups function. An assessment of lessons learned and good practices from this pilot should be captured and used to inform partners’ future interventions.

CBMES monitors wield significant power, particularly in a culture that respects hierarchy and glorifies leadership. This power and position can be used to promote community development or abused, depending on the intentions of the monitors e.g. determining the priority issues. An example was in Moroto when they choose to build a school fence and used 120million- was that a community priority if they do not value education? A possible check for this is to ensure that the framework for accountability by the monitors to their constituency is guaranteed. Ideally this should be during the community dialogues, however, during the field visit and discussion with a community in Katanga, Moroto district, they mentioned that the community dialogues are held at sub-county level and so not all community members are able to participate. They proposed conducting the dialogues closer to themselves (their community).

Recommendations  Clear formulation of the link between CBMES and VSLA, and assess lessons learned and good practices from the pilots.

 Consider incorporating advocacy for a review and more effective implementation of the Barazas and particularly seek to embed Barazas in district processes, formally link the findings of the Barazas into Government’s M&E and performance management systems. A clear distinction will need to be made between the Barazas and community dialogues- Barazas are government led and facilitated and an opportunity for district technical staff to report to citizens about their work. On the other hand, community dialogues are community led, are held to share monitoring reports, agree on key issues and also prepare for the Barazas. Community dialogues have selected duty bearers in attendance, while Barazas tend to have all heads of district technical departments, as well as the political leadership.

 For community monitors to shift from monitoring per se to actually influencing citizens and catalyzing joint civic action, may require them to work with other key community structures (formal and informal) like the farmers groups, women’s groups, and structures of religious institutions that can complement efforts to create awareness and mobilize citizens. CBMES as a strategy should therefore consider how to deliberately engage these structures in community dialogues, and where possible, in any follow up actions. Organisations like MONRALIP, with its faith based membership are well placed to do this, and will be testing this model in an upcoming programme. xi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

 The monitors also have power and influence- how can they use this effectively, to ensure that the voiceless are given space and ensure that they ‘guide’ communities- it is about leadership that has been entrusted to them. Consider possibly including a module on accountable leadership for the monitors during follow up training, since what they are doing is exercising leadership?

 Consider providing community monitors with a monitoring kit that could include a bag to carry their books, a T-shirt for identification and a water bottle. Also consider having more monitors so that they do not have to spend a lot of time travelling to different points for monitoring, since their work is voluntary.

Facilitating linkages between local and national level for Advocacy

DCA seeks to support partners that work at both local and national level. Ideally, the CBMES and other activities at local level should generate issues/concerns that may require advocacy for policy change or other interventions at national level.The Advocacy model makes the assumption that the locally based partners will be able to identify the issues for upward action by the networks, which is not always the case since partners tend to be busy with a number of issues and may not have the time to follow up on the national advocacy. For the model to be effective there might need to be more parallel communication and perhaps common interventions by partners at both local and national level. This will ensure that partners at both levels have a better understanding of the issues involved, and will therefore be better placed to design appropriate strategies and/or actions. This has been the case with interventions between UDN and MONRALIP who have worked together for some time, as well as partners in Teso that have worked with UDN.

This joint advocacy also offers an opportunity for capacity building for the local based partners for instance, HURINET and the publications that were used for capacity building, UDN and the work with MONARLIP using the online budget tracking system, UWONET and support to the women NGO networks like KAWOU, as well as ACCU’s work with Arelimok. In all these instances, partners on both sides found some benefit in the relationship in terms of new learning. It is only in the case of HURINET that there was a question about the relevance of some of the publications to the target group.

DCA therefore supports locally based partners, as well as national CSOs that are known for their advocacy work on a number of issues, and are mainly networks. However, supporting both locally based and national partners’ means that DCA’s partner portfolio is quite diverse, and that resources are spread thin. Programme officers also spend a lot of time ‘chasing after many partners’ instead of focusing on facilitating learning and fostering networking between a smaller and more strategically selected pool of partners.

The evaluation found that most of DCA partners’ advocacy efforts have enabled them build relationships of mutual respect with key duty bearers, and in the process also facilitated a seat for the CSOs in invited spaces like the Ministry of Finance, the Parliamentary liaison for UJCC, regular engagement with the legal and Parliamentary committee by HURINET and UWONET, among others. Opportunities to get into such spaces exists for other partners like MONARLIP in the Education sector working group in Moroto. The challenge for the CSO partners is how to use their presence in these spaces strategically in order to influence change, and not to view their presence in the spaces as an end in itself. They also need to be cautious about the threat of co-option by some duty bearers. xii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

The evaluation also noted that in many instances, advocacy is geared towards policy change, like bye-laws against SGBV in Moroto and Napak, as well as those aimed at preventing FGM and encouraging education for children. It is however important for the CSO s to recognize that in contexts like Karamoja with deep rooted cultures, advocacy should not only seek to change policy, but also aim to influence mindsets. This will require longer- term interventions with results that will be attained gradually. Such interventions could benefit from active engagement of influential institutions like religious and traditional leaders who can facilitate discussions/conversations with citizens.

Working with and/or supporting Faith Based Organisations DCA deliberately seeks to work with FBOs. Uganda is a ‘religious country’, meaning that almost all of the population ascribe to a religious faith. About 85% ascribe to the Christian faith, 12% are Muslim, and the remaining 3% follow indigenous beliefs, Hinduism, Baha'ism, and Judaism. The Roman Catholic Church has the highest number of followers among the Christians with 42%, the Anglican Church has 36%, and evangelicals, Pentecostals, and Orthodox Church members make up the remaining 22%.

Religious leaders have played a critical role in Uganda’s political, social and economic development, for instance through establishing some of the best performing schools, medical institutions and hospitals, and in 2010 established a national bank, the Centenary bank. Religious leaders, therefore have great influence, especially on social matters, as evidenced by their influence on the decision to table and pass the annulled AHA, as well as their pressure to block the tabling and discussion of the Marriage and Divorce Bill. Politicians have sought to benefit from this influence and to obtain the support of key religious leaders, for instance by giving them vehicles. It has been argued that political pressure and threats have affected the key role that religious leaders should play in discussions about human rights, poor governance, leadership and democratic practice in Uganda.

The challenge However, whilst religious institutions have the potential to advocate for a number of issues and influence political processes like the Uganda Joint Christian Council did during the 2006 elections, by monitoring and calling to question State excesses, and the Acholi Religious Leaders’ Peace Initiative(ARLPI) on the situation of citizens in northern Uganda in the IDP camps, they continually seem to fail to live up to this potential. Some individual religious leaders are vocal on key social and justice issues, however they do so as individuals and not as an institution. A number of factors contribute to this i. political pressure and threats to some religious leaders ii. some have been compromised by the patronage and gifts from political leaders aligned with the Government iii. bureaucratic structures and the ‘internal politics’ of these institutions that makes it difficult for them to operate effectively iv. the ‘NGOisation’ of religious institutions, that has resulted in institutions operating like NGOs with log frames’, as opposed to making the most of their existing structures and doing advocacy and awareness raising work as part of their ministry v. Reduced funding to some faith based organisations as a result of their public support and citizen mobilization for support for the Anti-Homosexuality Act (AHA).

xiii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Recommendations Whilst the FBOs have potential the challenges that they need to address in order to be more effective are also significant. DCA should consider a concerted effort ( perhaps through the ACT Forum) to support the FBOS address some of their more internal challenges, and facilitate more strategic thinking about possible interventions/issues on which they can have significant influence for instance the quality of education, the role of the state and the role of parents in this regard.

The Rights Based Approach (RBA) In a discussion with partners, there were mixed views on the difference that RBA actually makes to programming and results. In fact, some partners argued that it is more difficult to use the RBA because partners are more focused on their immediate needs and may therefore not fully appreciate the relevance of RBA at that point in time. Another challenge DCA partners raised about the application of RBA is when duty bearers ‘provide lip service’ and do not take any action on issues raised, which can be discouraging to the rights holders. Determining indicators and measuring change from RBA also seems to be a challenge.

Where RBA has proved to be effective is when it has been used as a core element of the CBMES, this could be because the citizens are able to work with RBA consistently and are therefore able to see the results of engagement on the basis of rights can produce in practice. Partners also mentioned that when citizens are able to experience the power and influence that knowledge and engagement from the perspective of their rights can have, they are then most likely to continue using it and making the most of their influence to obtain more effective service delivery and accountability for public resources. The results of RBA can thus be seen in the longer-term- RBA is a ‘banking approach’.

The challenges  Not all partners and citizens fully appreciate the use of RBA, particularly at the onset. Secondly, in some of the communities that DCA partners operate, the levels of poverty and trauma as a result of conflicts are so high that it is not possible to engage citizens on their rights when their immediate preoccupation is with immediate needs. In such a situation, DCA partners should explore a balanced (or transition) approach to applying RBA should be explored.  The challenge with using RBA is being able to measure the change. Whilst there are a number of stories of citizen’s engagement and influence, there is no concrete way to measure how these stories are able to influence the wider context a development trajectory at local and national level.

Recommendations Invest more in how to set indicators and measure impact of rights based approaches and specifically continue to explore the explore using the Availability, Affordability, Accessibility and Quality framework. Also invest in a baseline survey at the start of the programme that will be able to inform any M&E framework.

Gender mainstreaming Gender related issues and women’s rights, representation and participation have been highlighted by the DCA programme. Therefore, DCA has been effective in ensuring that its partner portfolio addresses gender equality, and that partners use both the agenda setting and integrationist approaches to gender mainstreaming. The integrationist approach is where partners incorporate gender into their ongoing activities. For instance, ensuring that women are represented amongst the community monitors ( target of 50/50%),that gender related issues xiv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

e.g. women’s access are captured in the CBMES tool, that deliberate efforts are made to engage and support women to be active participants, that service delivery areas selected are also determined on the basis of a gender analysis.

On the other hand, the agenda setting approach deliberately seeks to highlight and promote women’s rights. An example of this is the support to women’s political participation with the grant to UWONET. Another example is the envisaged SRHR component that focuses on FGM prevention and advocating for the SRHR of women and girls who are vulnerable to this cultural practice.

The challenges  Not all partners have been able to effectively mainstream gender in their interventions  The current support to women’s rights and gender equality are important, but may not necessarily address the core challenges of the cultural and traditional attitudes that foster inequality. The programme should consider supporting more interventions that engage the traditional and religious structures and get more male champions to support gender equality. This is particularly critical because of the important role that culture and tradition plays in the target regions, as well as changing gender relations in the post- conflict situation, as well implications on gender and power relations as a result of the disarmament.

Recommendations  Set objectives, results and indicators on gender equality  Gender analysis to inform programme design and partner interventions (to be reviewed and updated regularly) for instance the implications of disarmament on gender relations.  Consider support to a national women’s manifesto as a way to highlight and maintain consistent focus on agenda setting issues. The manifesto should have region specific issues that can in turn inform and be the basis of the partners’ collective actions/campaigns for gender equality and women’s rights at both local and national level.  Social and cultural barriers to women’s rights remain and could be addressed more effectively by balancing the support to political and community leadership and representation with more engagement at community level with traditional and other leaders about the importance of gender equality for the whole community. The work on building women’s leadership should therefore also consider fostering dialogues and the use of collaborative leadership to address the structural and cultural causes of gender inequality. Links to VSLA and women’s economic empowerment may also be useful.

Mainstreaming SRHR into Active Citizenship, some reflections Addressing SRHR within the framework of active citizenship can be attained in three ways: i. Firstly, by mainstreaming quality of SRHR services for women and girls as part of the CBMES monitoring tool. This will allow for the community monitors to regularly track progress in this regard and identify any areas for improvement and or advocacy in good time. SRHR issues will through this also consistently be part of the agenda of community dialogue meetings, offering an opportunity to create greater awareness amongst citizens, as well as obtain accountability from duty bearers. ii. Support to the women councillors could also ensure that they pass a bye law in this regard, and that councils invest/prioritise women’s and girls SRHR in the district budget and programmes. The councilors can then also specifically monitor the effective usage of these resources with other CSOs

xv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

iii. Possible common advocacy (at sub-county, district and national level) for effective implementation of key legislation like the FGM Act and the SGBV Act, all of which have been enacted into law, but their implementation remains inconsistent. The common advocacy could be undertaken a by a group of NGOs either under the Umbrella of UWONET, or as a coalition of other SGBV and SRHR organisations like the SRHR Alliance. The responsibility for the formation of such a Coalition would lie with UWONET. In the alternative, an appropriate national partner who understands these issues beyond legal analysis, and who is willing to engage fully on these should be explored. For instance, FIDA (U)

xvi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

ANNEX 2: RIGHT TO FOOD AND HUMANITARIAN ACTION PROGRAMME

A2:1 RELEVANCE The objective of the Right to Food Programme and Humanitarian Action was highly relevant to the needs of local Communities and complimented national and district policies to address deprivation and acute poverty in the areas where the projects were implemented. DCA correctly identified very vulnerable communities in Teso and Karamoja as well refugees in Rwamwanja and Adjumani refugee settlements. The evaluation deduced the rights based approach was appropriate as a bedrock of ensuring that right-holders increasingly become capable of claiming and upholding their right to food and livelihood sustainability. Thirdly, this programme attempt to address the immediate and structural causes behind the food insecurity and impoverishment created a foundation for the sustainability of the interventions using FFS and APFS which later supported creation of VSLAs and CBMES groups.

Humanitarian Action Partners in the refugee settlements appreciate the sustained effort and investment made by DCA in responding to the emergent, rehabilitation and development needs of refugees mainly from the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan. DCA core partner LWF has seen its capacity built over the last three years that has made it more relevant in responding to the needs of the right-holders (also referred to as ‘people of concern’) in the refugee settlements. A concern for other partners with whom LWF is operating is that Government needs to do more on the legislative side. Refugee response is not a decentralized function under the Local Government Act and while it is under the mandate of the new ministry of disaster preparedness, it’s a function that is heavily underfunded. Refugee response is responded to in a rather adhoc and on ‘as of when it occurs’ reactionary basis which skews the burden to local and international development partners.

As a consequence there is a general concern (especially on the part of UNHCR and Red Cross) that government through district structure is not showing movement to address critical public service delivery gaps in the refugee settlement especially water, health and education. UNHCR has been categorical in stating that it will not be able to support public service delivery in the refugee settlement for long. In response, the Office of the Prime Minister, LWF and UNHCR has entered a tripartite agreement to holistically address the challenges facing refugees under a new ‘Re-Hope’ Strategy and DCA will have to take a keen interest in how this is implemented in years to come. There is also a need for a deliverable effort to make interventions more youth- focused.

Right to Food Programme

The Right to Food programme is highly relevant to the Teso and Karamoja communities that were targeted since they face severe food shortages due to long spells of harsh climatic conditions. The evaluation felt that the most vulnerable and most deserving right-holders were targeted. Added to this the self-targeting criteria for the formation of groups under various and approaches increased the robustness of this identification criteria. DCA’s approaches DRR, VSLA, CBMES, and APFS/FFS were highly relevant to achievement of programme objectives and made it easy for DCA partners to associate themselves with right-holders in a manner that allowed organisation in operation. For instance C+D, ULA, and SOCADIDO were all focused on seeing through the approaches while collaborating on cross-cutting aspects and without xvii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

overlapping. It was important to note that districts felt that DCA interventions were highly timely and relevant.

A2:2 EFFECTIVENESS OF DCA APPROACHES AND METHODOLOGIES To ensure that right-holders become increasingly capable of claiming and upholding their right to food and livelihood sustainability to address structural causes behind the food insecurity and vulnerability, DCA introduced five main approaches to empower right-holders in refugee settlement (under the Humanitarian Action) as well as in Teso and Karamoja (under Right to Food programme). These included: Linking relief to resettlement/rehabilitation to development (LRRD); community based VSLA, Agro-pastoral/farmer field schools (APFS/FFS), community managed disaster risk reduction (CMDRR), and community based monitoring and evaluation system (CBMES). While at infancy these methodologies have begun to gain an adhesion within communities have demonstrated the potential to turn around the lives of right-holders in the years to come. However there are a lot of improvements that can be made.

