sign in sign up
<<
Home , Africell Uganda, Airtel Uganda, DFCU Bank, Ecobank Uganda, Gulu, Gulu Military Hospital

MAPPING ’S SOCIAL IMPACT LANDSCAPE Joseph Kibombo Balikuddembe | Josephine Kaleebi This research is produced as part of the Platform for Uganda Green Growth (PLUG) research series

KONRAD ADENAUER STIFTUNG UGANDA ACTADE Plot. 51A Prince Charles Drive, Plot 2, Agape Close | , P.O. Box 647, /Uganda on Kiwatule Road T: +256-393-262011/2 P.O.BOX, 16452, Kampala Uganda www.kas.de/Uganda T: +256 414 664 616 www. actade.org

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 i DISCLAIMER

Copyright ©KAS2020.

Process maps, project plans, investigation results, opinions and supporting documentation to this document contain proprietary confidential information some or all of which may be legally privileged and/or subject to the provisions of privacy legislation. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not read, use, disclose, copy, print or disseminate the information contained within this document.

Any views expressed are those of the authors. The electronic version of this document has been scanned for viruses and all reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure that no viruses are present. The authors do not accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this document. Please notify the authors immediately by email if this document has been wrongly addressed or delivered.

In giving these opinions, the authors do not accept or assume responsibility for any other purpose or to any other person to whom this report is shown or into whose hands it may come save where expressly agreed by the prior written consent of the author

This document has been prepared solely for the KAS and ACTADE. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the KAS and ACTADE or members thereof as a body, for supporting this work, for this report or for the opinions we have formed.

This work has been undertaken solely for the purpose of understanding the landscape of social impact investment in Uganda.

ii Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Disclaimer...... ii List of Figures...... v List of Tables...... v List of Abbreviations and Acronyms...... vi 1. Executive Summary...... 1 2. Background...... 1 2.1. The difference (CSR and SII)...... 1 3. Study Synopsis...... 2 3.1. Study goal ...... 2 3.2. Specific task for this research...... 2 3.3. Consultancy deliverables...... 2 4. Study Approach...... 2 4.1. Scope...... 3 4.1.1. Search strategy...... 3 4.1.2. Inclusion criteria...... 4 4.2. Mapping strategy...... 4 5. SII Initiatives in Uganda...... 4 6. SII Initiatives within the Corporate Organisations...... 5 6.1. Financial inclusion of refugees in Uganda, UGAFODE...... 5 6.1.1. UGAFODE SII initiative...... 5 6.2. Century Bottling Co. sustainability strategy...... 6 6.2.1. Century Bottling Co. SII initiative...... 6 6.3. Raintree Farms sustainability strategy...... 6 6.3.1. Raintree Farms social investment model...... 6 6.4. Pearl Capital Partners as a fund manager...... 6 7. Drivers of SII Investment in Uganda...... 7 7.1. SII awareness...... 8 7.2. Anchoring of SII initiatives...... 8 8. Policy and Legislation on SII...... 8 9. Planning SII Initiatives...... 8 10. Challenges and Opportunities for SII in Uganda...... 9 10.1. Challenges of SII...... 9 10.2. Opportunities for impact investors in Uganda...... 10 11. Corporate Social Responsibility Study Findings...... 10 11.1. CSR distribution per sector...... 10 11.2 CSR distribution per targeted beneficiary...... 11 11.3 CSR distribution per setting...... 12

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 iii 11.4. CSR distribution per donor type...... 12 11.5. CSR distribution per region...... 13 11.6. Beneficiary against setting assessment...... 13 11.7. Setting against donor category assessment...... 14 11.8. Regional distribution against beneficiary assessment...... 15 11.9. Donor type against region assessment...... 16 11.10. Target sector against region assessment...... 17 11.11. Key observations...... 18 12. Building CSR Initiatives into SII Initiatives...... 19 Annex 1: Profiled Companies for CSR Initiatives...... 20 Annex 2: Data Collection Tool...... 28

iv Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Data sources...... 4

Figure 2: SII investment sectors...... 6

Figure 3: SII categorisation...... 6

Figure 4: SII drivers...... 10

Figure 5: SII planning...... 12

Figure 6: Sector distribution...... 15

Figure 7: Distribution per beneficiary...... 16

Figure 8: Setting distribution ...... 17

Figure 9: Donor type distribution...... 17

Figure 10: Distribution per region...... 18

Figure 11: Beneficiary against setting...... 19

Figure 12: Donor category against setting...... 20

Figure 14: Regional distribution against beneficiary...... 21

Figure 15: Donor types against region...... 22

Figure 16: Targeted sector against region...... 23

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Initiative snapshot...... 15 Table 2: Beneficiary against setting...... 18 Table 3: Donor category against setting...... 19 Table 5: Regional distribution against beneficiary...... 20 Table 6: Donor types against region...... 21 Table 7: Targeted sector against region...... 22

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS SII : Social Impact Investment

CRS : Corporate Social Responsibility

KAS : Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung

ACTADE : African Centre for Trade and Development

UGAFODE : Uganda Agency for Development

SME : Small to Medium Enterprises

SIP : Secured Income Program

PCP : Pearl Capital Partners

vi Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The growing perception that impact investing is not yet mobilising much funding from the true private sector creates great interest in understanding why it has not been embraced holistically. Besides, the sizes of impact funds are not necessarily commensurate with the scale of the social challenges they are targeting. As such, the need for developing business models that recognise investment for sustainable development is imminent. This study set out to map out the status of social impact investment (SII) in Uganda. To achieve the objectives of the study, a desk review approach was used as well as a round table discussion with selected participants.

The results show that there is a glimpse of how SII is currently being practised. However, there is little media coverage of social investment yet ordinarily they are present. Additionally, it has not been possible to ascertain the extent to which it contributes to the economy in greater depth and how supply meets the demand side of the targeted communities. As such, a wider study that aims at identifying the specific underlying challenges of social enterprises in Uganda and how they can be addressed would be valuable.

2 BACKGROUND Corporate philanthropy is considered an important business strategy. It is crafted in a way of promoting philanthropic giving efforts of investing financial resources to improve the communities in which a particular business operates. Undoubtedly, giving back to the community is an excellent way to promote any business with regard to its products and services. However, this requires having policies and procedures in place which integrate social, environmental, ethical and human rights or consumer concerns into business operations and the core strategy. Invariably, the establishment of corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a sustainability strategy is a crucial component of the competiveness of any business.

While the factors driving companies to pursue this agenda are fairly consistent across the corporate world, this practice is viewed as a highly contemporary and contextual issue to all stakeholders, including the government, the corporate organisation itself and the general public. As such, this kind of belief has resulted in a paradigm shift in which there is a continued call for businesses to contribute to sustainable development by delivering economic, social and environmental benefits to all stakeholders in the form of SII.

The highest calling of impact investing is to increase the amount of capital being invested in places, companies, products and services that have significant social benefits. When looking at the overall impact investment space within East , Uganda is regarded as the second largest market, after .1 However, the impact investing community in Uganda still remains small, requiring support from corporate establishments and individuals. The plausible approach would be to persuade these establishments and individuals to act beyond CSR initiatives and embark on SII initiatives.

2.1 The difference (CSR and SII) SII is meant to be inclusive of the social as well as the financial return where the benefit is, at least theoretically, hard-wired into every impact deal. SII hinges on creating social and environmental benefits, in addition to generating financial returns. Impact investors want their money to make a positive and enduring difference for employees, clients and other groups in society — while creating financial value.

Without a doubt, impact investing can help in boosting the economy if properly harnessed as it can potentially fill the gap in the market for start-ups. Over the years, some of the corporate establishments in the country have invested greatly in CSR initiatives with the primary view that business can be used to effect positive social and environment change. While this is a positive gesture, some of these establishments are valuing this step as SII and seem to be stopping at this level. Some studies show that there are a number of impact funds active in Uganda.2 However, we need to ascertain how such opportunities have been harnessed in addition to what other corporate establishments and individuals have done within the same area.

