DANCHURCHAID UGANDA 2016-2020 COUNTRY PROGRAMME: FINAL EVALUATION REPORT
Submitted by
3rd
3rd Floo Adroit Consult International 3rd Floor, Mt Olive Country Mall, Plot 163, Ntinda- Naalya Road P.O Box 36544, Kampala; Uganda
Phone Numbers: TEL: +256 414 530 988; Mobile: +256 772 894 794
Email Address: Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.adroitconsultinternational.com
November 2020
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This report was developed by Adroit Consult International, through extensive consultations with the Dan Church Aid (DCA) Country programme staff, partners, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders. The Consultants wish to extend gratitude to the DCA Uganda and DCA Headquarters teams for funding this evaluation.
The team would like to appreciate the Country Director of DCA Uganda, for the management support that made this exercise possible. We would also like to acknowledge the support of DCA Uganda staff especially those at the management level as well as those implementing the various projects at different field offices, for their willingness and collaboration that made this evaluation a success. Relatedly, we extend our sincere gratitude to the DCA partners across the different locations for supporting this exercise. We are especially indebted to them for the on-ground mobilization of the different respondent groups and stakeholders, as well as for the human resource provided to support the evaluation. We also recognize the authorization and support given by the respective District Local Governments and COVID-19 task forces to conduct this evaluation.
The consultants would further like to thank the respondents in the evaluation, especially the staff from the District local governments, the communities, UNHCR, the donor organisations, stakeholders from all districts and all the Implementing Partners. Their willingness to arrange and provide information for this assignment, greatly facilitated the work of the consultants.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... iii MAIN MESSGAES/ RECOMMENDATIONS……...……..……………………………..……..…iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... i1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 4 1.1 Background to DanChurchAid (DCA) ...... 5 1.2 Background to the DCA Uganda’s Country Programme ...... 5 1.3 Introduction to the Evaluation...... 5
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF METHODS AND PROCESSES ...... 6 2.1 Evaluation Design ...... 6 2.2 Evaluation Scope ...... 6 2.3 The approach used to carry out the evaluation...... 6 2.4 Limitations and Challenges ...... 6 2.5 Format of the report ...... 6
3.0 OVERVIEW OF EVALUATION FINDINGS ...... 7 3.1 RELEVANCE ...... 7 3.2 EFFECTIVENESS ...... 13 3.3 EFFICIENCY ...... 21 3.4 IMPACT ...... 23 3.5 SUSTAINABILITY ...... 26
4.0 CONCLUSION ...... 27
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 28
6.0 LESSONS LEARNT ...... 29
7.0 ANNEXES 7.1 Annex 1: List of Abbreviations and Acronyms 7.2 Annex 2: Evaluation Questions 7.3 Annex 3: Evaluation Matrix 7.4 Annex 4: Key Informants Reached 7.5 Annex 5: Final ToR
ii
MAIN MESSAGES/RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Scale Up Innovation and Best Practice
Successful Innovations such as the nexus approach and digitization should be well-documented for learning and accountability and scaled up based on the success stories and lessons learnt.
2. Improve effectiveness of the ToC as an approach for assessing desired changes
A documented narrative of the new CP ToC should always be available to aid understanding of the pathways. Moreover, the ToC should be simplified to improve its effectiveness for assessing progress towards the change areas. DCA and partners should discussions on possible adjustment of the overall impact (goal) of the CP to make it more realistic. Finally, there is need to strengthen the use of the DAC criteria and the Log frame to complement the ToC and to enrich strategic thinking, especially through incorporating more quantitative indicators.
3. Adjust the Staff structure to suit implementation of the CP
To strengthen the MEAL function of the CP, Knowledge Management and Communications staff should be hired to document key learnings and improve knowledge management for continual improvement. This will complement the ToC approach. Relatedly, DCA and partners should prioritize annual staff assessments to determine staff satisfaction and utilize the results to identify solutions for staff retention, with emphasis on continuous staff capacity development.
4. Strengthen Partnerships for effectiveness of Programme Delivery
DCA should ensure close supervision of partners, especially in programme delivery and effective budget utilization, and should identify more partners for the Save Goal in line with the Localisation agenda.
5. Strength the role of Local and Cultural Leaders as agents of change The CP should involve local and cultural leaders more (to complement Faith Leaders) in creating mindset change. This is in addition to addressing the partner capacity gaps that emerged during the evaluation as well as those that are identified through on-going partner capacity assessments.
6. Explore new approaches and intervention areas based on context and situation analysis
The CP should adopt a multi-media approach to awareness, sensitization, and dialogue on COVID-19. Projects that increase access to land should be considered in the humanitarian context as land remains a key challenge to self-reliance for refugees. Similarly, Conflict resilience in both self and partner implementation should be strengthened, and opportunities of partnerships with international and national education institutions and organisations should be explored.
7. Strengthen and scale up the Nexus approach
To increase the effectiveness of the nexus approach, DCA should ensure that projects begin with the emergency livelihood enhancement as the first support within the initial 6 months, before introducing long-term livelihood interventions. The CP should, in addition, identify indicators to classify projects as a nexus (double, or triple) and use these indicators to identify and categorize key interventions that cut across the three goals.
8. Strengthen Localization, including attracting more private sector actors More local partners should be identified, especially for the Save Goal and business analyses should be conducted to demonstrate the added value accruing to both the private sector and to DCA. In addition, DCA should facilitate capacity building of local partners to align their internal systems and procedures to Government and donor requirements.
9. Consolidate and Diversify Environmental and Climate Change interventions
Environment and climate change interventions should be consolidated and diversified to include waste management, alternative lighting in form of solar and biogas, and preservation and restoration of vegetation cover.
10. Strengthen the Rights Based Approach
There is a need for continuous awareness raising to rights holders across all three Goals, on their rights and on strategies they can employ to hold their leaders accountable for the respect, protection, and fulfilment of rights. There is also a need to scale up dialogues with duty bearers on how they can better target the marginalized groups with support in order to ensure that no one is left behind.
iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the findings of the DCA Uganda Country Programme (2016-2020) evaluation as set out by Adroit Consult International. The purpose of the evaluation was to assess the Country Programme (CP) using the OECD/DAC evaluation criteria relating to Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact and sustainability for learning and accountability. The process of submission of this report was preceded by data collection and consultations with key stakeholders who among others included: donors, DCA Staff, partners, and direct beneficiaries. The process was highly descriptive, participatory and gender-sensitive. This report presents the findings using the DAC Criteria as below:
Relevance: The Country Programme was relevant in responding to the myriad of structural human rights violations in Uganda including addressing gaps in transparency, accountability, public policy, public sector programming and citizens’ participation in the public spaces. The programme also responded to several challenges within the Uganda context such as Gender-Based Violence, corruption, and societal discrimination. Moreover, the design of the Country Programme was guided by a thorough context analysis and was further informed by lessons from a joint evaluation of the previous three DCA Uganda Country Programmes carried out by a team of independent consultants. The evaluation further noted that the objectives and goals of the strategy were to a greater extent aligned with international human rights instruments and principles as well as with national and local frameworks that advance human rights and gender equality- which included the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), National Development Plans II and III, the 2006 Uganda National Gender Policy, Equal Opportunities law, National refugees policy and District Development Plans. Indeed, the DCA country program made positive contributions to these development frameworks. Governments at the Central and Sub-national levels were key stakeholders found relevant to the DCA country program. Even so, the Governments in some cases had policy, legal and financing gaps which were constraints to some degree to the realization of the Country Program objectives.
The evaluation found the CP Theory of Change (ToC) approach relevant but noted that the change areas, especially under Fight Extreme Inequality, were not easily quantifiable, as they are mostly concerned with attitude and behavior change. While all programme partners reported that they understood and owned the ToC, the evaluation notes the complexity of the ToC pathways and the need to include pathways that show the contribution of the Save Lives goal (especially to areas such as women participation, partnerships, and private sector responsiveness). This notwithstanding, DCA and partners highly appreciate the value added by the annual ToC critical reflection workshops, especially to programme and project management, and as feedback and learning sessions. The evaluation noted that projects and partners- especially in Fight and Build1 goals to a greater extent complemented each other in achieving programme objectives with regard to geographical spread compared to Fight and Save2. All the partner and projects also to a greater extent complement each other in terms of the target groups reached. The evaluation noted a versatile and diversified group of beneficiaries, leading to the ability of the CP to reach several marginalized groups more cost-effectively. Some of the target groups also benefitted from more than one goal, especially under the nexus projects in West Nile (Save and Build), and the empowerment of youth through vocational training projects in Karamoja region (Fight and Build).
Effectiveness: The evaluation found sufficient evidence of achievement of programme objectives at the outcome level. Key among these included; Enhancement of the capacity of marginalized groups; strengthened social accountability; food and nutrition security; enhancement of the capacity of different leaders and duty bearers in service delivery; economic empowerment of families through VSLA, financial inclusion/increased access to finance; and overall improvement in living standards of vulnerable families and communities. The highly patriarchal nature of the communities, however, still calls for more involvement of key village, cultural elders and customary leaders as agents of mindset change. Also, concerns were raised about the involvement of Community Based Monitors (CBMs) in politics, which risked them being viewed as partisan.
Through the Rights Based Approach, the capacity of marginalized groups was enhanced to follow up on commitments from duty bearers, through providing them with the tools and skills. And they were facilitated by the CP to demand equitable governance through national and international lobby events such as anti-corruption caravan, 16 days of Gender activism, Land awareness week, for policy action. Similarly, the capacity of duty bearers was enhanced to improve equitable governance and service delivery within their communities. They have formed panels in radio talk shows, meeting, forums and discussions to sensitize the communities on governance and accountability and participated in intervention, for example providing referrals for GBV cases in the community. Rights holders however to a lower extent understood the procedures for demanding for transparency and accountability3. The intervention was also faced with challenges such as transfer of duty bearers which caused rights holders to build relationships with local government
1 Teso and Karamoja regions experienced a greater synergy in Fight and Build goals compared to the other sub-regions 2 There is no region that has the Fight and Save complementing each other 3 who to ask, and the procedure to seek this information.
iv
officials a fresh. There is also need for sensitization of duty bearers as some seemed uncooperative and unwilling to provide information.
The nexus approach was evident through interventions such as peaceful co-existence and building self-reliance of refugees through their engagement in sustainable livelihoods such as agricultural value chains, cash-based interventions and Environment and Energy conservation. Findings however indicate that the nexus approach has been constrained due to the need for specialized land acquisition projects, emergency livelihood support and activities geared towards conflict mitigation. Concerning involvement of partners in the CP, 100% of the partners interviewed reported that they were involved in decision making to a greater extent. DCA also largely involved them in sharing ideas to inform project proposal development; in taking part in the Critical reflection workshop organized annually to enable sharing; and in participation in the Executive Director’s platforms. According to the partners, DCA also offered adequate support to enhance partner capacity through training, networks and platforms.
Efficiency: In the period of the CP, DCA implemented a total of 43 projects using a total budget of DKK 181,257,530.98, approximately USD 29,000,000 reaching a total of 22 districts in West Nile, Teso and Karamoja regions of Uganda. The CP provided a multi-sectoral approach to problem-solving in both the development and humanitarian contexts, which has consequently translated into improved benefits. Having one CP that incorporates all the interventions is cost-effective and recognizes the fact that the end goal is to lead to one impact. The consultants found this methodology to offer high Cost-effective benefits in terms of the opportunities for co-financing of projects, such that partners incur partial costs for the projects they implement. DCA also obtains the added benefit of organizations offering administrative support in form of staffing, office space, and resources among others. Also, there is greater reach of target groups at a cheaper cost than would be incurred if DCA was to implement all the activities on their own. Moreover, the need for close supervision and monitoring of development assistance, requires an organization with proven capacity and experience such as DCA. Much as DCA conducts joint monitoring with the partners twice a year at a minimum, there is need to i) further supplement DCA’s monitoring of partners activities as relying on partners to carry out Monitoring and Accountability based on their capacities might undermine the intended outcomes of the Country Programme. ii) Verify the work being done by partners through for example spot checks, as, some things may occur at the community level, with adverse effects on the programme but never be reported to DCA.
Based on discussions with funding partners (donors), efficiency was one of the criteria used in the selection of organizations to be supported with funding. DCA was viewed as satisfactorily efficient in resource utilization and with a high level of competitiveness. This was evidenced by the increased network of funders that the Country programme has had over the period, with some funding more than one project at ago, or within a particular period. Funding partners also attributed DCA’s competitiveness to its targeting of vulnerable communities in the most vulnerable locations such as Karamoja, West Nile and Teso sub regions of Uganda. Beneficiaries were also engaged as TOTs to enable skills are shared with other members in the community, a strategy that further aided in improving cost effectiveness. DCA Country programme has received funds from donors that include EU ECHO, EU-DEVCO, UNHCR, DANIDA, OSIEA. DCA’s ability to use these funds to co-finance projects has made it possible to scale up project interventions to more vulnerable communities, thereby increasing the number of beneficiaries reached.
Impact: The DCA Country Programme demonstrated impact across all the key areas of change at micro, meso and macro levels. For example, the government took one of the Uganda Debt Network (UDN) proposals (out of 12 in the CSOs paper) to fill staffing gaps in Napak district, especially in the health sector. Besides, the Land Equality Movement in Uganda (LEMU) worked closely with the Ministry of Lands to facilitate joint community education on laws and policies and hence facilitating the registration of twelve Communal Lands Associations. This consequently improved management of and enhanced security of tenure within three communities in Amudat as well as the recognition of customary land rights within state establishments like Napak District Local government by facilitating an ordinance process for communal grazing land management. Both UDN and LEMU are DCA partners whose work demonstrates the link between Central Government and Local Governments in terms of local to national advocacy of topical issues. DCA’s regular monitoring of duty bearers through the partners and projects also led to improved service delivery. For example, schools, hospitals, and markets recognized the need for quality improvement to serve the community. Private sector partners such as Mukwano Group and Bio fresh now have increased understanding of business and human rights. Moreover, the extension model by private sector companies to provide services within the refugee context has led to the creation of jobs for refugees and host-communities. For example, findings suggest that due to partnership with DCA, Airtel Uganda, strengthened its electronic and cash infrastructure, which included among others, employment of distributors to manage the liquidity of individual mobile money agents to support large scale disbursements.
The number of Faith leaders challenging the shrinking of civic space and intolerance of political activism has also increased. In addition, CSOs have used dialogue to advocate for the rights of marginalized groups and to hold leaders accountable for the taxpayers’ money. Furthermore, there is increased CSO participation in local and regional budget consultative forums for example UDN.
v
At the same time, the CP has empowered communities to actively demand for services from the duty bearers by leveraging the CBMES and Budget Literacy methodologies. Relatedly, various community-based structures such as CBMS, women caucuses, women’s advocacy groups, SASA and GBV champions have been formed to drive community changes on topical issues such as gender and social justice, social accountability, and participation in decision making, among others. The CP has further enhanced the participation of vulnerable groups such as women and youth in economic activities such as VSLAs and produce marketing associations both within the humanitarian and development contexts. At the same time, peaceful co-existence and social cohesion have been promoted between refugees and refugee host communities through dialogues and increased access to resources-one of the main causes of conflict.
Sustainability: The overall methodology of the CP of ensuring capacity strengthening and empowerment of CBOs and local organizations was viewed by the consultants as an effective pathway towards sustainability. Also, localized partnerships allowed the different organizations to appreciate and harness their capacities such that even with the exit of DCA, these local NGOs will continue operating. Moreover, the Country Programme formed partnerships with local organizations already involved in human rights and gender equality aspects. This shared vision is a guarantee that the organizations will continue with the activities beyond the lifecycle of the programme.
The evaluation further found out that the focus on changing behaviors and building the capacity of local leadership structures such as CBM, SASA groups, has the potential to have lasting effects. The CMDRR approach was equally found to be a sustainable approach to building resilience and adaptation capacities of vulnerable communities. Some of these structures such as the CBMs are becoming self-reliant and have been linked as recognized entities to the local government structures. These groups already have the mandate to act and create change within the communities where they are based. For sustainability, DCA also strengthened the capacity of the national responders as a means to contribute to the grand bargain through provision of tools and resources. DCA worked with local partners such as CEFORD, URCS and CSBAG to implement resilience building activities. DCA and partners have also worked with community leaders such as Local Government leaders, sub-county leaders and Refugee Welfare Committees to ensure that communities actively participate in planning and programming and as such input into the national planning and budgeting processes. DCA implementation through the nexus approach was also a strategy towards sustainability. The evaluation, however, noted absence of a CP exit and sustainability strategy for all projects, besides the one documented in the original programme document. Moreover, there was also minimal follow-up to ensure that all projects under the CP developed and implemented these exit and sustainability plans.
Recommendations
This evaluation identifies key recommendations for the implementation of the country programme, summarised as follows:
1. Scale Up Innovation and Best Practice 2. Improve effectiveness of the ToC as an approach for assessing desired changes 3. Adjust the Staff structure to suit implementation of the CP 4. Strengthen Partnerships for effectiveness of Programme Delivery 5. Strength the role of Local and Cultural Leaders as agents of change 6. Explore new approaches and intervention areas based on context and situation analysis 7. Strengthen and scale up the Nexus approach 8. Strengthen Localization, including attracting more private sector actors 9. Consolidate and Diversify Environmental and Climate Change interventions 10. Strengthen the Rights Based Approach
vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the findings of the DCA Country programme (2016-2020) evaluation as set out by Adroit Consult International. The purpose of the evaluation was to assess the CP using the OECD/DACs evaluation criteria relating to Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact and sustainability for learning and accountability.
1.1 Background of DanChurchAid (DCA) Founded in 1922, as a faith-based organisation in Denmark, DanChurchAid (DCA) assists the world’s poorest to lead a life in dignity regardless of gender, race, and creed, political or religious affiliation. The organization’s efforts to overcome poverty and injustice have reached millions of women, girls, men, and boys across the globe. DCA’s vision is a world without hunger, poverty, and oppression, in which popular and political powers constantly work strongly and actively for a just and sustainable distribution and use of the earth’s resources.
1.2 Background to DCA Uganda’s Country Programme DCA Uganda is implementing a Country Programme titled “Promoting Sustainable Livelihoods, Rights and Accountability in Uganda 2016-2020” guided by a long-term programme framework or Theory of Change (ToC) to empower vulnerable and marginalized women and the youth to overcome poverty, live in dignity and claim their rights. The Country Programme has two main goals namely: Participation and Accountability (Goal 1 under Fight Extreme Inequality) and Sustainable livelihoods and resilience (Goal 2: under Build Resilient Communities). Though not explicit in the Country Programme, DCA Uganda also implements the Save Lives goal through its self-implementation Humanitarian and Nexus work, guided by the Humanitarian Strategy. DCA’s geographical focus covers 6 sub-regions namely, Karamoja; Teso; West Nile; Acholi; Bunyoro and Mid-Central Uganda. The long-term vision of the Uganda country programme is that - Ugandans live peacefully in a thriving, democratic society with equal access to their rights and resources, and that they support each other to ensure a safe and sustainable future for all. The country programme identified the following 6 areas of change to achieve this long-term vision:
i) Transparent, accountable, and responsive government authorities have the capacity, resources and political will to develop, implement and enforce policies, which prioritizes the needs and rights of vulnerable and marginalized communities. ii) Responsible private sector engagement at all levels contributes to building a more productive Uganda for the benefit of all of its citizens: it increases productivity, creates access to credits and stimulates business. It provides employment with fair working conditions for more people, especially young men and women. iii) Leaders at all levels (including cultural and faith-based) positively influence society and institutions. They challenge unfair and abusive practices and promote and support the equal rights of all. iv) A strong and vibrant civil society supports the more vulnerable and marginalized communities to claim their rights and demand accountability. They represent and advocate for these rights at local, national, regional, and international levels. v) Confident and empowered individuals, especially women and youth, have the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions in their lives. vi) Families and households have the capacity and resources to provide secure and sustainable livelihoods for themselves and their communities, and they are resilient to climate change, environmental shocks, and conflicts
1.3 Introduction to the Evaluation The purpose: To evaluate DCA Uganda office Country Programme during the 2016 to 2020 programme cycle for learning and accountability purposes.
The objective of the evaluation: to assess the performance of DCA Uganda’s country programme, with a specific focus on the contribution of the programme to DanChurchAid’s global goals of Save Lives, Build Resilient Communities and Fight Extreme Inequality. Specifically, the evaluation was conducted against the DAC evaluation criteria of Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact and Sustainability, to draw lessons and make recommendations for future programme periods at country and global levels. The evaluation was also carried out to generate findings for organisational and programmatic learning on DCA’s global approaches and thematic priorities. The evaluation was guided by detailed Terms of Reference provided by DCA (Annex 5) and a detailed inception report (Appendix 3). A matrix containing the key evaluation questions analysed against the DAC Criteria is presented as Annex 2.
1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF METHODS AND PROCESSES
2.1 Evaluation Design We employed a descriptive and cross-sectional design using a highly participatory, gender-sensitive and qualitative method/approach to collect both qualitative and quantitative data that allowed the participation of rights holders throughout the evaluation process. Data Collection methods included In-depth Literature/Document Review, photography, Key informant/Stakeholder interviews, Focus Group Discussions, field visits and documentation of stories of change. The consultants developed a comprehensive evaluation matrix indicating the research questions and the respective data collection tools used in the evaluation.
2.2 Evaluation Scope The programme evaluation considered projects implemented by DCA from 2016- 2020. The consultants recognized that two partnerships (one with HURINET-Uganda and the other with MONARLIP) were already ended due to financial accountability reasons. The projects implemented by these partners were still assessed since they were implemented for some period of the country programme. A detailed list of the projects considered is shared as Appendix 1- Table 5. The evaluation reached a total of 19 DCA partners in different regions, received responses from 15 partners and interviewed a total of 4 donor organisations. The evaluation conducted 82 Key Informant Interviews (Annex 4), and 17 Focus Group Discussions with 156 participants at project level. A review of literature provided by DCA and the various partners was also carried out (Annex 4).
2.3 The approach used to carry out the evaluation To ensure effective and efficient execution of the evaluation, a three (3) stage approach was applied i.e. (i) Planning and inception, (ii) Field Work and Data collection, and (iii) Data Management and Reporting. An inception meeting was held with DCA, after which the relevant documentation on the CP was shared. This facilitated the development of a comprehensive Inception report (Appendix 3). The evaluation teams thereafter engaged in a 5- day field data collection process, which was followed by phone interviews with different key informants. The consultants visited 12 of the districts of implementation that included: Amudat, Katakwi, Moroto, Napak, Kotido, Soroti, Amuria, Arua, Yumbe, Lamwo, Kiryandongo and Kampala. The districts were selected purposively based on distribution of programme partners and projects. Choice of districts enabled each of the partners and their beneficiaries to be visited. Interviews were conducted using face to face, email and self- administered questionnaires. Data was then analysed using thematic analysis, and team discussions of findings.
DCA availed a letter introducing the consultants and explaining the purpose of the evaluation to the various stakeholders. The consultants observed the highest level of ethical considerations. The data collection was carried out per the DCA data and confidentiality policies. Informed consent was obtained from the respondents who were then required to sign a form as evidence of this consent. We also observed confidentiality especially with information, and data sharing. The names of all persons interviewed were kept confidential. Data collected from the field was not shared with any third party besides those assigned to carry out the assignment.
2.4 Limitations and Challenges The evaluation was affected by two main issues: (i) the political campaigns period, which led to the absence of some of the key stakeholders to participate in interviews. The majority rescheduled their interviews to a later date when they would be available. (ii) The COVID-19 pandemic, which led to adjustments in methods and approaches for data collection; for example, holding virtual meetings and making prior appointments in case the Key Informants were not physically available. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) were also observed during FGDs, for example participants wore marks, used sanitizers and observed distance between respondents during interviews.
2.5 Format of the report The evaluation report has been produced using the 1-3-25 format of evaluation reports provided by DCA. This format includes one page of main messages, followed with a 3-page executive summary and the presentation of findings in 25 pages of writing4. The report structure gives clear descriptions of the evaluation objectives as per the OECD/DAC criteria. However, the evaluation generated detailed data which has been included as annexes to the report.