Community based Village and Loans Association (VSLA)

VSLA as a methodology is predominantly aimed at lifting the saving culture among right-holders and empower them economically to purchase food and non-food items at the household especially in times of severe food shortage. The methodology builds on peoples/communities productive assets through accumulation of savings allowing for longer term planning, as well as, its small credit facility provides the resources for productive investment/diversification. The evaluation noted that women constituted the majority of savers in VSLA and this had empowered them economically and ‘saved them from having to demand on their husbands for the every little thing’ which meant a lot to women interviewed.

Secondly, VSLA groups have grown to serve as a platform for linking with markets. The broad participation (and benefit to) by women has attracted men and gradually the partners have recorded higher numbers of male right-holders in VSLAs. Secondly, it was evident that increased farm productivity has generated higher outputs which upon sell have enabled right- holders to save more linking APFS/FSS to VSLA. The evaluation noted further that leaders in groups under both methodologies were also active monitors under CBMES and some even went on to be elected as local leaders at various levels. Right-holders noted that savings from VSLAs had enabled them to take children to school and to start small businesses including goat rearing.

The VSLA have become a social safety-net system through its emergency funds in case of illness and similar where funds can be released without paying interest. Required savings leads to accumulation of assets as a cushion in case of emergency (which right-holders can lean on when they hitherto had to sell essential items in terms of emergency). In Karamoja some VSLA groups have been registered at district level as community based organisations.

However there are some challenges that need to be ironed out: i. There is still no clarity on what happens or what should happen after ’breaking the box’. While savers reserve the right to use the savings for items of their choice, the fact that households do not have seeds to plant in the next season demonstrated a lack of focus and proactivity in investing the savings. It was recommended that a group leaders where

xviii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

possible retained say 10% of the VSLA box savings so that it purchases seed in bulk for planting in the subsequent season. ii. There is need to train right-holders in enterprise selection so that inasmuch as the savers have the liberty on how they use their portion saved at the end of 9-12 months, they also have an option to select an enterprise in which to invest. There were mention of some right-holders purchasing cows from thier savings which on the surface seemed ideal but not efficient as the costs associated with raising a cow is substantially higher than its value. This is why the option of raising chicken, goats and other smaller scale businesses could have been more prudent. iii. It is important that right-holders that are unable to save consistently are not de- registered from VSLAs but given a consideration that keeps them engaged. iv. Instead of asking the district or DCA or other people to add funds to the box, right- holders should instead ask them to support enterprises that increase thier ability to save. Adding to the box would in compromise the whole idea of saving and whole purpose of VSLA.

Agro-Pastoralist Field Schools and Farmer Field Schools The evaluation concluded that it was prudent for DCA to focus on agricultural extension through exposing right-holders to modern-day farming technologies to increase the productivity on thier farming. This is very effective method of increasing food security and lifting right-holders from poverty and associated vulnerabilities. The Agro-Pastoralist field Schools (APFS) and Farmer Field Schools (FFS) groups have to a small extent transformed the thinking around farming (planting in line, using irrigation practices, and crop husbandry practices) which has in turn increase households’ availability to an extended array of crops. It was not possible to access the level of adoption of the learned technologies and if learning has ’moved from farmer schools to household farms’. During focus group discussions, it was evident that right-holders were keen to demonstrate the hands-on training they received and how it had helped them to farm better. The approach also included use of kitchen gardens and preservation of crops for food scarce periods. Emphasis was also laid on short-season crops although some (like egg plants in Karamoja) will need time to take root in some communities as they are relatively new.

APFS/FFS has introduced eggplant, tomato, onion seeds, cabbages, saving of cowpeas leaves as some of the enterprises. In the refugee settlement right-holders are still more inclined to planting maize on a large scale and there are a variety of other short-season crops that can be introduced. In addition, because of the important linkages, it has been possible (albeit on a small scale) that groups under APFS/FFS are also serving the purpose of advocacy. SOCADIDO utilised the opportunity to advance the issues of rights protection and individual empowerment. Men who participated in the groups noted that domestic violence in homes had reduced as a result of women empowerment and the general awareness raised from the participation in APFS/FFS groups.

While these successes are important going forward, it is important to address the following challenges that these methodologies are facing: i. Access to land for cultivation continues to be a challenge moreso in Karamoja. As Karamoja makes the transition from pastorism to agropastorism there need to appreciate the difficulties in making this transition (this is in reference to grazing cattle enchroaching xix | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

on farm lands etc). In Teso, there is a real concern on land fragmentation as household head partition land to their sons leaving daughters out and in other cases land grabbed from widows or divorcees. In the refugee settlement the youth who constitute 57-60% of all right-holders have no say on how land is used leaving them heavily dependent on their parents and guardians. In the event that young men chose to marry, they have little to raise their new families with. In general there seems to be limited legal options within the land laws and while ULA is working hard especially in Karamoja to ensure communities protect their land, the political powers and formal processes do not seem able to help. ii. It will be important for DCA through her partners to improve service extension services especially for households keeping animals. This calls to the introduction of the livestock aspects under APFS which were not part of the implementation and which were omitted at project design. For a cattle keeping population in Karamoja this was a glaring omission by the Partner C+D. Partners should work closely with the district production officials in this regard. iii. Arranging exchange visits among groups and across districts (for instance groups in Karamoja visiting groups in Teso) could be an eye-opening learning opportunity. iv. There is need to set up storage facilities for some groups with sizeable volume of harvest so that farmers are able to store their harvest, sell in bulk and at times when prices rise. v. If farmers are not able to generate own farm-saved seed its recommended that they use farm schools to learn, harvest and save seed that can be distributed for group members to plant or utilse savings under VSLA to purchase bulk seed from a private supply with a reputation to supply high quality certified seed.

Community managed Disaster Risk Reduction (CMDDR) – integrated in APFS/FFS

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) was set up as a deliberate approach to address challenges related to natural and artificial disasters so that they do not compromise the performance of other approaches and methodologies. The evaluation deduced that this integration has not yet been fully embraced. DRR is an integrated activity but the procedures of this integration is an area that partners did not seem to fully grasp. Having noted this, the evaluation appreciate the work done by DCA partners in this regard to help communities set up contingency plans. SOCADIDO trained communities in seven (7) parishes and helped them identify key issues. It was reported to the evaluation that these plans have now been incorporated in the district development plan for Amuria. It was good to note that this particular plan was implemented and the district supported Obalang sub-county with funds for a trees nurseries. SOCADIDO also trained teams in early warning systems to alert authorities where there are indications (or severely prone to) of disasters. However, there evaluation was told that there is wide discontent that formally broadcasted weather forecasts on the radios usually do not in most cases accurately report the ‘correct’ forecast. This has sustained the belief in traditional ‘weather forecast myths’ like the colour of flowering of some tree species etc. to predict the weather.

In Karamoja C+D and Uganda Land Alliance are working to address issues of land degradation with ordinances to regulate use of natural resources. The land board is at district level and not yet formally constituted. This makes all decisions on land difficult and many cases are pending. It also makes it a problem to enforce the obligations of the Land Act and to protect the security of tenure and land rights of pastoralists and agro pastoralists. In both Teso and Karamoja as well as in the refugee settlements, there is widely held fears that indiscrimate cutting of trees for xx | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

charcoal burning, brick making and use at households as fuelwood is a real threat to the environment.

The evaluation makes three proposals to improve this methodology: i. It is important that the next country program focuses further on aspects of climate change including tree planting, reducing soil erosion, use of organic matter to support soil health and advocacy tougher legislation of tree cutting and bush burning; ii. There is more that can be done with the metrological stations at Entebbe to support transmission of accurate weather forecast data for Teso and Karamoja including rain volumes, wind strength and rain partners; iii. Communities have expressed an interest in fuel-efficient stoves, peddling pumps for irrigation, and solar power and this is an issue that DCA can look at investing in in years to come.

Community Based Monitoring & Evaluation System (CBMES) The evaluation deduced that within a short time the programme (at least in Teso) has been able to embrace, train and implement the CBMES approach. There are CBMES monitors in Amuria who with support from SOCADIDO are able to monitor and evaluation the implementation of government programs. As has already been noted, it was interesting to see that most of the CBMES monitors emanated from group leadership under VSLAs, and FFS. However CBMES has not yet taken off under the humanitarian action programme and in Karamoja. In the Teso district of Amuria 10 advocates were trained in three parishes in various aspects including the understanding of the rights based approach, land matters, monitoring of government programs and working with local authorities. However during the focus group meeting with some of these members, it was evident that there is a conflict going on between them and political leaders who view them as ‘another’ establishment operating outside the law. But inasmuch as there is this challenge, the communities seemed to have more faith in CBMES monitors than in the government systems. This a quote of how the community perceived the work done by CBMES:

“CBMES advocates have been keen to ensure proper budgeting is done –and that the right amounts are being spent i.e. not cheating on cement or other construction materials because right now there are instance where budgeting made but not under a transparent process”

The challenge is that their views are not much appreciated by the local council which has been ‘uncomfortable’ in allowing them to sit in council meetings. To further this approach the evaluation makes the following recommendations: i. There is need for further training of CBMES monitors especially in M&E and documenting and communicating results; ii. The partners can look into providing some basic incentives like stationary, bicycles, or where possible some funds to facilitate their monitoring expenses especially travelling from place to place.

xxi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

A2:3 ASSESSMEN OF THE EFFICIENCY IN PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION The Right to Food and Humanitarian Action Programme is evaluated as having been efficient is use of financial and human resources but more can be done to improve. The table below shows the level of absorptive capacity as reported by the 2014 annual audit reporting.

Total Project Budgets Total Absorption PARTNER PROJECT Implementation Including Consumption For (%) Period Admin 2011- The Period- DKK 2014 RIGHT to FOOD FINANCIAL

SPENDING 2011-2014 - ULA 2011-2013 90,950.00 89,745.38 98.7 ULA 2011-2016 2,278,276.00 2,057,475.03 90.3 SOCADIDO 2010-2011 650,484.89 1,044,471.97 160.6 2012-2016 (2012- SOCADIDO 1,044,455.00 1,189,470.84 113.9 14) OCODI 2012-2016 NA -1,518.79 LWF- Katakwi 2012-2016 1,363,869.00 1,352,377.81 99.2 LWF- Emergency Resp.W-Ug 2012 555,556.00 553,568.29 99.6 LWF Rwamwanja 2012 1,161,763.00 1,086,625.93 93.5 LWF-Adjumani 2014 567,631.00 572,586.11 100.9 LWF - Adjumani S.Sudan 2014 1,000,000.00 436,799.03 43.7 CPAR 2010-2011/12 1,856,879.00 1,850,276.88 99.6 CPAR/C&D/ACTED-KALIP- EU 2012-2013 9,519,446.10 9,413,942.95 98 .9 SSD/ACTED/C&D - ECHO DPIII 2009-2011 435,273.62 475,398.62 109.2 SSD - INCODEP 2009-2010 NA -44,135.36 SSD/ACTED/C&D-DPIV-ECHO 2012-2013 3,738,706.50 4,785,158.48 128 SSD/ACTED/C&D-DPV-ECHO 2013-2014 8,687,370.50 10,933,535.61 125.9 DI 2013 Consortion 2013-2016 4,126,418.00 3,619,837.22 87.7 COPACSO 2014- 201,738.87 296,501.24 147 ACT Advocacy 2014 471,808.00 301,402.63 63.9 Right to Food - Cross cutting 2012-2016 3,829,722.00 3,486,516.87 91 TOTAL Spending Right to Food 41,580,347.48 43,500,036.74 103.1% 2011-2014 Grand Total 73,918,520.16 75,053,805.23 101.5

There were concerns about the duration of the projects with partners showing preference of same resources but spread over a longer time rather than having a lot of resources to spend within a short time. There are critical aspects linked to the RBA like empowerment, adaptation after training and other change management aspects that need more than 2-3 years to gain traction and deliver noticeable results/impact.

A2:4 SUSTAINABILITY AND THE LIKELIHOOD OF IMPACT The following are some of the key points that could ensure the sustainability i. Just as it will be under Active Citizenship Programme advocacy thrives under a well- functioning civil society. CBMES will need more time to mature and position itself as a complementary structure to government systems as a local watchdog that ensures right- holders have an entry point to refer their concerns on services they receive. Sharing of xxii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

reports with the local authorities and conducting joint investigations are critical to acceptability and synergy with current community monitoring systems. ii. Facilitate the linking of the VSLA and FFS groups to inputs and markets. Linking to inputs could be the organization of purchase of seeds from a reliable source. Strengthen community organization in marketing their produce at the right time so that they get maximum price for their goods. This will also apply to the sale of cattle. More focus could be on post-harvest handling with the purpose for sale. Collective marketing of produce through FFS. iii. In the longer-term, it may be possible to upscale and develop agricultural production from small scale and subsistence agriculture to viable value chains. This intervention requires a market analysis to identify market demands for products and potential market for products, enhanced skills and technology, business plans, and addressing power and control in the value chain. This intervention will include advocacy for and facilitation of market access. It will also include facilitating links with resource partners and relevant private sector actors. This is most relevant for Teso. iv. In Karamoja, for communities to do petitions, engage in writing with sub-county, or district writing is essential. I recommend that we link up with an organization that does catch up adult literacy. C&D may have this capacity and can build adult literacy as a precondition for effective advocacy to happen. v. Work towards securing communal lands and advocate against individualization and subdivision of communal lands as this will work counter to pastoralist to properly manage and utilize rangelands. vi. Use of household economy assessment as baseline. HEA is a livelihood-based framework for analyzing the ways people access the things that they need to survive and maintain their livelihood. It help determine people’s food and non-food needs and identify appropriate means of assistance, whether short term emergency assistance or longer term development programs or policy changes. HEA defines livelihood zones as a geographic area in which households obtain their basic survival needs, notable food and cash income. This means that they also typically have similar socio-economic groupings of similar asset bases, as well as relatively similar consumption patterns. These similarities apply to both good and bad years, in that coping strategies in response to shocks are also relatively similar within the same livelihood zone. The HEA could be used to generate a baseline for the livelihood-based activities of right-holders.

A2:5 RECOMMENDATIONS AND WAY FORWARD Overall the implementation of projects under Humanitarian Action and Rights to Food will remain relevant in the next DCA country programme. It will be prudent to focus on building on what has already been achieved and the following are suggestion to make even further improvements:

Relevance It is important that the next country programme focuses more on advocacy, community empowerment and collaborations between implementing partners and less on service delivery. For humanitarian action, there is now a ray of hope provided by the tripartite framework xxiii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

between DCA partner LWF, the Office of the Prime Minister and UNHCR. This provides an opportunity to broaden the framework for LRRD in that aspect. For Right to Food, the APFS/FFS remain highly relevant although much more can be done ensure uptake of the demonstrated technologies on farms and document trends in household income and on-farm productivity. It will be difficult for DCA to provide the relevance of these technologies/approaches if there is no concrete evidence of the impact these have had on farming systems, seed systems, soil health and market trends. Exercising right to food will require further investment in nutrition aspects especially for children and expectant mothers. While the evaluation noted that more foods is being produced it will be important to study (for instance) the trends in number of meals consumed daily.

Effectiveness of approaches and methodologies The success recorded in the approaches and methodologies so far should transit this programme into a new phase that strengthens critical aspects of availability, access, adequacy and quality. Linkages between VSLA and APFS/FFS to DRR (but to a limited extent) and CBMES should be explored. For instance leaders in most of these groups have become active CBMES monitors and even joining politics. In such aspects partners should be able to replace them proactively to ensure continuity. Having leaders ‘wearing various hats’ is important but only limited from one leader to another. In some instances it can lead to loss in oversight since they cannot be effective everywhere. In the next country programme, DCA partners should be bold to focus more on advocacy and less on provision of inputs and other services. This will require proactive investments like gradual and inherent systems to set up stores, grain/cereal banks, post-harvest loss reduction, under APFS/FFS and better enterprise selection, collective marketing under VSLA. The new country programme will need to continue the efforts to strengthen the land administration in Karamoja starting with community and traditional systems which are much linked to areal land committees. A new approach will have to be sought to ensure land boards are fully constituted although it is a process whose solution will need advocacy and lobby at the ministerial level rather than at district level. The evaluation supports the idea of proceeding with Cash Transfer Programming especially now that LWF has obtained the government green light after sustained advocacy with OPM. Climate change adaptation should be included in the new program design under DRR especially on three aspects: tree planting, soil health; and harvested rain systems that can support irrigation.