1 The landscape for impact investment in [https://thegiin.org/assets/161025_GIIN_EastAfrica_FULL_REPORT%20(002).pdf] 2 Mapping the impact investment space in Uganda [https://images.agri-profocus.nl/upload/post/Impact_Investor_mapping_report._final1433266036.pdf] Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 1 3 STUDY SYNOPSIS 3.1 Study goal KAS and ACTADE initiated this study in order to assess the current status quo of SII in Uganda. As a mapping study, it is intended to derive key metrics which can be used for further assessments and also to build consensus with the larger community of potential SII investors. As such, the overall goal was to understand the SII landscape in the prefecture of Uganda as well as how successful SII initiatives have been or are being implemented in the country. 3.2 Specific task for this research

The specific tasks outlined for this assignment included the following: • To assess what has been done in Uganda with regard to SII, in particular the extent to which SII contributes to the economy, and also evaluate if supply meets the demand side of the target communities. • To process, analyse and contextualise relevant data. • To draft a manuscript for publication that provides an in-depth analysis of how SII is practised and the extent to which it contributes to the economy, and evaluate if supply meets the demand side of the targeted communities.

4 STUDY APPROACH

This study was conducted primarily as a desk review study. Data was collected from existing resources and it is this data that was organised and synthesised so as to derive the desired output of the study.

The secondary data sources used include the following:

Two mainstream English newspapers, that is, The and The Monitor. These two were selected because of their wide coverage and what was published in them from January 2017 to June 2019 was assessed. Since SII is young in the country, the assumption was that some media mentions may have been captured and that would be a good start.

Organisational websites: Corporate/organisational websites and their network partners were reviewed to assess the level of involvement in SII.

2 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 4.1 Scope In this study, both CSR and SII initiatives within the country were mapped, as illustrated in the figure below.

Data Sources Investigated

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Social Impact Investment (SII)

404 Newspaper articles 1

67 Websites reviewed 23

Figure 1: Data sources

A bigger percentage of published content was about CSR initiatives. A total of 404 newspaper articles from both The New Vision and The were reviewed. Only one article mentioned a SII initiative within this review period. With regard to the online content reviewed, 67 websites had published content on CSR initiatives and 23 websites had published content on SII-related initiatives.

4.1.1 Search strategy For the online searches, a search strategy to derive the desired content was devised as a way of yielding greater precision and this would ensure that information sources were used in a consistent and structured manner. In order to build the desired structure, search terms that would return content within this area were developed and the search terms used were:

• Corporate social responsibility in Uganda • Corporate social impact investment in Uganda • Impact investment in Uganda The above terms were selected because of the way the terms ‘CSR’ and ‘SII’ are being used interchangeably on many organisational websites, highlighting the high rate of misunderstanding of the two. These terms helped to derive relevance of the results obtained. When the newspaper articles were being reviewed, the following descriptive variables were captured:

• Initiative headline • Initiative description • Donor organisation name • Implementation area/region: Central, eastern, northern or western • Targeted sector category: Education, agriculture, health, manufacturing, trade (other) • Beneficiary category: Women, children, community or other • Donor organisation categorisation: Local, international or partnership

• Note: In this context local includes organisations with multinational linkages but that are registered as local chapters. Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 3 4.1.2 Inclusion criteria The analysis did not consider the website data for CSR since most of it did not match the review period that was considered in the newspaper review. In some cases some initiatives published on the websites were dated – because they fell outside the review period, these were left out. For SII initiatives, a snapshot was taken to assess the various sector areas within which SII initiatives are distributed.

4.2 Mapping strategy Given the interconnectedness or perception of CSR and SII initiatives in the context of Uganda, the analysis could not span SII only per se without understanding how CSR is performing. Highlighted first is the state of SII in the country, followed by a general CSR mapping. The belief is that if an organisation is active in CSR initiatives, it is more likely to widen its philanthropy into SII. Hence, understanding this distribution would act as a starting point in determining potential sector needs where SII can create more impact.

5 SII INITIATIVES IN UGANDA The data for understanding the distribution of SII initiatives across the different sectors of the economy was based on an internet search mainly derived from impact investor interests or focus areas. In total, 22 websites were reviewed that provided details of their engagement in SII within Uganda. The results obtained from this review are illustrated in the table and the graph below.

Targeted (SMEs) 55

Education 5

Clean energy 14

All sectors 5 Targeted sectors Agriculture 23

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percentage Figure 2: SII investment sectors

It was observed that most active funds (55%) are targeting small to medium enterprises (SME) to create impact and these are not targeting any specific sector. The agriculture and agro-processing sector constitutes 23%; while investment interest in clean energy is at 14%. Education and all other sectors stand at 5%. The different companies which were profiled in this category are given in the figure below by category.

4 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 Fund Manager Fund Network /Initiative

Jibu COSEF Iungo Impact Carbon Mango Fund OXFAM Pearl Capital Partners BidNetwork Palladium Capria AgDevCo Uganda cooperative savings IFAD RENEW Strategies and credit unit XSML EADB Open society foundation Nile Breweries . Century Bottling Co Ugafode Raintree Farms

Figure 3: SII categorisation

The above results only provide a general picture of SII interests in Uganda. However, they do not give an in-depth analysis of what individual organisations are doing in terms of strategy so as to validate their involvement in SII; neither could the review ascertain the lessons learnt.

6 SII INITIATIVES WITHIN THE CORPORATE ORGANISATIONS Accordingly, in assessing what individual companies are doing with regard to SII, a round table discussion was conducted with 12 sample companies. The companies identified during the internet search, within the space of SII, were invited and included in this discussion. The key issue under discussion was how organisations or companies are investing in sustainable initiatives that are infused with a financial return on investment in the long run. The following qualitative information was obtained.

6.1 Financial inclusion of refugees in Uganda, UGAFODE With the influx of refugees in Uganda over the last couple of years, financial institutions started debating on how finance for refugees could be leveraged. As such, there was a need to explore possible ways of offering to refugees and other foreign-born residents in Uganda alongside low-income host community members. The UNHCR’s Annual Global Trends report3 indicates that Uganda had over 940,800 refugees and asylum seekers and this number grew to 1.4 million by January 2018. As such, financial inclusion is one of UNHCR Uganda’s key operational priorities under its protection and solutions strategy. Financial inclusion contributes to promoting self- reliance among refugees as well as stimulating economic activity at the local level.

6.1.1 UGAFODE SII initiative As a microfinance institution, UGAFODE tapped into this refugee market segment by creating financial options for this marginalised community; specifically lending and saving. It worked tirelessly with policymakers to ensure that all legislation and policy matters surrounding financial inclusion for this community were harmonised. This took considerable lobbying and effort to get it off the ground. In the end they have been successful in creating saving schemes for these people as well as lending options. Additionally, they have been able to employ interns from these communities within their branches. This has enabled them to break the language barriers as well as create the opportunity for visibility to segment Congolese, Sudanese and Burundians. In this pilot, they have so far registered 1,240 account openings and this is still ongoing. Ten groups out of these communities have been segmented and given loans. The social aspect in this model is the support for refugee communities or the extension of financial services to refugee communities in the country. The investment in this model is the creation of saving and lending schemes for these communities.

3 Global Trends forced displacements in 2018, UNHCR [https://www.unhcr.org/5d08d7ee7.pdf] Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 5 6.2 Century Bottling Co. sustainability strategy In building sustainability while creating impact, Century Bottling Co. identified four sustainability investment areas. These include the following:

• Sugar reduction: With the global call for bottling companies to reduce excess sugar within their products, the company started a sugar reduction initiative. In this, they aim at expanding to ensure that they have low or no sugar options across their portfolio. The immediate step was to change the packaging by introducing into the market smaller bottles and more ‘Zero’ products apart from Coca Cola. • World without waste: With plastic bottles being a hazard to the environment, the company looked at an opportunity to mitigate this risk. They set up a garbage collection point at the garbage dumping site in Kiteezi for all plastic bottles for their products. A collector of this garbage resells these bottles to them. They have earmarked a social enterprise arm, in turn, to recycle these bottles to make plastic pavers. • Water stewardship: With several concerns relating to environmental and health risks, the company turned around this opportunity by creating an initiative that looks at ensuring that a percentage of water used in their finished beverages is returned to nature and communities in a safe way. • Community: The company identified empowering women as a key community attribute that they can support. In this initiative, women are given coolers for use for only Coca Cola products and they have specific periodical sales for them to stay within this model, i.e. supporting the economic empowerment of women as social redress.