4 Terms of Reference, DCA evaluation policy
2
3.0 OVERVIEW OF EVALUATION FINDINGS
3.1 RELEVANCE
Relevance of the Country Programme strategy to the needs identified, especially related to the structural causes of rights violations in Uganda Uganda has faced a myriad of structural human rights violations including gaps in transparency, accountability and public participation that challenged and continues to affect the ability for all people to live peacefully. According to the Human Rights Report 2017, Uganda faces human rights violations such as disruption on the freedom of speech, whereby the government in 2017 restricted the ability of some individuals to criticize it or to discuss matters of general public interest.5 The report further highlighted national issues surrounding GBV6, Female Genital Mutilation7 and other harmful traditional practices8 against women. Persons with disabilities also continued to face societal discrimination, and limited job and educational opportunities among others, and there were reports of violence among ethnic groups for resources. Corruption particularly remained a top public concern, with Uganda scoring 25 points in 2016, 26 in 2017 and 2018, and ranked among the lower 50 countries in the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index.9 The design of the DCA Country Programme (2016-2020) was informed by a detailed analysis of these problems.
The design of the CP was further informed by lessons learnt from a joint evaluation of the previous three DCA Programmes, which was carried out by an independent team of consultants. According to the Uganda Country programme document 2017, all programme stakeholders who included among others, DCA partners, ACT Alliance members, development partners/donors, government agencies, wider civil society and communities were involved in a highly participatory and consultative process to ensure that the interventions developed were relevant to the needs of the target groups. These evaluations and assessments enabled the Country Programme to identify key gaps and challenges that required support through relevant interventions. DCA then conducted a contextual analysis to inform the formulation of the Country Programme, and these concluded on the relevance of the initiatives especially the focus of the areas of intervention, projects, and geographical scope.10
Throughout the lifecycle of the CP, DCA and partners conducted project-specific baselines and needs assessments before the provision of support to the target groups, as well as mid and end line evaluations of projects as per DCA Evaluation Policy. Also, partners were continuously guided and facilitated to seek feedback from the local communities and the leaders to ensure that interventions are tailored to their needs. For instance, partners such as Caritas Kotido facilitated formation of steering committees (District Education Officer (DEO), District Community Development Officer (DCDO), Probation Officer, Caritas board members and diocesan committees) to ensure that the most deserving (vulnerable) youth were selected to benefit from skills training. Support to agricultural value chains involved, among others, assessment of farmer preferences, suitability of soils, and market potential, before introduction of the value chains. DCA’s prompt response through self-implementation provides additional evidence that the interventions are demand-driven. The period from 2016 experienced an influx of refugees from South Sudan, a number which had more than doubled by 2017. With this came shortage in resources, and potential conflicts between refugees and host communities, and called for prompt action through provision of humanitarian support. DCA’s self-implementation humanitarian and nexus work was a response to this changing context. DCA also responded to the needs of communities through the provision of prompt support during the locust invasion and COVID-19 pandemic.
Approaches employed and their relevance The approaches and strategies of implementation used by DCA and partners were relevant to needs identified. Among others, the DCA utilized Community based Monitoring and Evaluation System (CBMES), Budget Literacy, Community Managed disaster risk reduction (CMDRR), Gender Inclusive Rights-Based Approaches (GIRBA), Start Awareness Support Action (SASA) and Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLA) across the three goals. Other approaches included; partnerships, capacity building, digitalization, private sector engagement, involvement in value chains, and the nexus approach, The relevance of these approaches to the needs identified is elaborated in Appendix 1- Table 1. The programme utilized multi-stakeholder engagements that eased mobilization of communities, and a multi-sectoral approach recognizing that the overall goal is affected by multiple factors across livelihoods, participation, and resilience.
5 https://ug.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/42/UGANDA-2017-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT-FINAL.pdf 6 The UPDF recorded 163 deaths of women due to domestic violence in 2016, almost a 50 percent increase from 2010 7 According to UNICEF statistics from February 2016, 1 percent of women under age 50 had undergone FGM/C 8 Media and local NGOs reported several cases of ritual child killings, violence against widows, and acid attacks 9 Country Programme Annual Report
3
Alignment of the CP to international human rights instruments and principles (including relevant international law for humanitarian and disaster response) and with national and local frameworks that advance human rights and gender equality The objectives and goals of the CP are to a greater extent aligned with international human rights instruments and principles and with national and local frameworks that advance human rights and gender equality. A table detailing the alignment of the CP to the instruments and principles listed below is shown in Appendix 1-Table 2. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR); International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); UN Human Rights framework, Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF); Constitution of the Republic of Uganda (1995); Settlement Transformation Agenda (STA) ; Vision 2040 ; National Development Plan III; Uganda's Refugee policy (2006), 2006 Uganda National Gender Policy
The activities implemented and principles for implementation were relevant to a greater extent. For example, an inclusive selection criterion was maintained as evidenced by the disaggregation and distribution of target groups. DCA and partners showed solidarity and support for human and gender rights through active participation of staff & beneficiaries in events such as 16 days of Gender Activism and International Refugee Day. They also conducted awareness on GBV and human rights related issues. A detailed analysis of this alignment is in Appendix 1- Table 3.
The CP operates under the guidance of DCA policy documents to ensure that implementation respects human rights and gender strategies thus the alignment with international human rights instruments and principles and with national and local frameworks that advance human rights and gender equality. These policies include; the ACT Alliance Gender Justice policy 2017, Active Citizenship Policy 2016, Anti- Corruption policy 2009, DCA Child Safeguard policy 2017, Gender Equality Policy, Human Rights Policy, Humanitarian Action Policy and the Safer Community policy. The CP enabled the involvement of national and international policy actors to support supervision. Appendix 1- Table 4 contains a short description of this, which for example, included the involvement in the screening of the beneficiaries.
Relevance of the country programme portfolio to the country programme objectives The evaluation found the project portfolio to be relevant to the objectives to a greater extent. DCA implemented the right projects to achieve the goals in saving lives, Building Resilient Communities and Fighting Extreme Inequality. Similarly, the CP is applauded for the recognition of the relevance of development interventions especially through the involvement of private sector actors, implementation in various value chains and executing Environment and Energy components within its portfolio. A list of the projects implemented is included in Appendix 1 – Table 5.
The CP to a lower extent implements the Fight Extreme Inequality interventions under Self-implementation. GBV, abduction of girls among others were some of the weapons of war in South Sudan during the conflict. This is in response to human rights issues in the refugee settlements among refugee host communities. Many Women and Girls in refugee-hosting districts for example face GBV at different hotspots, while these locations experience a great shift in gender roles11. Also, access to resources such as land remains a challenge to refugee communities limiting their livelihoods and resilience building. Much as messages of gender, peace and equality are mainstreamed in project implementation approaches, there is a need for specialized projects with a focus on peaceful co-existence, gender equality, and conflict mitigation. With the above in place, DCA Country Programme will also be able to achieve a synergy in interventions and capitalize on the aspect that resilience of refugee communities can be improved with all three components operating in an integrated manner (save- then build and fight). There was insufficient evidence to indicate existence of a database of projects implemented under the Country Programme portfolio to ensure continued relevance to the overall needs, and to ensure balance and synergy across the three goals.
Value addition and the relevance of using the ToC approach with partners for planning and as a yearly programme reflection and programme management tool The programme ToC approach was to a greater extent relevant to the CP. Nonetheless, majority of the areas of change especially in the Fight Extreme Inequality goal are not easily quantifiable, as they are concerned with attitude and behavior change. This presents a need for a methodology that captures the social changes, and the drivers to this change, as evidence of project achievements12. Aspects of the CP that involved improvement in livelihoods, food security and resilience are better monitored in statistical form using Logical Framework Approach especially within the pathways from output to the outcome, and outcome to impact. This is because a change in actions of one household may not affect the entire population. A dual approach of using both the ToC and the LFA to guide and assess the CP is recommended.
All programme partners shared that they understood the ToC and what its role in the CP. DCA and partners reported that the ToC aided in the development of project proposals, implementation, and monitoring. KIIs also showed increased ownership. For example, COU-TEDDO adopted components of the ToC in their recent strategic plan, and C&D have drawn their ToC to localize what they do on the ground with the bigger ToC.
11 Women are registered as heads of households and men are left powerless 12 A change in action of a duty bearer can affect a number of people in the community, thus a ToC approach
4
1. According to the findings, the ToC was easier understood in theory but quite complex in implementation. There was no evidence of a documented narrative of the ToC to aid understanding of the pathways. The Critical Reflection Workshop (CRW) report 2018 shares that partners properly understood the ToC following discussions and group exercises (carried out two years into implementation). This raises a question on whether staff who did not attend these CRWs were able to understand the ToC in practice. 2. There were proper adjustments made to cater for the humanitarian response aspects, however, some pathways were left out, that showed the synergy between its contribution to women participation, partnerships, private sector responsiveness among others. Within the ToC, the humanitarian component is slightly isolated. The consultants also agree with the findings from the annual CRW that the changes expected of the ToC were too many and some repeated causing the flow of changes to fall short of the logic. 3. Much as the ToC guided reporting on annual programme indicators within reports, the evaluation team noted that the utilization of the ToC at Country programme level was not at the same level as that of the Logical framework approach. Besides, qualitative indicators were to a greater extent used compared to quantitative. 4. DCA and partners experienced high staff turnover, limiting adoption and understanding of the ToC. Staff exited the organizations without understanding the ToC thus interrupting the learning process. Moreover, the orientation of staff takes some time as well
The evaluation noted that despite the relevance of the programme strategy and the ToC, the overall goal was too ambitious to achieve in the implementation period between 2016- 2020, as national peace is affected by numerous factors. Peace for all citizens requires joint effort. Much as the aspect of DCA contribution to the goal is diagrammatically represented in the ToC, there is need for discussions on a more realistic and measurable contribution. There is also a need to create two goals from Goal 2. This would allow DCA to focus on the livelihoods and self- reliance independent, as one goal and the resilience to conflict, environment and climate change as the other Goal.
DCA and partners highly appreciate the value added by the yearly CRWs, especially to programme management, for learning and improvement. A compiled list of the benefits and value addition of the workshop is shared in Appendix 1- Diagram 1. Key among these include; providing a channel for better understanding of the ToC, realignment of activities to fit within the ToC; and getting constructive feedback which subsequently improved implementation of projects.
“The CRWs have facilitated the positioning of partners for strategic funding because there is a lot of sharing and learning for the progress of the activities, and improvement of the final implementation of the programme.” Key Informant, TPO Uganda
The annual critical Reflection workshop report of 2019 showed that partners to a greater extent utilized learnings they had previously obtained, for instance, the ability to resolve implementation obstacles.
As part of the ToC CRW exercise of 2019, DCA conducted outcome harvesting under BUILD and FIGHT, which involved direct interactions with the beneficiaries. There was however inadequate representation of the SAVE aspect of self-implementation during the CRWs. Besides, despite the ability of the partners and programme staff to monitor and track progress within the ToC, the question remained on how aware the beneficiaries were, that change had occurred. To increase the relevance of the ToC, a Bottom-up strategy is advised. A CRW should be held with the beneficiaries, together with field implementing staff, to identify the changes they feel, and know have occurred.
Contribution of projects to the Country Programme pathway (ToC). Ways in which the projects and partners complement each other in achieving the country programme goals (geographically, targeting, thematically, etc.) The projects contributed to the CP pathway through all the three goals of Build, Save and Fight, as shown in Appendix 1- Table 5. DCA scaled up implementation to cover approximately 22 districts, (Appendix 1- Diagram 2) a significant increase from the previous CP. DCA implemented more projects at a national level, compared to the previous CP cycles.
The evaluation noted that projects and partners in Fight and Build to a greater extent complement each other in achieving the Country Programme objectives especially geographically, as shown in Appendix 1- Table 6. Teso and Karamoja regions particularly experienced a greater synergy in goals compared to the other sub-regions, with partners implementing projects across all the key goals of the ToC. To a lesser extent, projects and partners in the DCA under Save and Fight complement each other geographically to achieve the Country Programme goals. Reference is made to Appendix 1- Table 6, showing the distribution of partners and key components of the ToC being implemented.
Thematically, both the Save and Build aspects of the CP complement each other under the nexus projects regardless of the location. Also, the need for peaceful co-existence can easily be addressed by the influence of leaders at all levels, including faith and political leaders under Fight. Interaction with DCA revealed that there were challenges in the identification of partners despite the partnership policy and criteria for identification partners that DCA has in place. Also, most of the current partners did not have field implementation programmes in West Nile under the Save goal.
Findings noted that to a greater extent, partners and projects complemented each other in the target groups reached. The versatile and diversified group of beneficiaries contributed to the ability of the CP to reach several marginalized groups more cost-effectively. Target groups also benefitted from more than one goal, especially under the nexus projects in West Nile (Save and Build). In addition, some projects included Fight and Build interventions for the same target groups, for example 1010328 -11 (Appendix 1- Table 5) which aimed at empowering youth through vocational training and entrepreneurship in Karamoja. A matrix showing areas of mixed intervention Goals is shown as Appendix 1- Table 5.
5
DCA Learning Priority (Climate Change-CC): Extent to which climate adaptation and mitigation was appropriately integrated into the programme and the key outcomes and learning The CP integrates climate change and mitigation in its design. The goals elaborate the need for sustainable livelihoods and resilient communities, which includes environmental protection, climate mitigation and Disaster Risk Reduction. Much as implementation of CC was to a lower extent included in the portfolio in 2016, DCA subsequently implemented CC and DRR strategies and projects to increase the resilience of communities. DCA’s climate mitigation work 2019- 2020 under self-implementation was in line with the reprioritization of UNHCR from livelihoods to Environment and Energy (E&E).
Appendix 1- Table 7 provides a detailed list of projects that contributed to these outcomes: 1. Significant landscape contributions such as planting of over 1 million trees in refugee settlements such as Imvepi, Rhino camp, Lobule, Kiryandongo as well as the host communities. 2. Promotion of alternative sources of energy such as briquettes 3. Promotion of gender best practices that save the women from moving long distances in search of firewood 4. Increase in income sources through Income Generating Activities (IGAs) hence improved purchasing power 5. Reduction of expenditure on charcoal and firewood at the household level. 6. Reduction in tree cutting due to the adoption of energy-saving stoves. 7. Increased empowerment, skilling and exposure of the local and national organisations that were engaged such as HADS, Raising Gabdo Foundation, CYCORP and DRAGON to implement environmental protection and livelihood enhancement interventions. It has also enabled them expand their coverage on ground to target more beneficiaries and locations. 8. Introduction of clean cooking solutions to communities through the use of bio mass. For example, Raising Gabdo Foundation empowered communities to use cassava stalks following harvest as a source of fuel.
DCA also partnered with TPO and SOCADIDO to construct 9 underground water harvesting reservoirs and establish a 15-member leadership structure of Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction Committees to create awareness of DRR and climate change. 13 To facilitate and promote Climate Change advocacy work, DCA also through the ACT Forum implemented a CT-CISU project in a bid to advocate for climate change financing. A campaign, “ACT now for Climate Justice” was implemented with the Government of Uganda to deliver on ambitious and fair climate change agreements. The Act Alliance has lobbied with the Ministry of Water to scale up adaptation of climate mitigation activities and also empowered communities to speak out on areas of climate change. Faith leaders were also empowered to utilize the power of the pulpit to speak out on issues such as gender and climate justice.
DCA Uganda’s CP under self-implementation aimed at enabling refugees and displaced persons have access to life- saving and socio-economic services for self-reliance, sustainable livelihoods and fulfilment of their rights. To this end, DCA promoted environment and energy conservation through interventions such as tree planting, and increased access to briquettes and energy-saving stoves. The CP ensured the involvement of different environment CBOs, NGOs and climate change actors and experts. For example, DRAGON, a CBO, worked together with DCA to establish woodlots and to supply seedlings to the refugees and the host communities. DCA and partners were also participated in the national commemoration of the Water and Environment Week in 2019, a celebration that enabled them to showcase some of the technologies introduced and interact with other national environment actors.
DCA through its partner, Raising Gabdho Foundation (RGF), integrated climate change and adaptation through a ToT approach where groups were trained and tasked to train more people in the target community, thus enabling them reach a wider target group and target area. This evaluation documented other key learnings from DCAs climate mitigation (Appendix 1- Table 8). For example, Key Informant Interviews conducted with HADS revealed the following; Tree planting requires an in-depth needs assessment and contextual analysis to prevent the challenge of mismatch with beneficiary needs and low survival rates due to context factors In Kiryandongo, Pigeon Peas (Lapena) was highly recommended due to its benefits: Provides food; Acts as firewood trees; it is a natural fertilizing agent and grows for a short period. Cash for work approach is a recommended approach due to the positive effects on livelihood.
The extent to which the programme contributed to preparedness and response with humanitarian response. The extent to which the programme has been able to adapt and support the delivery of humanitarian response when needed according to established quality and accountability standards (e.g. CHS and Sphere) Adaptation of delivery of humanitarian response: The CP design integrates humanitarian response in its goals, vision and ToC. This meant that majority of the projects being implemented under Build and Fight were geared towards increasing rights and access to resources.
13 Programme annual report 2019
6
This eased adaptability to humanitarian response as the CP was well-positioned to address access to resources a main challenge faced by refugees in Uganda due to the immense pressure from the high population.14 Despite the internal challenges faced in the transformation of systems (especially finance and procurement) meant for partnerships, to cater for self-implementation- and within the humanitarian context, DCA was highly flexible and adaptive of changes to ensure timely provision of humanitarian support. Moreover, DCA made suitable adjustments and revision of the ToC, to include a sixth area of change, “Refugees and displaced persons have access to life-saving and socio-economic services for self-reliance, sustainable livelihoods and fulfilment of their rights. A third specific objective; “Refugees and displaced persons have access to life-saving and socio-economic services for self-reliance, sustainable livelihoods and fulfilment of their rights, was also incorporated under the Save Lives goal.
DCA also developed a humanitarian strategy to supplement the Country Programme document that had already been designed by the time DCA went into humanitarian response. DCA increased the number of staff by more than 100% to support the need for humanitarian support through self-implementation and extended its offices to West Nile region to increase its local presence in humanitarian response. DCA sought partnerships and funders to support its Save Lives Goal, resulting in approximately 17 projects being implemented in refugee settlements and host communities (Appendix 1- Table 9). Among these was the ECHO-funded Disaster Preparedness and Response (DPR) project being implemented in a consortium which focused on increasing resilience of refugees and host communities through capacity building of national humanitarian actors/ first responders (URCS, CEFORD and CSBAG) as well that of respective District Local Governments in Disaster Preparedness and Response. DCA utilized resources within the local context to provide humanitarian response, a strategy that promoted skills gain and prepared the local community, organizations and leaders in implementation. Staff were hired from the regions of implementation as they had a better understanding of the local context and better relation with the community in which they lived. Among others, beneficiary empowerment was achieved through their participation as community facilitators, mobilisers and group leaders.
“CEFORD’s capacity in DRR is being enhanced through partnership with DCA. Besides, our institutional capacity has been enhanced through the establishment of a warehouse that is being managed by CEFORD. This is the first time for our institution to manage a warehouse” Key Informant, CEFORD Involvement of humanitarian actors in implementation: DCA involved humanitarian actors for joint decision- making during meetings and collaborations during implementation. The data collected during this evaluation cited some humanitarian players at different levels including UNHCR, OPM and the Local Government. DCA supported these groups through logistics for key celebrations (International Refugee Day, 16 Days of Gender Activism, International Youth Day and Women’s day), partnership in livelihood activities through supervision of DCA activities; and seeking technical guidance in for example in selection of target beneficiaries and geographical areas of implementation.
Consultation with Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) revealed that DCA used the OPM database to obtain lists of refugees. This ensured proper selection, targeting of beneficiaries and streamlining of interventions with other agencies. OPM was also responsible for the allocation of geographical areas of operation to avoid duplication and to ensure that support reached almost/ all persons in need. Also, from 2017 to 2019, DCA was the sector lead in livelihoods and subsequently E&E sectors in 2020 in Bidi Bidi, and Rhino camp. The evaluation noted that other NGOs and INGOs were equally involved in knowledge sharing through Technical Working Group and coordination meetings.
“DCA has coordinated the livelihood sector for two years and this made it possible for the sector to consolidate achievements made” Key informant, UNHCR
“DCA has acted as a linkage for us to the host district in most of our engagements, especially to the office of the district production and marketing department that works directly in the M&E of the projects implemented. DCA also eased penetration for us as OPM to the community due to the good image created. They have had visible remarks on the ground of their projects and the beneficiaries appreciate what they do.” Key informant, OPM
DCA was highly effective within the humanitarian component. To a lower extent, other humanitarian actors were involved for the level of joint implementation or to create synergies in the support offered to the target groups. This could take the form of offering a different type of support- say livelihood, to a group of beneficiaries already being supported under the protection component by another organization. The DCA humanitarian strategy does not fully incorporate all activities and aspects of DCA’s response within the humanitarian context, since it was developed at the beginning of DCA self-implementation and not yet revised.
14 Frank Ahimbisibwe 2018, Uganda and the Refugee Problem: Challenges and Opportunities. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations ·
7
Implementation following CHS and sphere as well as other accountability standards DCA has several policies that have been used to guide the implementation of different projects. Key for instance is the PSEA policy which was introduced to all staff in special roll-out sessions after it was formally approved by the DCA Board15. At the same time, all staff undertook mandatory on-line training on complaints handling and the Code of Conduct. This helped raise awareness among staff on expected behavior. At country office level, the programme to a greater extent implemented the CHS commitments. For instance, there is a CHS Focal point to monitor implementation DCA implemented a CHS Audit and there is a CHS Accountability Improvement Plan in place that is reviewed annually.
As part of their Organisational Development, the local partners were trained in PSEA, fraud prevention and anti- corruption, then supported to strengthen/ put in place their own PSEA policies16. Local partners such as Uganda Debt Network (UDN) and Uganda Women’s Network (UWONET) were exposed to humanitarian response programmes through visits to DCA’s self-implemented humanitarian response programmes17. DCA also prioritized participatory monitoring of projects through carrying out monitoring visits to partners together with local authorities, other humanitarian actors and donors. Evaluations were also carried out to monitor the progress of outcomes and objectives.
TABLE 1: Performance of the CP across the 9 Commitment Areas of the CHS CHS DCA performance analysis Communities and people affected by crisis The respondents were aware of DCA and partners in the respective areas of receive assistance appropriate and relevant to implementation. In addition, the relevance section of this report provides sufficient their needs evidence of alignment of the Country programme to the needs of target groups. Communities and people affected by crisis DCA provided to assistance to the affected persons through the projects presented in have access to the assistance they need at the Appendix 1- Table 9. The survey results based on DCA’s evaluation of this commitment right time area showed that 90% (strongly agree 25.4% and agree 64.6%)18 of the 426 respondents agreed that the project staff keep promises concerning promised actions of interventions.
Communities and people affected by crisis DCA projects in building resilience to climate, environment and energy challenges have are not negatively affected and are more to a greater extent achieved their objectives. The CP also increased resilience to conflict prepared, resilient and less at-risk as a result through peacebuilding activities. There is however a recommendation on the need for of humanitarian action further scale up of resilience building in conflict.
Communities and people affected by crisis Community participation in the CP is presented as Annex 1 (Diagram 2). Findings also know their rights and entitlements, have indicate that beneficiaries were to a great extent involved in decision making especially access to information and participate in through their information provision role. There is need for the CP to scale up on efforts decisions that affect them to educate beneficiaries in the humanitarian context about their rights and entitlements.