Improving DCA partnerships All partners stressed that empowerment takes time and that they would prefer for funds to be allocated over a longer time to achieve results. However, LWF, SOCADIDO, ULA and C+D welcomed the plans to start a country program and feel that a 5-year or so program would allow them sufficient time to see through most of the projects planned. Partners noted that the new partnership policy is important in coordination of work done by other and clarity was needed on how best to engage and benefit from the activities and engagements under the partnership forum.

ANNEX 3: HIV/AIDS AND SEXUAL REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND RIGHTS

1. INTRODUCTION The DCA HIV/AIDS and Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) Programme is targeted at advancing a right based approach to prevent and mitigate the impact of HIV and AIDS. The programme has been implemented in Karamoja, Teso, Rakai and Lyantonde districts in Uganda in the period 2011-2015.

1.1 Methodology xxiv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Evaluation rationale DCA GLRO commissioned a joint programme evaluation of all three DCA programme types in Uganda in order to: utilize the findings, conclusions and recommendations to provide substantial guidance to the design of the future Uganda country programme and to have those findings feed into the Global Report and to DCA organizational learning. However, the programmes in question have not yet come to an end (HIV/AIDS/SRHR 2011-2015). The evaluation thus cannot be regarded as a classic final evaluation but it will seek to assess the likelihood of achieving initially contextualized objectives by the end of the planned programme period. The rationale for performing the evaluation prematurely is to allow for timely entry of recommendations from the evaluation for the development of DCA Uganda country programme.

Review team for HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme evaluation Lead consultant: Maiken Mansfeld (external international consultant), Support: Janepher Taaka (DCA programme officer PT4), Phoebe Mutonyi (DCA programme officer PT4)

Methodology and selection criteria While it would have been desirable to undertake a classic impact evaluation, the conditions and set up of the programme have not allowed for a counterfactual scenario to contribute with-and- without scenarios, furthermore baseline data were not available at programme level. A general summative and participatory evaluation approach was employed based on the following four aspects: (I) Using the OECD-DAC criteria to assess performance to the extent possible without quantifiable baseline data. This will be complemented by the (II) ‘Most Significant Change technique’. The evaluation furthermore had a strong emphasis on the (III) Assessment of DCA partnerships, as well as (IV) Evaluating the gender inclusive rights-based approach employed in the programme. This evaluation of the DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme concerns projects implemented under DCA programme type 4 in Uganda within the time period 2011-2015, the specific 11 projects are presented in table 1.

Table 1. HIV/AIDS/SRHR project overview, DCA joint programme evaluation 2015 Partners Project implementation period Active/ inactive partner RACA 2011-2014 * Active partner 2014-2016 CIPA 2011-2013* Active partner 2014-2016 RACOBAO 2012-2015 Active partner POZIDEP/REACH 2011-2014* Inactive partners TPO 2012- 2015 Active partner UNASO 2014-2015 Active partner UNERELLA+ 2013-2014 (evaluation not Inactive partner (Contract available) cancelled) COU-TEDDO 2012-2014 (project evaluation Active partner pending) (2015-2016 potential extension) C&D-HURINET 2014-2016 Active partners * Project evaluation was available

xxv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

While it is not the intention to give a detailed evaluation of all 11 projects concerned, this programme evaluation will provide the overall findings and related recommendations gathered from the following sources:  Document review and analysis (see list of reviewed documents in annex)  DCA GRLO staff interviews (see annex)  Survey questionnaire sent to all (8) active partners  Anonymous partnership online survey sent to all DCA partners  Field visits to three active projects in the south western Uganda, Lyantonde District, (RACOBAO) and North Eastern Uganda, Katakwi and Kaberamaido districts (TPO and COU-TEDDO) (see annex for detailed study tools)  Roundtable discussion with DCA partners  Roundtable discussion with representatives from ACT member organizations  De-briefing session DCA and partners

During field visits semi structured/in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were carried out with DCA partner staff, key legal and moral duty bearers, and key rights holders. While the overall themes for these interviews and FGDs were pre-determined, extensive probing was used to gain more insight into emerging topics. Full list of informants is provided in the annex. Selection criteria for field visit sites comprise:  Represent traditional as well as more innovative approaches and projects, including looking into the balance between strategic service delivery, capacity building and advocacy  Cover projects/activities at both local and national level as well as the link between the two Longer term interventions  Cover and include the following approaches: Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLA), Community-led advocacy through the Community Based Monitoring and Evaluations Systems (CBMES) approach, Start Awareness Support Action (SASA!) approach  Involve both local and national, faith-based and secular partners, as well as international partners  Involve local government structures and actors – for advocacy targeting as well as networking and coordination. The evaluation applies a mixed method of qualitative and quantitative data analysis and the consultant used ‘progressive focusing’ for data analysis (i.e. the qualitative data analysis presented an iterative and reflexive process that began as data were collected rather than after data collection has ceased28).

1.2 Limitations The main limitation of this evaluation concerns that the DCA programme under evaluation did not have baseline data from where specific success can be measured. Furthermore the lack of a control group/situation prevents inferring particular changes reported as a result of programme implementation. However, some specific results are still relevant to report on because they are so unique that it would be unlikely that any other project or circumstances could have affected this change. Yet, these limitations should be kept in mind throughout the evaluation. This evaluation therefore seeks to utilize the ‘most significant change’ methodology, coupled with case stories and quantitative data when available and a judgment of the likelihood that change was achieved because of the programme.

28Stake, 1995, on Progressive Focusing xxvi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

1.3 Contextual update The latest national wide data on the HIV epidemic in Uganda reported an HIV prevalence at a national average of 7.3% (women 8.3%; men: 6.1%)29. MOH projections indicate a total of 1,618,233 people living with HIV in 2013; including 1,441,285 adults, and 176,948 children below 15 years. However, there has recently been a reduction in the number of people detected with HIV annually in Uganda (from 160,000 in 2011 to 137,000 in 2014). The reduction has almost exclusively been in relation to mother-to-child- transmission (MTCT) which has fallen from 28,000 cases in 2011 to 8000 cases in 2014. Adults (>15 yrs.) thus have a continued relatively stable and high HIV incidence over the last 4 years. About 380 Ugandans are infected with HIV every day (UAC website 2015) and Uganda is among the top 10 countries in the world who contributes with most new HIV cases30.

By the end of December 2014, 737,658 PLHIV in Uganda were receiving ART. 69% of ART- eligible individuals (below CD4 350) were on treatment countrywide in 2013, which is a great achievement over a relatively short time. Between July 2013 and June 2014 almost 180,000 patients were enrolled on ART, the plan is to enroll 250,000 more in 2015 alone31. Yet only about 10% of the cost for HIV prevention and treatment programmes in Uganda is covered by the state, international donors fund the remaining. The increase in PLHIV on ART has also caused a decline in AIDS related deaths, dropping from 73,000 cases in 2011 to 61,000 in 201332. However the roll-out of ART sets high demands to monitoring of CD4 count, and viral load technology which are not prevalent in the vast majority of health centres handling HIV patients in Uganda. This coupled with the fact that uninterrupted access to ART through-out life is a major challenge in Uganda presents a very dangerous cocktail and could have catastrophic consequences for Uganda, and the world as such, both in terms of human lives lost but also severe economic challenges, in terms of ART resistance development and onward transmission of resistant HIV strains. Between 2008 and 2012 the prevalence of drug-resistant HIV strains in Uganda had risen from 8.6%to 11.6%, which is 3 times higher than in other sub-Saharan countries33.

42% of all new infections projected in the latest Modes of Transmission (MOT) model from 2008/934 were among persons in mutually monogamous heterosexual relationships; while another 46 percent were among persons in multiple sexual unions. 11 percent of the new infections were projected to be among sex worker clients, partners of sex workers, and sex workers themselves. Because of the criminalization of sex work in Uganda and reliance of self- reported data for this study, it should however be expected that sex work has a greater role to the spread of HIV than portrayed in this study. In general, and possibly due to the criminalization of sex work, there is a severe lack of data on sex workers and the relation to the HIV epidemic in Uganda.

29Uganda AIDS Indicator Survey 2011 30UNAIDS global report 2014 31 UAC, NADIC webpage: http://nadic.uac.go.ug/nadic/system/tdf/products/factsheets/Progress.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=127 accessed 3 April 2015. 32UNGASS 2014 33 Hamers RL et al. HIV-1 drug resistance in antiretroviral-naive individuals in sub-Saharan Africa after rollout of antiretroviral therapy: a multicentre observational study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2011 Oct;11(10):750-9. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70149-9. Epub 2011 Jul 27. 34http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTHIVAIDS/Resources/375798- 1103037153392/UgandaMoTCountrySynthesisReport7April09.pdf xxvii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

About 10% of all new HIV infections are among children infected through MTCT35. The major problem in terms of MTCT is that ANC attendance and health facility deliveries are still low (41%), and poor post-natal care service delivery - only 37% of exposed infants received ART in 2013)36Paediatric ART is only delivered at on third of all HCIII37.

Condom use among those with more than one sexual partner during the last 12 months was very low at only 15% in 201338. HIV testing rate increased to 60% in 2013 (who had taken an HIV test and knew the result over the last 12 months). A study in Kampala in 2012 contracted out by the MARPs Network found HIV prevalence at 35.7 percent among sex workers (n=503); 16.7 percent among injecting drug users (n=54); 9.3 percent in fisher folk (n=321); 9.1 percent in MSM (n=398), 6.6 percent in truckers (n=213), and 1.9 percent in uniformed forces (n=415). (UNGASS report 2014). However, distinct regional differences exists (In Kalangala fisher community the prevalence of HIV was 37% in 2012.)

HIV and SRHR is highly interrelated and over the past 5-10 years this connection has been recognized at international level, and the trend in HIV generalized epidemics as witnessed in Uganda has ever since been to move from “HIV programming” to the more broader and inclusive “SRHR programming” or even for HIV programmes to directly targeting health system strengthening. According to the latest UNGASS report, 51% of ever-married or partnered women aged 15-49 have experienced physical or sexual violence from a spouse in the past 12 months, of which 21% had experienced spousal sexual violence39.

There is a large regional variation in HIV prevalence in Uganda. HIV prevalence is highest (12.5% women; 8.4% men) in central Uganda (inkl. Rakai and Lyantonde Districts) and lowest in the Mid-eastern region of Uganda (4.4% women; 3.8% men). In Teso and Karamoja regions, the HIV prevalence was lower than the national average (about 5.0-5.5% in 2011), but had rapidly increased from 2.5% in 200540. Prevalence is however strongly influenced by other factors41 than HIV transmission rates and caution should be taken when interpreting such data. Violence from a spouse was particularly high in the regions of Eastern (64.2 percent), North (60.6 percent), West Nile (55.2 percent), and East Central (52.1 percent).

2. Relevance of programme

2.1 Relevance of thematic programmes to identified needs and context

The DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme42 seeks to address structural causes of rights violations in relation to HIV/SRHR. In Uganda, structural causes of rights violations in relation to HIV/SRHR comprise: laws and regulations hampering the attainment of the highest possible enjoyment of SRHR, gender culture male dominance and power, harmful traditional practices, weak health systems, limited coordination on HIV/SRHR issues between key stakeholders; poor

35 UAC, NADIC webpage: http://nadic.uac.go.ug/nadic/system/tdf/products/factsheets/Progress.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=127 accessed 3 April 2015. 36 2013 Uganda HIV and AIDS Country Progress report, UAC, Kampala 2014. 37UNGASS 2014 38Ibid. 39ibid 40Uganda AIDS Indicator Survey 2011 41life expectancy of PLHIV, birth rates, HIV testing rates 42 DCA HIV and AIDS strategic Plan 2011-2015, with an update 2014 “Programme strategy and status of implementation of the HIV/AIDS and SRHR programme” xxviii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

supportive environments within the criminal and justice system, limited participation and low voice of the poor and marginalized, corruption and poverty43.

The DCA HIV/AIDS and Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) Programme is targeted at advancing a rights based approach to prevent and mitigate the impact of HIV and AIDS. Specifically the project has worked with vulnerable rights holders, especially people living with HIV, young women, girls and men in poor fishing and pastoralist’s communities in the programme area to empower and enable them to claim and fulfil their sexual and reproductive health rights resulting in increased protection from HIV and its impacts. Furthermore, the programme has worked with legal as well as moral duty bearers in order to hold them accountable.

The DCA HIV/SRHR programme strategy 2011- 2015 for Uganda targets close to all identified critical structural causes and is thus considered highly relevant. Fighting corruption is not as such present in the strategy but is complemented in some districts by the DCA programme type 1, “Active citizenship”, which addresses corruption. Addressing SGBV as part of an HIV prevention programme is a major strength of the DCA HIV/SRHR programme. SRHR, human rights and gender culture are closely related and the RBA is considered a very sensible approach. The programme design thus corresponds well with what it intends to achieve. The DCA RBA and applied rights based methodologies such as CBMES, VSLA, SASA! are also considered highly relevant methodologies to address the identified structural causes of rights violations in relation to SRHR. Having a separate and final objective of the programme concerning partnerships and capacity strengthening is original and sends a strong signal that this element is important to DCA.

Considering the previously mentioned Global shift of looking at the field of HIV prevention and care more broadly, DCA have also managed to operationalize SRHR components within their original HIV/AIDS programme, particularly with the inclusion of specific projects addressing SGBV, but also in relation to sensitization concerning maternal health and holding authorities accountable for maternal health services. However, the programme still has a predominant emphasis on HIV/AIDS both in the strategy but also in the project descriptions and annual reports. It is however not always clear specifically which SRHR issues have been raised for advocacy issues in CBM groups, some are mentioned in annual reports but it is not clear if that is a complete list. Uganda has one of the highest unmet need for family planning (40%) in the world44, and this could be more strategically addressed in the programme description of a classic SRHR programme and its projects also considering the still extremely high fertility rate in Uganda which is worrying in relation to economic development and food security in the country, the two other main focus areas of DCA in Uganda. Furthermore, two major causes of mortality and morbidity for women in Uganda should receive more attention in a ‘traditional’ SRHR programme: advocacy for skilled birth attendants, and issues related to unsafe abortion which is not mentioned in the current DCA programme and project descriptions. The intersection of the field of SRHR and HIV is particularly clear in relation to the prevention of mother to child transmission of HIV, and considering that in Uganda still about 10% of all new HIV infections are among children, in a combined HIV/SRHR programme such that this of DCA it would have been interesting and relevant to address eMTCT from a rights based perspective to a larger extent that what has so far been conducted under this programme. Overall, increasing integration of SRHR including ANC and post-natal care within existing HIV/AIDS projects will improve

43National Strategic Plan for HIV/AIDS 2011/12-2014/15 Uganda 44 UN 2013f xxix | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

relevance of the programme in a Ugandan context: e.g. budget monitoring of SRHR instead of HIV/AIDS services only; advocacy of paediatric ART delivery at lower health care levels etc.

Legal discrimination based on sexual orientation45 in Uganda has been hotly debated during the programme period in the entire World but has only received little attention in the implementation of projects and other activities under this programme despite the rights based approach being a corner stone for DCA46. Other important legal instruments highly contested in the country during the programme period such as the HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act 201447 as well as the stalled potential updated bill of the Marriage and Divorce bill from 2009, that would make marital rape an offence have also only to a limited extent been addressed with advocacy activities by DCA and partners.

The programme include few projects that focus on alcohol abuse - a major driver of both SGBV and engagement in risky sex in the target districts, but the evaluation finds that additional efforts emphasis in alcohol would have been relevant in particular with regards to SGBV projects. .

HIV key populations in Uganda include: sex workers and their sexual partners, widows, long- distance truck drivers, boda boda riders, fishermen and women living in fishing communities, pastoralists, and other mobile workers.48 Overall the DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme strategy has identified the most vulnerable and HIV at-risk rights holders and they have been well described in the programme strategy. The interpretation of the programme’s ‘MARP approach’ have though been interpreted not as a strategic and targeted approach, but more as a general mainstream approach by working in the areas of affected communities. The section on effectiveness will discuss how this may have reduced the effectiveness of the programme.