6.2.1 Century Bottling Co. SII initiative The SII model for Century Bottling Co. is built within its operational strategy. The company is driven by the belief that sustainability and CSR money come from doing business; hence doing business itself needs to be both responsible and sustainable. As such, they have created products around each stream while ensuring that anything that relies on business being sustainable is also sustainable on its own. The company produces an annual business and sustainability report4 to highlight their contribution in this regard.

6.3 Raintree Farms sustainability strategy Raintree Farms is a value-added grower and processor of medicinal crops. As a social enterprise, it focuses on improving the economic livelihoods of the farmers and workers that it engages with. Leveraging sustainable forest and environmental restoration of bio-diversity, the company invests in medicinal crops, particularly Moringa oleifera.

6.3.1 Raintree Farms social investment model Through its Secured Income Program (SIP), this company identifies farmers who have land but lack capital to invest in their land. In this model, a farmer must provide 2.5 acres of dedicated land to Raintree farms – 1.5 acre dedicated to high density leaf growing for powder and 1 acre dedicated to seed tree growing and food crops intercropping. As a sustainability strategy, the farmer sells the forest outputs to the company and is, in addition, given a retainer monthly fee. This creates a win-win situation where communities, the environment as well as the company benefit. As of now, the company has over 115 farmers in its out-grower network and over 156 acres in its supply chain.

6.4 Pearl Capital Partners as a fund manager Pearl Capital Partners (PCP) is an impact investment company within Uganda, managing a number of funds. Generally, impact managers are characterised by focusing their fundraising efforts on articulating a strategy that leads to an expected return, both financially and socially; and on emphasising fund management’s experience in relevant areas of social impact and/or fund management’s financial performance. PCP specialises in agriculture 4 2018 Business & Sustainability Report [https://www.coca-colacompany.com/content/dam/journey/us/en/private/fileassets/pdf/2019/Coca-Cola- Business-and-Sustainability-Report.pdf]

6 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 investment for small- and medium-sized agribusinesses within East Africa. They use smallholder farmer networks to generate significant income for millions of families across East Africa. Some of the funds under their management include the following:

• Yield Uganda Investment Fund • African Agricultural Capital Fund • African Seed Investment Fund • African Agricultural Capital (AAC) Farmers or entrepreneurs within this sector can obtain access to this funding as long as they meet the requirements as set out by PCP.

7 DRIVERS OF SII INVESTMENT IN UGANDA As the fundamental norms governing the role and purpose of capital in society are changing, there was a need to examine the driving factors behind SII investment in Uganda. In order to obtain this information, participants in the round table discussion were given questionnaires. The information observed is illustrated in the figure below.

Other Not at all Significant acount A little 9% 8% Driving factors for SII I leverage the Power of Big 17% Companies 18% 33% Awareness & Sector Priorities

73% 42%

I anchor Impact Somewhat aware Investing to Market Return

Identified the same as a general business idea/model Opportunities like Driven by organizational strategy 5 impact investment Personal interest be funders a social entrepreneur 8% 5 8% Both 34% Targeted 2

50% Received SII Funds 4

Did not receive SII Funds 8

Passion to address society challenges

Figure 4: SII drivers

When assessing awareness of SII, it was observed that 33% of the participants were somewhat aware of what impact investment entails and 50% only received funding from SII funders. Fifty-nine per cent of the participants had slight knowledge of SII. This shows that there is an awareness gap as far as SII is concerned. Hence, more needs to be done to raise awareness of social impact investment, which seems to have been overshadowed by CSR initiatives. Raising awareness amongst potential social entrepreneurs holds the key to creating a sound SII ecosystem in the country.

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 7 7.1 Anchoring of SII initiatives Anchoring is defined as the tendency of investors to rely on some piece of information to take decisions. Social entrepreneurs and the funders are usually seen as the investors. Literally, even the social entrepreneurs are investors in their start-ups but the common term ‘investor’ relates most to the funders of social enterprises. In assessing how the SII end actors anchor their investment, it was observed that 73 % of the participants anchor their investment to market returns. As such, 42% of the participating companies indicated that their investment is driven by organisational strategy and is both targeted, that is, not for every sector. It is not surprising that the majority of them were driven by the passion to address social challenges and the personal interest to be social entrepreneurs. There are certainly many risks that could arise out of misallocations if impact investors do not anchor themselves to market returns. Hence, as SII awareness takes shape, there is a need to clarify the attributes of impact , especially those which will result in premium returns.

8 POLICY AND LEGISLATION ON SII An assessment of existing policy or legislation regarding SII was undertaken. It was observed that there is no specific policy targeting SII in the country. There is only a general investment policy review on Uganda which was developed by the United Nations.5 Policy is important in providing guidelines for introducing the SII concept and engaging wider government on the SII agenda. This agenda would move towards:

• Leading with social outcomes to highlight how impact investing can achieve better results than other policy approaches, incorporating elements of private-sector rigour and more robust measurement of outcomes • Developing targeted proposals for government departments to identify how impact investing can be useful for achieving specific policy goals across government.

9 PLANNING SII INITIATIVES Planning for SII initiatives plays a critical role in targeting the right investment. An assessment was made of how planned SII activities are executed by the current SII investors. ‘Investor’ here refers to social entrepreneurs, funders and conventional-for-profit organisations infusing SII in the conventional business model. The results observed are illustrated in the figure below.

Urban Both 5-10 Individuals Years 1- 2 17% 17% Years 33% 42% 41% 17% 66% 25%

25% Rural 17% Both Peri Urban 3 - 5 Communities Years

120

100

80

Both 60 Both Peri Urban 40 Communities Rural 20 Individuals Response percentage

Response percentage Urban 0 Agriculture Education Other Small scale industry Agriculture Education Other Small scale industry

Investiment sector concetration Investiment sector concetration

Company receives charity application very often 6 Company is part of any network of SII if for the whole Operation strategy 5 similar business models 4 Company receives charity application very often 2 Company is not part of any network SII is part of the bigger enterprise 7 of similar business models 8 Company never receives charity application very often 4 Figure 5: SII planning

5 Investment Policy Review: https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/publications/71/investment-policy-review-of-uganda 8 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 It was observed that 42% of the participants plan SII initiatives as a short-term strategy that runs for 1-2 years. About 33% plan these activities as a long-term strategy that runs for 5-10 years. As such, 58% of the participants indicated that SII is part of their bigger enterprise planning strategy. Sixty-six per cent of these companies are investing in both communities and individuals, both within the rural and the urban settings. The results also show that investment is skewed towards the agricultural sector within the peri-urban sector. Within the education sector, investment is within the urban setting. Another observation within the agricultural sector is that individuals are being invested in more than communities. Investment in the small-scale industries is yet to be identified.