Communities and people affected by crisis DCA has a fully developed Complaint mechanism in place that through a Complaints have access to safe and responsive desk, face to face mechanism, toll-free lines and joint interagency meetings. Complaints mechanisms to handle complaints. were also received, documented and shared to a greater extent Communities and people affected by crisis DCA provided complementary support through collaboration and coordination with receive coordinated, complementary OPM, UNHCR and other NGOs. A report documented on the end line evaluation of the assistance. Listen Learn And Act (LLA) project revealed that 87.1% of 434 respondents indicated “a lot” and “to a great extent” when asked to what extent the project complements other partners work19. Communities and people affected by crisis DCA prioritized the use of reporting, coordination meetings, technical working group can expect delivery of improved assistance as meetings and joint supervisions to identify learning areas, obtain feedback and reflect on organizations learn from experience and previous experience so as to improve implementation reflection
Communities and people affected by crisis DCA has a staff structure in place for management and coordination. Much as findings receive the assistance they require from revealed that some of the implementing staff did not have adequate capacity, DCA competent and well-managed staff and complemented this with technical support from the Country office. In addition, staff volunteers completed one another in different areas in order to achieve results. Compulsory training was also provided during probation Communities and people affected by crisis DCA’s effectiveness in resource management is demonstrated by the increased support can expect that the organizations assisting form funding partners, which demonstrates their trust and confidence in the organization. them are managing resources effectively, efficiently, and ethically.
15 DCA Annual Report 2017 16 For example, LEMU was trained and drafted a PSEA, that was approved by the board and has been disseminated to staff 17 DCA Annual Report 2018. 18 End of Project Evaluation of UNHCR Livelihoods Project Implemented By Danchurchaid. Listen Learn and Act (LLA) Report; Robert A. Esimu 19 End of Project Evaluation of UNHCR Livelihoods Project Implemented By Danchurchaid. Listen Learn and Act (LLA) Report; Robert A. Esimu
8
The table above outlines performance of DCA in the 9 commitments of the CHS as one of the components of the sphere. DCA also to a greater extent ensured that beneficiaries had access to support ad protection, enabling it to achieve the objectives of the Humanitarian Charter. The Country Programme also ensured that upon recruitment, all staff members in DCA undergo various on-line training and short courses, using Fabo online learning tool as part of their orientation. This has ensured that staff have the necessary skills to ensure participation and accountability of beneficiaries.
DCA Learning Priority (Partnership): How the CP engaged with faith-based actors in programming and advocacy, and the relevance in the balance between secular and Faith Based Organisations (FBOs) DCA maintained an appropriate mix of secular and FBOs (9 FBOs and 17 Secular partners) during the CP period) as shown in the table below in Appendix 1- Table 10. Under this CP, the use of FBOs was identified as DCA’s niche and efforts were put in place to ensure that faith leaders are supported to effectively use the available spaces for policy influence especially on issues of good governance and gender justice20. DCA also facilitated advocacy of FBOs through the provision of funds that support dialogues, as well as the creation of networks and platforms for advocacy. The relevance of the mix between secular and FBOs is due to the added advantages that are derived from each of them.
FBOs are trusted by their communities: Their implementation is seen as honest and transparent, which enabled ease engagement of communities as well as the adoption of activities. A project end line evaluation report by Caritas Kotido in 2019 sighted the trust and confidence of the community and district leaders as one of the enabling factors to the achievements of the project. FBOs provided a channel to reach a wide number within the community: The Uganda National Census of 2014 highlights 99.8% of Ugandans as belonging to a religion, with the highest being Catholic (39.3%), followed by Anglican (32%) and Moslems (13.7%). As such, the engagement of religious leaders through FBOs enabled a wider channel of the population to be reached. Similarly, the linkages between the different faiths /religions coordinated by DCA partners made it possible to reach masses across the country on issues of mutual concern especially messages of reconciliation, electoral democracy, gender justice and climate change. Key to note is also that Faith structures exist at all levels of the community. In addition to this, their support is linked to spiritual aspects thus increasing their ability to provide psychological support to beneficiaries. DCA is itself a Faith-Based Organisation, and this collaboration made it easy for the adoption of policies, principles and methods. Also, this meant that there was a common vision and principles.
The gaps in implementation with FBOs are to a greater extent offset by the good mix with secular organizations. For instance, challenges in technical, organizational and infrastructural capacities are minimal with secular organisations compared to FBOs because secular organisations are to a greater extent dynamic and have more opportunities to obtain the relevant skills and resources. Another key learning is that majority of Faith-based actors are not open to advocacy especially in the political agenda, due to principles of impartiality. This is where secular organizations provide complementary benefits. Moreover, Faith-Based Organizations are sometimes not willing to compromise, especially with interventions/ approaches that deviate from their strategies. The secular partners also have more flexible internal systems and processes that provide an added advantage to working with them.
3.2 EFFECTIVENESS
Achievement of the country programme objectives at outcome level Outcome 1: The country programme led to enhanced capacity and awareness on rights and responsibilities of marginalized groups especially women and young people to effectively participate in decision making processes and demand for gender-equitable governance.
The capacity of marginalized groups was enhanced by the country programme to follow up on commitments from duty bearers, through providing them with the tools and skills. Their ability to monitor, write reports and engage with the duty bearers over sectorial service delivery was built. This was because of the training conducted to facilitate the formation of structures such as CBMs and SASA Faith leaders in Soroti, Amudat, Amuria, Amudat and Katakwi. The training increased their understanding of government policies and monitoring of social accountability. Consequently, these structures have been able to utilize the available platform to advocate for improved service delivery and equitable governance. In Amuria district, community monitors indicated that they observed changes on how citizens can demand accountability from their leaders as evidenced by their confidence in demanding for services from their leaders (duty bearers). Similarly, the trained CBMs and SASA groups shared the multiple benefits they had obtained as presented in Appendix 2: Story 7 & 8. In DCA’s CP Annual Report 2019, it is noted that the district leadership is embracing the role of Community Based Monitors and realizing the need to incorporate them into the district monitoring system, including facilitating them to participate in district forums such as technical planning meetings.
20 Annual report 2017
9
The CP has created and provided predictable and sustainable platforms for dialogues between duty bearers and service delivery beneficiaries through among others community dialogues, social accountability platforms, and joint monitoring follow up and meetings. This approach has enabled the different groups to hold leaders accountable for service delivery. Duty bearers have also formed panels in radio talk shows and discussions to sensitize the communities on governance and accountability Marginalized groups were facilitated by the CP to demand equitable governance through national and international lobby events such as anti-corruption caravan, 16 days of Gender activism, Land awareness week, for policy action. In addition, there was increased awareness of the community on issues of service delivery and GBV, through use of media channels such as local newspapers, radio spot messages and radio talk shows. For example, one of the social accountability platforms was covered by ‘Etop’, a local newspaper. This attracted many readers and target audiences. The CP also enhanced understanding of laws, policies and land tenure issues, especially in Karamoja sub region.
Channels have been created that have significantly enabled women and men to share sensitive inequality issues before they are shared in the general community dialogues. COU- TEDDO held women and men-only spaces to enhance this initiative. This has also enabled each gender group to understand their roles and contribution to the rights process. For example, both men and women have become activists for change, to challenge structural causes of inequality.
Besides the above, the capacity of different leaders and duty bearers was enhanced to improve equitable governance and service delivery within their communities. Among others these included: 1. The ability of Faith leaders to speak out more boldly on the social and political issues facing the country, such as political intolerance, bad governance – corruption, poor service delivery, and gender injustice (kidnaps, women murders and other forms of gender-based violence).21 2. Increased support from Local Government leaders, which was evident from their participation in forums and meetings, as well as providing referrals for GBV cases through the Local Council 1 structures. 3. Increased recognition of the role of CSOs in the promoting equitable governance and decision-making processes. DCA partners such as UWONET contributed to the process of formulation of the National Development Plan III. UDN contributed to reviewing the institutional effectiveness of both the Auditor General's office and the Office of the Inspectorate of Government as a means of improving the Agencies' effectiveness in addressing corruption and improving prudent resource utilization in the country. Government of Uganda adopted 80% of the gender recommendations made by CSOs under the coordination of UWONET and HURINET in 201722. 4. The increased presence of leaders and other stakeholders in advocacy platforms through the Uganda National Dialogue. Awareness about the National Dialogue Process was created both at national and district level. Political leaders, CSOs, religious leaders, youth and women have had a greater appreciation of the national dialogue process. There is also remarkable appreciation and respect of people’s freedoms of expression by the authority at the district and local communities.23 5. DCA partners have used community and district evidence to influence national level processes and agendas, for example through analysis of government budget proposals, echoing citizen’s perspectives and presentation of CSO positions on issues24. They have also made necessary recommendations.
The majority of the communities are highly patriarchal, thus the promotion of Gender equitable governance and reduction in GBV is highly affected by deeply rooted social constructs. As such, key village, cultural elders and customary leaders were to a lower extent involved in championing gender justice and yet they play a crucial role in achievement of mindset change. Dialogues were usually one sided. For example, the communities often found faults with duty bearers, and the elders dominated discussions in youth dialogues. Many CBMs are also currently having high interests to join the political agenda. This provides two added benefits (i) having leaders who are already trained on the need for equitable governance and public accountability, (ii) Creating a good relationship between CBOs and the future leaders since they have had a long-standing working relationship. It, however, creates a risk of CBMs using their platforms for political campaigns and to expose Leaders due to personal interest. Also, candidates that have lost previous elections to former CBMs have developed a bias for the CBOs supporting them. Data collected also suggested that CBM work is limited due to their inability to access information from duty bearers, including budgets, plans etc. The COVID-19 pandemic presents a question on the need for adoption of new methodologies of ensuring the achievement of this outcome. Reports suggest that the lockdown and physical distancing measures also limited the ability of the community monitoring groups to meet, organize and engage duty bearers for improved service delivery.25 DCA and partners have so far adopted the use of online modes of meeting using Zoom and Microsoft teams. The consultant physically attended a dialogue between The Elders Forum Uganda (TEFU) and the Youth organized at IRCU on Tuesday 22nd September in which some of the members attended via the Zoom platform.
21 Country Programme Annual report 2019
22 Country Programme Annual Report 2018 23 Report, IRCU- Critical Reflection Workshop 24Findings from CSBAG showed that they supported, financed and spearheaded CSOs to successfully interface with national institutions like Parliament of Uganda, Ministry of Finance (MoFPED) and Equal Opportunities Commission 25 Strengthening Civic Engagement for equitable service delivery and Gender Justice in 6 sub counties Bi annual report 2020 COU TEDDO
10
Outcome 2: More marginalized communities are supported to increase food security and strengthen their resilience to conflict, environment and climate change challenges.
The CP registered progress in realizing this outcome as seen in the resilience building projects implemented by SOCADIDO, LEMU and TPO. These projects have registered progress by building social, economic and environmental resilience of communities. Community capacities have been enhanced to deal with shocks, increase food insecurity, through use of technologies such as ridge cropping, high- yielding, drought-tolerant and pest-persistent seed varieties, home gardens and post-harvest storage, and in DRR. 26 Marginalized communities were economically empowered through VSLA, to meet their basic needs. VSLAs have also enabled the rights holders to start small scale Income- Generating Activities, resulting in improved standards of living.27 Groups have also been able to access financial support due to the linkages with chain actors in agriculture especially through increased access to agricultural inputs and loans to facilitate their investments. There has been increased support to the community through community resilience building efforts by the local Governments.28 There is also increased farm production and productivity due to the involvement of marginalized communities in agriculture. More households and communities are meeting their food needs and have a surplus for sale. According to reports under BRISK, a total of 1154 households reported an increase in yield in 2019, an increase from 845 households that reported an increase in yield in the previous seasons of 201829. Moreover, more men and women have become involved in commercial farming, and there is an increase in the number of households that adopted improved agronomic practices such as kitchen gardening, sack mounds, row planting, timely planting and weeding, and simple irrigation as well as proper post-harvest handling practices30. Also, there is a shift from pastoralism to agro-based livelihoods, particularly in Karamoja as shared during one of the interviews: “before, the community was just concentrating in pastoralism, where cattle rustling was also part of the game. With the coming of the project, many farmers have opened acres of land to farming and the benefits are evident. For the first time groundnuts, irish potatoes and vegetables are grown in Loroo sub-county.” CBM, Amudat
The CP enabled skilling of marginalised groups in agricultural production, business, and vocational training. This has increased job opportunities, and consequently, access food and improved standards of living. For instance, 73% of the youth trained through an EU-funded project implemented by consortium of DCA, C&D and Caritas Kotido in Karamoja secured employment by 2019.31
Capacity of the communities in Climate Change Adaptation and DRR was built through the CMDRR committees, development of disaster contingency plans, and through continuous awareness on disaster risk reduction. Farmers have also to a greater extent adopted recommended technologies demonstrated in the Farmer Field Schools, a model implemented by TPO, one of DCA’s partners in Karamoja sub region. Communities have also experienced strengthened resilience to environment and energy challenges in West Nile (Bidi Bidi and Rhino Camp) through construction of improved cooking technologies (Energy Saving stoves) that save up to 50% fuel thus reducing on the destruction of forest cover; growing artificial and fast growing trees that enhance soil fertility; and making briquettes as a substitute for firewood thus reducing on the encroachment of forests. Capacity was enhanced through trainings and sensitising the communities on energy saving practices and their benefits to the environment.
Outcome area 3: Refugees and the displaced person have access to life saving and social-Economic services for self-reliance, sustainable livelihoods and fulfilment of their rights
There has been increased access to financial services through VSLA. This has been through DCA’s facilitation of beneficiaries to form VSLAs, as well as the voluntary actions of groups formed due to the project to carry out briquette making, farming, IGAs, among others. Involvement of beneficiaries in VSLA has increased their financial literacy and financial inclusion (access to credit). Focus Group Discussions with beneficiary groups revealed that this has enabled them to meet their family needs (Appendix 2: Story 1& 5). Training provided by the programme also facilitated a better understanding of the saving culture, and digitization increased participation of beneficiaries in saving and promoted financial inclusion through increased access to credit.
26 Country Programme Annual Report 27 Promoting Citizen Engagement for Equitable, Just & Accountable Development in Katakwi & Amuria Districts. Annual Report 2018, COU- TEDDO 28 In Teso they introduced communal storage facilities at sub-county level to mitigate food insecurity and improve commodity prices 29 BRISK December report 2019 30 SOCADIDO Report- Annual Critical Workshop Report 2019
31 Empowering Youth Through Vocational Training And Entrepreneurship In Karamoja, Uganda, Endline Evaluation Report 2019- Caritas Kotido
11
The CP has enabled refugees and displaced communities to access income generating and employment opportunities. This was due to increased access to finance, which enabled beneficiaries to set up businesses. They were also able to acquire improved skills and capacity in savings, production, and identification of areas for self- reliance. The projects implemented under self-implementation also provided skills on selected areas of self-employment. Beneficiaries have acquired skills in welding, salon business, and tailoring, etc. The subsequent effect of the above changes has been visible in improved Standards of living. This was due to the increased purchasing power and ability of communities to meet their needs. Also, the Cash for work approach enabled the beneficiaries to have a variety of channels for utilization of their money, to improve their health, education and livelihood indicators (Appendix 2: Story 2). Improved access to food which resulted in food and nutrition security were also noted. Furthermore, DCA supported refugee farmer groups to produce foods such as maize, cassava and beans, thereby reducing their reliance on food rations.
The livelihoods of refugees and displaced persons are to a greater extent affected by their access to resources, as well as peaceful co- existence with neighboring communities to increase their ability to support them. Although the access to financial, skill and income- generating resources were increased, the Country Programme to a lower extent paid attention to channels that create more durable solutions such as integration. This created difficulty in for example access to markets and to fertile/productive land. Also, the Protection component and access to rights, which is one of the key intervention areas of DCA does not come out strongly in the self- implementation work. Support provided may not have included the development of constructive management plans for inputs together with beneficiaries. For instance, groups supported with livestock reported that they lost them due to diseases. Persons provided with briquette making machines, also mentioned that they needed technicians for repair, who were not within the community, and they did not have the funds to do so. Groups involved in briquette making did not have any markets for the briquettes. Skills trainings particularly in Teso and Karamoja were also reported to be short-lived which may have limited skills adoption. This presents a need for constant refresher trainings.
Effective use of participation and accountability mechanisms in engaging rights-holders DCA utilisation of participation and accountability mechanisms was visible. For example, DCA ensured regular feedback mechanisms, and effective reporting channels on implementation through use of systems for lodging in complaints from beneficiaries. These mechanisms included use of toll-free lines, emails, and suggestion boxes. DCA and partners also used community mobilisers/ facilitators as a link between the implementers and the community, which led to increased beneficiary trust in the system and to ease of reporting complaints and providing feedback. Based on the reports shared, it is evident that the community mobilisers/facilitators were present at community coordination/ feedback meetings. The programme methodology also incorporates community dialogues that provided a channel for sharing and discussing project progress with beneficiaries. Information was regularly shared with community leaders and policy makers through reports, and they were involved in the activities such as project kick-off meetings, sensitisations, beneficiary selection among others. These established mechanisms led to empowerment of beneficiaries to speak freely with DCA in terms of contributing ideas. Besides the channels for accountability, DCA and partners ensured beneficiary participation in activities. The evaluation highlighted selection of suitable enterprises, activities, and methods to be utilised as the main areas where beneficiaries participated in Appendix 1- Table 11.
In 2018, DCA Country office assessed the level of rights holders’ participation in partners’ projects and scored at least 50% to be in the last three categories according to DCA Participation guidelines (i.e. As functional, interactive participation or self- mobilization).32 There was however no follow-up assessment conducted to establish progress in 2019 and 2020. The beneficiary accountability mechanisms such as toll-free lines, emails and suggestion boxes were to a lower extent effective, due to the limited knowledge rights holders had about these existing channels. Besides, there are low literacy levels in the areas of implementation. Community meetings and structures were effective to a greater extent, due to issues of trust. Monitoring and evaluation was also carried out but more at project level than Country Programme level. As such, the evaluation noted that the processes and the system were streamlined to a lower extent. Partners were encouraged to carry out assessments and evaluations for example Post Distribution Monitoring assessments, Baseline evaluations and End line evaluations. Findings show that minimal follow-up was conducted to ensure that the assessments and evaluations have been carried out by partners, and data from them extracted for learning.
DCA Learning Priority (Nexus): Extent to which the country programme is embracing a nexus approach and its contribution to the programme’s effectiveness The CP embraced the nexus approach to humanitarian response and this was to enable the refugees and host communities to peacefully co-exist and to engage in sustainable livelihoods such as agricultural value chains, cash- based interventions and Environment and Energy conservation. In addition, The Country programme response through COVID-19 support, especially in Teso and Karamoja and West Nile, was also a good example of the humanitarian- development nexus approach. The nexus humanitarian-peace-development nexus was implemented to a greater extent, through community capacity building, promoting peaceful co-existence, enabling linkages to livelihood enhancement resources, and involvement of the private sector in programming. In addition, marketing associations were also formed to support produce market identification and linkage. This aspect of the Country Programme is one of the good practices towards a more sustainable form of support, and it has great potential that should be continuously explored.
The nexus approach further contributed to effectiveness through the use of favorable policies and frameworks to guide implementation. Among others, these included the Uganda Refugee Policy that calls for non-discrimination of refugees
32 Country Programme annual report 2018
12
and their empowerment to enable them to enjoy similar rights as citizens of Uganda and the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) that stresses local integration. The nexus approach was a channel to enable refugees are empowered to engage in gainful employment and production value chains.
Key learning from the Fresh Fruit Nexus project was that the communities supported still had a challenge with their livelihoods, which limited their transition into commercialized and development-driven interventions. Also, DCA and partner staff capacities in development- humanitarian nexus were to a lower extent enhanced. During KIIs, staff shared that they had little knowledge about where the line between the humanitarian and development aspects are drawn. The evaluation also noted the need for adjustment of DCA procedures, systems and policies to cater to the needs for both development and emergency contexts. “The organization has long protocols which do not adequately respond to sharp emergencies”. Also, close monitoring and follow-up are necessary to observe the learning and development changes from the nexus approach. To ensure the effectiveness of the nexus approach, there is a need for incorporation of issues of land acquisition which is a channel towards sustainability. Also, the nexus approach requires a concrete context analysis. Key Informants revealed that the Sunflower distributed could not grow well in Adumi because soils in Adumi could not support proper growth. Findings also note that the involvement of the private sector requires a business case that demonstrates the convergence of interests between the humanitarian and private sector actors and the added value from private sector engagement. There is need for the projects to cater or provide for a business analysis to provide a deeper understanding of the quantitative benefits of engagement, including examples of a return on investment which would be helpful in advocating for greater principled involvement by companies. It will also enable DCA to match their needs to the interests of the private sector actors and, consequently, help determine which tools to customize for them to manage their collaboration33.
DCA also implemented the Triple Nexus with the component of promotion of peaceful coexistence among refugees and communities. At national level, the organization is a member of the National peace-full co-existence taskforce which deliberates on strategies to reduce conflicts among refugees and host communities; identify and implement peacebuilding initiatives between refugees and host communities and contribute to sharing and exchange of information with other task force members among others. The targeting of beneficiaries within the nexus was a 50:50 ratio enabling support to reach both refugees and host communities, a strategy that promotes peace. In addition, interventions were implemented that promoted peaceful co-existence through dialogues, sports events, participation in international events like the International Refugee day etc. The E&E component was also implemented to reduce conflicts arising from competition for timber/wood for fuel and construction etc.
Much as DCA streamlined the aspect of peacebuilding within its interventions, implementation was mainly towards conflict reduction rather than conflict management and mitigation as a strategy to strengthen community resilience to Conflict. This could take the form of community dialogue (for mediations and reconciliations), training local actors to mitigate conflicts in the community etc. In addition, much as there was an effort by some of the DCA partners to implement conflict mitigation34, projects specifically targeting conflict reduction were to a lower extent evident in the CP as a whole. There is also need for a deeper analysis of the conflict aspect in order to design projects directed towards specifically conflict. For instance, analyzing between which groups the conflict mostly is (research suggests that both refugees and host communities identified the main points of conflict as within the refugee communities themselves, rather than between hosts and refugees)35, the main causes and drivers in the intervention area.
The extent to which the programme tested and effectively adopted innovative approaches/technologies DCA tested and effectively adopted innovative approaches and technologies to a greater extent, which included digitization of Cash transfers, digitization of data collection, use of e-vouchers, underground water harvesting, construction of energy-saving stoves and briquette making, among others. DCA’s technology and innovation approach improved the effectiveness of programming to a greater extent. A compiled list showing innovations in the CP in Appendix 1: Diagram 3.
Documentation of technologies was done more at a project level than at CP level. There was limited evidence of the existence of tracking of the utilization of these innovations to facilitate learning, through robust documentation, and sharing of this information with different stakeholders. Moreover, most of the technologies/innovations of the CP were provided as part of the design of the projects. Although DCA and partners adopted approaches and technologies from beneficiaries/ other partners, there is still work to be done especially in implementing a bottom-up approach to the adoption of technologies.
33 The business case: A study of private sector engagement in humanitarian action, OCHA https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/PSS-BusinessCase-FINAL.pdf
34 LEMU project worked with communities to resolve conflicts in respect to land use. The project facilitated communities to reach a compromise with encroachers and promote peaceful co-existence. All CLA constitutions also incorporate conflict resolution. 35 Are Integrated Services a Step towards Integration? Uganda Case Study – 2018 https://regionaldss.org/wp- content/uploads/2019/03/ReDSS-Uganda-Report-FINAL-2019.pdf
13
How partnerships have been established or enhanced as a result of the country programme (DCA and partners, partners and rights holders, rights holders and duty bearers, and partners among themselves) what evidence is there to show that DCA and partners have actively sought new partnerships and knowledge resources during the progress of the programme as new needs have arisen
Partnerships have been enhanced to a greater extent as a result of the Country Programme. DCA and Partners: DCA formed partnerships with 38 local, national, and international organisations, companies and institutions during the period of the Country programme. Appendix 1: Table 12 shows the different partnership networks due to the Country Programme. Among these, were 6 partnerships in Consortia that are listed below:
1. Multi Sectoral Assistance to South Sudanese Refugees and Host communities in West Nile (Bidibidi, Palorinya and Rhino Camps): Mercy corps (Lead Partner), CARE, Save the Children and Oxfam 1. DFID Market System Development Approach: Mercy Corps (Lead Partner), Palladium 2. Increased resilience of refugees and host communities in Arua and Lamwo District through a more effective and coordinated response during sudden emergencies: CEFORD, URCS & CSBAG 3. Protection and Restoration of the Environment & Promotion of Safe Access to Sustainable Energy and Green Livelihoods in Refugee and Host Communities- DRAGON, CYCORP, HADS, WNCA 4. Livelihoods Enhancement for West Nile and Acholi: LWF, UPMB & Mukwano 5. Empowering Youth through Vocational Training and Entrepreneurship in Karamoja- DCA, Caritas Kotido & Institute for Cooperation and Development (C&D) 6. Interfaith Action for Gender Justice- RACOBOA and CoU-HCT)
DCA is a member of the ACT Alliance Uganda Forum which brings together 15 organisations, 12 of which are International agencies. Some of the members collaborated with include: Church of Sweden (CoS), Church of Uganda (CoU), Diakonia Sweden (DIAKONIA), Ecumenical Church Loan Fund (ECLOF), Finn Church Aid (FCA), Lutheran World Relief (LWR), Rural Action Community Based Organisation (RACOBAO), The Lutheran World Federation (LWF), Uganda Joint Christian Council (UJCC) and World Renew (WR). DCA also has a coordination role in the ACT Alliance as it hosts the Act Alliance Advocacy Officer.