The geographical scope of the programme is relevant considering the current epidemiological trends of HIV, prevalence of harmful traditional practices, concentration of key populations and poverty levels. The Uganda AIDS Indicator Survey (2011) indicated that Karamoja was one of the regions that showed a double increase in HIV prevalence in a five-year period - from 2.4% (2005/6) to 5.3% (2011/12) and Karamoja is a region where FGM is still practiced. In Teso, fishing communities are dominant and the rates of SGBV and alcohol abuse is severe. Rakai and Lyatonde districts remain areas of concern for HIV/AIDS/STIs because of remaining harmful traditional practices and because the districts are occupied by pastoral communities and fisherfolks who interface with the population on the mainland. Sex work and truck drivers are very prevalent in transport hubs such as Lyantonde (connecting to Rwanda and Kenya) and Teso (along the highway to Juba). It is estimated that the HIV prevalence in Lyantonde and Rakai district is 12% (National HIV Sero-survey, ANC sentinel sites and RHSP cohort) compared to the current national prevalence of 7.3%. The major risk factors and key populations are thus prevalent in the areas of implementation of the DCA programme.

2.2 Alignment of programme interventions to international, national and district policies and recommendations and human rights instruments and principles

45The Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2014 46“DanChurchAid works with a rights-based and non-discriminatory approach to liberate people from hunger, poverty, destitution and oppression irrespective of their religion, gender, political conviction, race, nationality or ethnicity, disability or sexual orientation”. (DCA global strategy 2015-2022) 47http://www.hivlawandpolicy.org/sites/www.hivlawandpolicy.org/files/Ugandan-HIV%20Law.pdf 48 UNGASS 2014, NSP Uganda xxx | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

The DCA HIV/SRHR programme strategy complements global obligations such as the MDGs, UNGASS and Universal Access targets to HIV/AIDS services and is in line with national and international policies and recommendations including the National development plan, the National HIV prevention strategy 2011-2015 and the programme specifically contributes to attainment of all four goals of the National Strategic Plan for HIV/AIDS 2011/12-2014/15. The programme is further aligned with human rights instruments and principles to which Uganda is a signatory: Universal Declaration on Human Rights; Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women; Convention on the Rights of the Child; International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights.

With the increasing amount of evidence showing that earlier ART significantly not only reduces morbidity and mortality but also contributes to reducing HIV transmission49, the use of ART as a part of a public health strategy to reduce the spread of HIV infections has gained more and more emphasis in international and national HIV policies and treatment guidelines across the World, including in Uganda50. The DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme 2011-2015 is considered to contribute positively to this approach, not by filling the health service gap as many other actors attempt to, but instead to increase citizen claiming and community monitoring of health services. The evaluation finds that applying such an methodology is a significant comparative advantage and a very important complimentary approach to the typical needs based programming of other NGOs/CSO in the target areas which may however also be needed until duty bearers show more accountability and responsiveness.

2.3 Synergies

Synergies with other DCA projects under the same programme/ under another DCA programme Several informants mentioned that the partner platform has greatly facilitated increased knowledge on other HIV/AIDS/SRHR projects and even other programme type projects within DCA. This in turn has allowed for exchange of experiences and taking up new practices and methodologies (CBMES, SASA! etc). More efforts have been introduced by DCA under the time period of evaluation to integrate projects under different DCA programmes reaching the same districts/ sub-counties and also to introduce elements from one programme into other programmes (kitchen gardens for PLHIV etc.). Introducing CBMES in PT4 projects is considered a great advantage of the current programme and has shown results already (see under effectiveness). VSLA have also been integrated into most PT4 projects, though some with more success than others (see under methodologies). FFS has so far only been introduced in a few PT4 projects. This has clearly created synergies51. However, synergy in the form of advocacy at district or national level as a result of DCA partners joining hands and speaking with one voice were not as significant in the HIV programme. This may be related to the fact that implementation in the same district and specifically at sub county level of different projects is still relatively scarce when UNASO the new partner at national level is not considered– see table 1 Geographical Overlaps, DCA programmes in Main report. The impact of advocacy at local level could potentially increase if areas of implementation (district and sub county level), were overlapping to a higher extent than what is currently the situation. One example is Katakwi district where both PT1 and PT4 projects are implemented but with little overlap in sub-counties and limited collaboration across the projects (data from field visit). Introducing UNASO as a new

49Donnell, Beaten, et al 2010; NIAI 2011; 50 Treatment as Prevention Framework for Action in 2011 (WHO 2011g), and the WHO/UNAIDS treatment 2.0 strategy (WHO/UNAIDS 2011); Cohen, Chen et al 2011; National Strategic Plan for HIV/AIDS 2011/12-2014/15 Uganda 51the creation of a whole that is greater than the simple sum of its parts xxxi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

partner is a very relevant initiative to increase advocacy in relation to HIV/AIDS/SRHR at different levels, including at national level and it is very likely that this approach will achieve synergies across projects within DCA PT4. However because of the newness of the contract with UNASO (Dec 2014) results of this project is yet to be seen. Particularly PT3 and PT4 projects have very limited geographical overlap if disregarding the UNASO project which was initiated a few months ago (Table 1).

Integrating HIV/SRHR into DCA PT1 (Active citizenship) and PT3 (Right to Food) has already been initiated in order to create synergies however so far only to a limited extent (e.g. HIV/AIDS/SRHR sensitization in VSLA groups), yet full fledge mainstreaming into the two programmes should be considered. Possible approaches for mainstreaming are provided later in this evaluation report.

Synergies with projects outside DCA:

The first step of creating synergies is awareness of projects implemented in the same district and sub-county. Some partner organisations are implementing related projects in the same districts and sub-counties however funded by other development partners than DCA. In such instances it was noted that implementing partners are actively trying to increase synergies, but more should be done in terms of awareness within DCA on other current and related projects of their partners and active dialogue should be promoted to increase synergy at partner level.

It is suggested to support and encourage partner organisations to map and interact with organisations in the same district implementing related project despite those not being funded by DCA. The following webpage newly launched by UGA may be useful in the future when it becomes populated: http://nadic.uac.go.ug/nadic/.

Synergies within ACT Uganda Forum Projects funded by other ACT members in the same district are not always known by the partner organisations and even between ACT member organisations knowledge gaps in relation to existing projects are prevalent (ACT forum roundtable discussion; Field visits).

Synergies may be improved by increasing cooperation between development partners, e.g. within the ACT forum. Communication gaps are still present between funding/international partners within the ACT alliance, both in relation to project implementation but also concerning capacity building of partners, where overlapping capacity strengthening initiatives of the same implementing partner have been reported as plentiful (ACT dialogue meeting). Joint monitoring trips and increased dialogue between ACT international partners with same partner organisations have already been introduced and it is recommended to scale up this approach. District based coordination meetings within ACT may also enhance collaboration and synergy between ACT member organisations at district level however the feasibility of this should be further investigated. The recent employment of an advocacy officer within ACT is an important step to facilitate the current gap between advances at local level advocacy to national level. Concrete results are yet to be seen because of the newness of this employment, however a shared ACT advocacy strategy is now in place, which is an important first step. Furthermore a visual mapping of ACT projects throughout the country could possibly be uploaded and maintained through the ACT forum Uganda at a potential future ACT Uganda country subpage.

2.4 How did RH contribute to the development of the programme/projects? The extent to which rights holders have contributed to the development of the programme and its projects is different from project to project. Some organizations had made use of baseline xxxii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

surveys to explore for instance in which format the target groups wished to receive information about HIV/AIDS, others reported very honestly that they only to a limited extent had included rights holders in the design of their projects. In some cases it was clear through conversations in the field that dialogue with RH had not been sufficient because activities were not specifically tailored to the views and preferences of the RHs.

3. Effectiveness of programme

3.1 Main programme results against LFA for the programme

Overall the development objective and all immediate objectives have been met/ or are likely to be reached by the end of 2015, though not all specific indicators are likely to be met.

The Development objective of the programme is that the vulnerable rights holders, especially people living with HIV, girls, young women52, and fisher folk in fishing and pastoralist communities in the programme area are enabled to claim and fulfil their sexual and reproductive health rights resulting in increased protection from HIV and its impact.

Below is a detailed analysis of the extent to which objectives have been achieved/are likely to be achieved presented under each objective and indicator.

Objective 1: Duty bearers, in particular local governments, traditional and religious institutions are taking actions towards effective service delivery and elimination of harmful practices.

1.1 Reduced incidences of FGM/C in the target areas by 2015 Many other state and non-state programmes and projects in the area have worked to reduce incidence of FGM/C, and with no verifiable baseline data and no control group it is not possible to assess the extent to which the programme have influenced the incidence of FGM in target areas. Below is a short summary of results of the two projects in the region implemented under the programme which target this indicator.

The EuropeAid funded project 2014-2016 implemented in Karamoja by a consortium of HURINET and C&D53, seeks to reduce SGBV and support implementation of the FGM act from 2010 and other legislation promoting SRHR. The project has simplified gender responsive laws and trained duty bearers and RH on SGBV issues. Two incidents of arrests of FGM perpetrators have taken place in the target area since the implementation of the project in April 2014. Results related to reducing the actual prevalence FGM has not been reported, but is also not an indicator for the project as such.

The DCA partners REACH and POZIDEP implemented an anti-FGM project from 2011-2014 in Amudat district. The evaluation of the project concluded that awareness creation among stakeholders particularly the duty bearers, popularising alternative livelihoods and to a lesser extent empowerment of the rights holders. However other objectives of the projects had not been met and efforts to effectively reach the young people under the project were limited. DCA annual report describes that as a result of the project activities “196 girls and 96 boys flocked protection centres in search for refugee” (DCA annual report 2013). The final project evaluation

52 18-35 years

53and REACH until this partner was terminated xxxiii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

does not attribute the project any clear role in the rescue of the girls and boys. According to the DCA annual report 2012, “POZIDEP managed to mobilise 75 circumcisers, who turned down their tools and denounced FGM in 2012”. This was not confirmed in the final project evaluation. The evaluation further concludes that after the enactment of the FGM act, families that still carry out FGM do so in very isolated and remote areas that is often inaccessible to the law enforcement officers, and in other cases, they cross to the Kenyan side of the boarder to carry out the cutting (Pozidep final project evaluation 2014).

1.2 Increased number of actions being taken by duty bearers towards effective service delivery, gender equality and elimination of harmful practices

The number of actions taken by duty bearers has increased during the programme period, which in turn has improved service delivery, and to a lesser extent also promoted gender equality and the elimination of harmful practices. The evaluation finds that the programme overall has enhanced dialogue between right holders and relevant duty bearers at district, sub- county and parish level, especially through community level advocacy actions (CBME groups) and coordination/dialogue meetings by the local government. Dormant government structures such as Barazas have also been revitalized in some communities, as have Village Health Team (VHTs) and Health Management committees (HMCs).

Sub country budget improvements for health and HIV/AIDS between 2011 and 2014 have been reported in 5 sub counties where DCA partners implemented projects. The evaluation finds it credible that the lobbying for an increase budget for HIV/AIDS carried out in these districts by DCA partner organizations have contributed directly to this increase. Other concrete examples of increased accountability following lobbying activities by CBME groups related to SRHR and HIV is evident in the programme; e.g. improved budgetary allocation to a health centre III; 1 new maternity ward, 1 new placenta pit, accreditation of 3 HC II’s to provide ART; enhanced supply chain management whereby uninterrupted supply of ARVs at 4 HCs II/III; increased outreach by health centres (4 outreach posts established; one motorbike to cover transport in another sub country); appointment of additional (5) health workers in lower level health units; formulation of bylaws in alcohol consumption in at least 2 sub counties; a midwife attracted to HCIII; installing electric power at a health centre; upgrading a Health centre II to a Health centre III.

These are all important and respectable results over a relatively short time, yet the scale is still limited considering the need. An intensified pressure at district level is thought to enhance accountability of legal duty bearers to a higher extent, and make the programme more cost- efficient. More training and follow up of training is also needed. Presence at village, parish and sub county level is high in most projects, whereas only few projects have a strong presence at district level which hampers the effectiveness of advocacy activities (observation at field trips, interview partners and DCA staff, CIPA project evaluation).

Anecdotal evidence that harmful traditional practices such as: early and forced marriage, abduction of girls, “widow inheritance” and “wife sharing” have decreased in the target areas by involving religious and cultural leader in some projects have been reported. The example of a cultural leader in Lyantonde now requiring seeing birth certificates before he allows a marriage is a good example of how to use powerful cultural leaders in the fight against HTP. The approach is highly relevant, but projects should focus on documenting results, and have sufficient baseline data to document also change. Furthermore, in Lynantonde a newly introduced ordinance by local government had tried to get sex workers off the streets by increasing police presence and arrests - a regulation that had made sex workers protesting xxxiv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

publically in Lyantonde. The DCA partner organisations in the district had not carried out any specific work in relation to this.

1.3 Increased dialogue and discussions among religious and traditional institutions against harmful practices

Increased dialogue and discussions among religious and traditional institutions against harmful practices was repeatedly documented during field trips and in the documents reviewed. The team met with very proactive and well-informed examples of religious and cultural leaders and their role as ‘change agents’ in the communities is very important and considered very cost- efficient, and it is strongly recommended that DCA with its connection to the faith based networks utilize this channel to an even higher extent. During the field trip however, information from religious leaders with persistent values that contrasts to human rights (e.g. regarding family planning, condom use, and homosexuality) was noted, and should be addressed by DCA and partner organisations. It was also communicated by one religious leader that particularly Catholic fathers had walked out of training sessions of religious leaders supported by the DCA partner organisation. Other challenges include that some religious denominations especially the Pentecostal churches have provided wrong information in relation to HIV prevention and treatment further fuelling stigma and discrimination and discouraging people living with HIV from accessing treatment (they will be cured through prayers) More supervision or selective targeting and use of change agents/peers in relation to training sessions might prevent this in the future.

Indicators

2.1 Increased number of communities participating in CBMES The CBMES approach in the DCA programme was initiated in 2011. As of April 2015, a total of 45 CBMES groups have been established and trained under the DCA PT4 programme. Assuming that each group is having between 15-25 monitors (reported to be the average), this adds up to a total of 675-1125 trained monitors in the target areas of this programme.

2.2 Increased number of active networks of Rights holders (e.g. PLWH groups, lobby groups and CBO formed as a result of program empowerment interventions) The number of active networks of RH has increased during the programme implementation. As of April 2015, the following groups in addition to the abovementioned CBMES groups have been formed under the DCA PT4 programme: 5 PLHIV groups; 20 SASA! groups and 161 VSLA groups. Not all groups have registered as CBOs, the specific number of registered groups is not available. Yet, in TEDDO it was mentioned as one of the most significant changes that one VSLA group had registered at the sub county as was granted support by the government to start bee-keeping. In Rakai, the CBME committees/groups of three parishes, areas of operation for DCA partner CIPA, came together in 2012 to form an informal network out of the desire to have a consolidated voice to the sub county and district duty bearers. This reportedly had led to positive results in the health service delivery in the sub county. Some projects report that many new VSLA groups have started in the target areas out of inspiration but without the interaction of the partner organization (COCAP evaluation; RACOBAO interview). RACOBAO have further formed an exclusive network of PLHIV called ‘Lyantonde PLHIV network’ who have jointly xxxv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

managed to attract financial support from within the district. In Teso, the Omacia group supported by TPO, presents a strong link between duty bearers and rights holders.

2.3 Increased actions54 taken by rights holders towards challenging harmful practices, unequal gender roles, harmful practices, stigma and discrimination

Group formation and use of methodologies such as CBMES, VSLA and SASA! have generated specific results in relation to access to information, prevention, care and support over a short time span. Partner organisations has been trained in the participatory methodology known as Community Based Monitoring and Evaluation systems (CBMES) and some also in the SASA methodology, which in turn enhanced capacities of rights holders and duty bearers through trainings and other networking activities. Substantive progress was noticed in as far as communities raising their concerns with sub-county and district level duty bearers using government programme documents, dialogue/ coordination meetings etc. Many partners mentioned that this is the most significant change of the projects- that people have started demanding their rights. In a CBME group visited during the evaluation field trip, one of the female monitors was now standing for vote to LC1 chairperson, a good example of how CBMES has potential to empower woman and their increase their recognition in the community.

The evaluation identified differences in the quality of the implementation of the CBMES. The process by which the work of the group was leading into existing structures such as the barazas, VHTs, HMC etc. differed from project to projects and even within projects. The field trips also found that sensitization issues were sometimes more prominent than advocacy elements in CBME groups and some CBMEs reported that it was demotivating them to keep pressing for changes in service delivery from duty bearers without any tangible outcomes and benefits in their community Furthermore, communication seemed to be an issue for most groups/monitors:

“Community monitors that had been recruited by the implementing partners did not have any means of communicating with the project offices since it was too expensive, given no budget lines” (POZIDEP final project evaluation 2014).

