UGANDA

USAID/UGANDA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FOR THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR ACTIVITY

FIRST QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT (OCTOBER –

DECEMBER 2013)

DATE : January 2014 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Tetra Tech.

PREFACE

USAID/Uganda’s Environmental Management for the Oil Sector activity is a four-year project awarded to Tetra Tech in September 2013. The project aims to build capacity of Ugandan institutions, professionals and citizens to better understand, monitor and mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts from the oil and gas sector on biodiversity.

The project has three expected results:

 Strengthened capacity of Government of Uganda (GoU) institutions to manage the environmental impacts of the oil and gas sector;  Strengthened capacity of Ugandan professionals in the public and private sector to manage the environmental impacts of the oil and gas sector; and  Strengthened capacity of Uganda civil society to participate in decision-making of the oil and gas sector.

Tetra Tech has engaged three core subcontractors to achieve these results namely Texas A&M University (TAMU) (have long experience in the oil and gas engineering and environmental training and research and interface with biodiversity), Business Community Synergies (BCS) (have worked in the Albertine Graben on community issues relating oil and gas), and Quest Energy (currently running short courses for Ugandan professionals in across the value chain of the oil and gas sector). The team works with diverse stakeholders including the Uganda government’s “environmental pillar institutions” (EPI) and petroleum agencies, civil society, oil industry firms and in the oil-bearing local governments and communities.

AUTHORS: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector Team

This report was prepared for the United States Agency for International Development, Contract Number AID-617-C-13-00008, USAID/Uganda Environmental Management for the Oil Sector

Implemented by: Tetra Tech ARD P.O. Box 1397 Burlington, VT05402

Tetra Tech Contacts:

Ian Deshmukh, Senior Technical Advisor/Manager [email protected]

Jones Ruhombe, Chief of Party [email protected]

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Annual Work Plan

USAID/UGANDA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FOR THE OIL SECTOR ACTIVITY

FIRST QUARTERLY DRAFT PROGRESS REPORT (QPR) (OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2013)

JANUARY 2014

DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE ...... I ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS...... VI 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 7

1.1 BACKGROUND ...... 7

1.2 PROJECT STRUCTURE ...... 8

1.3 KEY OPERATING ASSUMPTION ...... 10 2.0 WORK PLAN RESULTS AND ACTIVITIES ...... 11

2.2 RESULT 1—STRENGTHENED CAPACITY OF UGANDAN INSTITUTIONS TO MANAGE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR ...... 12

2.3 RESULT 2 – STRENGTHENED CAPACITY OF UGANDAN PROFESSIONALS TO MONITOR AND MANAGE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR ...... 12

2.4 RESULT 3 – STRENGTHENED CAPACITY OF UGANDAN CIVIL SOCIETY TO PARTICIPATE IN DECISION MAKING IN THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..13 3.0 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT...... 14

3.1 IMPLEMENTATION TEAM AND STRUCTURE ...... 14

3.2 ADMINISTRATIVE START-UP ACTIVITIES ...... 15

3.3 WORK PLAN PREPARATION ...... 15

3.4 ADAPTIVE PROJECT MANAGEMENT: CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES ...... 15

3.3 MONITORING AND EVALUATION ...... 16

3.5 INTEGRATING GENDER CONERNS ...... 17 4.0 FINANICIAL MANAGEMENT ...... 18 ANNEXTURE: WORK PLAN SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES, DELIVERABLES AND TIMELINE ...... 19  Accessing District Local Government...... 21  Conduct Capacity Needs Assessments ...... 21  Design courses ...... 22  Awareness meetings for local leaders and short-term training for district technical staff in one or two districts ...... 22 Course materials designed ...... 22