DCA also enhanced partnerships through identification and bringing on board new partners during the course of the CP, for example, RACOBOA.
Partners among themselves: To a greater extent, there was collaboration and partnerships between DCA partners themselves. This evaluation identified the following instances of partnerships. 1. UWONET has been able to share their knowledge through capacity development of other partners such as COU TEDDO. 2. UDN also partnered in capacity building of CSBAG (budget advocacy), MONARLIP and TEDDO 3. Caritas Kotido and C&D partnered to implement a youth empowerment project in Karamoja 4. TPO BRISK partnered with URCS to train farmers in Karamoja on CMDRC approaches. 5. SOCADIDO partnered with LEMU and COU TEDDO for implementation
Partnerships were also enhanced through the critical Reflection Workshops where DCA partners had a platform to discuss and share progress of their projects, new ideas, challenges and way forward.
Partners and rights holders: Through the country programme, partnerships were formed between partners and rights holders to a greater extent. Rights holders engaged in; 1. Taking up leadership roles: These groups were engaged as community facilitators, SASA faith leaders, Community Based monitors among others 2. Provision of resources such as land for planting, and labor by rights holders, and being given inputs by DCA partners 3. Carrying out a role of advocating for social services, which made the achievement of objectives easier. 4. Availing of training grounds to support implementation, based on consideration of which was more favorable. 5. Provision of information to support monitoring and partner project improvements. The partners also provided linkages for rights holders. For example, they collaborated in linking youth to vocational training institutes, and linking VSLAs with various SACCOs and financial institutions.
Rights holders and duty bearers: The relationship between rights holders and duty bearers was enhanced but to a lower extent. Rights holders were in position to share complaints and advocate for better service delivery. This information provided supported in enabling duty bearers perform their roles. In addition, duty bearers also linked the rights holders to existing government programs for example youth livelihood programs and women entrepreneurship programs
14
Rights holders themselves: The Country programme enhanced partnerships between rights holders themselves through the groups and associations that brought together people from different areas. These groups included Village Savings and Loans Associations, Income Generating Activity groups, Production & Marketing Associations, Briquette making groups etc. Some partnerships, between the partners and rights holders, / duty bearers and rights holders were to a lower extent formalized
How partners are involved in decision-making and their decision-making powers in the planning and implementation of the country programme including the cross-cutting activities. DCA involved partners in decision making to a greater extent and provided them with decision making powers in planning and implementation of the country programme including the cross-cutting activities. 100% of the partners interviewed agreed to this, and among others, the areas of involvement included the following: Participation in generating ideas for the formulation of the DCA country programme Taking part in partners’ platform organised annually to critically review of the CP ToC Participating in Executive Director’s platforms (meetings between DCA and EDs of her partners) to discuss matters of strategic importance to the partnerships Budgeting process of projects under the country programme.
Analysis of project annual reports revealed that DCA partners and staff initiated a new thinking process, informed by the evaluation in terms of direction and areas to strengthen and consolidate. This was packaged in a concept note and discussed with partners during round table forums and partner platforms. The communication between DCA and partners is well established and streamlined. Partners shared that their communication is responded to in time and that they are all aware of the DCA focal persons to reach out to. Communication is carried out through various channels such as phone calls, emails, on-line platforms, and physical meetings. Involvement of partners in the decision-making process is also evident from the fact that the feedback provided by the partners was incorporated into the country programme. For instance, SOCADIDO’s suggestion to harvest water for production, and the CBM Model from UDN were adopted. Similarly the request by TPO for more tractors to support the opening of more land in phase I of the Building Resilience in Southern Karamoja (BRISK I) project, was addressed through the provision of funds by DCA to support tractor hire services in BRSIK II. Partners, however, cited the possibility of communication gaps within DCA that led to delays in decision making.
The extent to which DCA delivers adequate capacity support (including responsiveness) for project implementation and organisational strengthening, particularly with regards to capacity development to the partners. The extent to which the country programme enabled the partners’ and DCA’s advocacy work with other relevant actors, e.g. facilitation of networks etc.
The CP continued supporting partners to use evidence-based advocacy, empowering the rights holders with knowledge and skills, and creating platforms for them to directly take charge of bringing about change while the partners and DCA play a facilitator role to ensure that these changes are citizen-led hence sustainable. DCA to a greater extent provided funding to partners to carry out activities that achieve the goals of the CP and are consequently aligned to their individual organizational strategies. Furthermore, support was also given in resource mobilization, as well as, guiding partners in re-adjustments of budgets.
This came in handy during the COVID-19 pandemic, where partners were supported to respond to the emergency, even within the development context. DCA has also enabled its partners to benefit from the various forum and networks it is a part of. For example, the ACT Forum whose coordinating officer is housed by DCA. Information obtained during this evaluation revealed that national partners such as CoU, UJCC and RACOBAO are now part of this forum, which has enabled them learn and share experiences that can improve effectiveness of their work.
Under Save, DCA worked with local and national organizations (HADS, CSBAG, Lishe, CEFORD, DRAGON, URCS, CYCOPR) in implementation to build their capacities in Livelihoods, E&E, and resilience response, through provision of training, financial support, financial support, exposure and technical supervision. The capacity of partners was enhanced in digitization of data collection, participation in ToC critical reflection workshops, participation in national and international forums, and supporting them to train other partners. DCA partners are also able to benefit from the organizations good practice of online learning through the Fabo online learning tool that provides continuous capacity building in. A table diagram showing how DCA built the capacity of partners is shown in Appendix 1: Table 13.
How partners have contributed to the achievement of the various aspects of the country programme ToC Partners played their roles in contributing to the ToC to a greater extent. The Country programme ToC outlines 11 areas for partner contribution. The table below summaries shows how partners contributed to these aspects. A detailed table is in Appendix 1: Table 14.
15
TABLE 2: Contribution of partners to the ToC through their roles as outlined Role in the Theory of Change Example of Partner contribution
Extent to which Partners Reviewed, DCA partners have contributed to the legal and public policy framework, for example the analysed and contributed to the legal marriage and divorce bill, constitutional amendments on the proposed removal of the and institutional frameworks Presidential Age Limit and compulsory land acquisition by government; and providing feedback on budget discipline across the country at the different budget process levels within the country. Extent to which partners built DCA partners contributed to the formulation of the NDP III through coordinating and capacity of national government and documenting the women's voices and aspirations for the five-year plan. They also, supported non-state actors on roles, awareness and implementation of government policies. A petition on more stringent laws to responsibilities and technical skills safeguard women and girls was also presented to the Speaker of Parliament by faith leaders coordinated by DCA and ACT Alliance Advocacy officer. Extent to which partners provided DCA partners supported work on civic space and reached out to CSOs that were affected by training on advocacy for CSOs at government clamping and closure of offices. national and district level Extent to which partners facilitated Partners to a greater extent facilitated development of networks, through formation of working development and running of networks groups. They also continued to strengthen and mentor district women’s networks and and platforms on issues of common community structures in an effort to foster dialogue and conversations among communities and concern duty bearers on rights and responsibilities. Extent to which partners Facilitated All Active Citizenship partners have linkages with the State Accountability mechanisms Grassroots, national and International including the Inter Agency Forum for the Accountability Sector under the Directorate of Ethics linkages and Integrity and the Ministry of Finance. At grassroots level, formation of Community structures and facilitators has to a greater extent led to linkages with the community Extent to which partners Sensitized There is still work that needs to be done especially with the sensitisation of media. Much as media on issues of rights abuse implementation has been carried out through media channels such as local newspapers, radio (exclusion , land rights and food spot messages and radio talk shows, media houses still need to be engaged to understand their security) contribution especially to advocacy on issues of rights abuse
Extent to which partners engaged A campaign, “ACT now for Climate Justice” Campaign, which called upon the Government of religious and Cultural leaders on their Uganda to deliver ambitious and fair climate change agreements during the international UN potential influence in changing Climate change conference was also launched. Faith leaders also used the power of the pulpit negative attitudes, norms and to speak out on issue such as climate justice. There has been positive change in the attitude and practices perception of faith leaders on their roles in promoting gender justice through their spaces and prophetic roles. Cultural leaders have been involved to a lower extent. Extent to which partners provided Community Based Monitors and SASA Faith leaders were trained to enable understanding of training and awareness to community government policies and the concepts of social accountability monitoring. These structures farmers on food rights and have thus been able to utilize the available platform to advocate for improved service delivery governance and equitable governance. Extent to which partners conducted Partners trained marginalized groups in modern agronomic practices, post-harvest handling and Training of marginalized women, men farming as a business. Partners are also encouraging farmers to grow short term maturing crops and youth on agro ecology, climate like beans and drought resistant crops like root tubers smart agriculture and other approaches on market development. Extent to which partners engaged with Partners engaged with District Local Governments, and other businesses including vocational local and national businesses to skills institutions, and bulking centres among others. Other partners were private sector encourage support & investment in companies such as Mukwano, and Ensibuuko, among others. alternative technologies & food production opportunities Extent to which partners facilitated There was increased access to financial services due to the encouragement of VSLA market development, value addition methodology by partners. Target groups were also linked to different SACCOs and for target producers microfinance institutions. Market development was also facilitated through formation of producer associations. Partners also trained groups on proper post-harvest handling methods.
Other contributions were: • Implementation of projects that contribute to the overall objectives of the ToC. Based on evaluation reports reviewed, these projects contributed to the ToC to a greater extent due to i) increased reach in targeting of marginalized groups; ii) enhanced skill & awareness, economic empowerment etc. An elaborate description of contribution of partner projects is described under outcome achievements in Section 3.2 of this report. • Dedication of resources including staff, office spaces, among others to ensure that project activities were completed • Utilization of the partner’s networks for advocacy as well as for implementation of activities • Participation in the annual ToC Critical Reflection workshops through which progress is reviewed and necessary adjustments made.
16
DCA Learning Priority (Localization): The challenges and opportunities in operationalizing localization in the programme. How DCA contributed to reinforcing the ability of local and national actors and partners to deliver on needs in an effective and timely fashion
To implement the localization agenda, DCA partnered with local partners and CBOs as shown in Table 3 TABLE 3: DCA local partners over the period of the CP Local Partners West Nile: Mukwano Group of Companies, Raising Gabdho, TPO, Ensibuuko, Uganda Red Cross, Uganda Protestant Bureau, Uganda HADS, CSBAG, Lishe, CEFORD, DRAGON, CYCORP. Teso & Karamoja: Soroti Catholic Diocese Integrated Development Organization (SOCADIDO), Caritas Kotido, Land and Equity Movement Uganda (LEMU)
To a greater extent, the CP reinforces the ability of local and national partners to implement and deliver on their CP and subsequently individual results. Some of the partnership assisted in building the capacity of the “ first responders” (example URCS, CEFORD and CSBAG) as well that of the respective District Local Governments in Disaster Preparedness and Response especially in Cash and Voucher Assistance (CVA), District Contingency Planning (DCP), as well as Advocacy work. Also, interviews conducted with representatives from these organizations revealed that the partnerships increased their scope of implementation and exposure to other NGOs. Partnerships were also formed to enhance implementation of development interventions in Teso and West Nile regions. Findings revealed that DCA re- enforced the technical managerial and financial capacities of the local actors as shown in the Table 4.
TABLE 4: Technical, managerial and financial support given to local partners Technical Managerial Financial Working space has been provided. Staff training Monetary support for Work tools have been provided Joint sessions project implementation Guidance on the project has been availed Supervisions Provision of cash to Tricycles to help in transport have been provided. Provided. facilitate administrative Training and skilling Exposure to other costs Technical input from DCA staff NGOs Paying wages. Establishment of infrastructure like warehouses that will continue to be sued by partners Monetary support for Taxes and wages
The evaluation identified key challenges and opportunities for the localization agenda, and these are shared in Appendix 1: Table 15. These are summarized in the Table 5.
TABLE 5: Opportunities and Challenges for localisation Opportunities Existence of a Charter for Change (Uganda) Forum, of which DCA is an active member. Increasing emphasis by donors to fund consortia involving local actors Fairly high level of community organisation which makes it easy to form national and local organisations Localization enables DCA to get in touch with the “first responders” and the first point of contact with the community. Localization eases penetration and access to communities. There are opportunities present due to the good understanding that these partners have of their locations Local agencies can easily solve the conflicts within the community. Partnerships harness benefits from areas of specialization of the different partners. Benefits arise from the networks of local partners.
Challenges Restrictive legislation, e.g requirements for registration or validation of NGOs Local partners usually do not have the required capacity for implementation. Enforcement of local actors to follow and use international actors' procedures. Competition for example amongst NGOs, and between partners and local agents outcompeting DCA. Delay in collective decision making. Localization arrangements present challenges in variation of systems and procedures of the different actors. Staff of international actors are more skilled, experienced and better motivated than that of local actors. Communication with the donor is usually only through the Lead partner. This leads to the main partner sometimes making decisions without involvement of other partners. Local actors have limited income to cater for co-financing requirements of major grants. Localization partnerships require that both parties’ interests must overlap enough to take on each other’s risks. This is however complex especially in private-humanitarian sector partnerships, because incorporating social considerations has a less obvious and longer-term impact on the private partner. In addition, engaging with a for-profit firm raises ethical and reputational risks for FBOs.
17
3.3 EFFICIENCY
Analysis of whether the country programme approach has been a cost-efficient way to implement DCA’s humanitarian and development assistance The Country Programme approach has provided a multi-sectoral strategy for addressing problems in development and humanitarian contexts, which has consequently translated into improved benefits. Having one, holistic Country Programme is cost-effective, and recognizes the fact that the end goal is to lead to one impact. The CP approach has also, to a greater extent, been a cost-efficient way to implement DCA’s humanitarian and development assistance. While one would argue that the implementation through partners is highly costly especially concerning the needs in capacity building and monitoring, this methodology offers cost-beneficial aspects in terms of: a. The ability for co-financing for projects, such that partners incur partial costs for the projects they implement. b. DCA obtaining added benefit of organizations offering administrative and technical support in form of staffing, office space, and resources among others. c. Better knowledge of the local context by partners enabling ease in implementation d. Greater reach of target groups at a cheaper cost than would be incurred if DCA was to implement all the activities on their own.
In addition, the need for development assistance requires constant supervision and mentoring, which is easily provided by an organization with sufficient capacity and experience in delicate humanitarian work, as DCA. On the other hand, the costs of poor implementation and accountability to refugee communities would be high if implementation was completely left to local and national organizations. Localization as promoted by DCA will however provide the required benefits in terms of building local capacity, thus the strategy of co-implementation is encouraged. There is however need to scale up the number of partners, especially in areas of protection, environment and peace.
Much as DCA conducts joint monitoring with the partners twice a year at a minimum, there is need to i) further supplement DCA’s monitoring of partners activities as relying on partners to carry out Monitoring and Accountability based on their capacities might undermine the intended outcomes of the Country programme. ii) Verify the work being done by partners through for example spot checks, as, some things may occur at the community level, with adverse effects on the programme but never be reported to DCA. The Country programme evaluation also noted that beneficiaries under self- implementation all mentioned that they were only supported by DCA. This calls for more collaboration in delivering humanitarian support.
This evaluation documents other key learning points for partnerships and self- implementation under the country programme as captured in Appendix 1- Table 16.
The extent to which the interventions are cost-effective, and the resources used in an efficient way The country programme utilized majority of the budget assistance inform of humanitarian and development work to target groups. Overall, the interventions were cost-effective, however, the determination of the extent of this cost- effectiveness was constrained by absence of quantifiable data to determine the output vs budget expenditure.
The annual reports for 2018 and 2019 indicated that overall actual consumption against the budget for 2018 was good, with 92.4 % spending, and 91% in 2019. DCA avoided delays in implementation of the CP through use of a number partners that created an opportunity for decentralization and division of tasks. This enabled DCA to increase its area of reach, at the same time providing timely support to beneficiaries at minimal internal costs36. There are also clear procedures, principles and policies for finance, and procurement37 which further minimized delays as both a partners and DCA had a clear understanding of the system operation enabling the CP to maintain a good value for money for projects. Value for money was also enhanced through the regular annual financial audits and reporting that allowed DCA to identify the best practices to adopt, and potential areas of revision. It is through these audits that DCA was able to identify and discontinue funding to two partners due to misuse of funds. DCA invested in low cost-high effect and sustainable interventions that could be more cost-effective in the long term. These included capacity building of beneficiaries in construction of Lorena stoves, briquette making, vocational skills, Village Savings and Loans Associations etc. In the selection and implementation of projects under the CP, DCA carried out adequate research and consultations with partners and other district stake holders in order to prevent duplication and wastage of resources.
The extent to which DCA coordinated its programs to ongoing similar interventions by other agencies Interventions were streamlined with the support of local authorities and local actors. For instance, the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) and UNHCR allocated areas of implementation to agencies. DCA also collaborated with Danish Refugee Council (DRC) and other agencies responding to refugees – coordinating on DERF funding for example when distributing cash to ensure beneficiaries are not duplicated. Also, the continuous collaborations between the District Local Governments, DCA and partners ensured that duplication of interventions was avoided. For example, C&D held
36 The use of partners eliminated the need for DCA to set up offices and hire additional staff in some field locations 37 Procurement systems enabled DCA to get quality goods and services at the lowest costs
18
discussions with Caritas Kotido to identify modalities of working together, and held meetings with Enabel, on youth Skills Development. Implementing actors also share reports and feedback among themselves to streamline interventions. GIZ that was working on Climate change with C&D has embraced this approach. To a greater extent, however, the country programme, especially under self-implementation, carried out collaborations to ensure learning from other NGOs operating within the same context. DCA actively participates in interagency meetings and sectoral meetings under its West Nile interventions. It was also a lead agency in livelihood, and is still the lead in Environment and Energy, a platform that enables it collaborated with partners in similar sectors to streamline activities. DCA also coordinates with other ACT members, to avoid duplication of interventions but also to increase synergies and coordination. Climate and gender justice. DCA has also discussed the issue of coordination and harmonization and information sharing with the Danish embassy.
How funding partners see DCA in terms of efficiency of resource utilization and competitiveness Based on discussions with funding partners, efficiency was viewed as one of the criteria in the selection of partners to be supported with funding for implementation. According to the funding partners, is satisfactorily efficient in resource utilization and has a high level of competitiveness. This is further evidenced by the increased network of funders that the Country programme has had over the CP period, with some donors funding more than one project at ago. DCA’s Country programme has been funded by5 donors over the 5-year period, namely, EU ECHO, EU-DEVCO, UNHCR. DANIDA, OSIEA. DCA’s ability to use its own funds to co-finance projects has made it possible to scale up project interventions to more vulnerable communities. This has been highlighted as one of the key strengths of the organization especially within the humanitarian context. Furthermore, DCA follows the PPM guidelines in the design and management of projects, is CHS-certified, and applies these standards to ensure quality and accountability. These are key factors that have contributed to its high level of competitiveness. Two additional factors seen as a key strength for DCA were i) DCA’s strategy of capacity building of local structures and CBOs and ii) DCA’s focus on most vulnerable areas such as Karamoja, Teso and West Nile region. There has been no evidence of donor partners withdrawing funding to DCA. On the contrary, funding partners have ensured timely disbursement of funding to DCA.
DCA processes of fund disbursement were considered to be lengthy by some of the funding partners, due to the funds provided by donors being handled at HQ before being disbursed to partners. Funding partners advised that to increase competitiveness, DCA should invest in capacity building of its internal staff in different components especially of the interventions implemented. The aspect of staff capacity was also cited by district leadership especially under DCA self-implementation. Building staff capacity would also reduce outsourcing, and increase staff retention. There is also need for improved capacity within DCA staff to thoroughly understand the ToC and how each of the positions fit within it. DCA staff in administration, Finance and procurement, should also be taken through aspects of implementation in humanitarian and development, to have an in-depth understanding of the requirements of both.
The extent to which DCA is a learning, flexible, and innovative organization – both from its programs and other similar agencies DCA rates highly in the learning component, as seen by donors, internal staff, partners as well as leadership structures within the implementation areas. DCA and partners document lessons learnt and best practices at project levels, and these are shared during meetings, monitoring visits and the critical reflection workshops. Despite this, there is need to create a position38 whose main role is to systematically document and share learnings at Country Programme level, in a way that involves tracking for further scale-up or change in approaches.
DCA is also a highly innovative organization, as seen from the range of approaches and technologies adopted (Appendix 1: Diagram 3). The organization’s flexibility and innovativeness is also demonstrated by its responsiveness to disasters and emergencies through its humanitarian response implementation.
Furthermore, DCA is a highly flexible organization. Incorporate feedback from beneficiaries, district leadership and partners. DCA for example incorporates key feedback from partners, its own staff, and the beneficiaries, for improved programme implementation. The organization believes in participation and inclusion in decision making.
3.4 IMPACT
KEY QUESTION RQ: 4.1 what has been the positive and negative impact at rights-holders and duty-bearers level (outcome) directly or indirectly across the six areas of change in the country programme? What are the intended and unintended changes?
Change Area 1: Transparent, accountable, and responsive government authorities have the capacity, resources and political will to develop, implement and enforce policies, which prioritises the needs and rights of vulnerable and marginalized communities.
38 Knowledge Management Manager 19
The CP to a greater extent improved government’s transparency, accountability, and responsiveness through frequent engagements with the duty bearers, joint monitoring and trainings and collaboration in implementation of projects. Government authorities also participated in the community and radio talk shows to discuss issues of transparency and accountability. This has enhanced their ability to respond to the needs of vulnerable and marginalized communities. According to reports shared by UWONET during the critical reflection workshop of 2019, there was a positive response of the government towards budget allocation toward calendar gender events such as Women’s day. For instance, Napak District allocated towards gender events - 1 million shillings for FY 2018/2019 and for procurement of bicycles for People with Disabilities to procure at least 2 for the FY 2018/19, compared to the previous years where allocation was only made for formation of women councils as a means towards gender mainstreaming. In addition to this, females were given an additional score to enable them to effectively compete for positions in the district39. The government took on one of the UDN proposals (out of 12 in the CSOs paper) to fill staffing gaps in Napak district, especially in the Health Sector. This was presented at the pre-budget advocacy and in the inter-ministerial policy meetings. UDN’s participation in the Education Inter-Ministerial Policy meeting also led to the adoption of their alternative proposals to the National Budget Framework Paper and Ministerial Policy statements for FY 2017/18 in which the Education ministry prioritized school inspection in the new Education sector Guidelines for FY 2017/18 to address quality and teacher absenteeism.40 LEMU worked closely with the Ministry of Lands to facilitate joint community education on laws and policies and hence facilitating the registration of twelve Communal Lands Associations (CLAs). This consequently improved management of and enhanced security of tenure within three communities in Amudat as well as the recognition of customary land rights within state establishments. Napak District Local government for example, passed an ordinance for communal grazing land management.