In some communities there was limited knowledge of who is a community monitor, and at times the accountability of monitors was inferior:

“In some cases, the community couldn’t recognise the benefits of their actions which implies that community based monitoring was inadequate and information flow from monitors to the larger community was lacking.” (SHARP evaluation report ) Influential persons in the group have shown to increase impact in some groups and also accountability.

HIV and SGBV are highly interrelated public health concerns. DCA started implementing the SASA! approach in 2013 and as of April 2015, 20 groups have been established under the programme. SASA! is an evidence based community mobilization model to increase empowerment of women and decrease SGBV in communities55. Throughout the field visits the

54 Actions could include lobbying local councils to implement by laws, demonstrations and community dialogue against harmful practices

55Abramsky et al. Findings from the SASA! Study: a cluster randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of a community mobilization intervention to prevent violence against women and reduce HIV risk in Kampala, Uganda BMC Medicine 2014, 12:122; xxxvi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

evaluator received numerous anecdotal reports on decreased violence, empowerment, and shift in power balance within the SASA! group member households. The evaluation found that the implementation of the methodology varied greatly across projects, which can be partly explained by the fact that training in the SAS approach had only been conducted very recently, and after the implementation of the groups.

However, the methodology is still a newly introduced methodology in DCA, and SASA groups have not existed long enough to expect diffusion into the community of such change. Furthermore, the ‘multi-exposure approach’ of SASA! has not been fully utilized in any of the groups visited. Increasing presence of the communication messages at different places (e.g. poster at police station; information leaflet at health clinics; street theatre; casual talk by SASA! groups members; group support, home visits etc.) would be required to increase effectiveness. In addition, knowledge of other forms of violence than physical is limited in some groups and men are not as present in the groups as needed, yet men still take leadership positions when they are there.

It is recommended to ensure high quality training of all partner staff incl. in particular field staff and to increase monitoring of the implementation of the methodology. When partners are confidents with the methodology, the number of groups need to be scaled up in order to achieve the desired multiplier effect and see specific changes in communities as a whole. It would be highly relevant to consider a baseline survey before introducing SASA in a new target area, in order to measure specific attitudinal and behavioral changes.

Advocacy for amendment of existing or new laws or policies that are found to be counterproductive to SRHR and HIV prevention, and care have however not been addressed at sufficient level during this programme. The evaluation found that some interviews duty bearers were still found to lack knowledge on certain national laws e.g. the HIV Prevention and Control bill, the Marriage and Divorce act (respondents field visits, HIV mid-term review) and a recent project evaluation report also concluded that more trainings and a clear follow up plan for duty bearers at district level is needed (SHARP evaluation). Various projects under the programme have been concerned with popularizing new and existing laws. The simplification of gender responsive laws by the current EuropeAID supported project in Karamoja project is an example of best practices - an approach which may be used other projects of DCA partners. The popularized versions already developed may even be translated to the relevant local language and used in other projects directly and within short time.

Advocacy issues that required national level engagement were presented through district local governments, but with no clear feedback mechanisms or actions taken. As a result DCA engaged a national level HIV advocacy partner UNERELA+ in 2013. Despite the good intentions and relevancy of the organisation as such, this partner was not able to deliver and bring district level data to national level and the contract was terminated prematurely. A new partner, UNASO, to facilitate the gap between local level issues to national level has been engaged late 2014. The results of this partnership are yet to be seen, but the project document appears very relevant to address this gap.

A comprehensive advocacy strategy was generated and finalised by the HIV and AIDS platform in 2013 to direct partners’ advocacy work resulting into more organised grass root advocacy interventions. This is a great achievement which should be sustained and followed up.

NambusiKyegombe et al. ‘SASA! is the medicine that treats violence’. Qualitative findings on how a community mobilisation intervention to prevent violence against women created change in Kampala, Uganda, Global Health Action 2014 xxxvii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Nevertheless, gaps in the advocacy strategy and its implementation was identified during this evaluation. The majority of issues raised by the community mobilisers during the programme period have been related to getting HIV services closer to the population (DCA annual reports; Interviews and focus groups CBMES, partner organization HIV/SRHR questionnaire) excluding POZIDEP/REACH anti-FGM project in Karamoja and the recent anti-SGBV project in Karamoja where advocacy has been concentrated on issues related to SGBV, incl. FGM. For a rights- based organization such as DCA, advocacy for decentralizing HIV services is crucial, however the needed technology to monitor response to treatment is just as crucial to avoid a future ART resistance crisis in Uganda as is advocacy on post violence support, stigma and discrimination and harmful traditional practices such as wife sharing, wife inheritance and early marriages. The evaluation found that the technical capacity of field officers of partner organizations who are supervising CBME groups do not always have the required technical knowledge on issues such as CD4 point of care technology, viral load testing, alternative methods of health service delivery etc. Awareness was also inferior in relation to HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and the emergency contraceptive pills for sexual violence assaults. Even less technical advanced issues such as corruption and discrimination in relation to health care delivery and harmful cultural practices had been only very limited addressed by the CBME groups (DCA annual reports; interviews; focus groups CBMES; minutes from CBMES meetings), yet corruption was perceived as one of the most common barriers for post sexual violence medical care as reported by survivor focus group participants and in other documents from the programme (interim report 2014 EU project).

Several partners have mentioned that high poverty levels among the most marginalised community members has been a hindrance to empowerment and meaningful and active participation.

Access to information and prevention related to HIV/SRHR/GBV Without the baseline data and a control group it not possible to determine the specific change owing to the programme implementation, however, all 11 projects in the programme have worked extensively with reaching this objective. Particularly the “information” part is a robust element of all projects and sensitization activities have been plentiful during the implementation of the programme yet concrete results from these however are not available systematically.

Anecdotal reports during field trips and some project evaluations performed during the time period report a decreasing prevalence of GBV and increased knowledge on HIV/AIDS/SRHR in communities that have been sensitized. As an example an evaluation report mentions that the health providers in Katuuto County had noted a rise in the numbers of community members seeking ANC and family planning services after sensitization activities (CIPA evaluation report 2013). Information from focus groups discussions during the field visits also reported that RHs information levels on HIV prevention, SBGV etc. had increased over the past years owing to the projects implemented by DCA partners.

xxxviii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Sensitisation meetings for RH have been carried out by all projects in the programme, in some instances also by participation of DB (legal, moral) in the form of dialogue meetings. Drama, music/dance, radio shows have also been used as communication channels. Targeting of ‘youth’ appears to have increased since the DCA HIV/AIDS mid term review because of the focus this attained after the review56, however the age span of ‘youth’ needs to be agreed upon among all partners. While information activities overall seems relevant and some projects also have assessed them effective, the field trips identified multiple incidents of misconceptions and negative attitudes among those who are implementing the sensitization activities. E.g. partner field staff during evaluation mission: “PLHIV should refrain from sex” and reportedly a cultural leader during a sensitization meeting: “Women who are loud should be beaten”, and a political leader: “If a women is raped by her husband it is because she did not do her job well enough”. (data from field trips). Furthermore, ‘Sex work’ seems to be a taboo even among some partner staff.

Increasing trends in condom demand from the hospital and other condom outlets have been reported in Lyantonde (DCA annual report 2011). The use of ‘condom distributors’ (volunteers in the community) seemed to be a good and complementary resource for accessing condoms beyond the health centres where many (esp. young people) did not wish to go for condoms. Yet, condom availability was reportedly still insufficient, in some of the target areas, particularly at places such as bars and lodges where sex work (including transactional sex) was very common (focus group women landing site; Interviews with sex workers, interviews fishermen). One of the condom distributors mentioned that visibility in terms of a t-shirts/ cap would increase his visibility in the community.

In the effort to reach men more effectively in the programme, which was also a concern of the mid-term review, one of the DCA partner organisations has initiated groups of ‘male champions’. This concept is much appreciated, but the way by which it has been implemented is not ideal. First of all, not all male champions were specifically targeting only men, but instead held sensitization session for the community as such as they also did as health educators (the four male champions in our focus group discussion were also ‘health educators’). Second, the evaluation team was informed that one of the ‘male champions’ was a woman (and not transgender), “the community had elected her as male champion and there was nothing we could do” was the reasoning of the partner organisation. While this may be seen as a somewhat extreme form of ‘non-discrimination’ the whole concept of male champions builds on the idea that men knows better than women how they want information on HIV and SGBV etc. Targeting of men and participation is still limited in some groups (particularly VSLA; SASA!). However, leaders of established community groups are most often men.

The evaluation found some missed opportunities of working with most at risk populations, specifically sex workers and fishermen. The effectiveness of the DCA HIV/SRHR programme under this objective, but also the other objectives of the programme would have been significantly higher if the projects had targeted self-identified sex workers, and utilized already self-formed groups of fishermen instead of sensitizing the community as such where the such key population may or may not be present. Sex workers for instance usually do not attend such mainstream sessions in their community either because they sleep during the day or they are afraid to be recognized by clients and their wife’s (info from interviews with sex workers in Lyantonde). Contrary to the belief of organizations in the field, sex workers are not all mobile, the majority actually reside permanently in the areas of interventions and know each other.

56DCA mid-term review HIV/AIDS 2013 xxxix | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Official group formation could be encouraged and utilized to increase their empowerment and their unified voice against the human rights violations they experience every day. More mobile sex workers and long-distance truckers can be reached with ‘moon-light outreach sessions’ providing condoms and HIV testing. The District health Ofiicer (DHO) in Lyantonde, a town founded on sex work, was aware of the gap in addressing sex workers and did not seem reluctant to consider providing such moonlight services in the future (interview DHO in Lyantonde), however the pressure should preferably come from the community in line with DCA philosophy. Sex workers in Uganda experience profound exploitation and repeated human rights violations such as unlawful arrests and detention, violence, extortion, vilification and exclusions.57 Which was also confirmed by interviews conducted in the field during this mission. Exploitation and violence from police, brothel owners and even from local government were commonly reported (interviews sex workers, Lyantonde). Further, condom use is most often determined by clients' willingness and their ability to pay58. At a more structural level, it should be mentioned that there is no rightful representation of sex workers in the Uganda Aids Commission and the Global Fund CCM59

Targeting fishermen directly and fisher communities were at times also found insufficient, with projects not reaching landing sites (CIPA evaluation report 2013) and examples of non-targeted interventions when landing sites were reached (e.g. providing general sensitisation in fishing communities, but not specifically targeting fishermen and/or using peer-to-peer approaches or self-established groups of fishermen in the implementation of activities) (field trip in Kaberamaido district).

Access to care and support services in relation to HIV and SRHR There is an overall increase in terms of uptake of HIV testing in the whole of Uganda since 2011 (LQAS 2013). Katakwi district in particular reported a significant increase in those who have received an HIV test within the last 12 months and who knew the results between (from 45% to 65% 2012 and 2013) (LQAS report 2013). The potential contribution of DCA supported project by TPO in Katakwi to this achievement cannot be determined with the present study design, however considering the activities implemented in the district between 2012-2013 (sensitization, advocacy for HIV testing services and outreach HIV testing of 500+ in 2013) (Annual report TPO 2014) the project may to some extent have contributed positively to such a significant increase.

RACA has worked with National Medical Stores to distribute drugs without interruptions to HC IIs and in an operational survey carried out by RACA in January 2014 it was found that 82% of rights holders attest to improvement in HIV/AIDS health service delivery. Bringing services closer to the population have also been documented in other districts. Lyantonde district is one example where the accreditation of two outreach posts was successful after lobbying by RACOBAO. The number of people going for HIV testing in Lyantonde increased from 26,869 in 2012 to 27,171 in 2013 however it is not known to what extent this project have effected the still relatively small increase. Yet in 2012, RACOBAO in partnership with the Lyantonde District Health officer (DHO) mobilised communities for HCT services as a result, 26,859 people accessed HCT compared to 14,941 in 2011. (Lyantonde HMIS reports 2010/2011 and

57Scorgie et al.Human rights abuses and collective resilience among sex workers in four African countries: a qualitative study. Global Health. 2013 Jul 26;9(1):33. doi: 10.1186/1744-8603-9-33. 58Mbonye M1, Nakamanya S, Nalukenge W, King R, Vandepitte J, Seeley J.'It is like a tomato stall where someone can pick what he likes': structure and practices of female sex work in Kampala, Uganda. BMC Public Health. 2013 Aug 10;13:741. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-741. 59https://www.facebook.com/WONETHAUganda xl | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

2011/2012). Two Health Centre IIs were also accredited to provide ART services in Rakai and Lyantonde (annual report PT4 DCA 2012), which may have contributed to increased adherence to ART (95% as opposed to 89% in 2011) (Lyantonde HMIS report, 2011/2012). The specific data on ART uptake as a consequence of the accreditation of the health centres is not available, one of the centres saw a doubling from 21 on ART to 44 on ART over a year, but it is not clear where these people were started on ART. The evaluation identified during the mission that clinics and hospitals have refused a significant number of patients to transfer to another treatment centre at lower level despite their own wish to transfer. This issue of specific rights violation, which significantly hampers access to health cervices (and adherence to ART), had not yet been addressed by the partners, but is essential to look further into.

CIPA in Rakai district has succeeded in mobilising communities to attend reproductive health services, reactivating Health Management Committees, and successful lobbying of the rehabilitation of maternity ward (separation for privacy issues. see photo), increased number of health workers at on health centre and ART outreach via motorcycle. Effects of this included an increased utilisation of reproductive health services (attendance at maternal health care services in Minziro sub county was 657 in 2012 and 721 in 2013), and increased turn-up of patients at the health centre (from 30 to 50 per day on average). (evaluation COCAP 2013)

Typical SRHR issues such as family planning, ANC, STIs besides HIV, have not been as vigorously implemented in sensitization activities and lobby activities as have HIV/AIDS issues and concerns. This most probably reflects that the DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme was expanded only recently to also cover SRHR.

PT4 partner organisations (n=8) were asked if there had been any changes in the availability, accessibility, affordability, acceptability and quality of HIV/SRHR related services since 2011, of which 100% reported that accessibility and acceptability had increased; 80% that availability to vulnerable populations had increased, and 60% that quality of services had been improved. that Fewer reported increased affordability (40%). All partners reported that there was a high possibility that improvements were related to the work of their organisation (HIV specific partner questionnaire). The AAAAQ indicators would be relevant to measure at baseline at household levels in the next country programme.

3.1 Reduce HIV prevalence in fishing communities in target area by 5% by 2015

This particular indicator is not considered realistic to attain by the end of 2015, and prevalence is reported to have increased (2011 Uganda indicator), but neither is it perceived relevant for this project. Prevalence is influenced by many other factors that has the potential to increase or decrease HIV prevalence, but which are not related to reduced HIV transmission: e.g. changes in overall community mortality rates and PLHIV mortality in particular (which would naturally increase if increased uptake of ART); and changes in birth-rates. Incidence rates are also closely linked to changes in uptake of HIV testing, thus also making this a questionable indicator for a project which intends to increase HIV testing in the target area. The programme’s success in relation to reducing some common risk factors and increasing access to information and health services in some fishing communities will though have a positive influence on the HIV epidemic in these communities, yet the effect could have been larger as previously explained in particular by using a more strategically targeted approach across all projects and by improving the capacity of CBMES.

xli | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

3.2 Increased number of vulnerable rights holders with active and functional socio economic activities60

There is ample evidence that the existence of VSLA groups initially supported by DCA partner organisations in the target areas have increased. The number of VSLA groups reached 161 by April 2015 and this increase can by and large be attributed to efforts of the DCA projects. In some districts new VSLA groups were reported formed by communities themselves inspired by the DCA supported projects but without any involvement of the partner organizations. Furthermore, other development organizations than the DCA partner organizations in the target areas have also implemented VSLA groups, it is not known to what extent this increase represents that VSLA groups is the new ‘mantra’ in community development projects or if other organizations were also inspired by DCA supported projects to initiate similar interventions.

The programme has succeeded to empower targeted rights holders i.e. PLHIV, young girls and women including survivors of SGBV, fisher communities and pastoralists who have become increasingly aware of their rights and responsibilities. However, the actual extent of the change incurred is not measurable because of missing baseline data for the programme.