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report v

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AWP Annual Work Plan BCS Business Community Synergies CNA Capacity Needs Assessment CoP Chief of Party CSO Civil Society Organization EMM Environmental Monitoring and Management – Senior Technical Advisor EMPAG Environmental Monitoring Plan for the Albertine Graben EPI Environmental Pillar Institutions GoU Government of the Republic of Uganda M&E Monitoring and Evaluation NEMA National Environment Management Authority NFA National Forestry Authority OG Oil and Gas PEPD Petroleum Exploration and Production Department PMP Performance Management Plan QPR Quarterly Progress Report SoW Statement of Work STA-AP Academic Programs - Senior Technical Advisor STTA Short Term Technical Assistance USAID United States Agency for International Development UWA Uganda Wildlife Authority

vi USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in Uganda and Tetra Tech signed a four year contract with an effective start date of 30 September 2013 to implement the Environmental Management for Oil Sector Activity. Tetra Tech has three agreed subcontractors namely Texas A&M University, Business Community Synergies (both based in the USA) and Quest Energy (based in Uganda), to support implementation. The First Annual Work Plan covers the period 1 October 2013 to 30 September 2014. This First Quarterly Report covers the period October – December 2013 during which the focus was on administrative start-up, and preparation of the First Annual Work Plan and draft Performance Management Plan. As a draft of the Work Plan was due on 30 November 2013 and approval of a final draft expected by 31 December, the programmatic activities discussed are mostly scheduled to begin in the second quarter of the project. With USAID, Tetra Tech held a series of one-on-one meetings and organized a strategic stakeholder consultation workshop on 21– 22 November 2013 as part of the Work Plan process.

The project works with the Government of the Republic of Uganda’s Environmental Pillar Institutions (EPI) for the oil sector as well as academic institutions, local governments and communities in affected areas, private sector oil interests and civil society organizations. Capacity-building of human resources in these institutions, so that they may better fulfill their roles in environmental management, is the focus of the project. However, at a higher level, because of the ecologically sensitive nature of the areas where oil is known to occur, the Environmental Management for Oil Sector Activity is ultimately aimed at conserving biodiversity in the Albertine Graben, the Nile River and the Great Lakes in western Uganda.

1.1 BACKGROUND

Uganda has an estimated 3.5 billion barrels of known recoverable oil reserves, and an estimated potential of 6 billion barrels. Most known reserves lie in the Albertine Graben, one of the world’s most biodiverse regions. The Albertine Graben is estimated to contain some 30 percent of Africa’s mammal species, 51 percent of its bird species, 19 percent of its amphibian species and 14 percent of its plant and reptile species. Protected Areas in the oil-bearing region include National Parks, Wildlife Reserves, Forest Reserves and Community Wildlife Reserves. Much of the area under exploration presenting the most urgent short-term threat is within Murchison Falls National Park, sensitive for biodiversity conservation and a popular tourist destination. The Murchison Falls – Albert Delta Wetland System is designated as a Wetland of International Importance. Indeed, the Graben is a foundation for a growing tourism industry that contributes $650 million a year to the national economy and that economic potential will extend beyond the period of oil extraction.

Ecosystem degradation from oil and gas activities is possible throughout the production cycle – exploration, surveying and drilling, extraction, processing, transportation, decommissioning and rehabilitation. Noise, vibrations and air pollution arising from extraction and processing of oil affect distribution patterns and movement of wild animals and may result in increased human-wildlife conflict for communities adjacent to protected areas. Pollution of aquatic ecosystems causes fisheries and water use concerns, which have local and trans-boundary implications, and are likely to have negative impacts on health of wild flora and fauna, and humans. Used water from oil extraction is often severely polluted, containing dangerous heavy metals that should not be allowed to pollute groundwater and nearby surface water bodies. According to the Environmental Sensitivity Atlas for the Albertine Graben, most of the region has a shallow water table, making groundwater especially susceptible to pollution. Local fishing

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 7

communities depend on both the Albert Nile and Lake Albert and damage to important inshore breeding grounds would be detrimental to fish populations.

Indirect environmental impacts from the oil industry mainly relate to increased population pressures and new infrastructure due to amplified economic activity in the region. Issues such as waste disposal, pollution, increased use of biomass for fuel, intensified demand for fish and bush meat, and an increase in poaching activities could significantly impact biodiversity conservation. Ugandan institutions need the capacity to effectively manage environmental effects of oil production. According to the Wildlife Conservation Society’s “Wildlife, Landscapes and Development for Conservation” project Final Report, because the oil industry is new to the country, there is limited understanding and capacity to address negative environmental impacts.

Government agencies such as the Petroleum Exploration and Production Department (PEPD), National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA), National Forestry Authority (NFA), civil society organizations and oil companies have expressed apprehension over the lack of expertise within Uganda to manage environmental concerns related to oil development. Among needs to manage and mitigate complex potential environmental impacts from the oil and gas industry are specialized knowledge and skills related to the industry. Many government officers are well trained in environmental disciplines, but with little focus on oil and gas. Community and district officials are also short of information and resources, lack technical expertise required to monitor and enforce environmental aspects of oil and gas development, and encounter challenges with engaging in technical planning and budgeting for environmental management.

