Chulho Hyun/UNICEF/Uganda/2007

SAMPLE OF ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPATING IN CONSOLIDATED APPEALS

AARRECACFACTEDADRAAfricareAMI-FranceARCASBASIAVSICARECARITASCEMIR INTERNATIONALCESVICFACHFCHFICISVCMACONCERNConcern UniversalCOOPICORDAIDCOSV

CRSCWSDanchurchaidDDGDiakonie Emergency AidDRCEM-DHFAOFARFHIFinnchurchaidFrench RCFSDGAAGOALGTZGVCHandicap InternationalHealthNet TPOHELPHelpAge InternationalHKIHorn Relief

HTHumedicaIAILOIMCINTERMONInternewsINTERSOSIOMIPHDIRIRCIRDIRINIRWIslamic RWJOINJRSLWFMalaria ConsortiumMalteserMercy CorpsMDA

MDMMEDAIRMENTORMERLINNCANPANRCOCHAOHCHROXFAMOXFAM UKPA (formerly ITDG)PACTPAIPlanPMU-IPURC/GermanyRCOSamaritan's PurseSECADEVSolidaritésSUDO

TEARFUNDTGHUMCORUNAIDSUNDPUNDSSUNEPUNESCOUNFPAUN-HABITATUNHCRUNICEFUNIFEMUNJLCUNMASUNOPSUNRWAVISWFPWHOWorld ConcernWorld ReliefWV

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................1

Table I. Summary of Requirements, Commitments/Contributions and Pledges per Sector...............3

Table II. Summary of Requirements, Commitments/Contributions and Pledges by Priority...............3

Table III. Summary of Requirements, Commitments/Contributions and Pledges per Appealing Organisations....................................................................................................................... 4

2. CHANGES IN THE CONTEXT, HUMANITARIAN NEEDS AND RESPONSE.........................6

3. RESPONSE TO DATE, AND UPDATED STRATEGIC AND SECTORAL RESPONSE PLANS.................................................................................................................................... 11

3.1 RESPONSE TO DATE............................................................................................................11

3.2 UPDATED STRATEGIC PRIORITIES.....................................................................................14

3.3 RESPONSE TO DATE PER CLUSTER AND UPDATED SECTOR RESPONSE PLANS......15

3.3A Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM)............................................15

3.3B Coordination............................................................................................................15

3.3C Education................................................................................................................. 16

3.3D Food Security and Agricultural Livelihoods (FSAL).................................................17

3.3E Governance, Infrastructure & Livelihoods (Early Recovery)....................................18

3.3F Health, Nutrition and HIV/AIDS................................................................................19

3.3G Multi-Sector.............................................................................................................20

3.3H Protection................................................................................................................20

3.3I Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)..................................................................22

Table IV. List of Projects (grouped by cluster) with Funding Status....................................................23

4. NEW AND REVISED PROJECTS...........................................................................................43

5. CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................ 44

6. NEW AND REVISED PROJECTS SHEETS...........................................................................45

ANNEX I. ADDITIONAL FUNDING TABLES..................................................................................49

ANNEX II. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS............................................................................54

Please note that appeals are revised regularly. The latest version of this document is available on http://www.humanitarianappeal.net

iii

iv

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Steady improvement in the humanitarian situation has continued across northern Uganda. Since the issuance of the 2008 Consolidated Appeal (CAP) for Uganda six months ago, the last remaining restrictions on the freedom of movement have been lifted and a further 10% of the displaced population has left the camps of the Acholi, Lango and Teso sub-regions to move to villages of origin or transit sites closer to the farm lands and gardens from which many households derive their primary source of income. While the pace of return remains uneven across the Acholi and Teso sub-regions, the gradually increasing number of returnees has prompted further action by the Government and aid agencies to develop coordinated strategies for consolidating the peace dividends that have accrued since August 2006, despite the lack of a final conclusion to the Juba Peace Process.

Indeed, ensuring the sustainability of these gains within the three-year framework of the Peace, Recovery and Development Plan (PRDP) for Northern Uganda is essential to the long-term stability of the region. Thus, across the districts hosting internally displaced persons (IDPs), the humanitarian imperative for the next 18 months (July 2008 to December 2009) will be to help consolidate peace by actively supporting the Government’s lead role in stabilising the needs of the vulnerable population, while working to ensure that IDPs achieve the durable solutions recognised under the Uganda IDP Policy and further endorsed by the Camp Phase-out Guidelines issued by the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) in May 2008, namely: voluntary return; settlement in the former IDP camp; and relocation to another part of the country.

Unfortunately, despite the recognition of the decreasing humanitarian needs in the Acholi, Lango and Teso sub-regions made in the CAP 2008, with its attendant shift away from traditional emergency programming toward community-based recovery activities that complement other initiatives under the umbrella of the PRDP, low donor response has left the various clusters without the means of implementing most of their transitional programming. With less than 31% funding for the early recovery and recovery projects included in the CAP, basic service delivery and livelihood support in all IDP-hosting areas and in Karamoja are underfunded. Where possible, some of the more recovery- oriented projects have been withdrawn, wholly or in part, from this revised CAP.

It is critical that all partners recognise the potential risk: if humanitarian concerns persist or worsen due to lack of funding for projects aimed at stabilising displaced and returning populations, any sustainable recovery will be delayed, or even jeopardised.

Adding to concerns about the relatively low funding of the CAP is the deteriorating situation in Karamoja, which is fast approaching a worst-case food security scenario. While it is still too early to predict the massive failure of crops in the Karamoja region, the prolonged dry spell – for the third consecutive year – continues to delay the single cropping season and increase the susceptibility of livestock to deadly diseases. Even if rainfall does increase, there is a scarcity of cereal seeds for planting in the region. Visible signs of malnutrition have been reported in Karamoja, with global acute malnutrition (GAM) rates in both Moroto and Nakapiripirit Districts approaching 16% already in February 2008.1 Further aspects of vulnerability can be seen in the migration of the rural destitute to peri-urban areas within southern Karamoja and a noticeable increase in out-migration from the region. In Karamoja, therefore, particular attention must be paid to emergency preparedness and response, with specific emphasis on supporting the pastoralist economy as a humanitarian action and taking into account the particular needs of vulnerable groups, including women and girls.

Overall, through the mid-year review (MYR) process, humanitarian and development partners in Uganda have striven to sharpen the humanitarian focus in northern Uganda and to augment the capacity to prepare and respond in Karamoja. In this regard, all projects included in the revised CAP have been prioritised on a three-tier system that indicates short-term, high-impact projects (A), medium-term projects (B); and projects that do not respond to critical needs and/or needs that can be satisfied in the short- or medium-term (C). The projects have also been classified as humanitarian, early recovery or recovery. In keeping with the shortened implementation timeframe remaining before the end of 2008, the total requirements for any unfunded projects have been reduced. Thus, the revised requests for the Uganda CAP 2008 are US$372,475,934,2 against which some $166,659,652, or 45%, has been committed to date.