10 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR SII IN UGANDA 10.1 Challenges of SII A range of challenges for impact investors seeking to place capital in Uganda were identified and these include:

a. Insufficient investment-ready opportunities: The demand for capital by social entrepreneurs is huge but the formalities required to meet the organisation capacity assessment criteria required by social investors/ funders are way beyond the level of the social-focused start-ups. For example, one needs to have a balance sheet of at least $100,000 for impact fund consideration. b. Insufficient human capital and experience: Social enterprises are commonly family- or community- led initiatives that many times are passion-driven. Experience and the competence to manage a social enterprise to scale are usually lacking and the capacity to engage competent human resources is equally low. c. Lack of local presence and closeness by many investors: Investors’ interest is to make financial returns on their investments. May be owing to the low awareness of SII in the country, many SI investors are internationally based and are managing their risk through stringent terms given to their fund managers, which many times are beyond the capacity of the ordinary social enterprise at the local level. d. Social entrepreneurs in the country are still operating informally either due to the challenges identified in a.–c. above or even purposely to avoid exposure to taxation and other formal implications. This limits the identity and scale of social enterprises in the country, hence slowing the traction of the SII agenda at the local level. e. Awareness of what SII and social enterprises do is a big challenge: Modelling of enterprises as social enterprises gets mixed up with conventional for-profit models, leading to frustration by the end actors and to dropout. The need to sensitise, mentor and train masses about social enterprise modelling and management is apparent. f. Impact washing is equally a challenge in Uganda. One realises this when one looks at the many CSR initiatives dubbed SII by conventional businesses. Impact washing is when a company or fund makes impact- focused claims in bad faith without truly having any demonstrable positive social or environmental impact. g. Lack of standard social impact measurement guidelines to validate the qualification of initiatives into SII. Impact is measured and interpreted as per individual donor/investor or end actor/entrepreneur. h. Lack of seed and working capital for social start-ups, which stifles SI operations. As highlighted above, informal operations, in addition, lack the collateral required to access formal funding from financial institutions and, where present, the lack of proper business model planning does not match the conventional financial market’s interest rates. i. Enabling policies to promote social enterprises need to be in place too.

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 9 10.2 Opportunities for impact investors in Uganda Despite the challenges enumerated above, there are still many opportunities for SII, as highlighted below:

a. High unemployment and poverty cycles among the biggest percentage of the country’s population (the youth) coupled with multiple social challenges can be better addressed by mobilising the youth’s energy into social enterprises. Youth self-efficacy6 has a multiplier effect on development. b. Social challenges being gold mines for entrepreneurs, fostering entrepreneurial mindsets and the ability of the masses can fast-track the economic growth of the country. Supporting the masses to appreciate individual potential rather than donor expectancy or/and entitlement can go a long way in fast-tracking positive social change. c. A big number of NGOs and community-based organisations (CBO) in the country start with good intentions but fail because of limited or availability. funding. The availability of conventional grants is getting increasingly low. This presents an opportunity for NGOs and CBOs to start up social enterprise arms of their operations as a sustainability strategy. Technical assistance in the management and scale-up of the same for NGO operations is currently the option for donors yearning for impact and local service delivery spearheaded by locals. Other things being constant, the availability of SII funding for social enterprises would soon grow. d. Conventional businesses that consider supporting the growth of a vibrant economy so that it thrives are starting to rethink their CSR initiatives and to turn them into social enterprise arms, e.g. the Century Bottling Company social enterprise above. Since they are conventional businesses, investing in such social enterprises can spur good and quicker returns for the social impact investor compared to the ordinary social entrepreneur in the community. Other businesses may be motivated to follow suit, hence growing the SII landscape that can effectively absorb the available SII funds on the market. e. Impact investment is new in Uganda, meaning the presence of fertile ground to develop it as the first players and influence the policies, market and more.

11 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY STUDY FINDINGS 11.1 CSR distribution per sector The results obtained in understanding how CSR initiatives are distributed across the various sectors are illustrated in the figure below. For this assessment, there was interest in assessing which sectors of the economy benefited more from the CSR initiatives within the study period.

Health Sector Frequency Percentage Agriculture 43 10.64 Education 24% Education 97 24.01 34% Trade Health 136 33.66 27% Manufacturing 19 4.7 Agriculture Trade 109 26.98 11% Manufacturing Total 404 100 5%

Figure 6: Sector distribution

It was observed that the majority of the CSR initiatives (34%) were inclined towards the health sector rather than the other sectors profiled. This was followed by the education sector, which received 24% of the initiatives. Manufacturing got the least initiatives, at only 5% of the total initiatives reviewed within this period. A snapshot of the activities per sector is described in the table below.

6 Self-Efficacy as a Positive Youth Development Construct: A conceptual review. Sandra K.M. Tsang, Eadaoin K.P. Hui & Bella C. M. Law. 10 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 Table 1: Initiative snapshot

SECTOR CSR INITIATIVE ‘More than 300 people suffering from visual-related illnesses in received free treatment and surgery during a three-day eye camp held at Regional Health Referral Hospital. The camp was organised by Dr Agarwal’s Eye Hospital and . Some patients also received free surgery and glasses.’

‘The Bwindi Mgahinga Conservation Trust (BMCT) launched a programme to facilitate the Batwa in district to make bricks as a way of generating income and help Manufacturing them construct permanent houses. About Shs 70 m was secured for the project aimed at improving the standards of living for the Batwa in the area.’

‘Five farmer groups from the sub-counties of Kameke, Akisim, Olok, and Kabwangasi in district benefited from oil seeds supplied under the Vegetable Oil Agriculture Development Project Phase II. Every farmer group received 20 kg of improved soya beans. The project was for poverty eradication.’

‘A three-year project to enable pupils to stay at school was launched in Kabarole district. Items such as scholastic materials, sanitary pads and food were given out. It was launched Education at Buteebe Primary School and was to run in 20 schools around the county. It was being implemented by MTN Uganda in partnership with SOS Children Village. The project was worth Shs 330 m.’

‘KCB Bank Uganda trained more than 40 small and medium enterprises (SME) in business and financial literacy. The training was to see more than 340 SMEs empowered Trade with business management skills and information in , Lira, , Jinja, , Fort Portal and .’

11.2 CSR distribution per targeted beneficiary In understanding how CSR initiatives are distributed across different beneficiaries, the following results were obtained as summarized in the figure below. Beneficiaries were categorised as children, community, women and others for initiatives that were not targeted in this segment.

Community Beneficiaries Freque ncy Percentage

Children 33 8 Children 8% 82% Community 331 82 Other 4 1 Women Women 9% 36 9 1% other Total 404 100

Figure 7: Distribution per beneficiary

It was observed that 82% of the initiatives in this period targeted communities. Eight per cent of the initiatives were for children and 9% were for women. Hence, the majority of the initiatives in this period were community-based.

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 11 11.3 CSR distribution per setting The results obtained from assessing the initiative distribution per setting are illustrated in the figure below. This assessment was done so as to understand whether the CSR initiatives are most distributed within the rural setting or more on the urban side.

Rural Setting Freque ncy Percentage 70% Urban Both 49 12.13 18% Rural 283 70.05 Urban 72 100

Total 404 9 Both 12%

Figure 8: Setting distribution

It was observed that 70% of the CSR initiatives were made within the rural setting within this period. The urban setting only had a share of 18%. Twelve per cent were made within both settings.

11.4 CSR distribution per donor type Donor types were also assessed; and these were categorised as local, international and partnerships. Local donors comprise multinationals registered locally and other companies or organisations registered and operating only in Uganda. International donors are the foreign companies or organisations not registered in Uganda. Partnerships are the establishments where two or more organisations work on the same CSR initiatives. The results obtained are illustrated in the figure below.

Local Donor Organization Fre quency Percentage 76% Women International 56 13.86 14% Local 307 75.99 Partnership 41 10.15

Total 404 100 other 10%

Figure 9: Donor type distribution

It was observed that 76% of the CSR initiatives in this period were driven by local organisations. Fourteen per cent were partnerships while 10% were international organisations.

12 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 11.5 CSR distribution per region Another interesting aspect was understanding how CSR initiatives were distributed across the country during the same period.

67 16.5%

24 98 24.14% 5.9% 141 34.73%

Central Region Eastern Region Northern Region Western Region 76 18.72%

Figure 10: Distribution per region

It was observed that 35% of the CSR initiatives were done within the central districts of the country. Nineteen per cent were done within the western districts. The northern districts received the least initiatives. It is important to note that some initiatives, about 6%, were intended for the whole country and were not region-based.

11.6 Beneficiary against setting assessment In order to understand how CSR initiatives are distributed based on beneficiary categorisation within a specific setting, the following results shown in the table and graph below were obtained.