Substantial work precedes this project on issues related to environmental management of Uganda’s oil resources and capacity needs. With funding from Norway, NEMA completed a “Capacity Needs Assessment for the Environmental Pillar Institutions in Uganda” (CNA, 2012), “Sensitivity Atlas for the Albertine Graben” (2010), the “Environmental Monitoring Plan for the Albertine Graben (EMPAG, 2012)”, and PEPD with NEMA, also with Norwegian support, drafted a “Strategic Environmental Assessment of Oil and Gas Activities in the Albertine Graben, Uganda” in 2013. These documents are an excellent starting point for this new USAID project, which will assist in addressing some of the needs identified in the CNA. The draft Strategic Environmental Assessment of Oil and Gas Activities in the Albertine Graben, as the most recent of these documents, covers and updates developments regarding the CNA and EMPAG and provides valuable input to development of this Work Plan.

1.2 PROJECT STRUCTURE

The USAID/Uganda Statement of Work identifies purpose, objectives and expected results for the Environmental Management of the Oil Sector activity (referred to as “the project” in this document). The purpose is to build the capacity of government ministries, departments and agencies, academic and research institutions, civil society organizations, the private sector and other key stakeholders, to be better prepared to manage and mitigate impacts arising out of oil and gas development on the environment and biodiversity of the Albertine Graben. The overall objective is to improve Ugandan understanding of and ability to address the impact of oil and gas (OG) development on Uganda’s biodiversity. The three Results Areas are:

 Result 1 – Strengthened capacity of Government of Uganda institutions to manage the environmental impacts of the oil and gas sector;  Result 2 – Strengthened capacity of Ugandan professionals in the public and private sector to manage the environmental impacts of the oil and gas sector; and  Result 3 –Strengthened capacity of Uganda civil society to participate in decision-making of the oil and gas sector.

8 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

The three results are achieved through eight subsidiary outcomes that are elaborated in Section 2, and are shown in the draft Results Framework (Figure 1). This Results Framework was based on discussions with USAID and its Washington-based Measuring Impacts project during which some “outcomes” were rearranged under different “results” compared to the project Statement of Work (see Section 3.3). The diagram links these results and outcomes to “higher level” intermediate results and one of USAID/Uganda’s overall Development Objectives namely, “Economic growth from agriculture and the natural resource base increased in selected areas and population groups”.

Figure 1: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector Results Framework

This draft Results Framework will be finalized in the approved PMP in Quarter 2.

USAID funding is from its “biodiversity earmark” allocated to Uganda. This funding is tied to specific requirements of the Biodiversity Code below. The project is well-suited to meet these criteria. Biodiversity is at the center of the project purpose and objective listed above. A threat analysis is included in the Work Plan, and a project focus is on improving monitoring efforts. In addition, the draft PMP includes USAID global indicators for biodiversity. While the project does not expect to conduct its own site-based activities, rather improving Ugandan institutions capacity to do so, much of the commercially

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 9

proven oil reserves are within Murchison Falls National Park and other protected areas in the Albertine Graben, which are well established as biologically significant and ecologically sensitive areas. Success of the project will, therefore, positively impact biodiversity.

THE USAID BIODIVERSITY CODE USAID’s Biodiversity Code guides USAID in determining which activities are considered biodiversity conservation, and therefore count towards the biodiversity earmark. The code stipulates four criteria, all of which must be met to be considered a biodiversity activity: 1. The program must have an explicit biodiversity objective. It isn’t enough to have biodiversity conservation result as a positive externality from another program. 2. Activities must be identified based on an analysis of threats to biodiversity. 3. The program must monitor associated indicators for biodiversity conservation. 4. Site-based programs must have the intent to positively impact biodiversity in biologically significant areas.