1 MoH/UNICEF/WFP, Nutrition Assessment, February 2008.2 All dollar signs in this document denote United States dollars. Funding for this appeal should be reported to the Financial Tracking Service (FTS), fts@reliefweb.int), which will display requirements and current funding information on the CAP 2008 web page.

v

UGANDA

Some basic facts about Uganda:

Most recent data PreviouslyPopulation 28.2 million (UNFPA 2007) 17.4 million (UNFPA 1990)Life expectancy 46.2 years (UNFPA 2005) 46.4 years (UNFPA 1990)Under 5 mortality 136/1,000 (UNICEF 2005) 160/1000 (UNICEF 1990)Prevalence of undernourishment in total

population19% (FAO Statistical Division 2004 estimate)

Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita $ 1,390 (UNFPA 2005) $ 710 (UNFPA 1990)Percentage of population living on less than

$1 per day31% (UNDP 2005/6) 56% (UNDP 1992)

Proportion of population without sustainable access to an improved drinking water source

50% (UNFPA 2005) 85% (UNFPA 1990)

IDPs (number and percent of population)

1.1 million* (UNHCR, March 2008)

1.8 million (OCHA 2005)

Refugees In-country 206,019 (UNHCR, April 2008) 216,392 (UNHCR, November 2007)

ECHO Vulnerability and Crisis Index score (V/C)

3/3

2006 UNDP Human Development Index score

145 of 177

Also Uganda's rapid population growth rate of 3.5% per year makes it the third fastest growing country in the world. Population growth is responsible, in part, for the country's deepening poverty. At the current growth rate, Uganda's population will increase to 54 million in 2025, doubling in less than 25 years.

The first country in the world to roll-back its HIV prevalence rate, the current HIV prevalence among Uganda’s adult population is 6.7%. Worryingly, HIV prevalence is significantly high among women than among men – 8% versus 5%. In total, an estimated one million Ugandans are living with HIV.

* As of 31 March 2008, there were approximately 1.1 million Ugandans remaining in IDP camps or living in transit sites, with over 741,000 having returned to villages of origin.

1

UGANDA

Table I. Summary of Requirements, Commitments/Contributions and Pledges per SectorTable II. Summary of Requirements, Commitments/Contributions and Pledges by Priority

2

UGANDA

3

UGANDA

Table III. Summary of Requirements, Commitments/Contributions and Pledges per Appealing Organisations

4

UGANDA

5

UGANDA

2. CHANGES IN THE CONTEXT, HUMANITARIAN NEEDS AND RESPONSE Security and AccessProgress in the Juba Peace Process has fluctuated over the past six months, although there has been little immediate impact of these fluctuations on the actual situation on the ground in northern Uganda. While quick work was made of finalising the agreements on Agenda Items 4 (ceasefire agreement) and 5 (disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration) and the annexes to Agenda Items 2 (comprehensive solutions) and 3 (reconciliation and accountability), as well as the text of a Final Peace Agreement, following the appointment in January of a new chief negotiator for the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), the flurry of signings did not culminate, as expected, in the signing of the final peace agreement in April 2008. Instead, the LRA chief negotiator was dismissed. Moreover, a planned meeting between LRA Commander Joseph Kony and traditional, religious, political and cultural leaders in mid-May did not transpire. At the time of this mid-year review, the immediate future of the peace process is unknown. Yet all parties continue to call for adherence to the cessation of hostilities and commitment to the negotiating table. Meanwhile, LRA activities have been reported in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan and Central African Republic, where hundreds of civilians are alleged to have been kidnapped by the LRA.

Although the lack of a conclusion to the peace process is often cited as a reason that mass return has not occurred in the Acholi sub-region as it has in Lango, there is no indication that people are moving back into camps because of the recent developments. Instead, the general impression is that aggressive LRA activities have ceased to pose a real threat to northern Uganda. Significantly, the continued stability across the region has led the Government of Uganda to lift all remaining restrictions on the freedom of movement. It must be noted, however, that in the days before the finalisation of the present mid-year review, there were reports of a new military option for regional security being laid on the table which could impact the situation in northern Uganda.

However, in areas bordering the Karamoja region and notwithstanding the continued deployment of the Anti Stock Theft Units (ASTU), which has had a positive effect on security, increasing reports of raiding and other aggressive activities by illegally-armed Karimojong continue to impact return movement in Katakwi, Amuria, Pader and Kitgum Districts. The increase in aggressive activities is generally associated with the prevailing dry season and a shortage of pasture and water for cattle.

Security within Karamoja has seen a sharp decline in road ambushes since 2007 but an increase in the number of raids (the highest number was recorded in March 2008 compared to the previous six months) and worsening of Jie-Dodoth relations. Meanwhile, the disarmament programme in Karamoja has witnessed a dramatic decline in the number of weapons seized in 2008. According to the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF), 25,000 light weapons were captured in Karamoja in 2007 – an average of over 2,000 per month. Between January and May 2008, weapon capture has averaged 200 per month. Early this year, the average number of weapons seized was less than 100 per month.

Population MovementOver the past year, there has been significant movement of the displaced population out of the camps to transit sites and villages of origin (see Charts I and II below).

Chart I. Trends in Population Movement since January 2006

As predicted in the original planning figures for the CAP 2008, the return process has officially concluded in Lango sub-region, with the last remaining camp in Lira District phased out at the end of March 2008. With the lifting of the last restrictions on freedom of movement in Kitgum District, the entire population of northern Uganda now enjoys increased access to farmland and unrestricted travel time. Nevertheless, return movement remains uneven across the Acholi and Teso sub-regions, varying from 12% to 70%, respectively (Chart II).

Northern Uganda Population Movement January 2006 to April 2008

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

Jun-06

Nov-06

Mar-07

Jun-07

Sep-07

Nov-07

Jan-08

Feb-08

Mar-08

Apr-08

IDP Camps Transit Sites Villages of Origin# of people in

6

UGANDA

Chart II. Trends in Population Movement from May 2007 to April 2008 (Source: UNHCR)

DistrictOriginalCamp Pop.

CampsApril 2008

% in Camps Δ %

TransitApril 2008

% in Transit Δ %

HomeApril 2008

% at Home Δ %

Amuru/Gulu 453,223 248,359 55% ↓16.1% 111,000 24% ↓

1.5% 94,000 21% 17.7%↑

Kitgum 310,140 205,957 67% ↓12.3% 62,947 20% ↓

0.3% 41,236 13% 12.6%↑

Pader 338,939 93,707 28% ↓18.9% 186,042 55% Stable 59,190 17% 16.0%

↑

Total Acholi 1,102,302 548,023 50% ↓15.9% 359,989 33% ↓

0.7% 194,426 18% 15.7%↑

Amuria 72,417 22,000 30% ↓28.5% 9,000 12% ↓

19.1% 62,476 86% 76.7%↑

Katakwi 70,534 21,000 30% ↓66.6% 3,000 4% ↓

2.2% 36,000 51% 51%↑

Total Teso 142,951 43,000 30% ↓47.5% 12,000 8% ↓

10.7%↑ 98,476 69% 64.0%↑

Grand Total 1,245,253 591,023 47% ↓

19.5% 371,989 30% ↓1.9% 292,902 23% 21.3%

↑

As the population movement has continued, various District Disaster Management Committees (DDMCs) have identified priority camps for phase-out in both Acholi and Teso sub-regions. Following extensive discussion with the Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM) and Protection clusters in May 2008, the OPM issued the “Camp Phase-out Guidelines for all districts that have IDP camps”, reflecting the growing confidence that the situation in northern Uganda is normalising. The guidelines outline the modalities for phasing-out an IDP camp under the leadership of the local government structures. In addition, the guidelines emphasize the need to re-establish local government structures where necessary and – most importantly – present camp phase-out as the initial phase of a process geared to achieve the three durable solutions foreseen by the Uganda National IDP Policy, namely: voluntary return; settlement in the former IDP camp; and relocation to another part of the country.