Table 2: Beneficiary against setting

BENEFICIARIES Setting Children Community Other Women Total Both 5 37 4 3 49 15.15 11.14 100 8.57 12.13 Rural 231 0 28 283 72.73 69.58 0 80 70.05 Urban 64 0 4 72 12.12 19.28 0 11.43 17.82 Total 33 332 4 35 404 100 100 100 100 100

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 13 120

100

80

60 Both

Frequency 40 Rural Urban 20

0 Children Community Other Women Beneficiaries

Figure 11: Beneficiary against setting

It was observed that within this period, most of the CSR initiatives were women-based and within the rural setting. This constituted 80% of the initiatives done within this period. This was followed by children-based initiatives at 73% in the rural setting. Initiatives that were not targeted either at the community, children or women were distributed fairly across both the rural and the urban settings. For the urban setting, community-based initiatives scored more. Women-based initiatives were the least, at 11%, in this setting.

11.7 Setting against donor category assessment The focus of this assessment was on understanding which donor category contributed more within a given setting. The results we observed are illustrated in the table and graph below. Table 3: Donor category against setting

SETTING Donor Organisation Both Rural Urban Total

International 5 43 8 56 8.93 76.79 14.29 100 Local 33 218 56 307 10.75 71.01 18.24 100 Partnership 11 22 8 41 26.83 53.66 19.51 100 Total 49 283 72 404 12.13 70.05 17.82 100

14 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 90 80 70 60 50 International 40

Frequency Local 30 20 Partnership 10 0 Both Rural Urban Setting

Figure 12: Donor category against setting

It was observed that 77% of the CSR initiatives in the rural setting were provided by international organisations, 71% were contributed by local organisations and 54% were contributed by partnerships. On the other hand, partnerships contributed more, at 27%, when considering CSR initiatives that were undertaken both within the rural and the urban settings. Within the urban setting, it was observed that partnerships were more involved, at 20%, in the CRS initiatives undertaken.

11.8 Regional distribution against beneficiary assessment There was further interest in assessing how CSR initiatives are distributed based on the beneficiary category within a particular region. The key assumption here was that particular CSR initiatives target specific beneficiary categories based on region. The results obtained are summarised in the table and graph below. Table 5: Regional distribution against beneficiary

BENEFICIARIES Region Children Community Other Women Total All Regions 2 20 1 1 24 6.06 6.01 25 2.86 5.93 Central 16 111 3 11 141 48.48 33.33 75 31.43 34.81 Eastern 3 83 0 12 98 9.09 24.92 0 34.29 24.2 Northern 6 54 0 6 66 18.18 16.22 0 17.14 16.3 Western 6 65 0 5 76 18.18 19.52 0 14.29 18.77 Total 33 333 4 35 405 100 100 100 100 100

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 15 80

60

40 Children

Frequency 20 Community 0 Other

Women Central Eastern western Northern All Regions Region

Figure 14: Regional distribution against beneficiary

It was observed that women-based CSR initiatives were more pronounced within the eastern region, in which 34% of all initiatives undertaken were meant for this category. Within the northern and the western regions, there was a fair distribution of CSR initiatives across the different beneficiary categories. Within the central region, 75% of the CSR initiatives undertaken within this period were targeted at other beneficiary categories – being more general. However, women-based initiatives only constituted 31% of the total within this region for this period. It is also important to note that 3% of countrywide CSR initiatives were targeted at women.

11.9 Donor type against region assessment There was interest in understanding how donor type CSR initiatives are distributed across the various regions. The results obtained are illustrated in the table and the graph below. Table 6: Donor types against region

DONOR ORGANISATION Region International Local Partnership Total All Regions 2 17 5 24 3.57 5.54 12.2 5.94 Central 20 106 15 141 35.71 34.53 36.59 34.9 Eastern 13 74 11 98 23.21 24.1 26.83 24.26 Northern 14 47 5 66 25 15.31 12.2 16.34 Western 7 63 5 75 12.5 20.52 12.2 18.56 Total 56 307 41 404 100 100 100 100

16 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 40 35 30 25 20 International 15

Frequency Local 10 5 Partnership 0 All Central Eastern Northern Western Regions Region

Figure 15: Donor types against region

It was observed that partnerships based initiatives were inclined towards the central and the eastern regions, in which they took 37% and 27% respectively. However, in the other areas, it was a fair distribution, with an average of 12%. Within the northern region, international organisations provided more CSR initiatives; while in the western region, local companies provided more of these initiatives.

11.10 Target sector against region assessment There was interest in understanding how various targeted sectors are supported across the various regions. The assumption here was that perhaps CSR initiatives are inclined towards certain sectors per region. The results we obtained are illustrated in the table and the graph below. Table 7: Targeted sector against region

TARGETED SECTOR Region Agriculture Education Health Manufacturing Other Total All Regions 3 5 1 3 12 24 12.5 20.83 4.17 12.5 50 100 Central 14 32 55 5 35 141 9.93 22.7 39.01 3.55 24.82 100 Eastern 11 25 33 4 25 98 11.22 25.51 33.67 4.08 25.51 100 Northern 7 15 19 4 21 66 10.61 22.73 28.79 6.06 31.82 100 Western 8 20 28 3 16 75 10.67 26.67 37.33 4 21.33 100 Total 43 97 136 19 109 404 10.64 24.01 33.66 4.7 26.98 100

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 17 60 50 40 All Regions 30 Central 20 Frequency 10 Eastern 0 Northern Western Health Other Agriculture Education Manufacturing Sector

Figure 16: Targeted sector against region

It was observed that the health sector received a fair distribution of CSR initiatives at almost 30% across all regions. There was also a fair distribution of CSR initiatives within the education sector across regions with an average of 20%. The manufacturing sector was the least across all regions, with an average of 10%. Other sectors were fairly distributed across regions at an average of 25%, besides the western region which got a little more, taking 50%. 11.11 Key observations The key observations from the data show that:

• Most CSR initiatives within this period were community-based and targeted women. • Most of the initiatives were undertaken within the rural setting. • Most CSR initiatives were skewed towards the central region. • Local organisations contributed more towards these initiatives. • The main emphasis was within the agriculture, health and education sectors. • There was a fair distribution of CSR initiatives within the northern and the western regions. • Women-based CSR initiatives were fairly distributed across all regions. • There was a fair distribution of partnership strategies in providing CSR initiatives across all the regions.

18 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 12 BUILDING CSR INITIATIVES INTO SII INITIATIVES

The data obtained shows that local organisations are involved in some sort of philanthropy extended via CSR initiatives and in some contexts there are partnerships that are being formed to serve the same purpose. Looking at this as a building block for widening the SII community within the country, perhaps the following areas for further engagement with key stakeholders may be explored:

• Given that local companies are taking the lead in providing CSR initiatives, what strategies can be devised to support them in shifting their focus to the development of SII within the country as a sustainability strategy? • Given that the agriculture, health and education sectors are attracting philanthropy initiatives more, how can we form SII-based partnerships to ensure that economically productive and sustainable impact is made in these communities? • Given that women-based initiatives are more sought after, can more effort be made to introduce and support women’s involvement in SII initiatives as a means of cutting poverty cycles and impacting communities? • Given the heavy CSR investment in rural areas, wouldn’t organisational SII integration be enhanced, thus supporting awareness, interest and the ability to foster more SII in the rural areas? This would result in increased employment opportunities and enhanced livelihoods. • Would there be a possibility of boosting the manufacturing areas within the rural setting with a view to supporting women-based initiatives? • Can advocacy, training and business support services for SII growth and development in the country be part of the country planning agenda so as to foster tailor-made solutions for community social challenges. • What resources can be tapped into to harness the opportunity for investing in deeper research that can traverse the country to reach possible end actors (social entrepreneurs) so as to have a more informed study of the landscape? The notion of impact investing focuses on building a movement from the ground up to develop a market-based approach to tackle problems of global poverty. While CSR champions have done much work within large organisations, we can infer that the purpose of an organisation is different from CSR. If organisations have to move from CSR to SII, they ought to reexamine how they provide their various services in totality, particularly why they serve their stakeholders – employees, customers, partners, community members, the environment/planet and those seeking a fair financial return.

It is by understanding this purpose that new strategies will be formulated and directed towards initiatives that make an impact and a financial return in the long run. This purpose does not mean one-off campaigns, but rather a permeating consciousness or a well-defined intention. Hence, as CSR is evolving into corporate sustainability, this sustainability must be felt. Thus SII frameworks should be developed that should not undermine competitiveness but rather seek to harness the power of business to effect positive social change.