A recent synthesis of 7 randomized controlled trials (RTCs) in Sub-Saharan Arica61 confirms that saving groups have the potential to reaching the very poor and two of the seven studies captured changes in poverty levels. The review further states that VSLA at household level within 1-2 saving cycles impacts on increased savings and credit, increase business investment, and increase resilience among group members: e.g.; increase food security among treatment households and incur less catastrophic costs. However impacts are mixed in relation to health and education spending; business profit, asset ownership and social impact. These are though expected to take some time to appear (ibid) which may be the cause of limited impact seen in the review which have covered studies with only 1-2 saving cycles.

Of the DCA supported projects under the HIV/SRHR programme, the majority of the savings were reported spent to cover basic needs (health care incl. transport to collect ARVs, housing, school fees etc.) and to increase food security (live-stock, kitchen gardens etc.), whereas starting small-scale businesses was more rarely reported (focus groups discussions VSLA groups). An extraordinary level of ownership and sense of proudness among member was particularly evident in VSLA groups which had existed for more than 2 years. Such groups also reported increased levels of social empowerment and increased knowledge on HIV/AIDS/SRHR issues.

Groups did not exclusively comprise the poorest of the poor. Often the clan leader or other influential persons such as religious leaders were included in the groups. Some groups were self-selected others were identified by the DCA partner organization. Indeed this evaluation found there were large differences between how the VSLA methodology was implemented (e.g, presence of systematic integration of other areas; selection of group members; provision of start up seeds, goats etc). Some respondents reported that they would need (more) training in setting up small businesses, others reported that they had dropped out of the group as the share value increased. It is recommended to offer training in business skills to be provided in the VSLA

60 These could include VSLA, any other income generating activities and well as those engaged in commercial food production and other commercial agricultural activities

61Megan Gash and Kathleen Odell. The Evidence-Based Story of Savings Groups:A Synthesis of Seven Randomized Control Trials. Sep 2013. xlii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

groups for those who are interested. Additionally, individuals who drop out of a group should be encouraged to start up in a new VSLA group. Start up capita (in various forms: seeds, goats etc.) should not be provided.

The previously mentioned review (ibid) further concludes that additional services, particularly information sessions, can be effectively delivered through savings groups. It further states that a simple, three-day training program with a pictorial guide and certificate (structured replication) can be cost-effective and have a greater impact than spontaneous and non-facilitated replication.Present efforts of integrating HIV/AIDS/SRHR/ into VSLA groups should be continued. Furthermore, DCA may consider facilitating a structured replication of groups.

3.3 Increased number of rights violations reported According to the DCA annual reports, there has been an overall increase in the number of SGBV cases reported in all DCA HIV intervention areas during the programme, including early marriages, female genital mutilation, rape etc. Specific examples include: In Teso region, 140 cases were reported 2013, 75 in 2012. In Lyantonde, 5 cases of early marriages were reported, while the number of girls who sought protection from FGM in Amudat increased from 75 in 2012 to 130 in 2013. In 2012, 184 cases of human rights violation were reported to varied duty bearers in Rakai, Sharp project (RACA) area of which 56 child abuse, 39 child neglect and 89 domestic violence cases. It is considered likely that the SHARP human rights awareness campaigns and empowerment of right holders and dialogue meetings with duty bearers have contributed to the vast number of cases being reported. In Magorosub county in Teso, 23 cases of defilement were reported by right holders to duty bearers in 2012. These cases had been known prior to the project initiation but not reported due to fear of the perpetrators most of whom former UPDF soldiers.

However, the value of this indicator is questionable. While it is the intention to increase reporting of rights violations, in the case of SGBV the projects also seek to decrease violent episodes which if effective would decrease such reportings.

3.4 Increased number of rights violations handled and concluded

Since April 2014 two FGM-practicing surgeons and four parents of the circumcised children in the sub counties of Tapac and Mourita were sentenced to 6 and 7yrs imprisonment respectively (interim report EuropeAid project)

The DCA annual report 2013 describe that 50% of all cases reported in 2013 were concluded in favour of the survivors, which contrast with the trend observed during field visits: out of 28 cases of SGBV reported in the month of December 2014 in Katakwi district, only 3 had gone to court and this was not an unusual proportion (interview police Katakwi). According to the police the main reason for this low legal handling was that women withdraw their report before the case went to court. Dialogue with artner organizations and programme reports also confirmed this tendency and explained that often matters are dealt with outside the legal system by means of a negotiations between families involved (2014 interim report EU project, dialogue TPO;TEDDO). Previously TPO referred survivors of SGBV to Action AID who ran a women’s shelter and legal support centre in the same district, however funding issues had now closed down this centre, and there were no place where to TPO could refer these women. The trust in the legal system is generally very low, and corruption is abundant according to informants of this evaluation and progarmme documents.

xliii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

“The community reported that sometimes the health personnel demand for money to fill in the Police Form 3 (PF3) at the health center which hinders them from even trying to go there. Even at police stations, they are expected to give money for opening files, fuel for arresting the perpetrators or pertaining to required case follow-up” (Interim report 2014, EU project Karamoja)

None of DCA partners currently assist directly with legal support.

It is recommended to look closely at this last part of the justice path and be more critical towards data received from partner organisations on cases handled and concluded. Data from the field implies that there is a big gap in terms of access to justice. Strategic partnerships with an organization that can offer legal support and expertise is highly relevant for DCA in the future.

Objective 4: Increased partner collaboration, networking and coordination in relation to advocacy issues and build institutional capacity in RBA, gender and SRHR and HIV.

Indicators 4.1 Improved participation of DCA and partners in relevant national and sub national networks and alliances

Almost all partners in the HIV/SRHR programme replied in the survey that their network had increased as a result of being a partner with DCA. Particularly the annual DCA supported partner platform meetings were mentioned as important opportunities for networking with other organisations. DCA PT4 partners are participating in the following networks and alliances:  Human Rights Network (HURINET)  Forum for Women in Development (FOWODE)  Gender based Violence Network  Lyantonde NGO Network Forum (hosted by RACOBAO)  Churches United Against HIV and AIDS (CUAHA)  Rakai Network For AIDS Service Organisations (RANASO)  Action group for Health and AIDS (AGHA)  UWEZO Network for promotion of Citizen Participation in Universal Primary Education.  Development Network of Indigenous Voluntary Associations (DENIVA)  Rakai District AIDS Committee (DAC).  Lyatonde district AIDS committee (DAC)  Katakwi Social Protection Working Group.  Development Network of Indigenous Voluntary Associations (DENIVA)  Pokot Consortium on Elimination Of FGM Among Pokot Community  Kaberamaido Network of HIV/AIDS organisations  Amuria Network of AIDS service organisations (AMUNASO)  Uganda Network of AIDS Service Organizations (UNASO)

xliv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Through RANASO, CIPA and RACA were able to leverage their HIV and AIDS budgets; the two DCA partners won a grant from Uganda AIDS Commission through the Civil Society Fund (CSF) to scale up HIV prevention in Rakai District. UNASO brings together national level organisations and the PT4 programme partners, who are majorly national organisations, were therefore encouraged join UNASO, however not all PT4 national partners are currently members of UNASO.

Neither DCA nor its partners mentioned participating in networks related to SRHR.

4.2 Advocacy issues taken up by DCA and partners are measured and supported by reliable documentation

Results of advocacy issues taken up by partners have been provided in previous sections. In some instances the effect of an improvement has not been documented with reliable data (e.g. specific changes in uptake of ART after accreditation etc.), DCA should prioritise providing reliable documentation with concrete data for all lobby successes.

4.3 Improved understanding and use of RBA, gender, and empowerment of rights holders among DCA partners

Capacity enhancement of DCA partner organisations has been carried out through regular support visits, capacity building events and ‘partner platforms’. Capacity building has been particularly evident in the areas of GIRBA (70% reported having received training) and CBMES (60%). About half of the DCA PT4 partner organisations have developed a strategy for how to work with the RBA and about 1/3 have developed a gender policy. The evaluation found that overall the understanding and the use of the GIRBA was good, and that CBMES is providing a useful methodology to implement a RBA. There were few examples of partners having skewed interventions towards service delivery and where the level of expertise and appreciation of the RBA was insufficient. It has been difficult for some partners to adapt to RBA from the needs-based also because they seem to like giving gifts. Duty bearers also expect ‘gifts’ and service delivery from NGOs as exemplified in this quote when talking about what it would take to have more frequent coordination meetings in local government:

“if they could just give us some biscuits” CDO, Kaberamaido district

Limited advocacy work in particular with regards to legislative issues at district/national level and insufficient involvement of rights holders in project planning phase (e.g. the preferred places for condom availability; preferred format for sensitization etc) were also observed.

Finally, the evaluation found that an abundant number of new groups and structures were formed during the projects, where sometimes it might have been more sensible to use already formed groups/networks (e.g. community clubs for women etc). DCA and partners, like many other development actors, make use of volunteers in the community, and while this approach empowers RH, it was also seen that a volunteer with too many roles (e.g. community health educator + Male champion), becomes blurred and hampers effectiveness. Examples of a volunteer who is both a duty bearer and a rights holder in a group (e.g. LC1 chairperson) is not sensible and should be avoided in the future.

3.2 Un-intended effects (positive and negative) xlv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Some negative unforeseen events related to the DCA supported VSLA groups include: starting up of alcohol brewing of women because of savings/credit in the VSLA groups; and mandatory on site testing of HIV every 3rd month to sustain membership of the group. DCA is recommended to urgently look closer into these rather disturbing findings and act accordingly.

3.3 Effective management by DCA

The evaluation found an overall effective management and steering by DCA in terms of planning, staffing, resources management. Almost all recommendations from the HIV PT4 mid- term review where DCA directly could affect the issues had been addressed (e.g. partner platform). Overall good relations and communication with partner organizations and good capacities of POs were reported. Frequent monitoring visits and support to partners should also be also highlighted.

It is however worrying that REACH’s previous failure to demonstrate presence on the ground, inability to provide required staffing and general lack of clarity in their activity patterns was realized late by DCA. The evaluation further found that there was an overall insufficient critical supervision of project implementation and that most recent annual reports of DCA and partners present successes but only to a limited extent reflect on challenges. The evaluation discovered that selected procurement procedures of some partner organisations are of inferior standard (procurement of consultants etc.).

It is recommended to look closer at the M&E feedback and ensure quality of the monitoring visits. External spot checks and/or external mid-term monitoring missions might also present an opportunity to address such concerns. Reports from CBMES and advocacy strategies of CBMES would also be relevant information.

Coordination in consortia projects could also be strengthened, several sources mention that in projects with more than one partner the collaboration has been insufficient. (Evaluation report 2014 Pozidep; partners meeting). Roles of the respective partners in the implementation of the project should be clear from the beginning and described in an MoU.

3.4 Most significant change and added value of DCA All but one DCA PT4 partners answering the questionnaire mentioned that the most significant change of their projects under this programme have been the empowerment of rights holders to claim their rights which have resulted in improved service delivery. The last partner mentioned that the connection of VSLA group to government programmes and funding by registering the group/organisation at sub county level. When informants (partners and DCA staff) were as into the added value of DCA in relation to changes incurred throughout the programme, the 3 following topics was mentioned repeatedly: RBA in action (CBMES ect.) Influence through faith based organisations/networks Partnership approach

4. Efficiency of the programme

The total expenses for the programme in the period 2011- 2014 amounts to 15.084.431 DKK. Absorption capacity HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme 2011-2014, was 88% See Table 2 in main report which is considered sufficient.

xlvi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

4.1 Adequacy of resources (human and financial)

A number of partners have reported financial constraints and scarcity of human resources which have hampered efficiency. Some organisations reported that they have had to downscale their original catchment targets because of financial constraints. Furthermore, issues of scarcity of human resource at partner organisations were reported to have hindered the quality of implementation of the project.

4.2 Cost efficiency At an overall level, the DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme is considered cost-effective, particularly considering the high potential for sustainability and multiplier effects of the programme. Implementation of a RBA takes longer time to generate the same results as if the services were delivered directly to beneficiaries and this must be taken into account when considering effectiveness.

In 2012, DCA managed to reach approximately 11.000 (5650 males and 5384 females), who participated in one or the other way in the PT4 projects. In 2013, the figure had increased to approximately 14,900 (8317 men; 6583 women) (DCA annual reports 2013, 2014). As of 2013, the annual reporting to DCA included also the number of person benefitting indirectly by the programme supported interventions, and this figure reached approximately 57,250 persons (27,988 males and 29,263 females). Figures on reach in 2011 and 2014 are not available. Assuming that partners reached as many participants in 2011 as they did in 2012, the total number of participants in DCA PT4 Danida supported activities accumulates to 37.000 persons over the period 2011-2013, which had the costs of 8.569.767 DKK (audit reports), which is 231 DKK per person reached (32 USD/person reached). However, it is important to note that this figure does not say anything about the quality of the activities reaching the populations, and this is more important for DCA and should be measured and reported at a higher level in the future (i.e. attitude and behavior change). Furthermore, it is important for DCA to articulate the reasons for an initial higher cost per person reached by the RBA (CBMES, VSLA, Duty bearers trainings) which should be viewed in light of the sustainability and multiplier effect of the activities implemented. It is thus important is to document changes in availability, accessibility, affordability, acceptability and quality as a result of the project implementations.

There is also a large spread between the proportion of staff salaries out of total project budget - up to 45% of total project cost allocated to staff salaries. (RACOBAO 2012-2015 budget) and a large spread of the budget for final evaluation (up to 34.000.000 UGX) and baseline surveys. It is recommended to set a reasonable range in terms of the budget for admin costs, baselines and final evaluations.

For every project, the targeting of RHs (obj. 2+3) for specific activities had in most cases at least twice as high a budget as the budget for activities targeting of duty bearers (objective1). The budget for objective 4, which is concerned with strengthening partners is very fluctuating (table 4) among partners.

Table 4. Budget allocation for project activities per programme objective in the LFA for the DCA HIV programme, UGX, blank: data not available PARTNER PROJECT ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES PARTNER PROJECT IMPLEMEN DUTY RIGHTS CAP. STRENGTHENING TATION BEARERS HOLDERS (OBJ 4) PERIOD (OBJ 1) (OBJ 2 +3) xlvii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

PARTNER PROJECT ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES PARTNER PROJECT IMPLEMEN DUTY RIGHTS CAP. STRENGTHENING TATION BEARERS HOLDERS (OBJ 4) PERIOD (OBJ 1) (OBJ 2 +3) RACA 2011-2014 RACA 2014-2016 30.552.000 47.628.000 41.028.000 CIPA 2011-2013 CIPA 2014-2016 10.057.500 50.367.002 16.950.000 RACOBAO 2012-2015 53.384.000 95.890.000 39.340.000 POZIDEP/ REACH 2011-2014 27.913.000 53.993.000 1.486.000 TPO 2012- 2014 40.945.303 109.066.00 7.075.000 UNASO 2014-2015 NA NA NA UNERELLA 2013-2014 NA NA NA 116.600.00 2.620.000 COU-TEDDO 2012-2014 51.630.000 0 C&D/HURINET/REA CH(EIDHR) 2012-2015 Total

Considering cost-effectiveness, overall CBMES, VSLA and work related to training of duty bearers are considered cost-efficient especially considering their sustainability potential. Sensitization activities and psychosocial support are less cost-efficient. Examples of short project spans may limit the cost-efficiency. The evaluation found that change agents’ are key to cost-efficiency (traditional leaders, political leaders etc.) where little resources can give a large effect. Some thematic gaps such as alcohol prevention and legal support also limit the effectives of the projects.