In view of these developments, the primary focus of attention in northern Uganda is increasingly shifting away from providing humanitarian relief to supporting government-led recovery. For example, in the Acholi sub-region, where generous rains have fallen, some major food security actors carried out a last distribution of seeds and tools during the most recent planting season and are now redesigning their programmes to promote sustainable livelihood opportunities, including income generating activities (IGAs), livestock restocking, extension services and environmental conservation. An Emergency Food Security Assessment (EFSA) is currently underway to determine future food needs and a food assistance phase-out plan for the remainder of 2008.

Whereas above it was noted that the lack of conclusion to the Juba Peace Process is often cited as an obstacle to the mass return of the displaced population, it is increasingly apparent that the slow pace of population movement is primarily attributable to the lack of basic services in return areas, such as limited or no access to health care services, clean water and sanitation and/or inadequate education facilities. Such gaps increasingly expose the population to new risks, such as the outbreak of Hepatitis E Virus (HEV) in Kitgum District, which has rapidly spread from one camp to at least ten sub-counties, according to the latest report.3

Recent service availability mapping exercises and integrated assessments show an appalling lack of basic services in transit sites and return areas. Yet humanitarian agencies have neither the capacity nor the funding to meet all these needs, nor do they have the primary responsibility for redressing the long-term consequences of conflict and under-investment in social services. Instead, the role of humanitarian agencies, on the cusp of recovery and reconstruction after the emergency period, is one of helping to stabilise vulnerable populations by alleviating the worst consequences of the protracted humanitarian crisis and laying the groundwork for future development initiatives through support for the achievement of durable solutions for the displaced population, as envisaged in the Uganda IDP Policy.

To this end, support for ongoing humanitarian action throughout the remainder of 2008 is critical. If the current humanitarian situation persists or worsens due to lack of funding for projects aimed at

3 World Health Organization, Kitgum District Surveillance Report on Hepatitis E, 31 May 2008.

7

UGANDA

stabilising displaced and returning populations, any sustainable recovery will be delayed, or even jeopardised.

At the same time, it is incumbent upon all actors, international and national, to increase their cooperation with and coordination through national recovery and development mechanisms. To this end, and through the cluster mechanisms, humanitarian actors will continue to reach out to national apparatuses such as the sector working groups and district technical committees and offices to integrate identified humanitarian and recovery priorities and gaps analysis into their strategic planning at each level.

Chart III. CAP Funding Requirements by PRDP Strategic Objective

Although the PRDP was launched on 17 October 2007, its full implementation will start on 1 July 2008 (following the government fiscal year 1 July to 30 June) and run for three years. The PRDP provides a comprehensive framework covering more than 40 districts of northern Uganda and will serve as the consistent point of reference for both the remaining humanitarian programming and increasing recovery programming. Most of the international community’s programming within the present CAP falls within the PRDP Strategic Objective 2, Rebuilding and Empowering Communities, as shown in Chart III.

On 18 April, the Karamoja Integrated Disarmament and Development Programme (KIDDP) was launched as a sub-programme within the overall PRDP framework. Having benefited from wider consultation in its current form, the humanitarian and development community has expressed its support of the development objective contained in the KIDDP, but remains concerned about the use of sometimes excessive force in disarmament operations in Karamoja. In their advocacy, humanitarian and development partners are underscoring the inextricable link between development and disarmament in Karamoja.

Food CrisisReports of rising food prices have appeared on an almost daily basis in the Ugandan media. Although no comprehensive data sets are available to quantify the price increases, anecdotal evidence points towards price rises of 20 to 50% in food commodities, mostly in urban markets. With its relatively isolated market and diversified range of locally produced staple foods, it is expected that most of the population in Uganda may not be severely affected by the global food price crisis in the short term. In terms of situation monitoring, special attention should still be given to IDPs, return communities and Karimojong as their livelihoods are still very fragile. Some still rely on external assistance for food and agriculture production. In fact, the most severe price increases have been reported on processed and imported foods such as maize, wheat and rice, particularly in urban areas. On the other hand, in the medium term, with neighbouring Kenya being more affected due to its greater exposure to international trade, it is expected that exports from Uganda will significantly increase, directly affecting local prices and household food security. In addition, stability in southern Sudan and the continuously increasing demand for food supplies will also negatively affect food access for small-scale farmers, returnees and IDPs in northern Uganda. Within this scenario and to anticipate future food security problems, it is increasingly important to focus investment on agricultural production by availing quality inputs and facilitating the increased use of land.

The situation has also been impacted by the rising price of fuel, which has increased humanitarian agencies’ operating expenses. However, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the sharp spike in fuel costs during the worst of the post-election violence in Kenya – when Uganda, like other landlocked Central African countries, was cut off from supply lines – is estimated not to have had a substantial overall impact on the Ugandan economy as blocked supplies eventually reached the country.

CAP 2008 Funding Requirements by PRDP

Strategic Objective

050000000

100000000150000000200000000250000000300000000350000000400000000

SO 1 SO 2 SO 3 SO 4 Non PRDPProjects

8

UGANDA

Meanwhile, the food security situation in Karamoja looks far from promising at mid-year 2008. The prevailing La Niña conditions continued through May, with a consequent reduced level of rainfall registered in south-western, north-eastern and eastern Uganda. The prolonged dry spell has already delayed first season planting in the Teso sub-region and the only cropping season in Karamoja. While it is still too early to predict the massive failure of crops in the Karamoja region, the projections do not look good. Even if rainfall does increase, there is a scarcity of cereal seeds for planting in the region.