The results observed in this study are a turning point in shaping the future direction on understanding the intersects of SII and economic growth in the country. While there is a glimpse of how SII is currently being practised, it has not been possible to ascertain the extent to which it contributes to the economy in greater depth. Equally with this data, it has not been possible to evaluate if supply meets the demand side of the targeted communities. As such, there is great need for this comparative analysis as a way of measuring a meaningful impact of SII. Overall, this study has shown little media coverage of social investment yet ordinarily it is present in Uganda.

While there are still many challenges for SII, there are also other opportunities that can be tapped into. Emerging traces of SII are evident, although in its infancy. As such, as a country, if we are to build a sound philanthropy ecosystem that is driven by sustainability and impact, we have to rethink how best the private sector, through partnerships, can engage global bodies and tackle sustainability issues through impact investment in the long run. A deeper study of this subject can go a long way in identifying the specific underlying challenges of social enterprises in Uganda and how they can be addressed.

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 19 ANNEX 1: PROFILED COMPANIES FOR CSR INITIATIVES

DONOR ORGANISATION FREQ. PERCENT CUM. 40 Days Over 40 Smiles Foundation (4040) 1 0.25 5.75 A Chinese construction firm 1 0.25 6 Ability Explored 1 0.25 0.25 Absa, Barclays Bank 1 0.25 6.25 Action for Community Development, Father’s Heart Mobility Ministry 1 0.25 6.5 Adventist Development and Relief Agency 1 0.25 6.75 Advocacy for Better Health 2 0.5 7.25 Africa Disaster Reduction Research & Emergency Missions (ADRREM) 1 0.25 7.5 Limited African Development Bank 1 0.25 7.75 African Development Bank 1 0.25 100 Uganda 1 0.25 8 AgroMax and AVSI 1 0.25 8.25 Aids Support Organisation, with support from Dasha Support 1 0.25 8.5 Group Airtel 1 0.25 8.75 7 1.75 10.5 Airtel Uganda 1 0.25 10.75 Alur King 1 0.25 11 Apollo Ssansa Kabumbuli II 1 0.25 11.25 Archdiocese of Mbarara Development Association 1 0.25 11.5 Association of Volunteer International 1 0.25 11.75 Atin Afrika Foundation Uganda (AAFU) 1 0.25 12 Babana Family Clinic 1 0.25 12.25 Bafumbiro World Organisation 1 0.25 12.5 Bagwere Batakangana Association 1 0.25 0.5 Bagwere Batakangana Association (BBA) 1 0.25 12.75 Bamasaaba Farmers Federation 1 0.25 13 Bambino Life Foundation 1 0.25 13.25 , Lions Club, Jinja 1 0.25 13.5 Barclays Bank 1 0.25 13.75 Barclays Limited 1 0.25 14 Baylor Uganda 1 0.25 14.25 Boona Bageigahara Nyekundeire Group 1 0.25 14.5 Born-again pastors 1 0.25 14.75 Bryan White 1 0.25 0.75 1 0.25 15 Buganda Kingdom 1 0.25 15.25 Buganda Kingdom 1 0.25 16 Buganda Kingdom agricultural department 1 0.25 16.25 Buganda Kingdom health ministry 1 0.25 15.5 Buganda Kingdom, Vision Group 1 0.25 15.75 Bugisu Cooperative Union (BCU) 1 0.25 16.5 Bugwere Women Empowerment Foundation 1 0.25 16.75 Building Tomorrow Uganda 2 0.5 17.25 Bulamu Health Care International 1 0.25 17.5

20 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 Buntake Community Wellness Initiative 1 0.25 17.75 Bunyala chiefdom 1 0.25 18 Kingdom, Agro Limited 1 0.25 18.5 Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom 1 0.25 18.25 Bwera Marathon, a community initiative 1 0.25 18.75 Bwindi Mgahinga Conservation Trust (BMCT) 1 0.25 19 Canadians 1 0.25 19.5 Caritas 1 0.25 19.75 Caritas Uganda 1 0.25 20 6 1.5 21.5 Centenary Bank, Movit 1 0.25 21.75 Children from Canada 1 0.25 22 Railway 18th Bureau Company Limited 1 0.25 22.25 18th Bureau Group Company 1 0.25 22.5 Chinese business community 1 0.25 22.75 Chinese Christian community in Uganda 1 0.25 23 Chinese community 1 0.25 23.25 Chinese construction firm Henan Guoji Group 1 0.25 23.5 Chinese firm Zhang Group 1 0.25 23.75 Christ Revival Ministries 1 0.25 24 Citi Foundation, Voluntary Services Overseas 1 0.25 24.25 CitiHope Relief and International Development 1 0.25 24.5 City Tyres 1 0.25 24.75 Civil Society Budgets Advocacy Group 1 0.25 25 CNOOC 1 0.25 19.25 Department for International Development 1 0.25 25.5 Development Companions International (DCI) 1 0.25 25.75 Devenish Nutrition Ltd 1 0.25 26 Dfcu Bank 1 0.25 99.75 Dr Agarwal’s Eye Hospital and Tooro Kingdom 1 0.25 1 Dr Sascha Engel 1 0.25 26.25 East African Dairy Development 1 0.25 26.75 Ebenezer Diagnostic Centre 1 0.25 1.25 1 0.25 27.25 1 0.25 27 Economic Youth Empowerment Organisation 1 0.25 27.5 Edgars Youth Programme 1 0.25 27.75 Educate a Child International 1 0.25 28 Educate a Child, Korea Internatinal Corporation Agency (KOICA) and 1 0.25 28.25 World Vision Korea Electricity Regulatory Authority 1 0.25 28.5 Esco Uganda Limited 1 0.25 26.5 Esco Uganda Ltd 1 0.25 28.75 Eskom Uganda 1 0.25 29 Eugene Scholarship Fund and KKT Bus Company 1 0.25 29.25 European Union and NSSF 1 0.25 29.75 European Union Emergency Trust Fund 1 0.25 29.5 Uganda Limited 1 0.25 30 Exquisite Solutions 1 0.25 30.25

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 21 Father’s Heart Mobility Ministry 1 0.25 1.5 Finca Bank Uganda 1 0.25 1.75 Food and Agriculture Origination (FAO) 1 0.25 2 Former Woman MP, Freda Mubanda 1 0.25 30.5 Fort Portal Catholic Diocese 1 0.25 2.25 Forum for African Women Educationalists 1 0.25 30.75 Forum for African Women Educationalists 1 0.25 31.25 Forum for South African Businesses in Uganda 1 0.25 31 Fufa partnered with Buganda Kingdom 1 0.25 31.5 Global Health Collaborative, Massachusetts 1 0.25 31.75 Global Orchard Initiative Network 1 0.25 2.5 Global Partnership for Education 1 0.25 32 Good Samaritan Association 1 0.25 32.25 Grace Villa 1 0.25 32.5 , Community Empowerment Education Development 1 0.25 33.25 Gulu Natural Honey 1 0.25 32.75 Gulu Rotary Club 1 0.25 33 Harris International Ltd 1 0.25 33.5 Hill City Foundation 1 0.25 2.75 Hope 4 Kids International 1 0.25 33.75 Hope Institute Uganda, St. Francis Hospital 1 0.25 34 1 0.25 34.25 Humanitarian Effort and Relief Uganda (HEAR Uganda) 1 0.25 34.5 Hunger Project Uganda 1 0.25 34.75 Hwan Sung 1 0.25 35 ICC and Danish Embassy 1 0.25 35.25 IMC 1 0.25 35.5 Infinity Network Development Foundation 1 0.25 35.75 Innovation Africa 1 0.25 36 Insurance Regulatory Authority (IRA) 1 0.25 36.25 International Aids Services 1 0.25 36.5 International Development Institute 1 0.25 36.75 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Cross Crescent Societies 1 0.25 37 (IFRC) International Medical Foundation in partnership IHK and Clarke Group 1 0.25 37.25 South MP, Mr Alex Bakunda Byarugaba 1 0.25 37.5 Islamic Bank, Pearl Rice Company, Busowa Coperative 1 0.25 37.75 Ismaili Muslim Volunteers and Ismaili National Council of Uganda in 1 0.25 38 collaboration with Muslim Hospital Isuzi (MAC East Africa) 1 0.25 38.25 Japanese Government 1 0.25 38.5 Jinja Catholic Diocese 1 0.25 3 Joy Manning Organisation 1 0.25 38.75 Kabaka Foundation and Bukalango Medical Centre 1 0.25 39.5 University 1 0.25 39.75 Kabubbu Development Project 1 0.25 40 Sugar Limited 2 0.5 40.5 Kaleke Kasome Organisation 1 0.25 40.75 Kampala Rotary Cub 1 0.25 41