Change Area 2: Responsible private sector engagement at all levels contributing to building a more productive Uganda for the benefit of all of its citizens: it increases productivity, creates access to credits and stimulates business. It employs with fair working conditions and for more people, especially young men and women
According to the Country Programme reports, Private sector partners such as Mukwano Group and Biofresh (now Lishe) have increased understanding of Business and Human Rights, resulting for example in the removal of a clause on the contract between Mukwano and the refugee and host community farmers which had obliged the refugee and host community farmers into sale their sunflower produce solely to Mukwano or face prosecution. DCA-Airtel Uganda Partnership executed monthly humanitarian cash transfers to refugees through a mobile money platform, delivering about $600,000 to 24,000 beneficiaries in the Bidibidi refugee settlement in 2017, a strategy that to a greater extent led to stimulating business and boosting of markets. The literature reviewed during this evaluation suggests that this partnership led to Airtel Uganda to strengthen its electronic and cash infrastructure, which included among others, employment of distributors to manage the liquidity of individual mobile money agents to support large scale disbursements. In this sense, the partnership was mutually beneficial, with the telecom company gaining a tangible foothold in the Northern Uganda market and DCA serving the persons in need through increased accessibility to finance and employment opportunities.41 In addition, Airtel also committed to extend connectivity in Bidibidi settlement42. Project beneficiaries have also been able to get jobs especially through Cash for Work opportunities in stove construction, woodlot maintenance and woodlot establishment. For example, Internship opportunities were offered for recruits into the skills training organized by the partner (DCA) as an Implementing partner for UNHCR in Yangani Carpentry workshop, Yumbe. Another key example is that of Salim Daudi employed the Baraka ya Mungu Woodlot youth Club in Yumbe to plant trees. (Appendix 2: Story 1).
Change Area 3: Leaders at all levels (including cultural and faith-based) positively influence society and institutions. They challenge unfair and abusive practices and promote and support equal rights
The capacity of Faith leaders to challenge shrinking civic space and intolerance of political activism for example through the national dialogue process has increased. Faith leaders have particularly demonstrated increased understanding and articulation of human rights and gender/social justice and are more outspoken on matters of good governance and rule of law. Critical areas where their voices were heard included on the removal of the Presidential Age limit, compulsory
39 Two ladies that were recruited as CDO and the Probation Officer according to the recruitment guidelines and policy. 40 Report- Uganda Debt Network 41 Patrick Meagher Ammar A. Malik Edwarad Mohr Yasemin Irvin-Erickson July 2018 High-Tech Humanitarians, Airtel Uganda’s Partnership with DanChurchAid 42 Page 19. Patrick Meagher Ammar A. Malik Edwarad Mohr Yasemin Irvin-Erickson July 2018 High-Tech Humanitarians, Airtel Uganda’s Partnership with DanChurchAid
20
land acquisition, gender-based violence and the unexplained murders of women43 and the degenerating rule of law in the country. Similarly, male champions have emerged among the religious leaders as agents of change for gender justice. Some of the influencing work was done under the coordination of Inter Religious Council of Uganda (IRCU), Uganda Joint Christian Council (UJCC) and Church of Uganda-Planning, Development & Rehabilitation Department (CoU- PDR) and the different faith structures aligned to them. After several engagements with various stakeholders, the Government of Uganda agreed to fund the national dialogue process aimed at building national consensus on several issues, including the political transition in the country. Based on information from the interviews conducted with CBMs and leaders, there is also a mindset change due to the CP, and the community no longer views dialogue as a project but have started to own the process. This has been seen by their interrogation of things happening and questioning of leaders.
Change Area 4: A strong and vibrant civil society that supports the more vulnerable and marginalized communities to claim their rights and demand accountability. They represent and advocate for these rights at local, national, regional and international levels
CSOs have been able to utilize dialogue to: i) Advocate for rights of marginalized groups: According to information shared by IRCU during the critical reflection workshop of 2019, the working Group of Seven (IRCU, TEFU, CCEDU, IPOD, NCF, WSR and UWONET) organized to meet H.E. President Museveni to brief him on the progress of the UND process. With support from the President, virtually all government officials – and some opposition politicians who had been critical, sceptical, or at best, lukewarm to the Uganda National Dialogue (UND) started to embrace it wholeheartedly, leading to the formation of a new organ (the Uganda National Dialogue Coordinating Team (UNaDiCoT) to spearhead the dialogue process. ii) hold leaders accountable for the taxpayers’ money, example through social accountability by organizations such as COU-TEDDO.
There was also increased CS participation and representation in local and regional budget consultative forums. In the last two FYs, more CSOs have been allotted slots to input into the budget process. These participations consequently benefited rights holders and duty bearers as they were able to acquire knowledge from CSOs and also take part and influence decision making spaces using the same.44
There is increased adoption of gender mainstreaming at the institutional level of CSOs, as well as at operational level such as in the land, food security, and other sectors. For example, gender has now been mainstreamed in the Human Resource policy of the Church of Uganda, while religious leaders are closely working with cultural leaders to challenge harmful traditional practices such as Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and other forms of GBV. Similarly, organizations such as UWONET have continued to strengthen and mentor district women’s networks and community structures to foster dialogue and conversations among communities and duty bearers on rights and responsibilities for better service delivery and protection of women’s rights. Also, the organization has been developing institutional governance capacities of its member organizations, such as Napak Women’s Development Initiative (NWIDE) and Karamoja Women Umbrella Organization (KAWUO).45
Change Area 5: Confident and empowered individuals, especially women and youth, who have the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions in their lives
The target communities are empowered and are actively demanding for services from duty bearers. For example, women caucuses, women’s advocacy, community monitoring, SASA and GBV champions exist within the communities to drive change on social justice and decision making. Amuria Community Monitors indicated that they have observed changes on how citizens can demand accountability from their leaders as evidenced by their demand for services and the questions they now ask their political representatives. “They now talk with a big (strong) and united voice” they shared. In addition, there is increased participation of especially women in leadership positions. For example, due to the training and reflection platforms between the religious and women leaders in Karamoja, a female pastor has (for the first time) been appointed in Napak district. In addition, several women councillors have developed the confidence to engage in decision-making processes. For example, the formation of the four women caucuses of Lotome, Matany, Nadunget and Rupa has given councilors a foundation for presenting and supporting gender-responsive policies and
43 In 2017 over 21 women murders by unknown assailants were recorded in the outskirts of Kampala, their bodies mutilated and dumped in forests or swamps. This was coupled with crimes of passion where the victims were mainly women across the country.
44 UDN Report- Critical Reflection Workshop
21 45 UWONET Report- Critical reflection Workshop
initiatives46. The CP initiatives have also led to the adoption of good practices. Appendix 2: Story 4 shows the story of a woman who was once a Female Genital Mutilator, recognizing the effects of the bad practice, and engaging in better livelihood activities that do not harm marginalized groups. Similarly, communities supported during the COVID-19 pandemic have developed practices of handwashing thus its improved health benefits. The Country Programme also enhanced the participation of vulnerable groups such as women and youth in economic activities such as VSLAs and produce marketing associations. In addition, they have managed to take up leadership roles within their groups. There has also been an increased percentage of women and youth accessing education and employment opportunities.
Change Area 6: Families and households have the capacity and resources to provide secure and sustainable livelihoods for themselves and their communities, and they are resilient to climate change, environmental shocks and conflicts
The evaluation noted that there was economic empowerment of families and households through increased access to finance (VSLAs, SACCOs, and other microfinance institutions), skills (training and awareness sessions conducted), and employment opportunities in tailoring, hairdressing, baking among other vocational skills. Youth also obtained skills in areas such as carpentry, saloon work, and machine repair, that has enabled them start their own businesses and earn incomes example in Karamoja region. For example, 1135 vulnerable youth more than the targeted number of 900 were trained with vocational skills and entrepreneurship in Kotido, Nakapiriprit and Napak districts. Of these, 73% were able to get employment opportunities.47 DCA also contributed to enhancing community building through their engagement of members of the community. The CP enhanced peaceful co-existence, mostly through efforts to increase access to resources, one of the main causes of conflict. Moreover, environmental protection measures have been enhanced through promoting alternative source of energy such as briquette and improved stoves. Besides environmental protection, promotion of alternative sources of energy saves the women from walking long distances in search of firewood which exposes them to risks such as rape, robbery and murder. The CP contributed to the building/rehabilitation of markets and other components and infrastructure of different value chains. This included construction of storage facilities and increase in bulking/stocking centers due to increased production. In addition, service delivery to the refugees has been enhanced through various groups created like the cash for work project groups that are formed provide services in woodlot establishment, stove construction and woodlot maintenance. Furthermore, the CP interventions have contributed to improved self-reliance for refugees and the host communities. Economically, beneficiaries are now growing their own crops to improve food security. They have also engaged in Saving Groups that provide platforms for savings, access to credit. Socially, women have been empowered and no longer rely on the men and the only source of income/ breadwinner. A beneficiary from Karamojong testified about the improvement in independence and resilience in Appendix 2: Story 3.
3.5 SUSTAINABILITY
The extent to which the effects of the programme are expected to last beyond the lifecycle of the programme The programme approaches to ensure sustainability The overall methodology of the Country Programme of capacity building and empowerment of national and local organizations is as an effective pathway towards sustainability. Also, local partners act in their capacities and within their communities such that even with the exit of DCA, they will continue with the work. Moreover, some of the local organisations were already involved in human rights and gender justice work. This alignment of vision with DCA is a guarantee that these organisations will continue with the activities beyond the country programme. In addition, the focus on behavioural change as well as on capacity development of local leadership structures such as CBM, SASA Groups, and Disaster Management Committees, has the potential to achieve lasting effects. The CBMs have for example, been linked to the local government structures and given the mandate and tools to monitor service delivery. Furthermore, DCA and partners have worked with Local Government leaders, community leaders, and Refugee Welfare Committees to ensure that communities actively participate in and own planning and programming processes. Moreover, the direct involvement and participation of beneficiaries, for example, in construction of energy-saving stoves is both empowering and a very good exist strategy for the intervention. Interaction with the various project teams revealed that they had confidence in the community members to apply the acquired knowledge and skills beyond the lifecycle of the country programme. Similarly, DCA implementation through the nexus approach was also a strategy towards sustainability through peaceful co-existence and building self-reliance of refugees through sustainable livelihoods. Partners and projects were facilitated to develop sustainability plans which would then be rolled out in the different locations.
46 Report, UWONET- Critical Reflection Workshop 47 End of Project Report: Empowering Youth through Vocational Training and Entrepreneurship in Karamoja, Uganda: February 2020
22
Existence of exit and sustainability plans and strategies Some organizations working with VSLAs and other groups have registered them with the sub-counties. This linkage makes the groups to be legally recognized by the local authorities and to be recognised by the communities as their own. Exit meetings were also conducted where the continuity of project interventions was handed over to the local government leadership. Caritas Kotido for example linked the youth who benefitted from vocational skills training to the local government Community Development Officers to benefit from opportunities such as the government’s Youth Livelihood Programme (YLP) and Northern Uganda Social Action Fund NUSAF348. The evaluation noted that the implementation of exit strategies was not uniform across the different partners. Moreover, there was minimal follow- up to ensure that all projects under the Country Programme developed and implemented exit and sustainability plans. The consultants did not find evidence of an overall exit and sustainability plan/ strategy for projects at the Country Programme level, besides the one documented in the original programme document. The structure of the annual reports to lesser extent capture steps taken to ensure sustainability at an annual level. The work plan format from the start does not include steps and activities to ensure sustainability by DCA and partners. The critical reflection workshops also to a minimal extent contains discussions on sustainability.
Managerial, technical, and financial readiness to carry on the effects of the Country Programme At Partner level: The Country Programme built the technical capacity of partners through training, networks, linkages, and exposure. The projects implemented in partnership with DCA increased the visibility of the partners in the regions they operated in, as evidenced by information from the interviews conducted. Partners were also linked to various networks and platforms as a sustainability strategy. Partners have the technical knowledge of key aspects of the CP, but have limited funding to take on some of the main interventions of the CP. Also, there is a variation of partner capacity in advocacy. Local and national organizations are also challenged with the ability to co-finance projects. Similarly, CBOS have challenges in retaining skilled staff, which may affect their sustainability.
Local leadership structures: Technical efficiency to a greater extent exists at the duty bearer’s level. For example, Faith-Based Actors utilize their platforms to advocate for rights of marginalized groups, as part of their normal duties. Also, duty bearers are aware of their role and are confident that they will sustain this awareness beyond the life of the CP through participation in trainings, and carrying out, monitoring activities, mentorship and supervision. These structures are however financially constrained to take on interventions from the Country programme.
Community-based Structures: DCA Uganda CP, to a greater extent, provided the necessary skilling to ensure that Community structures such as CBMs and CMDRR can carry out their roles. Also, the spirit of voluntarism instilled in the community structures means that these structures will continue to work with minimal expectation of facilitation. The programme made efforts to link community-based structures to the district structures which will further enhance managerial sustainability. There were also signs of beneficiary ownership of the project. For example, the farmers participating in the BRISK project in South Karamoja are already contributing fuel for the tractors (or to hire tractors) for opening up land for agricultural production.
Social, economic and political factors that are likely to positively or negatively influence sustainability
48 Final project report 2016-2019
23
4.0 CONCLUSION
The CP was highly relevant in responding to the myriad of structural human rights violations in Uganda, as well as national, international and donor needs. The evaluation recognizes the invaluable contribution the CP has made, especially to the overall impact as there was sufficient evidence of achievements of the CP objectives at the outcome level. The period for which the DCA Country Programme (2016-2020) was running was key to the organization, its partners as well as beneficiaries. This is because it experienced a key change in focus that called for robust adjustments in structures, thematic targeting and geographical scope of the CP. Some of these included: 1) Inclusion of the humanitarian aspect/self-implementation within the Country Programme 2) Partnerships and localization; 3) Environment and Energy 4) More involvement of FBOs; 5) and the nexus approach. DCA is therefore commended for demonstrating high levels of flexibility and innovativeness in humanitarian work while continuously producing the required output and results within its development interventions. This will inform the new CP especially in strengthening the organisation’s involvement in humanitarian work, formulation of objectives and revision of the ToC.
This evaluation noted that much as there is progress in the achievement of synergies across the programme, partners in the Fight and Save to a lesser extent complement each other in achieving CP objectives compared to Fight and Build especially geographically. Efforts are being made to identify local partners to support implementation of humanitarian response (Save). This evaluation noted that in order for projects to complement each other thematically, the new CP should look at three key goals; (i) Fighting extreme inequality (ii) Building livelihoods and enhancing self- reliance and (iii) Building resilience to Conflict, Environmental & Energy challenges. The new CP should consider documentation of exit and sustainability strategies at a higher level that all projects will be subjected to. DCA implemented about 41 projects in 22 districts of Uganda over the CP period. These were highly relevant for the achievement of the overall impact or goal of the CP.
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Scale Up Innovation and Best Practice The new CP should incorporate aspects of implementation adopted during the previous CP period, including the nexus, digitization, among others. In addition, DCA should develop a database for tracking records on projects implemented under the CP portfolio with their thematic areas and Implementing Partners. This will ease monitoring and reporting. Projects should clearly be documented according to the respective goals, their progress and how they complement each other geographically, thematically and in targeting. Also, a database should be developed to monitor partner compliance with policies and processes. DCA should scale up documentation of innovation and best practice for learning and advocacy. In addition, DCA and partners develop clear Exit and Sustainability Strategies for programmes and projects.
2. Improve effectiveness of the ToC as an approach for assessing desired changes A documented narrative of the new CP ToC should always be available to guide in understanding of the pathways. The ToC should incorporate humanitarian response pathways, especially pathways that show the synergy between its contribution to women participation, partnerships, and private sector responsiveness among others. The ToC should be simplified so that progress towards the change areas can easily be assessed. In line with this, DCA and partners should hold discussions to adjust the targeting of the overall impact of the CP. Finally, there is need to strengthen the use of the DAC criteria and the Log frame to systematically track the progress at the Country programme level to complement the ToC and to enrich strategic thinking. This is especially concerning the incorporation of more quantitative indicators. Partners need to be encouraged to localize their project ToCs into the larger picture of the Country Programme ToC.
3. Adjust the Staff structure to suit implementation of the CP The CP should hire a Knowledge Management and Communications staff to facilitate the documentation of key learnings and improve knowledge management for continual improvement. Relatedly, DCA and partners should prioritize annual staff assessments to determine staff satisfaction and utilize the results to identify solutions for staff retention. This is essential for achieving a positive impact and to facilitate learning. Priority needs to be given to strengthening the MEAL function.
4. Strengthen Partnerships for effectiveness of Programme Delivery In the effort to build the capacity of partners, DCA should also ensure close partner supervision. Fight Extreme inequality interventions should be scaled-up in the humanitarian setting, through introduction of partnerships and specialized projects.
24
5. Strength the role of Local and Cultural Leaders as agents of change The CP should involve local and cultural leaders more (to complement Faith Leaders) in creating mindset change. This is in addition to addressing the partner capacity gaps that emerged during the evaluation as well as those that are identified through on-going partner capacity assessments.
6. Explore new approaches and intervention areas based on context and situation analysis DCA should scale up the nexus approach and consider reprioritization of livelihoods alongside E&E. To increase the effectiveness of the nexus approach, projects could begin with emergency livelihood enhancement within the initial 6 months. The CP should identify a set of indicators that classify projects as a nexus (double, or triple) and use these to identify and categories key interventions that cut across SAVE, BUILD and FIGHT goals. DCA should incorporate a system for a comprehensive and streamlined annual Code of Conduct surveys to ensure that there is documented evidence that staff and partners are implementing per CHS and other accountability mechanisms.
7. Strengthen and scale up the Nexus approach To increase the effectiveness of the nexus approach, DCA should ensure that projects begin with the emergency livelihood enhancement as the first support within the initial 6 months, before introducing long-term livelihood interventions. The CP should, in addition, identify indicators to classify projects as a nexus (double, or triple) and use these indicators to identify and categorize key interventions that cut across the three goals.
8. Strengthen Localization, including attracting more private sector actors Identify more local partners especially in achieving the Save aspect of the CP. DCA should conduct business analyses to demonstrate the mutual benefits accruing from private sector engagement. DCA should facilitate capacity building of local partners to update their internal procedures to align to Government and external donor requirements as well as training agency staff helps promote more sustained internal control procedures.
9. Consolidate and Diversify Environmental and Climate Change interventions Environment interventions should be diversified to cover areas of waste management, employment innovations, and provision of alternative lighting energy in form of solar, biogas and preservation and restoration of vegetation cover. DCA should increase its areas of coverage geographically to allow more people benefit.
10. Strengthen the Rights Based Approach There is a need for continuous awareness raising to rights holders on their rights and the different ways in which they can hold their leaders accountable. There is also a need to scale up on dialogues with duty bearers on how they can better assist the marginalized groups to ensure that no one is left behind.
6.0 LESSONS LEARNT
1. The annual yearly critical reflection workshops are highly relevant and effective for programme management, experience sharing, obtaining feedback on implementation, and for continual learning and improvement. 2. Involvement of FBOs is a good strategy as they are trusted by and can reach many people 3. An in-depth contextual analysis and consultations with the district, sector experts as well as the community is necessary before project design and implementation. 4. Institutions such as schools, prisons and hospitals are a good platform for advocacy and promotion of E&E work. 5. There is high relevance in the involvement of the end-users in the implementation process as community facilitators, trainees who also take part in decision making and provide feedback. 6. There are a number of actors that are implementing similar or related interventions. As such, collaborations are necessary to minimize duplication and wastage of resources and also provide complementary support. 7. Government is responsive and has the goodwill for collaborative, e. through provision of technical support 8. VSLA and Cash for work approach have positive effects on livelihood and have proved to be sustainable. 9. Challenges in coordination and variation in systems within consortium arrangements are minimized when the lead agency is an independent organization. 10. The use of local partners, and local structures is a sustainable approach for implementing interventions. 11. For sustainability, the involvement of youth and children is necessary as they form the future generation. 12. The implementation of interventions through use of partnerships allows for utilization of competitive advantage. This is because different interventions are implemented based on the partners’ areas of specialization. 13. Localization partnerships require that both parties’ interests overlap enough to take on each other’s risks. This will inform the procedures, goals and interventions used for the different partners. 14. Even though initiatives are made to empower partners to implement on their own, partnership arrangements require close monitoring to ensure compliance with outcome requirements.