1.3 KEY OPERATING ASSUMPTION

For the academic programmes (Result 2), Texas A&M University will work with Makerere University through the “Oil and Gas Environmental Management, Research and Curricula Committee” at Makerere University, other institutions of higher learning and relevant tertiary educational institutions and accordingly design courses and/or modules for training. In this context, “training of trainers” (TOT) is a prerequisite. The courses and/or modules will be designed to meet capacity needs of EPIs, local governments, and relevant private sector companies (Tullow Oil, Total and CNOOC) and civil society organisations (CSOs) and will be delivered largely by Tetra Tech’s subcontractors Texas A&M University, Quest Energy and Business Community Synergies.

The environmental monitoring and management programme will target mainly the EPIs, which are Government of Uganda (GoU) “lead agencies” for various aspects of environmental management, and the Petroleum Exploration and Production Department, which is a lead agency for the oil and gas sector in Uganda. EPIs include National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), Directorate of Water Resources Management, Uganda Wildlife Authority, National Forestry Authority, Ministry of Water and Environment and the Fisheries Resources Department. NEMA chairs and is the coordinator of EPIs. .

The project will as much as possible work with existing institutions and within and through existing processes and it is assumed that existing operational arrangements will function reasonably smoothly. As seen above, however, the project will have to engage with multiple partners that have disparate albeit complementing and at times overlapping mandates. In any case the institutions are not at the same level of preparedness to engage the project. Accordingly, strong coordination will be essential if the project is to harness the inherent synergies and deliver efficiently.

10 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

2.0 WORK PLAN RESULTS AND ACTIVITIES

2.1 INTRODUCTION

“Results”, “Sub-results” and “Activities” in this section are taken directly from the Annual Work Plan (October 2013 – September 2014). The shaded box below the activity title is also reproduced from the draft Annual Work Plan for the first year (AWP1). Activities not programmed or implemented in Q1 are not elaborated in this report. Annexture contains the implementation schedule presented in the AWP1, slightly modified to reflect the nature of this report. It should be noted that Q1 has been dominated by “start-up” activities (vide 3.2) including those relating to programme such as:

(i) Drafting the work plan for the first year (second draft submitted for approval); (ii) Drafting the PMP for the project (first draft submitted for review);. (iii) An initial stakeholder workshop; and (iv) Extensive consultations with government, other donors, and the private sector

The project team together with USAID/Uganda Mission held consultations with strategic and potential implementation partners to brief them on the scope of the project and solicit for additional suggestions for AWP1. Consultations started with initial briefs to the partners on project start-up and these were followed by a 2-day workshop (report of proceedings available) during which a “vision” and priorities for the project were identified and key stakeholders mapped. Thereafter, the project team drafted AWP1 and while the second draft is being reviewed by the USAID/Uganda Mission, feedback discussions continued with the partners to further internalize the project and elaborate on AWP1. The partners include Makerere University (MU), National Environment management Authority (NEMA), Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA), National Forestry Authority (NFA), Petroleum Exploration and Production Department (PEPD), Norwegian Embassy to Uganda, Tullow Oil, Total (U) Ltd and China National Overseas Oil Corporation (CNOOC), the Lake Albert Development Plan Group (joint venture of all three oil companies operating in Uganda). Key outcomes of the meetings with implications for AWP1 include in particular and the project in general include:

(i) Prioritising the Directorate of Water Resources Management for initial assessment given the aquatic biodiversity in the River Nile, Lake Albert, Lake George, Lake Edward, Kazinga Channel and River Semuliki and presence of Ramsar sites in Albertine Graben; (ii) Need for specifying what criteria were used to select the districts and to be included in work plan (physical location in the Albertine Graben, prevalence of oil exploration activities and presence of Protected Areas). It was suggested to add Ntoroko, Kanungu, Kiryandongo and Nebbi to the original cluster of districts to be supported by the project (Nwoya, Buliisa, Hoima, Kasese, Rubiriizi and Rukungiri); (iii) Sharing the Tetra Tech ARD Technical proposal with Key Partners; (iv) Sharing Statements of Work (SOWs) for all short-term technical assistants (STTAs) proposed; (v) Including in the SOWs in STTA for evaluation of the oil and gas information hub that NEMA is trying to establish in their library and what needs will be to make it into an information clearing-house; (vi) Considering how NEMA can actively participate in the initial assessment so that it is more useful for them and provides a capacity building opportunity; (vii) Sending formal request to NEMA to nominate staff to participate in the Makerere Oil and Gas Environmental Management Research and Curricula Committee;

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 11

(viii) Helping in acquiring monitoring/laboratory equipment (This will be addressed by separate USAID mechanism); (ix) Co-opting NEMA and PEPD staff in assessments after themselves have been assessed; and (x) Considering “Strengthening of existing “Ranger-based Monitoring” (MIST) by including monitoring oil and gas impacts on environment and biodiversity” for AWP1.