22 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 Kamuli municipality MP, Rehema Watongola 1 0.25 41.25 district Woman MP, Nsheijah Kabaritsya 1 0.25 41.5 Kansai Plascon 2 0.5 42 Kansai Plascon 1 0.25 42.25 Home Care 1 0.25 42.5 KCB Bank Uganda 1 0.25 39 KCB Bank Uganda 1 0.25 39.25 Kenya Ports Authority 1 0.25 42.75 MP, Cuthbert Abigaba 1 0.25 43 Kikunyu Kwagala Women’s Group 1 0.25 43.25 Kilimo Trust, dfcu Bank 1 0.25 43.5 Kinyara Sugar Ltd 1 0.25 43.75 Kiyinda Diocese 1 0.25 44 Korea International Corporation Agency 1 0.25 44.25 Water and Sanitation Project 1 0.25 44.5 Lango Development Forum 1 0.25 44.75 Legal Aid Uganda 1 0.25 45 Lions Club 1 0.25 45.5 Lions Club 1 0.25 45.75 Lions Club of Bwambara 1 0.25 45.25 Lions Club Uganda 1 0.25 3.25 Lions Club, Busia 1 0.25 46 Lira Garment Industry (LGI) 1 0.25 46.25 Lunch for Learning 1 0.25 46.5 MAC East Africa Ltd 1 0.25 46.75 Masaka Diocese, Letshego, Primary Care International,LifeNet 1 0.25 51 International MasterCard Foundation 1 0.25 51.25 MasterCard Foundation 1 0.25 51.5 MasterCard Foundation, FAWE 1 0.25 3.5 Mbale Area Federation of Communities (MAFOC) 1 0.25 51.75 Mbarara Archdiocese 1 0.25 52 of Science and Technology 1 0.25 52.25 Mbarara Woman MP, Ms Rosette Mutabi Kajungu 1 0.25 52.5 Medical Aid to Northern Uganda (MANU) 1 0.25 52.75 Micro-Development for the Alleviation of Poverty through Learning 1 0.25 53 Entrepreneurship (Maple) Miryante Orphans Home 1 0.25 53.25 Mooncatcher Project, a US-based NGO in partnership with Woman of 1 0.25 53.5 Purpose MP of municipality, Mr Yeri Ofwono 1 0.25 47 Mr Brian Kirumira, Erias Brian White 1 0.25 53.75 Mr Chulwhye Cho 1 0.25 54 Mr Herbert Kabafunzaki 1 0.25 54.5 Mr Mauku Mugole 1 0.25 54.25 Mr Paul Amoru Omait 1 0.25 54.75 Ms Cissy Namujju, Woman MP, 1 0.25 55 Ms.Hanifa Kawooya, the District Woman MP 1 0.25 55.25 MTN Foundation 3 0.75 47.75

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 23 MTN Uganda 9 2.25 50 MTN Uganda 1 0.25 50.25 MTN Uganda Foundation 1 0.25 50.5 MTN Uganda in partnership with SOS Chidren’s Villages 1 0.25 50.75 Mukono Adventist Church 1 0.25 55.5 Mukono Smart Cities Initiatives 1 0.25 55.75 MultiChoice Resource Centre, NEPAD 1 0.25 56 National Social Security Fund (NSSF) 1 0.25 3.75 Nature Uganda 1 0.25 57 NC Bank Uganda Ltd 1 0.25 56.25 Nile Breweries Ltd 1 0.25 57.25 Nord-Süd-Brücken Foundation 1 0.25 57.5 NSSF 2 0.5 56.75 OKOA Refugee Group 1 0.25 57.75 Old students of Mbulamuti Primary School 1 0.25 58 Olive Group Church through Hope 4 Kids 1 0.25 58.25 Omer Farming Ltd 1 0.25 58.5 Opportunity Bank 1 0.25 58.75 in partnership with Rotary 1 0.25 59 Partners of Divine Care Ministries 1 0.25 59.25 Pathways Hope for Africa Initiative 1 0.25 59.5 Pauline and Juliet Uganda 1 0.25 59.75 Pearl Dairy Ltd 1 0.25 60 Pentecostal Assemblies of God (PAG) 1 0.25 60.25 Pilot Light Foundation in partnership with African International Christian 1 0.25 60.5 Ministry Plan International Programme 1 0.25 60.75 Plan International Uganda 1 0.25 61 Plan Uganda International 1 0.25 61.25 Pride Microfinance 1 0.25 61.5 Pride Microfinance 1 0.25 61.75 Pupils of Maria Assumpta Primary School 1 0.25 62 Rain Foundation and Aid Environment 1 0.25 62.25 Reproductive Health Uganda 1 0.25 62.5 2 0.5 63 Rotaract Clubs of Busitema and Livingstone International Universities 1 0.25 63.25 Rotary Club 6 1.5 64.75 Rotary Club 2 0.5 68 Rotary Club and Centenary Bank 1 0.25 66 Rotary Club Muyanga, Ellen Meadows Prosthetic Hand Foundation 1 0.25 65.75 Rotary Club of Jinja 1 0.25 4 Rotary Club of Kampala East 1 0.25 66.5 Rotary Club of Kisugu Victoria View 1 0.25 66.25 Rotary Club of Mbale in partnership with Mbale People’s Clinic 1 0.25 68.5 Rotary Club of district 1 0.25 68.75 Rotary Club, Infectious Diseases Institute 1 0.25 66.75 Rotary Club, 1 0.25 68.25 Rotary Club, Kampala 1 0.25 65

24 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 Rotary Club, Kampala, PKF, Letshego 1 0.25 65.25 Rotary Club, Kololo 1 0.25 65.5 Rotary Club, Rotaract Club 1 0.25 67 Rotary International 1 0.25 67.25 Rotary Kampala, Canadian Institute for Rural Education Development 1 0.25 67.5 Royal Embassy, Vision Group 1 0.25 69 of Companies 1 0.25 69.25 Rural Initiative for Community Empowerment 1 0.25 69.5 Rural Investment Supports Initiative 1 0.25 4.25 Rwenzori Child Help Foundation 1 0.25 69.75 Ryan’s Well Foundation, Divine Waters Uganda 1 0.25 70 SABA Engineering International, Veritas 1 0.25 70.25 Sadolin 1 0.25 70.5 Sam Childers (famously known as the ‘machine gun preacher’) 1 0.25 70.75 Sasakawa Africa Association 2 0.5 71.25 Secondary schools in 1 0.25 71.5 Self Help Africa 1 0.25 71.75 Send a Cow 1 0.25 72 Send a Cow Uganda 1 0.25 72.25 Seventh Day Adventist Church 1 0.25 72.5 Shalom Development Project 1 0.25 72.75 Shia Ismaili Muslim Community in Uganda 1 0.25 4.5 Sign Health Uganda 1 0.25 73 Sister Effect 1 0.25 73.25 South Isingiro MP, Alex Byarugaba Bakunda 1 0.25 73.5 St. Andrea Haibale Community Hospital 1 0.25 73.75 St. Conleth’s College in Ireland 1 0.25 25.25 Stanbic Bank 5 1.25 75 Stanbic Bank, Uganda 1 0.25 75.25 Bank, Challenges Uganda 1 0.25 75.5 Straight Talk Foundation 1 0.25 75.75 Students of Little Over Community School Derby in the 1 0.25 76 Students of College Nkopazambo 1 0.25 76.25 Surgeons teams from Germany 1 0.25 76.5 Sweet Sleep Uganda 1 0.25 76.75 TASO 1 0.25 77 Tawhid Muslim Association, Arabian Muslim Community 1 0.25 77.25 The Army Savings and Credit Cooperative 1 0.25 77.5 The Bukedea Woman MP, Ms Anita Among 1 0.25 77.75 The of Kigezi Development Forum, Mr. James Musinguzi 1 0.25 82 Garuga The Clarify Foundation 1 0.25 78 The district Woman MP, Ms Sarah Nakawu 1 0.25 4.75 The European Union and the Internationa 1 0.25 78.25 The Indian Association Uganda 1 0.25 78.5 The leader of Bugwere Cultural Institute 1 0.25 82.25 The Lions Club of Kabale 1 0.25 78.75