25
7.0 ANNEXES
7.1 Annex 1: List of Abbreviations and Acronyms BRISK Building Resilience in Southern Karamoja C&D Cooperation and Development CBM Community Based Monitor CBMES Community based Monitoring and Evaluation Systems CBO Community Based Organisation CD Country Director CHS Core Humanitarian Standards CMDRR Community Managed disaster risk reduction CoC Code of Conduct COU-TEDDO Church of Uganda Teso Dioceses Planning and Development Office COVID-19 Coronavirus 2019
CP Country Programme CRRF Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework CSBAG Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group CSO Civil Society Organisation DAC Development Assistance Committee DCA DanChurchAid DEO District Environment Officer DRR Disaster Risk Reduction E&E Environment & Energy ECHO Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection ED Executive Director EU European Union FBA Faith Based Actors FBO Faith Based Organisations FGD Focus Group Discussions FGM Female Genital Mutilation GBV Gender Based Violence GIRBA Gender Inclusive Rights-Based Approaches ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights KII Key Informant Interviews LC Local Council LEMU Land and Equity Movement in Uganda NDP National Development Plan NGO Non-Governmental Organisation OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OPM Office of the Prime Minister OSIEA The Open Society Initiative for Eastern Africa PSEA Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse SASA Start Awareness Support Action SDG Sustainable Development Goals
SOCADIDO Soroti Catholic Diocese Integrated Development Organisation STA Settlement Transformation Agenda SVSLA Village Savings and Loans Association ToC Theory of Change TPO Transcultural Psychosocial Organization UDN Uganda Debt Network UN United Nations UNFCCC The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for refugees UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund UPDF Uganda People's Defence Force UWONET Uganda Women’s Network
7.2 Annex 2: Evaluation Questions Evaluation Criteria Key issues to be discussed during the End Key issues to be discussed during the End Line Assessment Line Assessment (Sub- evaluation Question) (Main evaluation Question)
Relevance: We shall examine the extent to which 1. To what extent is the country programme To what extent is the intervention aligned with international human rights the country programme strategy is relevant to the strategy relevant to the needs identified, instruments and principles (including relevant international law for needs identified, especially related to the especially related to the structural causes of humanitarian and disaster response)? and with national and local rights violations in Uganda? structural causes of rights violations in Uganda as frameworks that advance human rights and gender equality? well as the funder’s goals and intentions. We shall 2. To what extent is the country programme What is the added value and relevance of using the ToC approach with specifically evaluate the significance of the portfolio relevant to the country partners for planning and as a yearly programme reflection and programme objectives? programme management tool? project approaches, strategies and models to To what extent are the projects contributing to the country programme meeting the needs of the target communities, the pathway (theory of change)? In what way do the projects and partners extent to which the project is aligned to the complement each other in achieving the country programme goals national and international development priorities (geographically, targeting, thematically, etc.)? and DCA’s global development agenda and goal DCA Learning Priority (Climate Change): To what extent is climate of Saving Lives, Building Resilient Communities adaptation and mitigation appropriately integrated in the programme and and Fighting Extreme Inequality and as well laid what are the key outcomes and learning? Please have a special focus on ground for cross-cutting themes of environment, learnings from DCAs mitigation work (2019-2020) with environment and energy activities in settlements areas child protection, peacebuilding (social cohesion) To what extent has the programme contributed to preparedness and response in relation to humanitarian response? To what extent has the DCA programme been able to adapt and support delivery of humanitarian response when needed according to established quality and accountability standards (e.g. CHS and Sphere)? DCA Learning Priority (Partnership): How has the country programme engaged with faith-based actors in programming and advocacy? Is the balance between secular organisations and faith-based organisations relevant? Effectiveness: We shall examine the extent to 3. To what extent were the country To what extent were the participation and accountability mechanisms which the programme has achieved its objectives, programme objectives achieved at used effective at engaging rights-holders by DCA and by partners? outcome and goals and the effectiveness of the outcome level? DCA Learning Priority (Nexus): To what extent is the country
various projects activities, strategies and programme embracing a nexus approach? How is that contributing to the programme’s effectiveness? approaches in achieving the programme To what extent has the programme tested and effectively adopted objectives. Additionally, we shall identify the key innovative approaches, technologies etc? internal and external factors that have influenced 4. How have partnerships been established or How are the partners involved in decision-making and what are their the achievement or non-achievement of the enhanced as a result of the country decision-making powers in the planning and implementation of the
programme objectives and the effectiveness of programme? (DCA and partners, partners country programme including the cross cutting activities? To what extent the design, planning, delivery and management of and rights holders, rights holders and duty does DCA deliver adequate capacity support (including responsiveness) the projects by consortium partners. The main bearers, and partners among themselves?) for project implementation and organisational strengthening, particularly with regards to capacity development to the partners? focus will be on the comparison of projects How have the partners contributed to the achievement of the various targeted outputs, outcomes and impacts as aspects of the country programme ToC? specified in the project baseline versus the DCA Learning Priority (Localisation): What are the challenges and achieved at project completion. opportunities in operationalising localisation in the programme? How did DCA contribute to reinforcing the ability of local and national actors and partners to deliver on needs in an effective and timely fashion? To what extent has the country programme enabled the partners’ and DCA’s advocacy work with other relevant actors, e.g. facilitation of networks etc? What evidence is there to show that DCA and partners have actively sought new partnerships and knowledge resources during the progress of the programme as new needs have arisen? Efficiency: 5. Has the country programme approach been a To what extent are the interventions cost-effective and the resources used cost-efficient way to implement DCA’s in an efficient way? We shall carry out a comprehensive analysis to humanitarian and development assistance? DCA Learning Priority (Partnership): where relevant, what are the key examine whether the programme and project learnings from working in partnerships vs. self-implementation? results have been achieved at a minimum cost. To what extent DCA coordinated its programs to ongoing similar Specifically, we shall assess how economically interventions by other agencies? How? the project resources (funds, personnel, time, How does its funding partners see DCA in terms of efficiency of resource utilization and competitiveness? logistics, etc. are being utilized and converted into To what extent is DCA a learning, flexible, and innovative organization target results to ascertain value-for-money – both from its own programs and other similar agencies
Impact: 6. What has been the positive and negative Transparent, accountable and responsive government authorities impact at rights-holders and duty bearers level have the capacity, resources and political will to develop, implement and We shall seek to examine and establish both (outcome) directly or indirectly? What are the enforce policies, which priorities the needs and rights of vulnerable and qualitative and quantitative impact of the project intended and unintended changes across the six marginalized communities. Responsible private sector engagement at all levels contributing to against its expected results. Focus shall be put on (6) priority areas? examining positive or negative, intended or building a more productive Uganda for the benefit of all of its citizens: it increases productivity, creates access to credits and stimulates business. It unintended, direct or indirect, immediate or long- provides employment with fair working conditions and for more people, term impact at rights-holders and duty bearers especially young men and women level (outcome)
Leaders at all levels (including cultural and faith based) positively influence society and institutions. How do they challenge unfair and abusive practices, and promote and support the equal rights of all. A strong and vibrant civil society that supports the more vulnerable and marginalized communities to claim their rights and demand accountability. They represent and advocate for these rights at local, national, regional and international levels Confident and empowered individuals, especially women and youth, who have the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions in their lives. Families and households have the capacity and resources to provide secure and sustainable livelihoods for themselves and their communities, and they are resilient to climate change, environmental shocks and conflicts. Sustainability: 7. To what extent can the effects of the To what extent are target groups managerially, technically and financially programme be expected to last beyond the ready to carry on the effects of the programme We shall document the steps that have been taken lifecycle of the programme? Social, economic, environmental and political factors that are likely to towards sustainability of the project’s benefits/ positively or negatively influence sustainability of the programme results results and the likelihood of continuation of Sustainability in the six change areas of the country programme programme benefits/results after the end of the project. We shall specifically examine the existence of sustainable mechanisms and exit strategies that are in place, the extent to which the project’s beneficiaries and institutions both at national, district and regional level are technically, financially and managerially prepared to take on with the project’s benefits and activities after the project lifetime.
7.3 Annex 3: Evaluation Matrix 1. RELEVANCE
KEY QUESTION: RQ1.1 To what extent is the country programme strategy relevant to the needs identified, especially related to the structural causes of rights violations in Uganda? Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Interventions are implemented Extent to which needs assessments and evaluations were Project and programme baseline/ Literature Review based on pre-identified needs and a carried out prior to implementation needs assessment reports KIIs pre-existing problem especially Presence of needs especially in structural causes of rights Literature from online sources related to causes of rights violations in Uganda prior to the project violations
2. Approaches and strategies of Extent to which approaches used address gaps in structural Project and programme baseline/ Literature Review implementation are relevant to causes of rights violations needs assessment reports needs identified Extent to which contextual factors were incorporated in the Programme Document and programme strategies strategic Plan Extent to which characteristics of target groups were incorporated in the programme strategies and approaches
Sub Questions
RQ 1.1.1: To what extent is the intervention aligned with international human rights instruments and principles (including relevant international law for humanitarian and disaster response) and with national and local frameworks that advance human rights and gender equality? Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. The objectives and goals of the intervention are aligned List of international human rights instruments and Policy Docments Literature Review with international human rights instruments and principles principles, national & local frameworks that are (including relevant international law for humanitarian and applicable to humanitarian response The Programme disaster response) and with national and local frameworks Extent to which objectives and goals of the country Document that advance human rights and gender equality. programme capture aspects of the above listed human rights and gender equality 2. The implementation approaches/ activities of the Extent to which activities implemented and Policy Documents Literature Review intervention are aligned with international human rights approaches for implementation consider and promote instruments and principles (including relevant the rights of target groups and gender equality The Programme international law for humanitarian and disaster response) Presence of DCA programme Human rights and Document and with national and local frameworks that advance Gender strategies/ documents to guide implementation human rights and gender equality of the country programme
Extent to which national/ international human rights & policy actors were involved/ engaged in discussions of the programme interventions and approaches used
KEY QUESTION: RQ1.2 To what extent is the country programme portfolio relevant to the country programme objectives?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection DCA portfolio focuses on thematic Portfolio goals are aligned to DCA country programme objectives Policy Docments Literature Review areas of the programme objectives Programme Document
Sub Questions RW 1.2.1: What is the added value and relevance of using the ToC approach with partners for planning and as a yearly programme reflection and programme management tool?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. The programme utilized the ToC Extent to which the ToC approach addressed gaps in project management ToC objectives and Literature Review approach with partners for Extent to which reflection workshops were organised and level of workshop Reports planning and as a yearly participation of partners and DCA Reports, partners and programme reflection tool Extent to which action points of the workshops were implemented and DCA incorporated by partners and DCA KIIs & FGDs
2. DCA & partners used the ToC Partners understand, own and used the ToC in project implementation approach to solve obstacles in Presence of evidence of Partners and DCA that report experienced value programme implemntation addition due to the use of the ToC Partners and DCA KIIs & FGDs
RQ 1.2.2: To what extent are the projects contributing to the country programme pathway (theory of change)? In what way do the projects and partners complement each other in achieving the country programme goals (geographically, targeting, thematically, etc.)?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. Goals, objectives, componets and Extent to which goals and objectives of partners and projects capture the need the results of the projects are to increase women and young people participation in decision making processes aligned to the overall goals of the and holding their leaders accountable for the delivery of improved services, the Project proposals and Literature Review country programme theory protection of their rights and for equitable development Programme ToC Extent to which goals and objectives of partners and projects capture then need document to for more marginalised communities having secure access to land and are producing adequate food for household consumption, generate income, and are resilient to conflict, environmental and climate change challenges. Extent to which goals and objectives of partners and projects capture the need for refugees and displaced persons have access to life-saving and socio- economic services for self-reliance, sustainable livelihoods and fulfilment of their rights 2. DCA country programme Evidence of presence and use of Criteria for selection of DCA partners in Programme ToC Literature Review maintains a mix of partners and relation to goals of the country programme portfolio document projects that each utilize their Extent to which Partnership and project portfolio enables DCA reach all target Selection areas of expertise to contribute to groups identified in the ToC documents of the overall goals and objectives of Extent to which Partnership and project portfolio enables DCA cover partners KIIs the country programme geographical scope in areas with the most need DCA programme Group Interviews Extent to which partners were committed and worked together to achieve goals staff of the ToC through inhouse collaborations Project Reports and partners R3 1.2.3: DCA Learning Priority (Climate Change): To what extent is climate adaptation and mitigation appropriately integrated in the programme and what are the key outcomes and learning? Please have a special focus on learnings from DCAs mitigation work (2019-2020) with environment and energy activities in settlements areas
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. The country programme design Extent to which the country programme integrates aspects of climate change in Programme Literature Review integrates aspects of climate its goals, vision and ToC Document change and mitigation Extent to which objectives and activities of projects target the need and support Project Documents in climate adaptation and mitigation strategies 2. DCA adequately identified and Evidence of activities were implemented to increase climate change adaptation Project reports Literature Review KIIs responded to needs in climate and mitigation across country programme and projects Project reports and with actors change adaptation and mitigation Extent to which actors in climate, environment and energy were adequately actors involved during programme implementation Staff who Outcomes and learning from implementation of work in mitigation implemented mitigaton work KIIs
RQ 1.2.4: To what extent has the programme contributed to preparedness and response in relation to humanitarian response? To what extent has the DCA programme been able to adapt and support delivery of humanitarian response when needed according to established quality and accountability standards (e.g. CHS and Sphere)?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
The country programme design Extent to which the country programme integrates aspects of humanitarian Programme Literature Review integrates aspects of humanitarian response in its goals, vision and ToC Document response Extent to which objectives and activties of projects incorporate aspects of humanitarian response in its goals, vision and ToC Extent to which programme results and outcomes responded to crisis and needs Project Documents of / objectives of humanitarian frameworks and strategies Annual Reports
The humanitarian response Presence of evidence of humanitarian actors being involved in implementation Actors and donors in KIIs component built capacity in through partnerships and collaborations humanitarian response preparedness and response Actors in humanitarian response report improved benefit and value addition due Project reports to participation of DCA in humanitarian response Programme documents Extent to which humanitarian target groups were supported Extent to which objectives of the Humanitarian Response Plan and the ACT Literature Review Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan were implemented
DCA implemented humanitarian Evidence of incorporation of standards in implementation plans and extent to Programme Document Literature Review response projects were effectively which interventions followed these standards Implementation plans implemented in accordance to CHS Extent to which compliance with quality and accountability standards were M&E reports and KII and sphere as well as other monitored and results used to improve programming in humanitarian response programme reports accountability standards Humanitarian Action Partners are using the CHS when responding to crisis and Programme/ partner have active complaints mechanisms and Staff Code of Conducts (complaint staff FGDs mechanisms and CoC) Target groups
DCA builds country programme Extent to which staff capacity was built to handle humanitarian reponse Programme reports Literature Review capacity to implement humanitarian especially in accordance with quality ahd accountability standards Programme/ partner response Level to which the programme developed documents to ensure that staff KIIs implementation is guided by quality and accountability standards Group Interviews
RQ 1.2.5: DCA Learning Priority (Partnership): How has the country programme engaged with faith-based actors in programming and advocacy? Is the balance between secular organisations and faith based organisations relevant.
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. DCA partners with faith based Presence of activities/ components of the project being implemented by faith Programme and project Literature Review organisations and actors in based organisations documents programming Extent to which the country programme facilitated advocacy activities of faith Project and annual based organisations and actors programme reports Extent to which Faith based actors were involved in activities and Faith based actors programming Percentage of partners under DCA country programmes with advocacy strategic plans with updated annual targets and percentage that have implemented them KIIs
2. Country programme maintains an Number and contribution from and to faith based organisations compared to Project/ programme Literature review appropriate mix of secular number and contributions from and to secular organisations of the country document and reports organisations and faith based programme actors 3. Country programme experiences Evidence of collaborations as well as evidence of benefits of work with Faith Project reports Literature Review additional value from work with based actors/ with secular organisations Faith Based Actors KIIGroup Interviews both secular and faith based Evidence of each of the categories of organisations addressing a gap that the Secular organisations organisations other could not 2. EFFECTIVENESS
KEY QUESTION: RQ2.1 To what extent were the country programme objectives achieved at outcome level?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. The country programme led to Extent to which target groups demonstrate improved knowledge of Human Programme progress Literature Review enhanced capacity and awareness Rights, and gender equitable Governance indicted by participation/advocacy/ and evaluation reports on rights and responsibilities of collaborations in the particular topics areas. The country programme KIIs marginalized groups especially contributed to rights-holders increasing their enjoyment of their rights women and young people to Extent to which target groups build strong, civic and social networks that Programme and FGDs effectively participate in decision demand for accountability and gender equitable service delivery from Duty project target groups making processes and demand for bearers. Communities and civil society have increased engagement in evidence Most significant gender equitable governance. gathering, documentation, advocacy and decision-making at all levels. Stories of Change DCA Learning Priority (Rights-based approach): To what extent have the interventions contributed to the empowerment of rights-holders to claim or
access their rights and entitlements; and of duty-bearers to fulfil their obligations? Number of actions taken by Duty Bearer’s towards gender equitable governance, needs and demands of the marginalised groups. At least 4 key governmental reforms realised to which DCA partners have contributed for facilitating a more transparent and inclusive governance process 2. More marginalized communities Extent to which households have improved livelihoods to enable them cope with Programme progress Literature Review are supported to increase food shocks and increase their food security. and evaluation reports security and strengthen their Extent to which the country programme empowered men, women and youth Programme/ project KIIs resilience to conflict, environment able to hold government accountable for transparent allocation of resources and target groups and climate change challenges. implementation of appropriate development policies. Partners, institutional FGDs Extent to which the country programme enhanced capacity of partners and structures selected institutional structures to deliver effective and timely humanitarian Most significant response and recovery interventions. Stories of Change Group Interviews
3. Refugees and displaced person More people especially women and young people have employment/ they can Programme progress Literature Review has access to life saving and generate income. and evaluation reports social-Economic services for self- Host, displaced and refugee communities are producing enough food for their Programme/ project KIIs reliance ,sustainable livelihoods own needs and surplus for storage and sale. target groups FGDs and fulfilment of their rights Host, displaced and refugee communities have developed adaptive and Most significant mitigation capacity to climate change variabilities and shocks. Stories of Change
Sub Questions
RQ 2.1.1 To what extent were the participation and accountability mechanisms used effective at engaging rights-holders by DCA and by partners?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. DCA & partners establish and Evidence of regular feedback mechanisms established Reports Literature Review utilise participation and Evidence of appropriate complaint mechanisms are in place accountability mechanisms in Effective reporting channels on project implementation Target Groups FGD programming? Involvement in decision making Regular information sharing 2. Accountability and Participation Level of participation of rights holders in country programme activities Reports Literature Review channels increase rights holders involvement in the programme
Target Groups FGD
RQ 2.1.2 DCA Learning Priority (Nexus): To what extent is the country programme embracing a nexus approach? How is that contributing to the programme’s effectiveness?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. The DCA country programme Extent to which implementation of interventions are carried out in both Programme reports Literature Review implements the development- humanitarian and development contexts (activities, target groups etc) and extent humanitarian nexus approach to which collaborations and involvemnts were made for both humanitarian and development actors The DCA country programme implements other nexus in thematic components Programme staff KIIs of the programme and extent to which these actors are involved 2. The Nexus approach leads to Evidence of benefits of the approach in terms of levels of achievement and Programme reports Literature Review achievement of project results and characteristics of the approach that led to these achievements benefits Lessons sharing and best practices from the nexus approach are utilised in programming Extent to which the approach led to increased value addition to partners and Programme staff KIIs DCA Partners
RQ 2.1.3: To what extent has the programme tested and effectively adopted innovative approaches, technologies etc?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. The programme has tested and Evidence of innovations within the programme Programme and project Literature Review effectively adopted innovative Evidence of technologies adopted within the programme reports approaches, technologies Project partners Group Interviews Duty bearers KIIs Rights holders & Focus Group target groups Discussions
KEY QUESTION: RQ2.2 How have partnerships been established or enhanced as a result of the country programme? (DCA and partners, partners and rights holders, rights holders and duty bearers, and partners among themselves?)
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
2. DCA programme creates channels, Extent to which meetings, workshops, forum and other networking events Programme and project Literature Review platforms and initiatives for were organised and facilitated to enhance partnerships reports maintenance and enhancement of Extent to which the programme design facilitates and other channels were these partnerships created and facilitated to enable establishments of partnerships across different groups Project partners Extent to which MoUs with partners encourage partnerships with other groups Duty bearers Evidence, number, rationale and form of establishment of partnerships between Rights holders & Group Interviews DCA and its partners target groups Evidence, number, rationale and form of establishment of partnerships between KIIs partners and rightsholders Evidence, number, rationale and form of establishment of partnerships between Focus Group rightsholders and duty bearers Discussions Evidence, number, rationales and form of establishment of partnerships between DCA partners Evidence, number and rationales of other forms of partnerships
Sub Questions
RQ 2.2.1 How are the partners involved in decision-making and what are their decision-making powers in the planning and implementation of the country programme including the cross cutting activities? To what extent does DCA deliver adequate capacity support (including responsiveness) for project implementation and organisational strengthening, particularly with regards to capacity development to the partners?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. Partners are involved in decision Extent to which opinions of partners are sought in planning and Country programme KII making and have decision making implementation of the country programme as well as analysis of the decision staff powers in planning and making structure in the programme Partner staff implementation of the country Extent of open and free communication, as well as establishedand streamlined Annual programme programme including the cross- communication channels with partners reports Group Interviews cutting acitvities Extent to which feedback from the partners are incorporated in decision communication making processes strategies, minutes Literature review Client satisfaction with the overall transparency, communication and involvement in decision making
2. DCA delivers adequate capacity Extent to which DCA facilitated capacity building initiatives and exchange Capacity building KII support (including learning platforms across the different organizations reports and responsiveness) for project Extent to which DCA enabled knowledge and capacity of partners to be built programme reports Group Interview implementation and on their roles in the decision making process MoUs and partnership organisational strengthening, agreements Literature review particularly with regards to capacity development to the partners RQ 2.2.2: How have the partners contributed to the achievement of the various aspects of the country programme ToC?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Partners have fulfilled their roles Extent to which Partners Reviewed, analysed and contributed to the legal and Partner evaluation and Literature Review as outlined in the ToC institutional frameworks activity reports FGDs Extent to which partners built capacity of national government and non state Target groups KIIs actors on roles, responsibilities and technical skills Extent to which partners provided training on advocacy for CSOs at national and district level Extent to which partners facilitated development and running of networks and platforms on issues of common concern Extent to which partners Facilitated Grassroot, national and International linkages Extent to which partners Sensitised media on issues of rights abuse (exclusion , land rights and food security) Extent to which partners engaged religious and Cultural leaders on their potential influence in changing negative attitudes, norms and practices Extent to which partners provided training and awareness to community farmers on food rights and governance
Extent to which partners conducted Training of marginalized women, men and youth on agro ecology, climate smart agriculture and other approaches on market development Extent to which partners engaged with local and national business to encourage support & investment in alternative technologies & food production opportunities Extent to which partners facilitated market development, value addition for target producers
2. Partners roles lead to achievements 3. Extent to which partners involvement led to changes as shown in the ToC Report Literature Revie of aspects of theory of change 4. To what extent were the 5. Accountability and participation mechanisms are used by partners and DCA Partner Reports Literature review participation and accountability and how this contributed to the ToC mechanisms used effective at engaging rights-holders by DCA and by partners? RQ 2.2.3: DCA Learning Priority (Localisation): What are the challenges and opportunities in operationalising localisation in the programme? How did DCA contribute to reinforcing the ability of local and national actors and partners to deliver on needs in an effective and timely fashion?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. DCA operationalizes localization Extent to which implementation interventions were localised DCA Programme staff KII in the programme Challenges and gaps faced under localisation in terms of structural, managerial, Programme documents resource, among others and reports Literature Review Opportunities created by localisation of implementation 2. DCA Country programme Extent to which the country programme offered technical, managerial and Partner staff Group interview addressed gaps of local, national financial support to local, national actors and partners to enable them deliver Partner reports Literature Review actors and partners to enable them on needs Local and national KIIs deliver on needs effectively Extent to which capacity activities and training was offered to local, national actors actors and partners to enable them deliver on needs The intervention contributed to institutional changes (changes in laws, policies, practices, resource levels) for furthering human rights and gender equality
RQ 2.2.4: To what extent has the country programme enabled the partners’ and DCA’s advocacy work with other relevant actors, e.g. facilitation of networks etc?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. The country programme provided Extent to which meetings/ workshops/ events were organised and facilitated 1. Project annual Literature review platforms for support of partners under the country programme to enable partners discuss and share with other reports KIIs and DCA advocacy work actors Group Interviews
Number of collaborations created with other actors and the category of actors 2. Programme Percentage of partners under DCA country programmes supported to develop annual reports advocacy strategic plans with updated annual targets and percentage that have 3. Project Partners implemented them
RQ 2.2.5: What evidence is there to show that DCA and partners have actively sought new partnerships and knowledge resources during the progress of the programme as new needs have arisen?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. New needs arise during DCA & Partners document, discuss and share the need arising DCA & Partner staff KII implementation of the country DCA & Partners document, discuss and share finfings on mapping of potential DCA & Partner Reports Group Interview programme partners to adress this need Literature Review
2. DCA and partners actively seek Extent to which DCA & partners shared findings on the potential needs with a DCA & Partner staff KII new partnerships and knowledge wider audience DCA & Partner Reports Group Interview resources Extent to which DCA & Partners made efforts to contact potential partners and Literature knowledge resources
3. EFFICIENCY
KEY QUESTION 3.1 Has the country programme approach been a cost-efficient way to implement DCA’s humanitarian and development assistance?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. The programme utilized the Allocation of a high percentage of the budget towards programme target Project Document Literature Review programme budget to mainly groups and humanitarian and development assistance Project Budget achieve programme outcomes 2. The country programme provided Approaches to provide assistance led to high achievements at minimum Project Document Literature review humanitarian and development costs. Project Budget assistance to target groups
Sub Questions RQ 3.1.1: To what extent are the interventions cost-effective and the resources used in an efficient way?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection
1. Extent to which the programme Projects achieved DCA country programme goals using the available Project Document Literature review minimized costs in resources and these were strategically allocated Project Budget implementation Extent to which achievement of the same results can be obtained with fewer Programme reports resources Evidence of maximization of financing streams and identification of alternative financing channels by partners and DCA Quality of outputs 2. Timeliness in implementation of level of Programme completion (%) at time of evaluation compared to the Project Document Literature review interventions overall workplan Project Budget Evidence of delays during implementation, the causes and how these were Programme Reports solved
RQ 3.1.2: DCA Learning Priority (Partnership): Where relevant, what are the key learnings from working in partnerships vs. self-implementation?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection DCA worked with partners to achieve Evidence of contribution of partners Partners Group Interviews country programme outcomes Level of achievments due to partnerships Programme staff KII Challenges/ existence of gaps in partnerships Programme documents Literature Review Best practices used by DCA & Partners DCA carried out self-implementation Level of achievemtns due to self implementation Partners Group Interviews to achieve country programme Challenges/ existence of gaps with self- implementation Programme staff KII outcomes Best practices adopted in self-implementation Programme documents Literature Review RQ 3.1.3: To what extent DCA coordinated its programs to ongoing similar interventions by other agencies? How?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection DCA identified similar interventions Evidence of lessons learnt/ best practices adopted from similar interventions Partners Group Interviews implemented by other agencies Level of attendance of technical meetings example working groups meetings Programme staff KII Extent to which DCA programme interventions are duplicates in areas of Programme documents Literature Review implementation Other agencies DCA partnered with other agencies Level of sharing of information and findings with other agencies Partners Group Discussion implementing similar interventions implementing similar interventions Programme staff KII Extent to which DCA and partners implemnted interventions jointly with Programme documents Literature Review other agencies and how this led to improved efficiency Other agencies Level of involvement of other agencies in interventions RQ 3.1.4: How does its funding partners see DCA in terms of efficiency of resource utilization and competitiveness?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Partners see DCA as efficient in Funding partners report positively about DCA programme Funding Partners Literature Review resource utilisation Partners increase percentage contribution to the DCA country programme Reports from Funding KII Extent of timely disbursement of funding to DCA Partners Programme Documents 2. Partners see DCA as competitive Funding partners continue to work with and fund DCA projects Funding Partners Literature Review Extent to which funding partners withdraw funds from DCA Reports from Funding KII Partners Programme Documents RQ 3.1.5: To what extent is DCA a learning, flexible, and innovative organization – both from its own programs and other similar agencies?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. DCA incorporates lessons learnt Evidence of lessons learnt incorporated in other programmes Programme staff KII from its own programs in Programme reports Literature review implementation 2. DCA is flexible and innovative Evidence and number of innovations by DCA Programme staff KII organisation Programme reports Literature review 3. DCA incorporates lessons learnt Evidence of lessons learnt incorporated in other programmes Programme staff KII and best practices from other Programme reports Literature review similar agencies
1. IMPACT
KEY QUESTION RQ: 4.1 What has been the positive and negative impact at rights-holders and duty bearers level (outcome) directly or indirectly across the six areas of change in the country programme? What are the intended and unintended changes?