During the “Measuring Impact” workshop held at the USAID/Uganda Mission between the Mission’s environmental team, project staff and facilitators from Washington D.C., a decision was made to delete former Result 3 and transfer the two outcomes under it to Result 1 and to transfer also Outcome 1.2 on research to Result 2. These shifts were made to refine internal consistency across the “Results”.

2.2 RESULT 1—STRENGTHENED CAPACITY OF UGANDAN INSTITUTIONS TO MANAGE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR

Implementation of activities under this result is scheduled to start in Q2. However, a decision was taken to start “institutional capacity assessment” (Activity 1.1.2) with only two institutions namely NEMA and PEPD. Relevant staff from these institutions will participate in subsequent assessments. Quarter2 activities shall include:

(i) Assessment of baseline and monitoring systems at the EPIs and other stakeholders (1.1.1); (ii) Workshop to present and verify findings and recommendations from the assessment (1.1.1); (iii) Institutional capacity assessment of PEPD and NEMA (1.1.2); (iv) Review, collection, analysis and consolidation of information on biodiversity in the Albertine Graben for updating the EMPAG (1.1.4); and (v) Workshop for collaborative assessment of threats to biodiversity and their monitoring and mitigation (1.1.4).

2.3 RESULT 2 – STRENGTHENED CAPACITY OF UGANDAN PROFESSIONALS TO MONITOR AND MANAGE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR

While implementation of most activities under this result is scheduled to start in Q2, there are some activities scheduled for Q1 that were carried out (see Table below). The project also received input, through STTA, from Texas A&M University on, among other topics, establishing an effective and operational working relationship between the project and Makerere University’s appropriate officials/academic staff, TAMU and exploring possible evolution of working relationships between TAMU and Makerere (such USAID’s support to both Universities in the Higher Education Science Network) that may add value to the development of environmental management in the Uganda oil sector. A half-day workshop was held with relevant Makerere University staff and other stakeholders during which membership of the curricula and research committee was proposed and terms of reference for the committee outlined. USAID/Uganda Mission is currently negotiating a Memorandum of Understanding to pave the way for cooperation between Makerere University and the project.

Activity 2.1.1: Identify members for the Oil and Gas Environmental Management Year 1 Status Research and Curricula Committee Inputs Facilitate formation of the Committee Q1-Q2 Underway Outputs Terms of Reference for Committee Q1 Done

12 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

Activities planned for Quarter2 under this Result revolve around completing formation and operationalizing the Makerere University Oil and Gas Research and Curricula Committee including

(i) Assessment of critical research gaps, priorities and potential funding sources; (ii) Workshop to create groups to write proposals; and (iii) Stakeholder meeting to determine communication strategy.

2.4 RESULT 3 – STRENGTHENED CAPACITY OF UGANDAN CIVIL SOCIETY TO PARTICIPATE IN DECISION MAKING IN THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR Implementation of activities under this result is scheduled to start in Q2. The activities include:

(i) Hiring a communication STTA; (ii) Introducing the project to target districts; and (iii) Conduct capacity needs assessment for the districts.

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 13

3.0 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

3.1 IMPLEMENTATION TEAM AND STRUCTURE

The Environmental Management for the Oil Sector activity has a small dedicated field team based in Kampala and a Tetra Tech Home Office support group as shown in the diagram below. The figure also shows relationships to organizations in Uganda, crucial to success.

This implementation structure follows Tetra Tech’s time-tested approach to field projects. One unusual, but not unique, feature is to have a team member seated in another institution (Makerere University) outside the main project office. This arrangement is to enable the continuous feedback needed for development of new academic programs and consolidate relationships between Makerere University and Texas A&M University. Although fully integrated into the project team operationally, the Senior Academic Advisor is expected to be a Texas A&M University employee, again to strengthen these relationships and ensure academic credibility. The entire team is now on board except that the Senior Academic Advisor is still working as STTA pending conclusion of a subcontract agreement with Texas A&M University.