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 25 The Lions Club of Kabale in partnership with Marlborough Lions Club of 1 0.25 79 United States of America The MP for Rushenyi, Mr Mwesiga Rukutana 1 0.25 79.25 The National Social Security Fund (NSSF) 1 0.25 79.5 The National Water and Sewerage Corporation 1 0.25 79.75 The Rotary Club of 1 0.25 80 The East MP, Mr Henry Ariganyira Musasizi 1 0.25 80.25 The Samia Bugwe North MP, Mr. Gideon Onyango 1 0.25 80.5 The Woman MP, Ms Angelina Osegge 1 0.25 80.75 The Tororo Municipality MP, Mr Apollo Ofwono Yeri 1 0.25 81 The Tororo Municipality MP, Mr Apollo Yeri 1 0.25 81.25 The Uganda Communications Commission 1 0.25 81.5 The United States African Development Foundation and Citi Foundation 1 0.25 81.75 The youth, Uganda 1 0.25 82.75 Together Alive for Good Health and Good Life 1 0.25 83 Tooro Kingdom in partnership with North India Cultural Association 1 0.25 83.25 Toro Kingdom 1 0.25 83.5 Toro Kingdom, North Indian Cultural Association 1 0.25 83.75 Tororo Archdiocese 1 0.25 84.75 Tororo Cement and Yalfa Transporters 1 0.25 84.25 1 0.25 84 Tororo Cement, Yalfa Transport Company 1 0.25 5 Tororo MP, Yeri Apollo Ofwono 1 0.25 84.5 Total E&P Uganda 1 0.25 85 Total Uganda 1 0.25 85.25 True Venture for Children Uganda 1 0.25 85.5 Trust Fund for Victims 1 0.25 85.75 Turkish non-governmental organisation 1 0.25 86 UBL in partnership with Kabaka Foundation 1 0.25 86.25 UCA 1 0.25 86.5 Ugachick Poultry Breeders Ltd, Vision Group 1 0.25 88 Uganda Breweries Limited 2 0.5 88.5 Uganda Breweries Limited, Vision Group 1 0.25 88.75 Uganda Christian University, Mukono 1 0.25 89 Uganda Indian Association 1 0.25 5.25 Uganda Joint Medical Stores (UJMS) 1 0.25 89.25 Uganda Microfinance Support Centre 1 0.25 89.5 Uganda Muslim Alliance 1 0.25 89.75 Uganda Red Cross Society 1 0.25 90 Uganda Small Scale Industries Association 1 0.25 90.25 Uganda Veterans Assistance Board 1 0.25 82.5 Uganda Voucher Plus Activity Project 1 0.25 90.5 1 0.25 86.75 Umeme 1 0.25 90.75 UMSC 1 0.25 87 Undisclosed well-wishers in the United States 1 0.25 91 UNICEF 1 0.25 91.25 United Kingdom-based Muslim cleric and Mr Kalisa 1 0.25 91.5

26 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 United Nations Development Programme 1 0.25 5.5 University of Kansas Hospital 1 0.25 91.75 UNRA 1 0.25 87.25 UPA Old Mutual Insurance 1 0.25 87.5 US doctors 1 0.25 87.75 Vegetable Oil Development Project 1 0.25 92.25 Veritas Investment Ltd 1 0.25 92.5 VI-Agroforestry 1 0.25 92 Vision Group 5 1.25 93.75 Vision Group and Private Education Development Network 1 0.25 94 Vision Group, National Forest Authority 1 0.25 94.25 Vivo Energy 1 0.25 94.5 Voiceless Orphan Task Force Uganda 1 0.25 94.75 Voluntary Action for Development 1 0.25 95 Volunteer Action Network, Women Global 1 0.25 95.25 1 0.25 95.5 West Nile Trust Fund 1 0.25 95.75 Rotary Club 1 0.25 96 Woman MP, Evelyn Chemutai 1 0.25 96.25 Women Health Care Development and Woman 1 0.25 96.5 Women of Purpose 2 0.5 97 World Bank 1 0.25 97.25 World Bank, Agriculture Technology and Agri-business Advisory Services 1 0.25 97.5 World Food Programme 1 0.25 97.75 World Vision 2 0.5 98.25 World Vision Organisation 1 0.25 98.5 World Vision Uganda with funding from United States Government’s 1 0.25 98.75 Bureau of Population, Refugee and Migration Wyss Medical Foundation 1 0.25 99 Zhang’s Group Liu Ming Shu 1 0.25 99.5 ZTE Uganda 1 0.25 99.25

TOTAL 400 100

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 27 ANNEX 2: DATA COLLECTION TOOL MAPPING SOCIAL IMPACT INVESTMENT IN UGANDA

Social impact investment (SII) seeks to generate social impact alongside financial return. This investment often brings together capital and expertise from the public, private and not-for-profit sectors to achieve a social objective.

KAS and ACTADE have initiated this study in order to assess the current status quo of SII in Uganda. As a mapping study, it is intended to derive key metrics which can be used for further assessments and also to build consensus with the larger community of potential SII investors. As such, the overall goal is to understand the SII landscape in the prefecture of Uganda as well as how successful SII initiatives have been or are being implemented in the country.

We thank you in advance for taking time to complete this questionnaire.

Company name:

Location:

No. of employees:

Total yearly turnover:

Headquarters (Y/N)

1. How much have you heard or read about social impact investment?

Answer choices Not at all A little Somewhat aware A significant amount

2. How would you define a social impact investment? • Answer choices An investment that has both a financial return and a social return An investment that is likely to be small-scale and directed towards a social enterprise An investment whose return could match the market return but might be less liquid An investment that is primarily philanthropic but also has a financial return Don’t know Other

28 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 3. Indicate which of the following sectors your organisation has invested in over the last 2 years. Education Agriculture Health Social housing Small-scale industry Other • If other, please specify:______

4. Which factors would encourage you to make an active decision to invest more in social impact? (Select the three most important) • Answer choices Hearing from other schemes or organisations that have invested in social impact A better understanding of what social impact investments are Clear evidence of organisational interest in and acceptance of social impact investments Greater provision of social impact investment products Other • If other, please specify:______

5. How often do you get applications for CSR or SII? • Answer choices Very often Often Never

6. Is your impact investing initiative targeted or driven by organisational strategy? • Answer choices Targeted Driven by organisational strategy Both

7. Are you supporting individuals or communities? • Answer choices Individuals Communities Both

Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 29 8. In which areas are your investments concentrated? • Answer choices Rural Peri-urban Urban

9. Describe any success stories you have registered emanating from your SII initiatives ______

Thank you

30 Mapping SII in Uganda – Study Report November 2019 MAPPING UGANDA’S SOCIAL IMPACT INVESTMENT LANDSCAPE

KONRAD ADENAUER STIFTUNG UGANDA ACTADE Plot. 51A Prince Charles Drive, Kololo Plot 2, Agape Close | Ntinda, P.O. Box 647, Kampala/Uganda Kigoowa on Kiwatule Road T: +256-393-262011/2 P.O.BOX, 16452, Kampala Uganda www.kas.de/Uganda T: +256 414 664 616 www. actade.org