5. Evidence based approach to programming and documentation

The evaluation found that many baseline studies and project evaluations performed within the DCA programme suffer from inferior quality (e.g. questionnaire from 20 household to represent an entire population in a sub county). Furthermore, in some instances staff did not have the capacity to judge what represents a high quality baseline study. Evaluations will overall only get as good as a baseline study, why it is highly recommended to increase efforts to document accurate and valid baseline data before the project is initiated. This might require a higher budget allocation to baseline studies than what is presently the norm and/or initiating strategic partnerships with research-based institutions. In any case, the procurement of consultants needs to be strengthened. Practice of having a database of consultants and getting only one quote for a tender was reported during interviews with partner organisations. There is also a gap in data collection analysis and storage of relevant information at some partner organizations. Establishing simple information management system where relevant data or information is stored for easy and consistent use in reporting and proposal writing would be relevant

xlviii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

The application of certain evidence based methodologies (SASA!62, VSLA63, FFS) is a major advantage of DCA programming and unique for DCA compared to many other NGOs. It is highly recommended to continue using such evidence based methodologies, but also to consider how to contribute with data that DCA has direct access to through its projects on the ground to further boast the research evidence base and thus strengthen the legitimacy of the organization, its advocacy work and fundraising possibilities. At present DCA GLRO collaborate with the Institute of Human Rights in Denmark however it is strongly recommended for DCA GLRO to Initiate further strategic collaborations with established research institutions that are present also in Uganda64. Such collaboration would be a clear asset for DCA in terms of being able to document specific impact of projects (including ensuring quality of baseline studies), hereby to significantly improve fundraising potentials and national advocacy and by delivering data and results from the field on less well-documented approaches and interventions, DCA GLRO will contribute directly at global level to fight extreme inequality, save lives and build resilient communities as spelled out in the DCA global strategy 2015 - 202265 .

6. Sustainability

6.1 Institutional changes

The programme has worked to revitalize existing, but in may cases dormant structures, such as Health Management Committees (HMCs), Village Health Teams (VHT), School Management Committees (SMCs), Baraza’s, Sub country AIDS commitees (SACs) and District AIDS committees (DACs). This is considered very important for sustainability and similar approaches should be ensured in the future DCA country programme.

6.2 Citizen claiming and monitoring of rights and response

The evaluation found that citizens have been empowered and are now to a higher extent claiming and monitoring rights and response. The established groups are furthermore likely to continue after the project ends. However, the evaluation also discovered that in many cases DCA/partners provides small incentives (transport allowances, tea, lunch, biscuits etc.) for dialogue meetings or other obligations of duty bearers, which is not a sustainable solution. Local government in Katakwi reported that coordination meetings between local government structures and CSOs stopped in a period with no funding for transport etc. Below are two examples of ‘facilitation’ from Karamoja:

“On the 28th October there was an emergency reported in Tapac of forced marriage/defilement of a girl aged 13yrs, which happened on the 22nd/October/2014, The CDO reported the case and also notified the police. C&D facilitated the sub-County with fuel and also lunch allowance for the four constables who went to rescue the child from Tapac sub-county.” (Interim report 2014, EuropeAid project)

64Explore for example collaboration between:

65 xlix | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

“On 19th October 2014 C&D facilitated the police to go and pick three survivors of FGM, one surgeon and three parents from Moruita sub-county, Katabok parish, Lopedoi village. The three girls were taken for medical examination and psychosocial support and are now recovering.” (Interim report 2014, EuropeAid project)

Be aware also of the possible unfavourable effects of transport allowances, lunches etc. to the sustainability of the CBME groups.

6.3 Are changes considered sustainable or what is required to make them sustainable?

Most elements of the programme are considered sustainable, in particular the used methodologies CBMES, VSLA, SASA! In terms of sustainability of VSLA groups, a recent study found that 92 percent of 331 groups across 6 countries have remained active for four years after the end of NGO support (66) but that there is still a lot to learn about the long-term sustainability of independent groups. Sharing evaluation results across partner organizations in the field is thus important.

The increased service delivery from duty bearers in terms of new health care staff, accreditation of health centres, increased outreach, establishment of a placenta pit, a maternity ward etc. has a high sustainability potential, yet constant pressure to maintain the changes may be needed from CBME groups. The apprenticeship programme is in its current form not a sustainable investment because the partners are paying owners of the shops (bodaboda garage; beauty saloon etc) for the training of the young people. This element should be re-thought if DCA decides to continue with this, e.g. encourage parents/guardians in VSLA groups to save for the training of their adolescents in vocational skills and provide the link to possible employers etc. The Ruby Cup distribution under this programme is also not a sustainable investment, yet DCA may explore if menstrual cup firms might be interested in providing the cups at a subsidized price for testing out a market price etc. Instead of providing transportation for police in the vent of a SGVB emergency, and lunches to motivate people to come for dialogue meetings, DCA and partners should strive to make government and other duty bearers aware and responsible for providing appropriate remuneration and cover transportation costs, while acknowledging their areas of responsibilities.

Downscale significantly incentives to established CBME groups, emphasize instead the social advantages of being a monitor/volunteer in a group, such as recognition in the community and possible ‘career’ opportunities.

66Megan Gash and Kathleen Odell. The Evidence-Based Story of Savings Groups:A Synthesis of Seven Randomized Control Trials. Sep 2013. l | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

7. Way forward

7.1 Geographical scope Areas of implementation continue to be relevant but in terms of geographical scope and synergies, it seems most important for DCA at this stage to increase their presence at district level through partners, and thus concentrate on deepening activities at district level by having projects that strategically overlap at district level, so that intense pressure on duty bearers can be achieved. Of course projects implemented in the same districts needs to complement each other.

7.2 Approaches and methodologies to be carried forward

Continue work with CBMES, VSLA, SASA!, and focus on scaling up CBMES and SASA! Under the next country programme; ensure gender balance in leadership of groups, share best practices systematically; and be patients because impact from CBMES; VSLA, SASA takes time.

Specifically for the three applied methodologies in the PT4 programme:

CBMES: Strengthen the advocacy element- too much focus on sensitization activities; strengthen advocacy related to GBV; provide technical support to CBMES to identify feasible and cost effective interventions (PEP after sexual violence; local budget for outreach services instead of sensitization activities etc.); Influential persons in the groups may increase success of the group; ensure sufficient representation of PLHIV and survivors of GBV; increase visibility of monitors; Use/collaborate/link to a higher extent with already established structures e.g. VHT; HMC etc.

SASA: Increase capacity in groups on violence issues (economic violence, sexual violence, emotional violence in particular); increase male involvement in groups; increase the ‘multi- exposure’ approach; allow time and scale up to see specific changes at community level as a result of implementation

VSLA: Ensure systematic integration of information sharing on HIV/SRHR; consider introducing training in IGA/starting small businesses; ensure focus on vulnerable groups

7.3 Innovation It is conventional wisdom that NGOs have a specific moral mandate to test out new and emerging solutions in the field and document and potentially scale up to national level if they are found effective. The DCA PT4 programme has included innovative elements/ideas, but to a rather limited extent and with no documentation of its effectiveness/acceptability so far and the follow-up plan is not clear.

A project in Teso was addressing absenteeism from school in relation to menstruation which is a innovative and very relevant issue in Uganda. The project has been handing out menstrual cups on a pilot basis to one school in Magoro subcounty. Currently a study to assess the acceptance of the menstrual cup among women has not been planned. During the field trip the evaluation team found anecdotes of good acceptance and positive effects on school attendance rates reported by both young women, teachers and parents, but such preliminary findings should be studied in more details before scaling up this intervention. Further, DCA should investigate how the RBA intersects with this element and how it can be made sustainable: i.e. li | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

potential collaboration with manufacturers of menstrual cups to subsidize while investigating a market or alike.

DCA is recommended to intensify the sharing of knowledge on innovative approaches/ elements among partners, ACT alliance members and other organisations in DCA’s network. (ICCO has used some innovative approaches: flying food etc.)

7.4 Increasing value for money Recommendations to increase value for money Geographical focus and deepening, Focus on quality instead of quantity Thematic focus and closing gaps within selected focus areas Specific targeting of key actors/high risk groups Selecting strategic partners and increasing synergies

Presence at district level should be deepened. The cost-efficiency may be increased if focus on working in as many sub counties as feasible in one district instead of implementing in only few sub counties across several districts. Synergy at district level with several partners operating in the same district should be sought.

Focus to a higher extent on quality instead of quantity and measure quality outcomes at project level: e.g. instead of indicator of reaching 5000 RHs with sensitisation on HIV/IADS, try to reach fewer RHs but then document changes in those people’s knowledge, attitudes and behaviour due to the project.

Addressing identified thematic gaps can have a great impact on value for money. Consider working with alcohol prevention in areas affected severely by alcohol abuse in the new country programme (affects food security, poverty, HIV/AIDS; GBV; women empowerment). In addition legal aspects and support should also be addressed, as the link to jurisdiction is currently weak.

Increase inclusion of rights holders in programme/project design in all projects will also greatly increase value for money.

Specific targeting of key actors/ vulnerable/high risk populations, A study from Uganda concluded that about 3200-4148 new HIV infections occur on the Kampala-Mombassa highway in one year and that targeted interventions towards sex workers along this highway could prevent almost two thirds of these infections67. Recent research using statistical modeling in The Lancet Special Issue on HIV and Sex Work68 reports that that the decriminalization of sex work would have the greatest effect on the course of HIV epidemics across all settings reviewed by the paper, averting 33—46% of HIV infections in the next decade.

67 Morris CN, Ferguson AG. Estimation of the sexual transmission of HIV in Kenya and Uganda on the trans-Africa highway: the continuing role for prevention in high risk groups.Sex Transm Infect. 2006 Oct;82(5):368-71. Epub 2006 Jul 19.

68The Lancet Special Issue on HIV and Sex Work, https://secure.jbs.elsevierhealth.com/action/getSharedSiteSession?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thela ncet.com%2Fseries%2FHIV-and-sex-workers&rc=0&code=lancet-site lii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

It is highly recommended that for the remaining period of the DCA HIV/SRHR programme and even for the future programme that sex worker rights issues are addressed using the RBA. While criminal laws urgently need reform, supporting sex work self-organisation and community- building are key interim strategies for safeguarding sex workers' human rights and improving health outcomes in these communities. Examples of relevant activities under the DCA programme include: Group formation with sensitization and dialogue and link to established CBME groups, VSLA for sex workers; training of police and brothel owners to increase security; facilitate dialogue meetings between local government and sex workers groups; lobby DHO for outreach services; training of health care providers to access health services without stigma and discrimination; advocacy at national level by linking up with the newly founded network for sex workers: Uganda Network for Sex Workers Organisations (UNESO) or the Women Organizations Network for Human Rights Advocacy (WONETHA). While doing this it is of course important to ensure that sex workers have a meaningful voice in programming, at all stages of planning and implementation69

Selecting strategic partners is key to increase value for money. Ensure that DCA has a diverse partnership portfolio. Specific recommendations to a possible future partnership portfolio are provided elsewhere in this report.

7.5 Mainstreaming of SRHR and HIV/AIDS into the new country programme The DCA HIV/AIDS/SRHR Programme will be phased out as required by DCA HQ by the end of 2016, however key aspects of this programme can sensibly be integrated into the new DCA country programme. Specific suggestions for SRHR mainstreaming components in the new country programme includes: Broaden the approach towards women empowerment so that efforts to empower women starts at the household level, and this could be initiated through continuation of the SASA! methodology. Include SRHR/HIV aspects into the training modular of CBMES; VSLA and other groups and ensure sensible targeting mechanism of members (e.g. ensure representation of SGBV survivors, PLHIV ect. in CBMES groups; target PLHIV for APFS/FFS to benefit from short season crops and nutritious crops e.g. through kitchen gardens). The CBMES tool should include monitoring the adequacy and responsiveness of systems and institutions to SRHR and SGBV. Mainstream monitoring the accessibility and quality of SRHR services for women and girls as part of the CBMES monitoring tool. This will allow for the community monitors to regularly track progress in this regard and identify any areas for improvement and or advocacy in good time. SRHR issues will through this also consistently be part of the agenda of community dialogue meetings, offering an opportunity to create greater awareness amongst citizens, as well as obtain accountability from duty bearers Continue revitalizing existing, but in many cases dormant structures, such as Health Management Committees (HMCs), Village Health teams (VHT), as well as Sub-country and District AIDS Committees (SACs/DACs). Support women councillors to pass a bye law regarding the need to protect SRHR, and that councils invest/prioritise women’s and girls SRHR in the district budget and programmes. The councilors can then also specifically monitor (with other CSOs) the effective usage of these resources by local government officials. Support partners to develop a common advocacy agenda (at sub-county, district and national level) for effective implementation of key SRHR related legislation like the FGM Act and the

69Beyrer et al. An action agenda for HIV and sex workers. Lancet. 2015 Jan 17;385(9964):287-301. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60933-8. Epub 2014 Jul 22. liii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

SGBV Act, all of which have been enacted into law, but their implementation remains inconsistent. The common advocacy could be undertaken by a group of CSOs either under the umbrella of UWONET, or as a coalition of other SGBV and SRHR organisations like the SRHR Alliance. The responsibility for the formation of such a Coalition would lie with UWONET. In the alternative, an appropriate national partner who understands these issues beyond legal analysis, and who is willing to engage fully on these should be explored. For instance, FIDA (U) Under Humanitarian Action it will be important to ensure that a sustainable sensible targeting mechanisms of members is made so that PLHIV are part of the self-selection criteria in the refugee settlements. At the broader level, it is important to ensure the continuation of the work on sensitization and empowerment of girls in school settings, but gradually shift this education responsibility to trained teachers. Where political and cultural leaders are identified to pass on information on community development, strategic messages should be handed to them to improve their communication in relation to HIV/AIDS.

liv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

ANNEX 4. LIST OF PERSONALITIES MET AT VARIOUS MEETINGS

DCA partners (roundtable discussion and debriefing meeting April 8 2015) Cissy N Kagaba ACCU Mary Sonko Ugandan Christian University AngellaNakiyimba CIPA Norah Owaraga CPAR Esther Akwii COPACSO Grace Apio SOCADIDO Fred Kasozi RACA Patrick Onyango Mangen TPO Edmond M. Owor ULA Denis OkoriOdiny MONARLIP Patricia Munabi FOWODE Patrick Tumwebaze UDN Rita Aciro UWONET Haq Mukumbi RACOBAO Robert Mwesihwa UNASO Richard TEDDO Giorgio Lappo C&D Brenda Nakyeyune POZIDEP (KIDS) Susan Labwot Uwonet Gider Nalubega UJCC Fred Kahwa ULA Dr.Maate Uganda Christian University Haq Makumbi RACOBAO Emanuel Nabirano TPO Robert Mwesigwa UNASO

DCA GLRO staff interviews Karin Elisabeth Lind RR GLRO Christian Juulsgaard Olsen PC GLRO acting Janepher Taaka PO HIV Phoebe Mutonyi PO HIV Robinah FO Tracy GFO

ACT roundtable discussion 31 March 2015: Okono Joy Dinah, Diakonia Rachel Kyozira ICCO Sanyu Jessica COU Wycliffe Nsheka FCA Nalubega Gider, UJCC

lv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

List of Persons Interviewed

1. Right to Food and Humanitarian Action Programme

LOYORO APFS GROUP CBMES ADVOCATES (OBARANGA SUB-COUNTY) MARCH 26TH, 2015 MARCH 24TH, 2015 NO NAME SEX NO: NAME SEX : 01 LOGER MOSES M 01 OKELLO PETER M 02 LOKORU ROSE F 02 OPIDING YUVENTINO M 03 NANGIRO TERESA F 03 ARUTO GRACE F 04 AMEI POUL M 04 OCARO PETER M 05 LOSUK DOMEMIC M 05 OLINGA JOHN PATRICK M 06 AKEE MARY F 06 ALOU JAMES M 07 ANGELLA BETTY F 07 AKIAI ESTHER F 08 LOMER KIPURAT M 08 ATAI MARY F 09 SAGAL MARITIN F 09 IBUNYU FLORENCE F 10 LOCHUM DEBRA F 10 IIKO WILLIAM M 11 LONGOL LUCIA F 12 ANGELLA IKAAR F CBMES ADVOCATES (ALITO PARISH) 13 AKOL ESTER F 14 LOGIT PETER M 01 OOJA JAMES M 15 LOBONG MARY F 02 OGUTO CHARLSE M 16 IRIAMA ABARAHAM M 03 AMEN ROBERT M 17 LANGOK SAMUEL M 04 EKALU JOHN PETER M 18 LABONG MARIA F 05 OCEN MOSES MWANIKA M 19 LOKAPEL MADELENA F 06 EKWAMU TOM M 20 KODET REGINA F 07 EGABU CHARLES M 21 ABONG LOKUT M 08 OCHAN FAUSTINE M 22 DUNGON PETER M 09 EKALU JOHN PETER M 23 ANGELLA BETTY F 24 AKEE LUCIA F CBMES ADVOCATES (OPOT PARISH) 25 KORIANG LUCIA F 26 LONGOLI CHRISTINE F 01 OPILA TOM M 27 IRIAMA LUCIA F 02 ARIAKOT SOFIA F 28 LOGIT PETER M 03 ATAI TEDDY F 29 LOWARAN PETER M 04 APIARO MAREARET F 30 LOPUWA NAMUK M 05 OROTIN PATRICK M 31 NAUPE AWAS F 06 EBADU CHARLES M 32 AKOL ESTHER F 07 OLENG JOHN M 33 LONGOLI LUCIA F 08 JOEL ODOGO M 34 AISU CHARLES M 09 ACOM SALUME F 35 LOCHUM DEBRA F 36 LOMURIA LOIT M lvi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