Area 1: Transparent, accountable and responsive government authorities have the capacity, resources and political will to develop, implement and enforce policies, which prioritises the needs and rights of vulnerable and marginalized communities. Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Transparent, accountable and Accountability mechanisms were strengthened Programme reports Literature Review responsive government authorities Government authorities are responsive to feedback and issues arising from the and country status FGD exist. communities they serve reports KII Records exist and are easily accessible Target groups Government authorities
2. They have the capacity, resources Policies, which prioritises the needs and rights of vulnerable and marginalized Programme reports and Literature Review and political will to develop, communities are included in budgets of government authorities country status FGD implement and enforce policies, Authorities are better performing their duties and obligations Government records KII which prioritises the needs and Authorities prioritise needs and promote rights of vulnerable and marginalised and budgets rights of vulnerable and communities on their own and allocate resources to support these Target groups marginalized communities. Government authorities Area 2: Responsible private sector engagement at all levels contributing to building a more productive Uganda for the benefit of all of its citizens: it increases productivity, creates access to credits and stimulates business. It provides employment with fair working conditions and for more people, especially young men and women Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Responsible private sector Increased productivity of the private sector in Uganda country status and Literature review engagement at all levels district reports contributing to building a more productive Uganda 2. Responsible private sector Increased access to credit by especially marginalized groups country status and Literature review engagement at all levels creates Increase in institutions providing credit sevices district reports access to credits and stimulates Evidence of business stimulation due to access to increased credit facilities business. 3. Responsible private sector Creation of employment opportunities by the private sector country status and Literature Review engagement at all levels provide Participation of project target groups in the private sector and changes brought district reports employment with fair working due to linkages facilitated by the programme conditions and for more people, especially young men and women
Area 3: Leaders at all levels (including cultural and faith based) positively influence society and institutions. How do they challenge unfair and abusive practices, and promote and support the equal rights of all. Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Leaders at all levels (including Leaders have active advocacy platforms for positive influence on society and Online literature Literature Review cultural and faith based) institutions Target Groups FGDs positively influence society and Leaders utilise their offices and resources for positive influence on society and institutions institutions and remain exemplary
2. Leaders challenge unfair and Presence of evidence arising of efforts to fight social and gender injustices in literature Literature Review abusive practices, and promote the country/communities Target Groups FGDs and support the equal rights of all. Leaders have programs in place for reaching out and supporting victims of abusive practices example counselling programmes, outreaches etc
Area 4: A strong and vibrant civil society that supports the more vulnerable and marginalized communities to claim their rights and demand accountability. They represent and advocate for these rights at local, national, regional and international levels Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. There exists a strong and vibrant Civil society increase the programs in place for support of the more vulnerable Literature Literature Review civil society that supports the more and marginalized communities Target Groups FGDs vulnerable and marginalized Civil society programs in place support target groups to claim their rights and communities to claim their rights demand accountability and demand accountability. There is representation and advocacy for the rights of the marginalised groups at local, national, regional and international levels Area 5: Confident and empowered individuals, especially women and youth, who have the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions in their lives Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Confident and empowered What evidence is there of changes arising from efforts to fight social and Literature Literature Review individuals, especially women gender injustices in the country/communities? Target Groups FGDs and youth, who have the Increased participation of womena dn youth in leadership roles knowledge and skills to make Increased percentage of women and youth accessing education and informed decisions in their lives employment opportunities Reduced crime rates from women & Youth Area 6: Families and households have the capacity and resources to provide secure and sustainable livelihoods for themselves and their communities, and they are resilient to climate change, environmental shocks and conflicts
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Families and households have the To what extent the programme has contributed to sustainable livelihoods of the Literature Literature Review capacity and resources to provide target groups (including key areas of production and productivity, alternative Target Groups FGDs secure and sustainable livelihoods livelihoods, increased incomes. for themselves and their To what extent the programme has contributed to better social organisation of communities farmers
2. Families and households are Evidence that the programme contributed to Social organisation and Literature Literature Review resilient to climate change, environment sustainability of sources of livelihoods Target Groups FGDs environmental shocks and conflicts
5. SUSTAINABILITY KEY QUESTION RQ 5.1 To what extent can the effects of the programme be expected to last beyond the lifecycle of the programme?
Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. The programme made efforts to ensure that effects last 2. Level of self-sustainability of the programme initiatives and 1. Programme Literature Review beyond the lifecycle of the programme level to which self sustaining initiatives were implemneted Document and 3. Presence of approaches/ strategies set up by the programme project documents and partners to ensure sustainability 4. Existence of an exit and Sustainability Plan 5. Evidence of plans set up by partners to ensure continued activtiies in project component areas RQ 5.1.1 To what extent are target groups managerially, technically and financially ready to carry on the effects of the programme Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Target groups were managerially prepared to carry on Extent to which the programme held exit meetings and Target groups FGD the programme effects and activities handed over to beneficiary groups aspects of the project Government KII Target groups set up and established leadership structures to Authorities Literature review take over the interventions Duty Bearers Extent of programme ownership by target groups Programme and project reports 2. Target groups are technically ready to carry on the Extent to which the capacity building was carried out in Target groups FGD programme effects and activities form of trainings, exchange visits, mentorship. Government KII Authorities Literature review Duty Bearers Programme and project reports
3. Target groups are financially ready to carry on the Components of the project incorporated within plans, District documents Literature review programme effects and activities frameworks and budgets of policy makers and district and budgets FGD actors Target groups The extent to which programme target groups have improved livelihoods and can continue with intervention results RQ 5.1.2 Social, economic and political factors that are likely to positively or negatively influence sustainability of the project results Assumptions to be assessed Indicators Source of information Methods and tools for data collection 1. Social factors that are likely to positively or negatively Community, demography, cultures & attitudes among others Target groups Literature review affect the programme District authorities KII 2. Economic that are likely to positively or negatively Incomes, employment, livelihoods, market condiitons, affect the programme among others
3. Political factors that are likely to positively or Policies, laws, regulations among others negatively affect the programme
7.4 Annex 4: Key Informants Reached NAME OF # ORGANISATION TITLE LOCATION RESPONDENT 1 CYCORP Project field coordinator Wakmaga Safi Yumbe 2 DRAGON Climate and Human Rights Isa Arita Abu Yumbe 3 TPO MHPSS, PROTECTION Birigenda Haggai Yumbe 4 DCA Project Staff Abadaku Noah Yumbe 5 DCA Project Manager Vien Mukisa Yumbe 6 OPM BIDIBIDI (Settlement) Assistant Community Services Officer Acidri Richard Yumbe 7 DCA Cash and Markets Officer Nantule Hellen Yumbe 8 DCA Senior Environmental Officer Andama Swaib Solo Yumbe 9 District Local Government Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Drajiga Rasul Yumbe 10 District Local Government District Production And Marketing Officer Rashi Kawawa Yumbe 11 District Local Government District Production &National Resources Officer Badaru Gertrude Arua 12 District Local Government District Health Officer Paul Drileba Arua 13 District Local Government District Environment Officer Asuku Robert Arua 14 CSBAG Staff CSBAG Representative Arua 15 Uganda Red Cross Disaster Preparedness And Response Officer Paul Okot Arua
16 UNHCR Staff Lanyero Paska Otto Arua 17 Community Empowerment for Rural Development Staff Juliet Donna Eyokia Arua 18 District Local Government Environment and Energy Hope B. Michael Arua 19 Woodlot entrepreneur Salim Daudi Woodlot Salim Daudi Yumbe 20 Cash for work group member Hardwork groups Atayi Rabiba Yumbe 21 Other NGOs (AFI) Distribution Cash Assistant Ilekat J Peace. Kiryandongo 22 DCA Project staff Aber Lucy Paklaki Arua 23 DCA Project Manager Nyeko Jimmy Arua 24 DCA Project Manager Drileonzia O. Simon Arua
25 DCA Project Staff Simon D. Arua 26 HADS Brilliant Farmers Group- CDO Gama Henry Kiryandongo 27 HADS Community Based Worker Joseph M Arthur Kiryandongo 28 DCA Project Staff Amos Ongwen Kiryandongo 29 District Local Government focal person for health services Nkuba B. Esther Kiryandongo 30 District Local Government District Health Officer Dr. Mutyaba Imaam DHO Kiryandongo 31 District Local Government Surveillance Focal Person Opido Simon Kiryandongo 32 HADS Humanitarian assistance and development services Representative Emmy Esabu Kiryandongo 33 District Local Government LCV Ntairehoki Charles Amooti Kiryandongo 34 DCA Maye Losi Doris Nini J Kiryandongo 35 DCA Community Based Worker Majema Peter Husea Kiryandongo 36 Water Mission Uganda Assistant WASH Officer Simon Arthur Tumusiime Kiryandongo 37 District Local Government Disaster Preparedness and Reponse project Aluku Anthony Toolit lAMWO 38 DCA Porject Staff Fitina Ronald Reagan Lamwo 39 District Local Government District Agricultural Officer (DAO) Komakech Richard Cyrus Lamwo 40 District Local Government District Environent Ofiicer Ocitti Richard Lamwo 41 District Local Government LCV Hon. Komakech John Ogwok Lamwo 42 District Local Government Resident District Commissioner Kidega James Lamwo 43 URC Staff Wilson Otage Lamwo 44 URCS Staff Oan Mathew Lamwo 45 Caritas Kotido (Project officer) Ochen Moses Aleka Kotido 46 District Local Government Distict Education Officer Kotido Dlg Lowari Anjello Mark Kotido 47 District Local Government District Probation Officer Etuko Brian Kotido 48 Building Resilience in Southern Karamoja (BRISK) Chepokurnya Elizabeth Karamoja 49 Community leader Cultural leader Abraham Nalem Amudat 50 District Local Government Resident District Commissioner Mr. Robert Adyanga Amudat
51 TPO Community Based Monitor Mary Kiiza Amudat 52 C & D Field Coordinator Kul Chandra Karamoja Akurut Josephine 53 TPO Project Corodinator Birigenda Haggum 54 District Local Government Gender Officer Opio Stephen Philip Katakwi 55 District Local Government CAO Bruno Nawoya Katakwi
56 SOCADIDO Staff Elwoku Pius Soroti 57 COU- TEDDO Programme Officer Esupu Richard Soroti 58 UDN Programme Manager Jude Odaro Kampala 59 Amuria District Integrated Forum – ADIF) Governance and Accountability John Paul Erongu Amuria 60 (Katakwi District Monitoring Network – KADIMON) Governance and Accountability James Peter Otim Katakwi 61 RRA Executive Director Byaruhanga Andrew Kampala 62 IRCU Secretary General Joshua Kitakule Kampala 63 OPM Staff Tayebwa Nicholas Arua 64 Raising Gabdo Foundation Head of Operations Komuhendo Pamela Kampala 65 Terego, Imvepi Refugee Settlement Settlement Coordination function Armitage Basikania Arua 66 DCA Country Director Peter Bo Larsen Kampala 67 DCA Head of Programme Augustine Enyipu Kampala 68 DCA Head of Finance Susan Amot Kampala 69 DCA Finance Officer Elias Lagu Kampala 70 DCA Programme Officer Fight Extreme Inequality Gladys Nairuba Kampala 71 DCA Programme Officer Build Resilience Francis Akorikin (left DCA) Kampala 72 DCA Humanitarian Programme Officer Emmanuel Adowa Kampala 73 DCA Project Manager- DMDP Anthony Agaba Kampala 74 DCA Act Alliance advocacy officer Patricia Roy Akullo Kampala 75 DCA Head of Humanitarian Operations Moges Temesgen Kampala 76 DCA Innovation and Digital Coordinator Anita Asimwe Kampala
77 DCA Staff Mary Kampala 78 UWONET Executive Director Rita Aciro Kampala 79 OSIEA Programme Officer Don Bosco Malish Kampala 80 EU ECHO Technical Assistant, European Union Delegation Jordi Torres-Miralles Kampala 81 EU- DEVCO Programme Officer, EU Delegation to Uganda Patricia Stephenson Kampala 82 UNHCR Country Director Gregory Acar Kampala
Focus Group Discussions
Group Location Total Number Reached Briquette Making groups Yumbe 9
Cash for work group Yumbe 11
Sunflower growing group Yumbe 7
Yangani group Yumbe 3
YEEP skills group Kotido 8
Vocational skills groups Arua 10
Farm production group in Zone 7 Arua 14 PSN group Arua 11 Village Savings and Loans Association in Zone 3 Arua 10 Briquette making group in Zone 7 Arua 14 Youth group Amudat 7 Alders group Amudat 12 Katukumwok elders group Amudat 13 Abarirela group Amuria 11 SASA faith group in Getom subcounty Amuria 13 Kapjan group Katakwi 10 Total 16 156
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020
7.5 Annex 5: Final ToR
Terms of Reference
Country Programme Evaluation
iii
Country or region: Uganda
Country Programme title: Promoting Sustainable Livelihoods, Rights and Accountability in Uganda
Country Programme period: 2016-2020
Timing of evaluation:1st June to 31st October 2020
1. Background
The DCA Uganda Country Programme is guided by a long-term programme framework or Theory of Change (ToC) to empower vulnerable and marginalized women and the youth to overcome poverty, live in dignity and claim their rights. Uganda has made remarkable socio-economic progress over the past 30 years and has enjoyed relative peace since the mid 1990s. Nonetheless, the country remains vulnerable to economic shocks and to effects of climate change and to human crises such as refugee influx. The country currently hosts the highest number of refugees in Africa and the 3rd highest refugee population in the world. From the human rights perspective, there are concerns over issues such as gender inequalities, restrictions on civic space and wide-spread corruption.
The long-term vision of the Uganda country programme is that - Ugandans live peacefully in a thriving, democratic society with equal access to their rights and resources, and that they support each other to ensure a safe and sustainable future for all. The country programme identified the following 6 areas of change to achieve this longterm vision:
(1) Transparent, accountable and responsive government authorities have the capacity, resources and political will to develop, implement and enforce policies, which prioritise the needs and rights of vulnerable and marginalized communities.
(2) Responsible private sector engagement at all levels contributes to building a more productive Uganda for the benefit of all of its citizens: it increases productivity, creates access to credits and stimulates business. It provides employment with fair working conditions for more people, especially young men and women.
(3) Leaders at all levels (including cultural and faith based) positively influence society and institutions. They challenge unfair and abusive practices, and promote and support the equal rights of all.
(4) A strong and vibrant civil society supports the more vulnerable and marginalized communities to claim their rights and demand accountability. They represent and advocate for these rights at local, national, regional and international levels.
(5) Confident and empowered individuals, especially women and youth, have the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions in their lives.
(6) Families and households have the capacity and resources to provide secure and sustainable livelihoods for themselves and their communities, and they are resilient to climate change, environmental shocks and conflicts.
The Country Programme has the following goals:
Goal 1 (under Fight Extreme Inequality): Participation and accountability: More women and young people participate in decision-making processes and hold their leaders accountable to improved delivery of services, increased protection and support to human rights for equitable development.
Goal 2: (under Build Resilience). Sustainable livelihoods and resilience: More marginalised communities have secure access to land and are producing adequate food for household consumption, generate income, and are resilient to conflict, environmental and climate change challenges.
Given that the country Programme was formulated before DCA Uganda went into self-implementation of humanitarian work in 2016, it does not have a specific goal on SAVE. However, the SAVE interventions are mostly included in country goal 2 and change areas 2 and 6. Moreover, a humanitarian strategy (attached) was developed and approved in 2018 to supplement the Country Programme. When referring to the Uganda country programme therefore, it means that all the three goals of Fight, Build and Save are implied. It is particularly important to note that SAVE constitutes a substantial portion of DCA Uganda’s budget (over 70%) and accounts for 100% of our self-implementation work. A large proportion of this funding went into livelihoods,environment and energy, as well as disasater preparedness and response.
Apart from the humanitarian response which is mostly self-implemented, DCA Uganda is working in partnership with local civil society organisations and faith based organisations, and promotes strategic engagement with the private sector, government and peer organisations. DCA’s partners over the period of the Country Programme implemantation are:
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
1. Uganda Women Network (UWONET) 2. Uganda Debt Network (UDN) 3. Church of Uganda (Household and Community Transformation) 4. Church of Uganda (Teso Diocese Development Organisation-TEDDO) 5. Rural Action Community Based Organisation (RACOBAO) 6. Transcultural Psychosocial Organisation (TPO) 7. Soroti Catholic Diocese Integrated Development Organisation (SOCADIDO) 8. Land Equality Movement of Uganda (LEMU) 9. Caritas Kotido 10. Institute for Cooperation and Development (C&D); 11. Raising Gabdho Foundation (Social Enterprise) 12. Uganda Red Cross (URC) 13. Centre for Rural Development (CEFORD) 14. Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group (CSBAG) 15. Humanitarian and Development Services (HADS). 16. Mukwano Group of Companies (Social Enterprise) 17. Uganda Protestand Medical Bureau (UPMB) 18. Human Rights Network Uganda (HURINET) ended. 19. Moroto-Nakapiripirit Religious Initiative for Peace (MONARLIP). In addition DCA Uganda is involved in collaborations and coordination with other agencies and/or alliances, namely:
ACT Alliance: In Uganda, this alliance has 15 organisations, 12 of which are International agencies. Some of the members collaborated with include: Uganda Joint Christian Council (UJCC); Church of Uganda; Swiss Church Aid; ICCO Cooperation, Diakonia Sweden, FinnChurchAid; World Renew; Lutheran World Relief; Church of Sweden, and Swiss ChurchAid/HEKS. Humanitarian Response Agencies/actors: UNHCR; International NGOs; National and local NGOs and Community Based Organisations; Office of the Prime Minister; Local Governments. DCA’s geographyical focus covers 6 subregions namely, Karamoja; Teso; West Nile; Acholi; Bunyoro and South- Western Uganda. This is in addition to national-level advocacy work.
2. Lessons learnt to date: Achievements in programme implementation
In regard to goal 1 of the country programme, there is increased citizen confidence to demand for their rights and quality services from duty bearers, as well as increased voice and participation of vulnerable categories such as women to take up strategic leadership positions, especially at Local Government levels. Through increased engagement between the women agency and government, there is increased prioritization of gender issues as for example evidenced in gender-responsive budgeting by local governments. In addition, there is increased advocacy for gender and climate justice, and more participation of DCA and partners in contributing to legal and policy frameworks that address climate and gender injustices. Similarly, there is increased collaboration between communities and local governments to promote social accountability in general. This has particularly been made possible through capacity building of communities to engage with the primary duty bearers in monitoring service delivery. At the same time, religious leaders are increasingly challenging social and gender injustices such as corruption, bad governance, abuse of office and gender based violence. DCA and partners have also influenced policy on resource allocation and facilitated dialogues on civic space and peaceful coexistence, among others.
Under Goal 2 of the country programme, there is significant increase in communities’ awareness on land rights and this has contributed to land tenure security, which has enabled the communities to increase crop production, both for household consumption and income generation. Similarly, communities are becoming more resilient to conflict, as well as to environmental and climate change shocks. The program has in addition, intergrated the village savings and loans component to increase financial inclusion and access to credit by vulnerable communities. To strengthen environmental resilience, the programe has built the capacity of community groups in tree growing, use of energy-efficient technologies, and soil and water conservation. Specifically under SAVE, DCA is using a nexus approach to ensure that refugees, displaced persons and refugee hosting communities have access to life-saving and socio-economic services for self-reliance, sustainable livelihoods and fulfilment of their rights. This is being achieved through interventions such as cash based programming, livelihood value chains, private sector collaboration, environment and energy conservation, digital innovation, financial inclusion, youth skilling/vocational training, disaster preparedness, and protection (e.g. peaceful co-existence between refugees and host communities).
Challenges in programme implementation
The political instability in South Sudan which was not anticipated at the time of designing the country programme. This explains why our SAVE ambitions are not elaborated in the Country Programme compared to the actual SAVE work.
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
The inflation of refugee figures, leading to a reduction in funding and reprioritization of sectors for humanitarian response (for example, the decision by UNHCR to re-direct focus from Livelihood to Environment and Energy in 2019). Repressive legislation such as the NGO Act and the POMA which caused uncertainity and anxiety (and possible self-censorship) among NGOs in regard to their operations. Corruption both in the public and private sectors as reflected in unnessary delays in accessing public services and to termination of cooperation agreements with some of DCA partners. Climate and weather variations which undermined DCA’s agro-based Livelihood and Environment and Energy interventions.
Significant external/national developments that have impact on the programme
Positive developments:
Positive developments include relative peace and stability in Uganda, recognition by government of the important role of the private sector, NGOs and Faith Based Organisations, a fairly stable economy, and existence of a very progressive refugee policy that promotes self-reliance and sustainable livelihoods among refugees and refugee hosting communities.
Negative developments:
The main negative developments were the instability in the Great Lakes region, especially the escalation of the South Sudan refugee situation, weak implementation of the country’s policies; increase in laws that are considered a threat to civic space, corruption in both the public and private sectors, and climate change and environmental degradation.
Strengths and weaknesses in relation to the project implementation e.g. the partner portfolio, partnership relations
Strengths
DCA Uganda’s funding has significantly grown from USD 3.8 million in 2016 to USD 6.1 million in 2019. Similarly, DCA’s geographical scope has since 2016 expanded into three additional subregions, namely Bunyoro, Acholi and South Western Uganda. Moreover, DCA has increased its experience and ninche, both through working with partners and through self- implementation. DCA’s participation in spaces such as inter-agency humanitarian forums, INGO forums, etc, has raised the organisation’s profile and reputation in the country. DCA is particularly recognised for building the capacity of partners in project implementation and for being a leader in innovations such as cash-based programming, e-vouchers, and digitalisation, among others.
Weaknesses
One of the key weaknesses observed was the corruption among some of the partner organisations which resulted in termination of their partnership with DCA. In addition, the needs in the communities were far more than the available resources could handle. While we registered a number of successes in resource mobilisation, competition for donor funding continued to rise- coupled with general donor apathy. The South Sudan conflict and the resultant spike in refugee populations particularly shifted donor interest from supporting development initiatives (e.g. from other deprived areas such as Karamoja subregion), to humanitarian response (e.g. in the West Nile subregion).
DCA’s role in the programme and programme management
DCA’s programmes are partner-implemented (for the Build and Fight thematic areas) and mostly self-implemented for the Save thematic area. DCA support to partners includes capacity building in social accountability, gender and social justice, finance and anti-corruption, governance, CHS and PSEA, among others. This is in addition to monitoring projects and convening annual platforms that bring together DCA and partners to reflect on the progress in implementation of the Country Programme. DCA also leads the fund-raising efforts (e.g. leading consortia in resource mobilization), and provides funding to local partners and community organisations for project implementation. DCA further creates linkages with the private sector /social enterprises (with a focus on promoting access to agricultural markets, affordable energy, and securing financial inclusion for the poor). Others are participation in consortia with other organisations, and supporting advocacy initiatives, learning and networks at national and international levels (both with DCA partners and through the ACT Alliance). 3. Purpose, objective and evaluation questions
3.1 The purpose
DCA is seeking to carry out an evaluation of DCA Uganda office country programme during the 2016 to 2020 programme cycle for learning and accountability purposes. The findings, conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation will provide substantial guidance to the design of the next country programme cycle, and will contribute to organisational learning at the global and country levels of the organisation.