Visible signs of malnutrition have been reported in Karamoja, with GAM rates in both Moroto and Nakapiripirit Districts approaching 16% already in February 2008.4 Such high rates are typically recorded only later in the year, prior to harvest, when household food stocks have been depleted. 5 The average severe acute malnutrition (SAM) rate is 2% across the region. Preliminary results from a Médecins sans Frontières - Spain (MSF-S) rapid assessment in May 2008 confirm the need to activate emergency nutritional programmes in some sub-counties of Moroto District. Further aspects of vulnerability can be seen in the migration of the rural destitute to peri-urban areas within southern Karamoja and a noticeable increase in out-migration from the region to urban centres such as Kampala, Iganga, Jinja and Mbale. In the Teso sub-region, reports indicate that many families are eating only one meal per day and/or subsisting on seasonal fruits. In addition to the obvious impact on human food security, the consequences of this prolonged dry spell are negative for the livestock population. Since March 2007, 100,000 of the two million goats and sheep in the Karamoja region have been lost to the ravages of the peste de petits ruminants (PPR), while the estimated 1.2 million cattle in the sub-region are at serious risk of Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia (CBPP) and tick-borne infections. Additionally, due to confinement of livestock within Karamoja and government denial of access to plush lands in neighbouring districts that resulted in lack of access to pasture and water, milk production has decreased and loss of livestock to death and disease has been reported.

In summary, the Karamoja region is quickly approaching a worst-case food security scenario in which nearly three-fourths of the population may require general food distribution (GFD) through the next harvest.6

Meanwhile, due to low production and general scarcity of commodities in Karamoja, the prices of basic food commodities have risen dramatically over the last six months. In Moroto District, the price of sorghum increased between 20 and 63% in various sub-counties between December 2007 and April 2008, while bean prices soared by 60%. Sorghum price increases in Nakapiripirit District over the same period have been as high as 114%, with equally sharp rises in the price of maize. The results of a 21 May inter-agency assessment in Abim District7 indicate similar food price increases since 2007 with sorghum up 150%, ground nuts and green grams up 25% and the price of beef/goat meat up 50%. Results from another inter-agency assessment in eastern Kaabong District8 on 24 May revealed a 40 to 100% increase since last year for maize grain, beans and sorghum/cereal. Ghee, a form of butter used for cooking and as a body moisturiser, increased in cost by 400%.

Nationwide Local Council (LC) elections are scheduled for November 2008. It is essential that the legal status of the LC I and II officials be resolved. The strengthening of the LC system, particularly at the LC I, II and III levels, is critical to facilitating the resumption of civilian governance mechanisms in northern Uganda while the camp commander structures put in place during the displacement period are disbanded. For instance, land disputes linked to population movements are still insufficiently understood by many actors and present obstacles to return, particularly for the most vulnerable, and have the potential to cause renewed instability. Thus, the LC III courts that are mandated to resolve land disputes according to Ugandan national law require added support to carry out their work.

4 MoH/UNICEF/WFP, Nutrition Assessment, February 2008.5 GAM rates in other parts of Karamoja are lower (8.3% in Abim, 9.1% in Kaabong and 6.3% in Kotido), reflecting some successful nutrition interventions to stabilise food security.6 The next harvest cannot be expected until September 2008 and may be delayed by failed or late rains.7 On 21 May 2008, inter-agency multi-sectoral assessments led by local government authorities were conducted in the four parishes of Nyakwae Sub-County (Opopongo, Oreta, Pupukamuya and Rogum) to gain increased understanding of the needs of the most vulnerable communities as determined by the District and partners.8 On 23 May 2008, inter-agency multi-sectoral assessments led by local government authorities were conducted in Kaabong District in Kalapata Sub-County (Kamion and Morokori parishes); Karenga Sub-County (Loyoro Napore and Pire parishes); and Lolelia Sub-County (Kaimese and Loteteleit parishes). The sub-counties were selected as representative of the district’s different environmental zones.

9

UGANDA

Regional ContextRegionally, Uganda continues to feel the impact of instability in its neighbours. In the wake of the disputed 27 December 2007 elections and violence in Kenya, an estimated 12,000 refugees entered the country and more than 2,000 of them sought international assistance. Under the leadership of UNHCR and the Government (Office of the Prime Minister) and in partnership with many humanitarian organisations, a temporary transit centre was established at Mulanda, some 35 kilometres from the Kenya border in Tororo District. Starting on 23 May 2008, Kenyan refugees interested in staying in Uganda for the longer term were relocated to the Kiryandongo refugee settlement in Masindi District in western Uganda.

On the other side of the country, the potential for renewed influxes of Congolese refugees remains as the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo continues to confront dissident groups, including the one led by rebel General Laurent Nkunda. While there have been no new influxes since December 2007, further arrivals are expected to occur if the tensions rise again.

Scenarios and Planning FiguresOverall, the most likely case scenario (see pages 17 to 18 of the CAP 2008) remains valid for Uganda, with some indication that most of the country, with the exception of Karamoja, is moving towards the best case scenario. Despite the lack of a conclusion to the Juba Peace Process, there is little expectation of renewed LRA attacks in Uganda.

For Karamoja, a revised most likely scenario could be triggered by the continued lack of rain. This scenario includes: continued food price inflation leading to worsening poverty and hunger; rains arriving late in the season, resulting in no meaningful agricultural production and poor harvests; increased out-migration patterns; GAM rates that increase to over 20%,with attendant worsening of the health status of the majority of the population; increased insecurity due to higher numbers of raids and revived road ambushes and criminal acts and greater pressure on health units to deal with gunshot wounds; worsening relations between the UPDF and local communities, resulting in increased protection violations and a disruption of peace and reconciliation efforts; and increased livestock losses as a result of epidemics. The need for urgent emergency assistance will be apparent in the last quarter of 2008.

The original planning figures have been confirmed for Lango, with all camps phased out by end-March 2008, although approximately 700 extremely vulnerable individual (EVIs) remain in former camps without family or community support. In Acholi and Teso, population movement continues as anticipated although more people than originally predicted are remaining in camps and transit areas in Acholi. In Karamoja, with the limited harvest last year and in the event of persisting below-average rainfall, more than 700,000 people could be in need of food assistance.

Changes in needsWhile the humanitarian situation in IDP camps in Acholi is stabilising, monitoring of the slow but steady return in the Acholi and Teso sub-regions confirms that the growing need for basic services in transit and return areas remains unsatisfied. Indeed, the continued pattern of commuting between transit / return areas and IDP camps is mainly attributed to the greater availability of services, including education, health and water, in the camps. The commuting pattern results in family separations in which children and elders are left behind, unaccompanied, in the camps while able-bodied family members move to transit sites or villages of origin to secure better access to plots.

The movement out of the camps has highlighted the inadequate capacity of village, parish and sub-county local administration fully to discharge their functions. There is a need for more structured capacity-building programmes. In addition, competition for scarce resources, coupled with the progressive erosion of traditional extended family / community networks and related values of solidarity, are increasing the number of extremely vulnerable individuals (EVI) left behind in camps to care for themselves, particularly since public welfare systems are not in place to meet their needs.

In Karamoja, the alarmingly high GAM levels registered in the first quarter of the year highlight the need for increased attention to nutritional status, as well as to the root causes of malnutrition and food insecurity in the region. Increased attention to education, water and sanitation and veterinary services to prevent further deterioration of livelihoods is of utmost importance.