37 ICHUMAR NOMER F 38 AMEI LORIONG M 39 WARAKORI ANDREW M 40 IIRIAMA FRANCIS M NAKORETE GROUP AMISIKISIAIMONO FFS/VSLA MARCH , 27TH ,2015 MARCH, 23RD ,2015 NO NAME SE NO: NAME SEX : X 01 CHEMARIAN NAKOMOL F 01 ATAI MARY F 02 CHEPONGINWE ENOPIR F 02 AYUPO TERESA F 03 CHEPTANU LOKWARET F 03 APIO VICTOR F 04 LOSIYAKEP NARWGO M 04 ASUKU SALUME F 05 CHEMUKAN YOWANA F 05 ALAKO LEYA F 06 CHEPKATAP F 06 AGIRO SEKU DINA F LOLINGAMERI 07 CHEPKATEKO F 07 ANYEGO SELINA F LONGURAGOLE 08 LOLINGAMERI M 08 IBUNYU FLORENCE F 09 CHEPOREEM LAMOLAR F 09 ANUSO MARGRET F 10 CHEPOCHEPTAN F LONGOLEPUS 11 LOLIMA ARSTI M EKANGANARU GROUPS ( MARCH,23RD,2015) 12 CHEPOKASOWA F JOSEPHINE 13 CHEPTANU F 01 EYOLU JOHN M LOGORIAGIRO 14 CHESURPOI TOUGOLE M 02 AROTIN LOYCE F 15 CHEPKATEKO LODOMO F 03 OGOSO ANTONY M 16 LOBUL NGOLEKOU M 04 AGWATO JANET F 17 CHEPKATEKO LORIBO F 05 ADONGO FLOW F 18 CHEPTEMO CHRISTINE F 06 ASEGE GRACE F 19 CHEPURAI F 07 ATEBO FAIBE F LOKWARADO 20 NAITALE MUSA M 08 ICODU MARY F 21 NABUE TERESA F 09 ABULO GLADES F 22 CHEPKATALE CELINA F 10 AKALO SELINA F 23 LOKORILIMA JOSEPH M 11 AKUO ROSE F 24 CHEPACHEKWA F 12 AJURO STELLA F TEBARANE 25 CHEPOCHEMURAN F 13 ASELO GRACE F CELINA 26 YOANA LIPALE M 14 AMUGE JOICE F 27 CHESARIPOI F 15 ATIM FLOW F LOKWARET 28 CHEPURETA LOBUL F 29 CHEPOKATAP LORUKAL F OBEDO UNITED WOMENS GROUP (MARCH, 23RD,2015) 30 CHEPOSAIT LINGARENE F 01 EBADU CHALES M AKAMANAROS 02 AMESO TERESA F (MARCH, 23RD,2015) 03 IDOTU GRACE F lvii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

01 EBUU JULIUS M 04 ATAI BETTY F 02 APEDU JAMES M 05 AKLOKOT HELLEN GRACE F

03 APOLOT STELLA F 06 ADIAO MAGRET F 04 APOLOT ROSE F 07 IGONGU JOYCE F 05 AKWAMU DEBORA F 08 OKIROR SIMON M 06 SAPIRI DINA F 09 APISO JOYCE F 07 ACUNGO ROSE F 10 IWOKA CHRISTINE F 08 ADONGO HELLEN F 11 APIO JANET F 09 OKELLO EMMANUEL M 12 APIO JENNIFER F 10 AKELLO JENIFER F 13 ALUPO MARY F 11 APIKO CHRISTINE F 14 APILA JANET F ALIT PARISH ENERUTU USLA ATTENDENCE SHEET AKILENG VILLAGE NO: NAMES OF MEMBERS TITLE SEX 01 EKALU JOHN PETER MEMBER M 02 OSEGA JOSEPH SECRETARY M 03 ABAL MARY TREASURER F 04 OPOLOT SIMON MEMBER M 05 OKIROR ROBERT MOBILISER M 06 OSEGA VICENT AUDITOR M 07 ARIOKOT GLADES MEMBER F 08 ALASO GRACE MEMBER F 09 OKELLO CRISTINE MEMBER F 10 AYUTO DOMITILA MEMBER F 11 AONO MARGRET MEMBER F 12 AUJO FLORENCE MEMBER F 13 ALIMU PETER MEMBER M 14 ORIOKOT JAMES MEMBER M 15 EDIGU JOHN M

EMORIKIKINOS VSLA MATILONG (OBALANGA S/COUNTRY ALITO PARISH)

NO: NAMES OF MEMEBER TITLE SEX 01 ODEKE THOMAS MEMBER M 02 OLUPET NELSON SECRETARY M 03 ONINKA JULIUS MEMBER M 04 AIGO JANET MEMBER F 05 APOLOT MICHEAL MEMBER M 06 OBULAI SAMUEL C/MAN M 07 OKIROR NIKANOLI MEMBER M 08 AKELLO TERESA MEMBER F 09 AROYO JOYCE MEMBER F 10 AIYO LEYAH MEMBER F 11 ATAI MAGRET MEMBER F 12 AKARO CHRISTIN MEMBER F 13 AMITO S MEMBER F 14 IREPLE SARAH MEMBER F 15 ATAPOR MARIM MEMBER F 16 ATABO STELLA TREASURER F

26TH, MARCH 2015 lviii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

ATTENDANCE LIST DDURING MEETING ON AREA LAND COMMITTEES OF NAKAPIRIPIT WITH THE EVELUATION TEAM OF DCA IN NAKAPIRIPIRIT NO: NAME TITLE SUBCOUNTY 01 UMO LOUMO ALBERT SECRETARY LOLACHAT 02 ANGELLA GABRIEL AROOR SECRETARY NAMALU 03 NGOROK CHALSE MEMEBER NAMALU 04 LOSIKE MATIA CHAIRMAN NAMALU 05 RUPE ANDREW C/PERSON ACC MORUTA 06 LOTIKIRU MATAYO MEMBER MORUTA 07 LIMLIM ALICE MEMBER MORUTA 08 BALU AUKO MEMBER MORUTA

26TH, MARCH,2015 NAKAPIRIPIRIT DIETRICT LAND BOARD LAND MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST NO: NAME TITLE TELEPHONE CONTACT 01 KORYANG ZAKARIA DLB C/MAN 0776915978 02 MOU BEN MEMBER 0758192278 03 ODUKA DAVID MACKENZIE DLB MEMBER 0776815585 04 REV: PHILIP AKOL MEMBER OF DLB 0774925624

MARCH ,8TH, 2015 COMMUNITY MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST NO: NAMES SEX VILLAGE CONTACT MUGISHA JEAN PAUL M BUGUTA 0772929952 RUHARA MASERE M BUGUTA NDIBWAMI SHERETO M BUGUTA NDAGIJEMANA ABIL M BUGUTA NSIMBOMANA ZABATOLA M BUGUTA TWAGIRAMUNGU EMMA M BUGUTA 0774248134 JOHN WAMUNGU M GIJAGAHE 0788086981 HITIYAREMBE NZABARINDA M BUGUTA NYIRAMANA BOLA F BUGUTA 0783764883 MUGISHA JOHN M BUGUTA NTIRIKINA AMOS M BUGUTA 0774845261 KABONEYE PIELI M BUGUTA NYIRANSABIMANA MUGISHA F BUGUTA DUSARE CHANTAL F BUGUTA N.RAZANA MAHORO F BUGUTA JACLINE DOMIJIRA F BUGUTA KABAMI ESPERANCE F BUGUTA NIKUZE REGINA F BUGUTA TUMUSHIME NRAMWIZA F BUGUTA WIMANA NYIRASAFARI F BUGUTA NRAFISHI LEONTINE F BUGUTA MAOMBI JISTINE F BUGUTA LYDIA KINGOMBE F BUGUTA ASSENDE CHANDAL F BUGUTA NRAMUJEZE CYIMPAYE F BUGUTA TWEIZERE NEEMA F BUGUTA UMWARI ESTHER F BUGUTA KANYAMANZA DAMASCEN M BUGUTA MWAMINI M BUGUTA lix | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

UWIMANA MBONIMPA F BUGUTA UWIMANA NTABUGI F BUGUTA NYIRANDABABONYE PERAGIE F BUGUTA BYIRINGIRO M BUGUTA NEMEYE MURAGI M BUGUTA 0786255793 TWIZERE NDENGEJEHO M BUGUTA

24TH, MARCH, 2015 DCA MEETING NO: NAMES POSITION 01 ELIAU STEPHEN PRODUCTION COODINATION (ASSIST.AGRIC OFFICER) 02 ADIRO FLORENCE PARISH CHEIF 03 MARIAM AKURUT ASST T/C DRR MEMBER 04 ASELLO JESSICA SAS OBALANGA 05 APIO JESCA CDO OBALANGA

lx | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

2. List of informants - HIV/AIDS/SRHR programme evaluation

Field trip Lyantonde 15-18 March 2015

Interviews RACOBAO: Haq Makumbi Director RACOBAO Vincent Mayega programme manager RACOBAO Jackson field staff RACOBAO

Interviews Legal Duty bearers, Lyantonde district Chairman LV: HarbertReshesshe CAO deputy: Yiga Martina District Health Officer: Dr.Obbo HIV focal person Chairman LC III: Elisa Ganafa Sub county Chief: Steven

Moral duty bearers Lyantonde Cultural leader- Solomon Lusingo, Bahima clan leader Religious leader EmmanueliRwakabenga, pentecostal church

Interview Health centre III In charge Peter Sekajugo Patient: Priscilla

VSLA focus group discussion, NakasoziAbeterine group, Lyantonde 15 women, 6 men

CBMES focus group discussion, Lyantonde 5 women, 5 men

PLHIV focus group discussion, Lyantonde, Kinuuka 10 women, 2 men

SASA! focus group discussion 25 women, 7 men

Interview sex workers, Lyantondo town Judice and Rose

GVB survivors couple, interview TulyasinguraMararet&Kikubagizo Joseph

Interview Apprentices: John Gayi and Rashid

Field trip Teso: Katakwi&kaberamaido district 23-27 March 2015 lxi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

TPO Katakwi staff interviews Deborah (Project coordinator) James (field based officer, social worker)

SASA focus group discussion (Survivor support group), Katakwi, Magoro 18 women

VSLA focus group discussion, Katakwi, Magoro 18 women, 10 men

CBMES focus group discussionKatakwi, Magoro 3 women, 9 men from 5 parishes

Anonymous Alcoholics focus group discussion Katakwi, Magoro 5 men

Interview duty bearers:  Sub county chief Magoro sub county  Centre Coordinating tutor, Magoro sub county: Elaso John Makwi  Head teachers, Katakwi, Magoro, primary school 1 male, 1 female  Police commander, Katakwi district

School management committee, focus group discussion, Katakwi, Magoroprimary school 3 men, 2 women

Children anti- GBV clubs, focus group discussion, Katakwi, Magoroprimary school 4 girls, 2 boys

Interviews staff TEDDOSoroti Moses (acting director TEDDO Soroti) Benjamin (field staff) Richard (programme coordinator)

Interview duty bearers: LC III Kaberamaido, Kobulubulu: Eputo Melvin CDO, Kaberamaido, Kobulubulu: Bernard Apollo Francis Cultural leader: Clan leader Joly

‘Male champions’, focus group discussion, Kaberamaido,Ochurusubcounty 4 men: Edmund, Joly, James, Robert

Women at landing site, focus group discussion, Kaberamaido, Ochurusubcounty 5 women

Fishermen at landing site, interviewsKaberamaido, Ochurusubcounty James & Patrick

lxii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Community health based educators, interviewsKaberamaido, Ochurusubcounty 3 men 3. List of Personalities interviewed under Active Citizenship Programme

Name Organisation Title

Ambrose Toolit DCA Programme Coordinator, Active Citizenship

Muhammed Ndifuna HURINET CEO

Stephen HURINET Programme Coordinator

James HURINET Project Officer

John Roberts HURINET Project Assistant

Imelda Namagga UDN Senior Programme officer, Communication and Rights

Maureen Agaba UDN Programme Officer, Governance and Rights

Jude Odaro UDN Capacity building Officer and Gender Expert

Moses Okoed UDN Project Assistant

Patrick Tumwebeze UDN

Julius Kapwepwe UDN Head of Programmes

Gilder Nalubega UJCC Deputy Executive Secretary

Joseph Oneka UJCC Head of Governance

Betty Adio UJCC Parliamentary Liaison

Dickson Okumu Parliament Head of Project Implementation Unit

Josephine Parliament M&E Officer

Mr. Richard Okudi MOFPED Ag. Commissioner

Robert Ssekatte MOFPED Fiscal Decentralisation Section

Moses Sonko MOFPED Budget Policy Section

Violet Akurut Adome UHRC Commissioner lxiii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Name Organisation Title

Pastor Valentine Dingire MONRALIP Vice chair

Rev. Simon Akol Aisu MONARLIP Secretary

Rev. phillip Makang MONARLIP Pentecostal

Denis Okori MONARLIP Executive Director

Rita Naburi MONARLIP Project Officer

Muhanguzi Charles Moroto District District Internal Security Officer (DISO)

Oputa Paul Moroto District District Education Officer (DEO)

Maggie Lolem Moroto District Community Development Officer (CDO)

Lometo Ceasar Moroto District District Speaker

Jakajabo Robert Moroto District LCIII Chair, Rupa sub- county

Logiri Anthony Abbot Moroto District CDO, Rupa sub-county

Jenifer Akot Moroto District ACDO, Rupa, sub-county

Chamcham Obadia Moroto District Headteacher, Rupa primary School

Moro Retano Moroto District Deputy

Okello Moses Moroto District Teacher

Kevin Rubangamiya Moroto District In charge, Rupa Health Center II

Ilukol Ilementina Moroto District Midwife, Rupa Health Center II

Ikaas Kizito Moroto District Nurse, Rupa Health Center II

Suzan Labwot UWONET Project Officer

Rachael Mishambi UWONET Project Officer

Abede Zachary ARELIMOK Programme Officer, Access to Justice Lomonya Joseph Napak District LCV Chairperson lxiv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Name Organisation Title

Peter Maruk Napak District District Speaker

Ruth Longole Iringo Napak District Gender Officer

Teko Magdalene Napak District District Women Councillors, Napak District Nakee Anna Ojai

Logetei Lina Lokol Deborah Ngoya Vicky Atim Wanamong Mary

Ali Noah Moroto District Community Members, Katanga Lomakol Samuel Locha Christine Odong Lorot Caroline Shaban Jaden Iluko Reuben Sunday Francis Alinga Betty Nakiru Anjelle Abuba Nadim Iribot Mary Lowakorii Margarat Longoli Anna Angella pPeter Sgal Mark Bashir Noor Abdallah Ramathan Adeudu Denis lxv | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Name Organisation Title

Korobe Ismail Lokwii Kizito Akoll phillip Moru Naume Lorika Max Teko Simon Peter Lotiang Jonathan Kitoparfarii Katanga Marii Titoo Ocom Mariko Kimm Kardimal Adan Yellowman

Odelok Thomas Moroto District Women CSO representatives and Onyang Joseph members of KAWOU Lokongo Josephine

Asekenyo Hellen Lomolu Florence Loumu Joyce Teko Zubeda Akuu Betty Akwaro Sarah

Ochieng Dickson Moroto District Community Monitors, CBMES Rupa sub-county Lokii Emmanuale

Lotee Joseph Loru Emmy Kezi Jacob lxvi | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report

Name Organisation Title

Lokwii John Jivilanto Ayugi Margareyt Lomongin Bcky Awas Rose Achia Natalina Keem Lawrence Kabila

lxvii | DCA Uganda Joint Programmes Evaluation – Final Report