USAID/Uganda Tetra Tech Home Office

Key Stakeholders  Senior Technical Advisor/ Manager-Ian Deshmukh  Environmental Pillar  Project Manager–Kelly Kimball Institutions CHIEF OF PARTY  Contracts Manager-Pam Doran  PEPD  M&E Specialist-Robynne Locke  Local government  Civil Society Subcontractors  Affected communities  Oil companies  Texas A&M University  Other donors  Business Community Synergies  Quest Energy

Makerere University

FINANCE & SR TECH ADVISOR- M&E/TRAINING SR TECH ADMIN ENV. MONITORING SPECIALIST ADVISOR- MANAGER & MANAGEMENT ACADEMIC PROGRAMS Joseph Oonyu

OPERATIONS STAFF Assistant  Drivers

SHORT-TERM TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE – TETRA TECH, TEXAS A&M, Business Community Synergies, QUEST ENERGY

14 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

3.2 ADMINISTRATIVE START-UP ACTIVITIES

The project team, with support from Tetra Tech Home Office, successfully established the project operationally by completing the following: (i) Hiring of project staff (all technical and support staff on board); (ii) Visit by the Project manager from the Home Office to support start-up; (iii) Getting on board the 3 sub-contractors (Texas A&M University, Quest Energy and Business Community Synergies) started (All the 3 provided STTA during Q1 and reports are available. Negotiations for long-term contracts are underway); (iv) Procuring office furniture, project equipment and services (All furniture received, most equipment also received and the rest are on order. We have received one car, a laptop, inverter and generator from the completed USAID Northern Uganda Development of Enhanced Local Governance, Infrastructure and Livelihoods Program; Local Area Network is operational and we have procured a security firm to maintain security at the office and medical insurance for staff); and (v) Orientation of Chief of Party and other staff (Continuous process but preliminaries done. There was a “post-award” conference with USAID, Chief of Party (CoP) spent a week at the home office and the project has in this regard been supported and visited by the Senior Technical Advisor (STAM), Project Manager (PM), Contracts Specialist and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Specialist from home office).

3.3 WORK PLAN PREPARATION

The Chief of Party held the first meeting with Senior Technical Advisor – Environmental Monitoring (STAEM), Finance and Administration Manager and other identified staff that were yet to be contracted, including representatives of sub-contractors, on 1 November 2013. He introduced the project to them and what the “start-up” activities would be. It was decided to hold a two-day stakeholder workshop during the month to create a common understanding of the scope of the project, appreciate mutual expectations and provide input into and determine priorities for AWP1. Meanwhile, together with the USAID/Uganda Mission, a list of strategic partners were identified and mobilised through physical visits to their offices. STTA was contracted to prepare for and facilitate the workshop. A series of preparatory meetings were held between the STTA, USAID/Uganda Mission staff and the project and eventually the workshop was held on 21 – 22 November 2013. It was attended by 54 participants. Following the workshop, project staff, sub-contractors and STAM developed a first draft of AWP1 and this was submitted to the USAID/Uganda Mission on 31 December 2013 for review.

3.4 ADAPTIVE PROJECT MANAGEMENT: CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES

At minimum, the Environmental Management for the Oil Sector contract requires that the project address all three Results and eight sub-results presented in Section 2 over four years. Significant contractual flexibility exists in determining and implementing activities to achieve those Results. Activities in this Work Plan are based upon those presented in Tetra Tech’s proposal to implement the project, with modifications and elaborations based upon information gleaned since contract award. That technical proposal, and the contract Statement of Work both contain a range of assessments and analysis to guide activities, most of which will start in Q2. These assessments and analyses may produce findings and recommendations that call for adjustments to this first Work Plan. It is for this reason that many activities

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 15

in this document are in “formative” rather than “definitive” language. Much also depends upon the speed and content of defining operational relationships with implementing partners, many of which are only partly controlled by the project team. A mid-year review will take place in June 2014 to thoroughly review progress and seek USAID approval for any changes at the Activity level, or in scheduling, so that the project can best adapt to new information and any changes in circumstances.

An example of USAID and project collaboration for adaptive management was the rearrangement of project Results and Outcomes to provide a more logical structure that is described elsewhere in this report.