10

UGANDA

3. RESPONSE TO DATE, AND UPDATED STRATEGIC AND SECTORAL RESPONSE PLANS

In recognition of the decreasing humanitarian needs in the Acholi, Lango and Teso sub-regions, the CAP 2008 reflected a shift away from traditional emergency programming toward community-based recovery activities that complement other initiatives under the umbrella of the PRDP. Yet, while supporting and stabilising the returning population and community-based recovery in transit and return areas continues to be a priority for aid agencies, low donor response has left the various clusters without the means of implementing most of their transitional programming.

The overarching objectives laid out by the CAP 2008 are to: Save lives by providing emergency assistance where required and ensuring rapid response

capacity in emergency situations; and, Facilitate recovery by promoting durable solutions and re-establishment of livelihoods, including

disaster preparedness measures.

Within these overarching objectives, and given the various sub-regions’ different progression along the trajectory from crisis to recovery, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) in Uganda identified six geographic / thematic priorities for 2008. In November 2006, the IASC in Uganda agreed to maintain an ongoing monitoring mechanism; for 2008, the strategic monitoring has been strengthened to produce a tracking system that relies on the IASC Country Team, cluster leads, district officials and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). The chart below provides a brief evaluation as of May 2008.

3.1 Response to dateOverarching objectives Evaluation

Save lives by providing emergency assistance where required and ensuring rapid response capacity in emergency situations.

The operation has been successful in saving lives and responding to the emergency needs created by epidemic outbreaks and camp fires.

GAM levels across northern Uganda remain under control; in fact, the average GAM of 5.1% in districts with humanitarian operation is less than the national average of 6% and well below the 10% emergency threshold.

In Karamoja, however, both the food security and nutrition situations are deteriorating, requiring urgent support: GAM in the region averages 10% and is up to 16% in Moroto and Nakapiripirit Districts.

Low funding levels are hampering essential service delivery in the areas of health, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), nutrition, agriculture and food aid.

Facilitate recovery by promoting durable solutions and re-establishment of livelihoods, including disaster preparedness measures.

The proposed stabilisation and recovery of the populations seeking durable solutions is not taking place at the needed pace due to less than 31% funding for early recovery and recovery projects in the CAP and delay in the operationalisation of programme components within the PRDP through other sources of funding. Basic service delivery and support to livelihoods in all IDP-hosting areas and in Karamoja are in shortfall.

Geographic / Thematic PrioritiesIn Karamoja, to improve human rights protection, human security and food security by strengthening and diversifying livelihoods and response to disasters caused by natural and human action.

There has been an expansion of livelihood programmes by both United Nations agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in the areas of agricultural production and livestock support. The districts have also made use of OPM post-flood support to expand areas of agricultural production, particularly in green-belt areas.

However, the lack of rain will undoubtedly undermine both agricultural and livestock production in 2008. Moreover, there is an apparent shortage of cereal seed supplies. An outbreak of PPR has killed 100,000 goats and sheep and there has been a delay in emergency livestock vaccination programmes.

No livelihood programmes have been established to assist those Karimojong youth who have been disarmed by the UPDF. Cattle-raiding incidents remain high, with inadequate protection of kraals in Kaabong District.

Modest developmental improvements have been made in south Karamoja to assist re-settled populations in both Moroto and Nakapiripirit Districts.

The region as a whole continues its high dependence on food aid with a likely 70% of the population receiving food aid in 2008. Rural destitution, particularly in Moroto, fans out-migration of cheap and exploited labour.

11

UGANDA

Geographic / Thematic PrioritiesIn Acholi, to support the creation of conditions for voluntary return through maintenance and rehabilitation of basic social services at the parish and sub-county levels, while ensuring continued assistance in camps for remaining IDPs, particularly for EVIs.

48% of the population (534,381 people) have left the IDP camps in Amuru, Gulu, Kitgum and Pader as of March 2008, with 36% of returnees settling in transit sites and 12% in villages of origin. Most remaining IDPs in the camps (including a significant number of EVIs) report returning home as their best option for a durable solution. However, the prospect of return is challenged by fear of the resurgence of LRA activities, unexploded ordnance (UXO) contamination and continued illegally-armed Karimojong incursions into eastern Kitgum and Pader Districts, as well as the lack of or inadequate basic social services and infrastructure in return areas.

The water and sanitation situation in IDP camps is relatively good with over 75% of safe water points in the sub-region concentrated therein and coverage at average 14 litres per person per day (l/p/d). However, the situation is appalling in return areas with grossly limited access to water and virtually no sanitation facilities.

Almost all schools have been returned to their pre-displacement locations. Nevertheless, the poor learning environment due to insufficient classroom space, lack of sanitation, furniture, inadequate water points and lack of accommodation for teachers hampers enrolment and challenges overall access to education.

Health infrastructures are in place in most parishes but many are dysfunctional. Outreach services, including village health teams (VHTs), have been established in almost all parishes, but their functionality is hampered by an inadequate drug supply and lack of training. In general, the health sector suffers from inadequate staffing and equipment.

In Teso, to support the creation of conditions for disaster recovery and voluntary return through maintenance and rehabilitation of basic social services at the parish and sub-county levels, while ensuring continued assistance in camps for remaining IDPs, particularly for EVIs.

The above-listed challenges in terms of water and sanitation, education and health hold for the Teso sub-region.

Food insecurity persists with 24% of the sub-region classified as food insecure. There has been slow progress in recovery following the 2007 floods; drought

thereafter affected crop performance and lead to severe food insecurity. Quick Impact Projects (QIPs) have been introduced to support voluntary return. The return process has accelerated due to improved security, with a growing

number of former IDPs in parishes of origin.

In Lango: to support the returned population and expansion of recovery activities, particularly for EVIs.

Some 669 EVIs remain in the former IDP camps of the Lango sub-region despite the conclusion of the return process.

90% of returned communities have been assisted with farm tools and seeds to support agricultural livelihoods.

Basic service provision in the areas of return remains low compared to the services previously accessed within the camps.

The 2007 floods created a food security gap in the sub-region that has affected the recovery of returnees in affected sub-counties.

For refugees and asylum seekers, to ensure the delivery of emergency assistance and protection, including respect for their civil, social and economic rights, and to pursue all feasible opportunities for durable solutions.

A total of 35,635 refugees have been repatriated to Sudan in 2008. More than 2,011 Kenyan refugees who have chosen to remain in Uganda in the

longer term have been relocated from the Mulanda Transit Site in Tororo District to refugee settlements in Masindi District. Approximately 323 former refugees have repatriated.

100% of refugees have been registered and are receiving assistance.

To establish a rapid response capacity and strengthen disaster preparedness for emergencies, including disaster resulting from natural hazards.

Comprehensive disaster risk analysis and preparedness plans under the Hyogo Framework for Action were completed during the National Disaster Preparedness Workshop in March.

National cluster preparedness plans are currently being finalised. A United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination (UNDAC) response

preparedness mission is planned for the second quarter of 2008, following a ministerial request.

The OPM will establish a National Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction by June to take all these initiatives forward.

12

UGANDA

In the face of increasing transitional and recovery needs, the response to the CAP 2008 has been below average, with 41% of original requirements funded to date. The table below shows the percentage of funding received by the end of May with reference to the two overarching objectives for the CAP 2008.