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
3.2 The objective of the evaluation
The objective is to assess the performance of DCA Uganda’s country programme, with a specific focus on the contribution of the programme to DanChurchAid’s global goals of Save Lives, Build Resilient Communities and Fight Extreme Inequality.
The evaluation should be conducted against the DAC evaluation criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability with a view to draw lessons and make recommendations for future programme periods at country and global levels.
The evaluation is also expected to generate findings for organisational and programmatic learning on DCA’s global approaches and thematic priorities. In particular, DCA is keen to understand how DCA’s rights-based approach and country programming approach (including use of theory of change) has contributed to relevance, performance and complementarity. It will also be important that the evaluation generates findings which contribute to greater understanding of how DCA’s integration of cross- cutting priorities for localisation, engagement with faith-based actors, climate change and nexus may have contributed to relevance and effectiveness of the programme.
3.3 Standard DCA country programme evaluation questions
Relevance
Key question:
1. To what extent is the country programme strategy relevant to the needs identified, especially related to the structural causes of rights violations in Uganda?
2. To what extent is the country programme portfolio relevant to the country programme objectives?
Sub questions:
a. To what extent is the intervention aligned with international human rights instruments and principles (including relevant international law for humanitarian and disaster response)? and with national and local frameworks that advance human rights and gender equality? b. What is the added value and relevance of using the ToC approach with partners for planning and as a yearly programme reflection and programme management tool? c. To what extent are the projects contributing to the country programme pathway (theory of change)? In what way do the projects and partners complement each other in achieving the country programme goals (geographically, targeting, thematically, etc.)? d. DCA Learning Priority (Climate Change): To what extent is climate adaptation and mitigation appropriately integrated in the programme and what are the key outcomes and learning? Please have a special focus on learnings from DCAs mitigation work (2019-2020) with environment and energy activities in settlements areas e. To what extent has the programme contributed to preparedness and response in relation to humanitarian response? f. DCA Learning Priority (Partnership): How has the country programme engaged with faith-based actors in programming and advocacy? Is the balance between secular organisations and faith based organisations relevant? g. To what extent has the program contributed to sustainable livelihoods of the target groups (including key areas of production and productivity, alternative livelihoods, increased incomes. Social organisation and environment sustainability)? Effectiveness
Key question:
3. To what extent were the country programme objectives achieved at outcome level?
Sub questions: a. To what extent were the participation and accountability mechanisms used effective at engaging rights-holders by DCA and by partners? b. DCA Learning Priority (Rights-based approach): To what extent have the interventions contributed to the empowerment of rights-holders to claim or access their rights and entitlements; and of duty-bearers to fulfil their obligations? c. What results were achieved in terms of reducing the underlying causes of inequality and discrimination? What were the key factors that contributed to the achievement? d. DCA Learning Priority (Nexus): To what extent is the country programme embracing a nexus approach? How is that contributing to the programmes effectiveness?
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
e. DCA Learning Priority (Nexus):To what extent has the DCA programme been able to adapt and support delivery of humanitarian response when needed according to established quality and accountability standards (e.g. CHS and Sphere)? f. To what extent has the programme tested and effectively adopted innovative approaches, technologies etc? Key Question:
4. How have partnerships been established or enhanced as a result of the country programme? (DCA and partners, partners and rights holders, rights holders and duty bearers, and partners among themselves?)
Sub questions:
a. How are the partners involved in decision-making and what are their decision-making powers in the planning and implementation of the country programme including the cross cutting activities? To what extent does DCA deliver adequate capacity support (including responsiveness) for project implementation and organisational strengthening, particularly with regards to capacity development to the partners? b. How have the partners contributed to the achievement of the various aspects of the country programme ToC? c. DCA Learning Priority (Localisation): What are the challenges and opportunities in operationalising localisation in the programme? How did DCA contribute to reinforcing the ability of local and national actors and partners to deliver on needs in an effective and timely fashion? d. To what extent has the country programme enabled the partners’ and DCA’s advocacy work with other relevant actors, e.g. facilitation of networks etc? f. What evidence is there to show that DCA and partners have actively sought new partnerships and knowledge resources during the progress of the programme as new needs have arisen? Efficiency Key question:
5. Has the country programme approach been a cost-efficient way to implement DCA’s humanitarian and development assistance?
Sub questions:
a. To what extent are the interventions cost-effective and the resources used in an efficient way? b. DCA Learning Priority (Partnership): where relevant, what are the key learnings from working in partnerships vs. self-implementation? Impact
Key question:
6. What has been the positive and negative impact at rights-holders and duty bearers level (outcome) directly or indirectly?
Sub questions:
a. What evidence is there that the interventions contributed to rights-holders increasing their enjoyment of their rights; of duty-bearers better performing their duties and obligations; and of accountability mechanisms being strengthened? b. What evidence is there of changes arising from efforts to fight social and gender injustices in the country/communities? c. Were there any unintended effects on groups (either included or not included in the intervention)? Sustainability
Key question:
7. To what extent can the effects of the programme be expected to last beyond the lifecycle of the programme?
Sub-questions:
a. To what extent has the intervention contributed to institutional changes (changes in laws, policies, practices, resource levels) for furthering human rights and gender equality? To what extent are these changes sustainable? b. To what extent has the intervention strengthened citizen claiming and monitoring of human rights and gender equality? To what extent is it likely to continue once the project/programme ends? c. To what extent has the programme contributed to better social organisation of farmers?
4. Scope
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
The evaluation assignment should cover the DCA country programme period starting in 2016 and ending in 2020. It is expected to take place from 1st June 2020 to 31st October 2020. The time period might be affected by restrictions in relation to COVID- 19. If so, this will be discussed among the partners.
The evaluation will seek to visit the following areas: Karamoja Sub region (Amudat, Napak and Kotido districts) and Teso sub region (Katakwi, Amuria and Kapelbyong districts) for BUILD and FIGHT development work and West Nile subregion (Yumbe and Arua districts) for development-humanitarian nexus work under SAVE-BUILD goals. This will be in addition to engaging with national level partners mostly involved in the fight against social and gender justice. The evaluation will look at the country programme and the six change areas holistically. For more specific information, the evaluation will review the projects that were implemented during the period of the Country Programme (see Annex 3 for list of projects). However, while reviewing the projects, the consultant should take cognisance of the limitations to the following projects:
1010328-21: Power to the people in Napak and Moroto Districts (ended). DCA terminated partnership with MONARLIP, the implemeting partner due to Governance and accountability issues. This affected implementation of the project in its final year. It is possible to interact with the project beneficiaries during the evaluation but not the former staff of the implementing partner. However, the Board of Trustees can be accessed. 1010328-26: Promoting Civic Engagement and Corporate Accountability. Partnership with HURINET was terminated due to Governance and Accountability issues. While the project structures and beneficiaries can be met, the evaluation may not be able to obtain credible information from HURINET. 1010328-54: Promoting Youth Participation in Socio-Economic Development and Governance in Karamoja sub- region. The action, developed by DanChurchAid (DCA), is being implemented by Caritas Kotido Diocese (CKD), and Co-operation and Development (C&D). The project is still new and some of its districts of operation (Kaabong and Karenga) are also new to DCA. 1010328-56: Protection and Restoration of the Environment & Promotion of Safe Access to Sustainable Energy and Green Livelihoods in Refugee and Host Communities. While it is essentially a continuation of project 1010328-48, this project is still new- including some of the districts where it will be implemented.
1010328-58:Livelihoods Enhancement for West Nile and Acholi.The project is one of EU-funded Development Initiatives for Northern Uganda (DINU). Due to delays in releasing the call for proposals by the donor/OPM, this project is new and some of its districts of operation (Maracha, Koboko and Madi-Okollo) are also new to DCA. 1010328-60: Interfaith Action for gender Justice. The project aims to contribute to reducing the prevalence of VAW/C through faith centred activism in the Mid-central region of Uganda by enhancing capacities of faith leaders to challenge notions of toxic masculinity and patriarchy for behavioural and attitudinal change among men and women. While interfaith action for gender justice is not new, DCA has just re-entered the subregion where the project will be implemented, having last operated there in 2017. Other important considerations:
Timing: Uganda will go for general political elections in February 2021. The period July 2020 to
February 2021 will therefore be charecterised by a lot of political activity (campaigns). This could affect community consultations as people will be actively involved in these campaigns. Also as already mentioned, restricts in relation to COVID-19 could affect the timing as well as the possibilities of movement and conducting interviews.
COVID-19 Pandemic: some of the budgets and activities were re-adjusted as part of our response
to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Communication: There could be challenges in accessing some remote areas (e.g. farmlands),
Especially in the rainy season. Moreover, mobile phone and internet communication can be poor in some areas.
DCA’s self-implementation work: at the time of its design, the Country Programme did not
adequately reflect DCA’s self-implementation (humanitarian) work. This also explains why the country programme has only 2 goals (“Fight” and “Build”), with the humanitarian interventions mostly covered under the “Build” goal. As explained, we have therefore asked that the the humanitarian strategy be seen as a part of the country programme.
5. Method It is expected that the consultant will further develop the methodology to be applied within this consultancy. However, the consultants should be guided by the DAC evaluation quality standards for development evaluation in their development of the methodology, conduct of the evaluation and drafting of the report.49
49 https://www.oecd.org/development/evaluation/qualitystandards.pdf
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
In addition, the below key elements should guide the development of the proposed methodology. Participatory methodologies must be employed to ensure that the rights holders targeted by the programme effectively participate throughout the evaluation process. The method developed must also be gender sensitive and it must describe how it fits the purpose of the evaluation. In the data collection and analysis phase the team can use both qualitative and quantitative data collection. It is recommended that the methodology focuses on outcomes and allows for collection of data from multiple sources, like document review, stakeholder interviews, focus group discussions, participatory workshops.
6 Outputs 1. Inception report, which comprises initial findings of document review, fully developed methodology and evaluation matrix for the evaluation, and workplan for the evaluation. 2. A debriefing session on the most significant findings and recommendations to be discussed with the DCA Country Office. 3. Draft and final evaluation reports in 1-3-25 format which makes use of the suggested report structure below as agreed with the evaluation manager. 4. The consultant will present the findings in a partners’ meeting. 5. 7. DCA’s 1-3-25 Report Structure.
A good evaluation report prepared for DCA should follow the standard 1-3-25 format:
1. Start with one page of main messages 2. Follow that with a 3-page executive summary 3. Present findings in no more than 25 pages of writing. Further details are below and outlined in the DCA evaluation policy.50
1 Final Recommendations (once report is finalised)
3 Executive Summary
25 The structure of the report is flexible but should include the following sections: Background to programme Introduction to evaluation Description of methods and process. Overview of evaluation findings Conclusions Recommendations Lessons Learnt. Include visual graphics in the report as appropriate.
Annexes as needed. To include as a minimum: Final ToR. Inception Report. Tools for data collection Index, list of abbreviations 8. Suggested Scheduling and milestones for evaluation
Responsibility Suggested Time Deadline frame DCA External evaluation team 1. Publication of Request for Proposals (including x Min. 4 weeks 1st June 2020 this ToR as Annex 1). 2. Selection of evaluation team by the x 15th June 2020 Procurement Committee and negotiation of contract 3. Provision of initial documentation pack to x 15th June 2020 evaluation team 4. Briefing meetings with DCA and consultants x x 30th June 2020 and initial literature review
50 DCA Evaluation Policy
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
5. Inception Report submitted to DCA x Min. 1 week 6th July 2020 after briefing. 6. Feedback and approval of inception report. x Min.4 weeks 30th July 2020 7. Research, field work and interviews. x Ca. 4 weeks. 31st October 2020 8. First draft evaluation report x Ca. 2 weeks after 6th November field work. 2020 9. 1st Feedback to evaluation team x Min. 2 weeks 13th November 2020 10. Second draft evaluaton report x 1 – 2 weeks. 20th November 2020 11. - Dissemination Workshop x x Min. 1 week 24th November 2020 13. Evaluation finalised and approved by DCA. x x 27th November 2020 14. Preparation of management response and x 30th November action plan 2020
9. Evaluation Management
The evaluation will be managed by Augustine Enyipu, Head of Programme.
10. Team Composition and qualifications.
The evaluation team is expected to consist of 1 external team leader and 1-2 consultants, preferably from the country or region.
The team leader should possess the following expertise:
Proven team leader skills Extensive experience with evaluations, reporting and design processes, including skills such as indicator development, sampling, participatory evaluation methodology, appreciative inquiry methods, focus group interviews, etc. Experience with multi-sectoral evaluations Proven experience from NGO and CBO based development and humanitarian assistance in Uganda Proven expertise on the cross cutting issues such as Rights Based Approach and Gender. Experience with faith based organisations in general and DCA in particular is an asset Further, it is highly desirable that the team as a whole should have expertise in the following areas:
Fight Extreme Inequality/human rights: (Space for civil society, and protection of human rights defenders, inclusive participation in decision-making, equitable distribution of resources through inclusive and accountable institutions) Build Resilient Communities/livelihoods: (community-based disaster risk reduction and risk management, sustainable community livelihoods and development and job creation, community influence decisions for building resilient communities) Save Lives (Humanitarian response and Preparedness, Emergency Livelihoods and Early recovery, community safety and protection; nexus approach) Anti-corruption and organisational accountability. Organisational capacity development
ANNEX 2: PROPOSAL OUTLINE
Interested consultants and evaluation teams should submit a proposal using the structure and main sections identified below.
1. Rationale Any comments on the Terms of Reference of importance for the successful execution of activities, its objectives and expected results, thus demonstrating the degree of understanding of the Contract. Detailed list of inputs, activities and outputs. Any comments contradicting the Terms of Reference or falling outside their scope will not form part of the final Contract. An opinion on the key issues related to the achievement of the Terms of Reference and expected results.
2. Strategy An outline of the approach and methodology proposed for the evaluation. An outline of the the proposed activities considered to be necessary to achieve the contract objectives. (If appropriate) A brief description of the backstopping support that will be available to the evaluation team from the contractor.
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
(If appropriate) A brief description of subcontracting arrangements foreseen (eg. for enumerators, local consultants and/or interpreters), with a clear indication of the tasks that will be entrusted to a subcontractor and a statement by the Candidate guaranteeing the eligibility of any subcontractor.)
3. Timetable of activities The timing, sequence and duration of the proposed activities considering mobilisation time. The identification and timing of major milestones in conducting the evaluation, including an indication of how the achievement of these would be reflected in any reports particularly those stipulated in the Terms of Reference.
4. Key experts The proposal should include a detailed description of the role and duties of each of the key experts or other non-key experts, who are proposed as members of the evaluation team. The CV of each key expert shall be included highlighting his/her experience in the specific field of the services and his/her specific experience in the country/region where the services are to be performed. The proposal should clearly state existing commitments of experts which may affect their availability to participate in the evaluation to the extent possible. The proposal should clearly state any conflicts of interest which may compromise the objectivity of the experts in the evaluation. (eg. involvement in the programme being evaluated and/or employment by DCA and/or DCA partners.) The proposal should include 1 or 2 examples of previous work from previous evaluation assignments or similar.
5. Financial Offer The financial offer should be presented in the format outlined in annex 3. When preparing the financial offer, note that: o DCA will provide the following: mobilisation of stakeholders (including partner organisations and project beneficiaries) to participate in the evaluation; organising inception and debriefing sessions. o The evaluation team is expected to provide the following: own transport and accommodation.
ANNEX 3: LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED IN THE COUNTRY PROGRAMME 2016-2020
1010328-03: Humanitarian Response to Support South Sudan Refugees – Livelihoods Danida Humanitarian Partnership Agreement 01.09.2016 – 31.01.2017. 1010328-06:Building Resilience in Southern Karamoja (BRISK). This project is ensuring that more marginalized communities are supported to increase food security and strengthen resilience to conflict, environment and climate change 1010328-09: Land Security for improved livelihoods in Moroto, Nakapiripirit, Napak and Amudat Districts. Objectives: 1) strengthen land tenure security for improved livelihoods of the people in the Districts of Moroto, Nakapiripirit, Amudat and Napak; and, 2)strengthen the capacity of communities to articulate and utilize the available formal legal and institutional framework. 1010328-11: Empowering Youth through Vocational Training and Entrepreneurship in Karamoja (ended). Objective: improve the livelihoods of 900 vulnerable youth in Kotido Nakapiripirit and Napak districts through vocational training and entrepreneurship. 1010328-13: Promoting Citizen Engagement for Equitable, Just & Accountable Development (CoU- TEDDO). Objectives: 1) strengthen the capacity of citizens in Katakwi and Amuria to consistently engage with duty bearers for improved service delivery and accountability; 2). to enhance the capacity of moral duty bearers and responsiveness of legal duty bearers in Katakwi and Amuria to champion citizen voices on social accountability and challenge gender inequality. 1010328-15: Advocacy project: covers advocacy related activities and capacity building of Uganda ACT Forum members in advocacy. 1010328-16: Women’s voice and influence in leadership. The overall objective is to sustain women’s voice and influence in leadership for gender equality and equity. The specific objectives are: 1) to enhance capacity and skill set of 70 district women councilors to influence gender responsive decision making; 2) to enhance demand for Uganda’s compliance and adherence to and fulfilment of commitments and obligations under the International Human Rights Instruments, focusing on Women’s rights, gender equality and women’s advancement. 1010328-19: Deepening Citizen’s Actions for improved public accountability whose objectives are to: 1) strengthen capacity of community groups in Teso and Karamoja to effectively participate in Local Government planning processes for improved service delivery; 2) strengthen partnership and collaboration among CSOs/CBOs/Private Sector Associations and Religious Leaders for joint advocacy for increased accountability at local and national level. 1010328-20: DCA Self-Implementation Rhino Camp Extension: To improve Food security and protection of vulnerable South Sudanese refugee and host community households in Rhino Camp extension- Arua District by December 2018. To build self-reliance and improve livelihoods situation for refugees and host community households in Rhino Camp extension, Arua, with income generating activities and agricultural production by December 2018.
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
1010328-21: Power to the people in Napak and Moroto Districts (ended): The project aimed to: 1) empower citizens with skills and knowledge for increased local participation in government processes and oversight of government resource utilization in 6 sub counties in Moroto and Napak districts; and 2) enhance duty bearers’ responsiveness and accountability for transparent utilization of public resources and improved equitable service delivery. 1010328-22: ECHO II Livelihood Support to SS Refugees in West Nile (ended): The project aimed to: 1) improve the self-reliance and protection of South Sudanese refugee and host community households through the provision of multi-purpose cash, livelihoods, WASH and protection, 2)Refugees & host communities have increased income through agriculture & income generating activities; 3) Improved market functions including financial services, savings & credit products for refugee & host communities. 1010328-26: Promoting Civic Engagement and Corporate Accountability. Objectives: 1) Strengthen accountability among duty bearers and business entities for promotion, protection of rights and remedy for human rights violations; 2) promote an enabling environment for civic engagement in Uganda by 2020; 3) strengthen the institutional capacity of HURINET-Uganda (implementing partner) for effective coordination of the Network. 1010328-25: DFID Market System Development Approach (ended): Objectives: 1) to develop a stronger market system to build sustainable livelihoods for refugee and host communities; 2) Increased income and resilience for refugees and host communities in West Nile. 1010328-27: UNCDF_MM4P Project (ended). Objective: to develop a self-sustainable Airtel Money distribution network in BidiBidi refugee settlement to support digitization of Cash Based Interventions (CBI) and lay a foundation for further uptake of digital financial services. 1010328-30: Inclusive Market Development. The project is catalysing Inclusive Market Development in Yumbe District through self-sustained oilseed production by refugees and host farmer communities. 1010328-31. National Dialogue (Non-US Funding)- IRCU. This project initiated a citizen-focused national dialogue on the (political, social, economic, etc) future of Uganda. 1010328-32: HPA 2018 Project. Objectives: 1) self-reliance and improved access to socio- economic opportunities for conflict- affected South Sudanese refugees and host communities in Bidibidi, Rhino Camp Extension (Omugo Zone) and Imvepi Settlements, Yumbe and Arua Districts; 2) strengthen the capacity of communities to articulate and utilize the available formal legal and institutional framework. 1010328-33: UNHCR 2018 - Emergency Livelihoods Response for Self-Reliance to South Sudan Refugees. Objectives: 1) Increased HH food security, income & climate change adaptation through climate friendly agricultural practices; 2) Increased access to market/business opportunities; participation in socio-economic activities & social support programs. 1010328-37: DMDP Fruit Nexus: Full Implementation. The project supports the development of decent employment opportunities for refugees and host communities by training smallholder farmers to grow certified organic fruit for export. There were delays in kick-starting the project hence export of the sub-sector value chains is yet to commence. 1010328-38: Improving Resilience of Rural Households in Teso (SOCADIDO). Objectives: 1)To increase Food crop production and productivity among 3,000 households in 4 Sub Counties by 30%. 2)To increase Income among 3,000 households in 4 Sub Counties by 30%. 3)To improve Service provision by duty bearers in the target four Sub Counties. 1010328-39: Hack4Refugees (ended). Piloting the digital innovations that solve challenges faced in different interventions and mainly focusing on distribution of goods and services and information dissemination. 1010328-40: Mobile messaging solutions for farmers in refugee and host communities. Objectives: 1) Increased access to agricultural information and financial services by refugees and vulnerable farmers; 2) Increased uptake of agricultural technologies by refugees and vulnerable farmers throughout the agricultural value chain; 3) Increased agricultural production and productivity as a result of use of agricultural information, financial services and technologies by the refugees and vulnerable farmers; 4) Increased access to markets and better prices for agricultural produce. 1010328-48: Emergency Livelihoods Response for Self-Reliance to Conflict-Affected South Sudanese Refugees and Host Communities in Rhino Camp Extension (Omugo), Imvepi, and Bidibidi Settlement in West Nile, Arua and Yumbe Districts in Uganda (ended). Objective:to improve self-reliance and livelihoods, focusing on gradual social-economic integration, for the conflict-affected South Sudanese refugees and host communities in Rhino Camp Extension (Omugo), Imvepi, and Bidibidi Settlement in West Nile, Uganda. 1010328-50: Disaster Preparedness and Response: Objective: Increased Resilience of Refugees and Host communities in Arua and Lamwo districts through a more effective and cordinated response during sudden emergencies. This is a fairly new project that is building the capacities of local actors as first responders in humanitarian response. 1010328- 51. Digitalization and Improved Access to Credit of VSLAs in West Nile, Uganda: The project objective is to provide complementary financial and non-financial services to credit-ready refugees and host communities. 1010328-54: Promoting Youth Participation in Socio-Economic Development and Governance in Karamoja sub-region. The action, developed by DanChurchAid (DCA), Caritas Kotido Diocese (CKD), and Co-operation and Development (C&D), directly supports 2,000 youth and 30 youth organisations to contribute to the socio-economic development in
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)
Karenga, Kaabong, Napak, Nakapiripirt and Moroto Districts of Karamoja sub-region. 1010328-56: Protection and Restoration of the Environment & Promotion of Safe Access to Sustainable Energy and Green Livelihoods in Refugee and Host Communities. The project aims to protect and restore environment and natural resources while also promoting safe access to sustainable energy and green livelihoods for 90,884 direct beneficiaries and 363,536 indirect beneficiaries (four indirect beneficiaries per direct beneficiary based on average HH size) in the districts of Arua, Kiryandongo, Koboko, Madi-Okollo, Yumbe and Kampala. 1010328-58: Livelihoods Enhancement for West Nile and Acholi . The project is one of EU-funded Development Initiatives for Northern Uganda (DINU). 1010328-61-Access _Adoption_of Sustainable Energy and_Green Livelihoods among_Refugee and Host Communities.
Annex 1: Standard Terms of Reference: Country Programme Evaluation – Jan 2020 (v1; 27.01.2019)