3.3 MONITORING AND EVALUATION

A Tetra Tech home office monitoring and evaluation (M&E) specialist assisted initially during technical start-up by attending the project’s stakeholder workshop in November, meeting project and USAID staff and assisting preliminary thinking on development of a draft performance management plan (PMP). Of note were discussions with USAID regarding its Washington-based Measuring Impact project, for which USAID/Uganda is one of nine collaborating missions. The Measuring Impact Project conducted a 3-day workshop (3-5 December 2013) attended by the project team (including the home office M&E specialist and subcontractor personnel) and USAID staff that are working closely with the project. The aim of the workshop was to apply adaptive management principles to the project design. The workshop reviewed the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation, developed by the Conservation Management Partnership. The Open Standards are a collection of common concepts, approaches, and terminology in conservation project design, management and monitoring which help implementers to improve conservation. Workshop discussions and activities resulted in improved knowledge of adaptive management, a common vision and understanding of the project context, theories of change for strategic action, development of a detailed conceptual framework and using it to modify strategies, identify indicators to monitor the project and ensure the achievement of desired outcomes. Outputs of the workshop are incorporated in development of the Performance Management Plan. In addition, the conceptual model or particular result chains will be re-developed with relevant stakeholders to identify issues not captured by the workshop team and to provide a common understanding of the project. The project M&E/Training Specialist will build consensus amongst project staff, USAID and targeted institutions on the project’s theory of change, expected results, and indicators. The PMP will be founded upon the results of two consensus building activities: the Stakeholders Workshop (November 2013) and the Measuring Impact Workshop (December 2013). USAID’s goal for the latter project is to “Enhance the impact of forestry and biodiversity programs in USAID through improved knowledge, evidence-based programming, and adaptive management”. The two projects will work closely to ensure that the project’s M&E systems are in line with best practices for biodiversity monitoring and evaluation, and that adaptive management systems are in place from the start of the project.

Monitoring and evaluation Year 1 Status Activity Leader: M&E /Training Specialist (M&E/Training Specialist) Key Partners: Makerere University, EPI professionals Key STTA: Tetra Tech STTA Inputs M&E/Training Specialist and Tetra Tech STTA to consult staff and consultants to Q1 Done identify indicators and monitoring tools for project results M& E/Training Specialist with information from staff, to track and report external Q1-Q4 Started events that may affect work plan implementation or the PMP PMP developed and submitted to USAID Q1-Q2 Approval in Q2 Outputs

16 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

M&E System developed and providing regular updates to team on progress of Q1-Q4 System being AWP, PMP and targets developed Project monthly reports, quarterly, mid-year, and annual report Q1-Q4 Weekly and quarterly reporting being done

The major activities during the second quarter shall include the following:

(i) Baseline assessments to describe the current situation for indicators under each of the result areas; (ii) Identification of indicator targets for the four years; (iii) Refining the indicators to reflect the realities on the ground; and (iv) Training sub-contractors in data collection, management, and reporting.

3.5 INTEGRATING GENDER CONERNS

While the project M&E system will ensure that data resulting from project activities are disaggregated by gender, these records cannot ensure that gender impacts of oil development and project activities are gender neutral, or, where necessary, enhance the role of women towards equality. The CNA, EMPAG and Strategic Environmental Assessment of Oil and Gas Activities in the Albertine Graben acknowledge national policy on gender equality, but do not elaborate on how to apply the policy in ways affected by oil development. To ensure gender issues are properly integrated into project activities (and to stimulate others to do so) the project will employ STTA to conduct a gender analysis of issues arising from oil industry impacts on biodiversity at mid-Year 1to guide the remainder of the project. The Monitoring and Evaluation/Training Specialist will use the findings to ensure gender concerns are integrated into all relevant activities.

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 17

4.0 FINANICIAL MANAGEMENT

Below is summary of expenditure, in United States of America dollars, during the Quarter. The project initially relied on Ag-Inputs Project for all its financial transactions. It was planned to have the Finance and Administration and all the relevant SOPs in place during Q2.