Chart IV. Comparative Funding by Project Type

Project TypeOriginal

Requirements($)

Requirements as of 30 May

($)

MYR Requirements

($)

Funding Received

($)9

% of Original Requirements

Funded

Save Lives

Humanitarian Assistance 194,253,461 248,068,736 249,253,967 115,562,920 59%

Early Recovery 89,971,955 91,632,091 62,852,413 28,072,963 31%

Facilitate Recovery Recovery 89,718,075 89,518,819 60,369,554 23,023,769 26%

Total 373,943,491 429,219,646 372,475,934 166,659,652 45%

On the occasion of the CAP 2008 Mid-Year Review (MYR), most clusters have revised their requirements downward, prioritising funding for high-impact / short-term projects. In addition, a significant share of “recovery” projects under the Governance, Infrastructure and Livelihoods (GIL) cluster has been removed from the CAP entirely. The only exception to this downsizing trend has been the food aid sector of the Food Security and Agricultural Livelihoods (FSAL) cluster, which has recorded an increase of more than $54 million on top of the original request (see chart V).

Chart V. Total Change in Cluster Requirements from December 2007 to June 2008

Cluster Original Requirements

($)

Requirements as of 30 May

($)

MYRJune

($)

Total Change in Request

(original – MYR)($)

Current Funding

($)

CCCM 6,449,783 6,245,663 3,989,127 - 2,460,656 1,594,054Coordination 6,062,970 6,062,970 4,861,887 - 1,201,083 3,469,815Education 22,737,461 23,362,768 18,394,668 - 4,342,793 9,751,033Agriculture 33,388,498 33,702,821 29,305,268 - 4,083,230 11,835,560Food Aid 130,723,929 185,291,769 185,291,769 + 54,567,840 91,194,318GIL 34,157,495 34,407,952 17,911,724 - 16,245,771 2,393,292Health 43,817,906 44,322,754 34,476,748 - 9,341,158 17,135,566Multi-sector 16,851,084 16,851,084 16,851,084 0 3,956,350NFIs 4,643,800 4,643,800 2,500,000 - 2,143,800 0Protection 45,236,724 44,454,224 36,874,012 - 8,362,712 18,585,364 WASH 29,873,841 29,873,841 22,019,647 - 7,854,194 6,744,300

Total 373,943,491 429,219,646 372,475,934 -1,467,557 166,659,652

9 All funding figures as of 25 June 2008.

13

UGANDA

3.2 UPDATED STRATEGIC PRIORITIESRecognising that in the current phase there are decreasing emergency needs coexisting alongside increasing recovery opportunities and development initiatives, the IASC in Uganda considers that, on one hand, the overarching objectives in the 2008 CAP remain valid for the rest of the year, while, on the other, there is a need to refocus programmes and strategic and operational priorities to ensure that: Emergency response capacity is maintained; The gains of two years without hostilities and a successful emergency response are not reversed

because of the lack of services in return areas; There is progress in the short- and medium-term toward the attainment of durable solutions in IDP-

hosting districts; There is synergy between the short-term stabilisation of the population in return areas and the

medium-term recovery work to be substantively undertaken within the framework of the PRDP; There is progress towards the gradual attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and

the fulfilment of the core social, economic, political and cultural rights expressed in Ugandan law.

The strategic priority for the next 18 months in IDP-hosting districts is actively to support the Government of Uganda’s lead role in stabilising the needs of the vulnerable population, thereby contributing to the consolidation of peace and the attainment of durable solutions for the displaced.

In Karamoja, the strategic priority remains to improve human rights protection, human security and food security by strengthening and diversifying livelihoods and response to disasters caused by natural and human action. Due to the worsening food security environment, particular attention will be paid to emergency preparedness and response, with specific emphasis on supporting the pastoralist economy as a humanitarian action.

To ensure that the above redefined strategic priority for IDP-hosting districts is implemented in an effective manner, the clusters have agreed to use the following common operational approach under the leadership of the local government.

Integrated Assessments and TargetingThe ongoing work on disaster preparedness will ensure that, in the case of new emergencies, inter-sectoral response is undertaken under the leadership of the Government of Uganda on the basis of assessed needs and using the standardised rapid assessment tools agreed by the IASC Country Team. Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping (VAM) assessments and cyclical EFSAs will continue to determine levels of vulnerability and food insecurity. Food rations and/or food assistance phase-out will be determined on the basis of these assessments.

For areas where there is on-going IDP return and/or where IDP camps are being phased-out, integrated assessments focusing on sub-counties prioritised by the District Disaster Management Committees (DDMCs) will be conducted under the leadership of the local government to: Identify immediate- and medium-term actions that should be taken to progress toward the national

standards of service delivery by administrative units; Identify immediate- and medium-term actions that should be taken to ensure that the communities

benefit from stimulation of livelihoods and enhancement of civil administration; Identify which Government institutions and humanitarian, human rights and developmental agencies

will be responsible for ensuring that the agreed actions are implemented.

The results will be used to inform local planning and to shape strategic priorities and inform operational programmes for the second half of the year, the CAP 2009 and the PRDP operational planning for northern/northeastern Uganda.

Plans of ActionUnder the PRDP and born of the district’s development plan, the Gulu DDMC has initiated an example of how to synergise all partners in the design, implementation and monitoring of a widely agreed plan of action at the district level, which seeks to ensure basic social service delivery at the parish and sub-country level. The differentiation of short- and medium-term actions will be facilitated by the short- and medium-term targets agreed upon by the partners, which are, of course, informed by the PRDP. The achievement of the short-term targets will represent the “tipping point” signalling the declining importance of the humanitarian operation focussed on beneficiaries in favour of the increasing importance of community-based recovery efforts, capacity building and systems development. Local

14

UGANDA

government and partners’ joint plans will also be used clearly to identify the actions to be undertaken by the Government and those to be taken by United Nations agencies, NGOs and development partners.

Project PrioritisationTo ensure that resources are channelled into high-impact, poorly-funded programmes, agencies have agreed to use the MYR of the CAP 2008 clearly to identify high-priority projects by cluster (see project pages 20 to 53). Cluster leads will also take responsibility for periodically communicating new priorities to donors.

CoordinationDuring the second half of 2008 and, in some cases, into 2009, the clusters will work toward a transparent and professional conclusion of cluster leadership with deliberate efforts to assist in the activation – where relevant – of appropriate government-led sectoral coordination fora. Cluster lead agencies will ensure that the experience acquired during the emergency response is also integrated in the technical assistance work provided by development partners in support of the sectors.

While OCHA will gradually start a process of phasing down its coordination role, UN recovery efforts to support the implementation of the PRDP will be gradually taken up by the United Nations Resident Coordinator’s Office.