18 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

ANNEXTURE: WORK PLAN SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES, DELIVERABLES AND TIMELINE Activity Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Status Deliverable O N D J F M A M J J A S Result 1: Strengthened Uganda Institutions Outcome 1.1 Systems to monitor long-term impact 1.1.1 Assess GoU capacity to establish baseline information & Monitoring  Assessment and recommendations Assessment report X  Development of coordination mechanism  Facilitate meetings of the GoU oil and Gas monitoring committee 1.1.2 Institutional capacity assessments for selected key organisations  Assessment meetings for selected EPIs Assessment report X Plan for future assessments X 1.1.3 Basic training for implementation EMPAG  Design of basic training Basic training course and materials X  Delivery of short term training Trained staff of NEMA, UWA, NFA X PEPD and 2 Districts 1.1.4 Biodiversity threat assessment  Collection, review, analysis on biodiversity Biodiversity threat assessment, monitoring and X mitigation document  Workshop for collaborative assessment X Materials for integration into research programs  Review of EMPAG Result 2: Strengthened Uganda Professionals Outcome 2.1 Assessment of Makerere University’s current capacity conducted 2.1.1 Establish the OG Environmental Management DONE Research and Curricula Committee Committee formed X

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 19

Activity Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Status Deliverable O N D J F M A M J J A S 2.1.2 Assess curricula, expertise and teaching/ learning resources  Conduct outcomes based assessments Document outlining educational objectives X Implementation plan X 2.1.3 Assess curricula, expertise, resources of frontline institutions of higher learning  Evaluation of curriculum and capacity Evaluation report X  Formulated educational objectives Recommendation report X Outcome 2.2 Environmental management of biodiversity research in the oil and gas sector carried out 2.2.1 Design and implement a research program  Assessment of research gaps, priorities, and funding sources Report on research gaps, priorities, and X potential funding sources Groups created to write proposals X Call for proposals X Submit priority proposals X 2.2.2 Disseminate research findings  Stakeholder meeting to determine EMOS communications strategy  Survey potential media partners, NGOs, and communication channels EMOS communications strategy document X List of media partners and communication X Outcome 2.3 Short-term training designed and implemented 2.3.1 Evaluate stakeholder training needs  Conduct needs assessment Recommendation report X Design and deliver short-term training Design training modules Training module booklet X 2.3.2 Evaluate stakeholder training needs  Conduct needs assessment Recommendation report X Design and deliver short-term training 2.3.3 Support Training of Trainers for current faculty

20 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

Activity Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Status Deliverable O N D J F M A M J J A S Assessment from Activity 2.1.3 Recommendations for faculty training X Plan for implementing recommendations X Outcome 2.4 Degree programs designed and implemented 2.4.1 Enrich or develop curricula for degree programs Report on program options enrichment or creation of X new degrees, objectives, scope 2.4.2 Develop opportunities for scholarships  Meet to document steps and timeline Report on steps and timeline X Result 3: Strengthened Capacity of Uganda Civil Society to participate in decision-making of the oil and gas sector Outcome 3.1 Public awareness of biodiversity and environmental aspects of oil and gas activities enhanced 3.1.1: Assist GoU to develop and implement a Communication Strategy for environment and biodiversity issues to enable the public to participate in the oil and gas development process  Identify and hire communications STTA  Identify audiences and their information needs  Focus group discussions to identify effective messages and media for communicating with each group  Review existing Communication Strategies of EPIs and their best practices and lessons learnt  Works with trainees to develop user-friendly messages and guide them in implementing the Communications Strategy Communications strategy document developed X Report on information needs from focus group X meetings Communication materials developed and X Outcome 3.2 District and community capacity to manage biodiversity and environmental impacts of oil and gas development enhanced Activity 3.2.1: Assess training needs of local officials and community leaders  Accessing District Local Government  Conduct Capacity Needs Assessments Assessment report with strategy and action plan X for training and awareness building at local levels

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 21

Activity Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Status Deliverable O N D J F M A M J J A S Activity 3.2.2: Design and delivery of initial trainings to local officials and community leaders  Design courses  Awareness meetings for local leaders and short-term training for district technical staff in one or two districts Course materials designed X Over 60 people trained at district level, X Training program document X

Project Management and Deliverables Contract signature (30 September 2013) X DONE Office establishment DONE Initial Procurement DONE Establishing partner relationships DONE Annual Work Plan (second Draft) X X DONE Mid-Year Work Plan Review Gender analysis Launch/annual consensus stakeholder workshop X X Annual Report (due in Year 2, October 2014) PMP (first draft) X X DONE Baseline Plan X Baseline Report X

22 USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report

U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20523 Tel: (202) 712-0000 Fax: (202) 216-3524 www.usaid.gov

USAID/UGANDA: Environmental Management for the Oil Sector – First Quarterly Report 1