3.3 RESPONSE TO DATE PER CLUSTER AND UPDATED SECTOR RESPONSE PLANS3.3A Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM)

Output Achieved as of mid-yearNumber of closed camps and camps transformed into viable communities

In Lango sub-region, 40 camps have been phased-out and three transformed into viable communities. Camp phase-out activities will also be implemented in the remaining 173 camps in the Acholi and Teso sub-regions, where the rate of return is progressively increasing. More resources will therefore be required to enable the cluster to replicate the successful experience of Lango in achieving durable solutions

Number of standardised tools agreed upon and utilised for CCCM in Uganda

Camp phase-out guidelines were drafted and shared with the Government for official endorsement. They are particularly relevant to ensure that the freedom of movement and choice of IDPs is respected in the context of camp closure. A durable solutions assessment tool and return monitoring checklist were developed

Number of camps where the system of Camp Coordination and Camp Management has been established

Camp Management has been established in 42 of the 60 camps in Gulu and Amuru Districts, in 17 of the 61 camps in Amuria and Katakwi and in 19 camps in Kitgum

Number of trainings conducted Workshops on CCCM have been held in the Lango, Acholi and Teso sub-regions of northern Uganda. Partners from United Nations agencies, NGOs and community-based organisations (CBOs), as well as Government representatives, have been trained

Number of partnerships formed in areas where there is no camp management

UNHCR and CCCM partners monitor and advocate directly in areas where no camp management is established, using the usual referral system to clusters, districts and service providers

There are no significant changes in the objectives and response plan for CCCM. However, as the return movement is steadily progressing, more focus will be put on camp phase-out and on establishing measures to safeguard the freedom of movement of IDPs, particularly in the Acholi region, where major population movements are taking place and land disputes are arising.

As there are no major changes in the CCCM cluster objectives and response plan, there are consequently no changes in the cluster’s projects.

3.3B CoordinationAs the situation in northern Uganda has improved, adjustments have been made to the humanitarian coordination apparatus. As at mid-year, the IASC Country Team has initiated a discussion on adapting the cluster approach, which seeks fully to integrate the current cluster dialogue into government coordination apparatuses, thereby, underscoring the primary responsibility of the Government of Uganda as the provider of first resort. Recognising the increasing prevalence of

15

UGANDA

recovery programming in most districts, there is also recognition that some important humanitarian concerns remain to be met. Nonetheless, in terms of leadership and coordination meetings, it is anticipated that, over the coming six to 12 months, each district can develop one inclusive strategy per sector (e.g. in health, in education, in water) which should encompass the breadth of humanitarian and recovery priorities and all actors that conduct projects in that sector, including United Nations agencies, NGOs, the private sector and the Government of Uganda. With such efforts synergised into one strategy, their collective efforts and impact on the PRDP strategic objectives may be more readily defined and monitored.

Under the two overarching goals of the CAP 2008 – to save lives and facilitate recovery – humanitarian coordination has moved forward. In addition to the above-described dialogues and the wider consolidation of the humanitarian reform effort, security incidents remain at an acceptable level and have not impacted humanitarian access. Moreover, fruitful discussions on security in Karamoja have been held. Disaster response preparedness activities have included the floods lessons learned workshop and report and full risk-profiling for disaster preparedness is under way; as is the inter-cluster contingency planning and cluster preparedness plan for priority risks identified in the National Disaster Preparedness Workshop, held in March 2008.

While the formation of the Resident Coordinator’s Office remains a priority in 2008, the resources are being sought through means other than the CAP. Thus, the seed investment project is withdrawn. Otherwise, the objectives and projects of the coordination sector remain unchanged for the remainder of 2008.

3.3C EducationOutput Planned in CAP Achieved as of mid-year

Voluntary return of displaced schools in Acholi and Teso sub-regions and provision of accelerated learning opportunities for over-aged children and those released by the LRA at the parish and sub-county levels, while sustaining quality basic educational services within the IDP camps

Voluntary return of 90% of displaced schools in Acholi and Teso

Acholi: 72.5%Teso: 100%

Help restore education system in Lango sub-region through the rehabilitation of 50% of schools with regard to infrastructure, safe water and sanitation facilities, staff housing, provision of teaching and learning materials, psychosocial support and life skills education, teacher support programmes and early learning opportunities

Rehabilitation of 50% of schools in Lango

Classrooms: 31.8%Latrines: 62.5%

Accelerate provision of safe and appropriate basic education services in the Karamoja sub-region through expansion of quality pre-primary learning opportunities, formal and non-formal primary schools, including ABEK

No target set in original CAP proposal

Almost nothing has been done in pre-primary and very little in other areas. Of the four CAP projects related to Karamoja, two have received no funding

Increase the number of female teachers in primary schools in IDP camps, return areas and in Karamoja to one third of the total teaching staff in each school, and to reduce gender gaps in primary education

33% of female teachers

Female teachers: 22.9% (disaggregated data available for only 10 of 18 districts; aggregate data masks fact that many schools have no female teachers)

Female students: 47.8% (but masks regional and grade differences)

Increase access for children with disabilities to appropriate basic education services by 10% in IDP camps, return areas and Karamoja

10% increase in access for children with disabilities

No data available – most implementers still not collecting data disaggregated by disability

Re-open schools and ensure continued access to primary education in areas affected by new natural disasters in 2008 within the first six to eight weeks of an emergency

All schools re-opened within six to eight weeks of emergency onset

No major new emergencies due to natural disasters to date in 2008

No major changes have been made to the cluster’s objectives and response plan. However, the cluster will take a greater focus on Karamoja and post-primary education. No major changes to the cluster’s projects were made. A number of projects have not begun implementation due to lack of

16

UGANDA

funds, resulting in major shortages in infrastructural requirements in many schools and a dearth of activity in Karamoja.

3.3D Food Security and Agricultural Livelihoods (FSAL)

While food assistance has been maintained where and when necessary or adjusted for EVIs, Food for Work / Asset / Education and the return package, the operational approach for the food production component is gradually being adapted away from free agriculture input distribution to a voucher for work system, seed and livestock fairs, quality seed production, including skills development and access to financial grants.

A comprehensive and flexible Farmer Field School (FFS) curriculum has been developed to meet the specific needs of returning communities. The FFS members are supported with agriculture production inputs (tools, seeds, livestock and ox-ploughs), financial grants (to develop a business plan) and participatory trainings. In less than one year, more than 500 groups (1,500 households) have been established by 10 NGOs in Acholi, Lango, Teso and Karamoja.

Actors in the food production component supported more than 375,000 households, representing more than 50% of the target, through various types of activities. Most of these beneficiary households accessed services and agriculture inputs through trainings, income-generating activities (IGA), FFS, voucher for work, seed and livestock fairs or seed multiplication projects. It is estimated that beneficiary households under the agriculture production assistance will be able to generate extra monthly income of $25.

FSAL cluster members have also successfully agreed, contributed to and developed specific issue documents, assessments and strategic themes such as the Crop and Food Supply Assessment Mission (CFSAM), Integrated Phase Classification (IPC), FSAL Plan of Action for 2008-2009 in support of the PRDP, EFSA, Food Security Monitoring System (FSMS) and food assistance phase-out strategy.

The FSAL cluster has responded to the serious food crisis in Karamoja by providing emergency food assistance to over 700,000 people. In Acholi sub-region, FSAL has continued to provide food aid to 941,000 IDPs (including those in transit) at 40 to 60% of the recommended daily allowance (RDA). By May 2008, 46,250 metric tonnes (MTs) of food commodities had been provided to populations in Acholi. At the same time, approximately 135,000 flood-affected individuals in Teso sub-region received over 5,000 MTs of food assistance. The FSAL cluster continues to provide food assistance to the decreasing refugee population in West Nile (due to repatriation to Sudan) and an increasing number in the southwest (due to refugee influx from the Democratic Republic of the Congo)10. In the two regions, 10,670 MTs of food have been distributed. Over 1,800 Kenyan refugees, first displaced to Mulanda Transit Centre early this year and later transferred to the Kiryandongo settlement, have also received food support.

The food aid procurement price for maize in Uganda has risen from around $180 per MT in 2007 to $390 by the end of May 2008. There is also a rising trend in prices for other commodities, particularly beans, groundnuts, and rice (Chart VI below). The causes may relate to local and regional – and sometimes global – factors, including the rise in oil prices, post-election turmoil in Kenya (which reduced production and increased demand from that country), increasing demand from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and southern Sudan, and local production problems in Uganda.

10 Over 50,000 refugees have repatriated to Sudan since May 2006 when repatriation started, while a refugee influx estimated at 5,000 persons was settled in Nakivale refugee settlement.

17

UGANDA

Chart VI. Staple Food Prices, Weekly, January 2007 to April 2008, Average of Seven Markets

The price increases have had two negative impacts on food security. First, they have increased the costs of providing locally procured food assistance. Second, they are likely exacerbating food insecurity among vulnerable populations. The people in the north and Karamoja are mostly net buyers of food, and a 10 to 20% increase in food prices11 reduces their welfare level significantly as they need to spend more on food, thereby devoting less to other expenses such as health and education. Based on assessments and evidence-based studies, FSAL will develop appropriate additional programmes as required to address the impact of rising prices on food-insecure populations.

In general, the priority gaps expressed by the regions are: targeted food assistance for IDPs, EVIs and the return package; more assistance in terms of food production activity to meet increased needs linked to improved land access; and IGA within emerging rural markets.

3.3E Governance, Infrastructure & Livelihoods (Early Recovery)As part of the capacity building drive, 10 civil society organisations (CSOs) are participating in the Teso sub-region, while over 50 CSOs are involved in the Acholi sub-region. GIL cluster coordination is being done at the district level. The DDMCs are active in coordinating post-conflict responses and post-flood activities in the Teso sub-region. However, there is a need further to strengthen the DDMCs to take the lead in coordinating post-flood and recovery activities. There is also a need fully to support the organisation of sub-county disaster management teams.

Support has been provided to the national Amnesty Commission in coordinating reconciliation activities in northern Uganda. In Acholi sub-region, the Amnesty Commission is setting up reconciliation committees in each sub-county and the major remaining camps. Conflict resolution associations are equally being formed in each sub-county. Nevertheless, there is still a need to engage paralegals to handle the formal justice process, while at the same time build the capacity of the Amnesty Commission to deal with ex-combatants.

To facilitate recovery in return communities, community access roads and roads leading to IDP camps are being constructed / rehabilitated in the Lango and Acholi sub-regions, while discussions with district officials are on-going in Amuria, Katakwi, Soroti and Bukedea Districts for the rehabilitation of access roads under the QIPs. Most of the community road works are being done using the labour-based approach, providing short-term employment opportunity to the population.

11 According to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), a general ten percent rise in food prices will reduce their purchasing power by 5.5%.

18

UGANDA

To facilitate return and resettlement, efforts have been made to provide safety to the returning population: two explosive remnants of war (ERW) areas were identified in Kitgum and 31 UXO were cleared. The Uganda Mine Action Centre (UMAC) has set up a base in Kitgum to expedite clearance operations. A mine action team has also made assessment visits to Amuria and Katakwi Districts in response to reported UXO presence. Mine risk awareness raising activities are ongoing in northern Uganda. In Kitgum alone, 16,063 people in 43 parishes have received mine risk awareness raising information through drama shows and Information, Education and Communication (IEC) materials.

Assistance to landmine survivors is a critical aspect of post-conflict recovery: the process of identification of landmine victims is ongoing in northern Uganda. In Kitgum, 83 mine survivors have been identified and registered and 150 mine survivors / war-injured have been identified for support in a survey conducted in nine sub-counties of the district.

Overall, limited support to the CAP 2008 projects has left important interventions unfunded. Only approximately 10% of the GIL CAP projects have been funded to date. With the start of the PRDP implementation, the priority for the cluster will be building the capacity of local actors to participate in decisions impacting their interests. The OPM, district local governments, lower local governments, CSOs, local NGOs and communities will be targeted by the cluster capacity enhancement plan.

3.3F Health, Nutrition and HIV/AIDS

Output Planned in CAP Achieved as of mid-yearDPT3 Coverage Over 80% coverage Annualised immunisation coverage has dropped to

an average of 64.7% for the region. Poor funding of CAP 2008 and suspension of support from the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI) has affected programme implementation and achievement of proposed targets.

Integrated Diseases Surveillance and Response (IDSR) data timeliness and completeness

CFR of epidemics trends

IDSR reporting by health facilities to above 80%

CFR of epidemic diseases to within the WHO accepted level

IDSR reporting by health facilities is above 80% in all districts

Response to HEV outbreak in Kitgum District has been effective, registering a case fatality rate (CFR) of 2% (This figure is higher than 1% recommended by WHO, however, 76% of deaths were among pregnant women). The HEV case fatality rate among pregnant women in the third trimester is 20%. The epidemic is still on-going.

GAM rate GAM to below 10% for all districts in Acholi, Lango, Karamoja and Teso region (Amuria and Katakwi Districts)

GAM levels in northern Uganda region are under control and have been gradually declining with the exception of Lira District where rates increased to 7.1% between 2006 and 2007. In Karamoja region, GAM rates for Moroto and Nakapiripirit Districts are 15.6% and 15.1%, respectively, which is above the emergency threshold.

Current number / percentage of people with advanced HIV infection receiving ARV combination therapy in the past year

39% (10,467 out of 27,000) of eligible HIV-positive people in northern Uganda are currently on treatment. Although this seems low, it is higher that the national average of 35%.

Percentage of men and women aged 15 to 49 years who were counselled and received an HIV test in the last 12 months and who know their results

Data not readily available to monitor progress (the cluster plans to remove this indicator).

In the first half of the year, the key changes and challenges in the health, nutrition and HIV/AIDS cluster included decreasing immunisation coverage as a result of the suspension of GAVI funding to Uganda, deterioration of nutritional status, especially in the Karamoja region, and a general decrease in health services delivery as a result of lack of funds. However, these challenges did not warrant a change in the cluster objectives. Instead the response plans were realigned to reflect new developments in the humanitarian system.

19

UGANDA

Mainstream recovery activities such as human resources for health, construction of new health facilities, long-term training and large procurements of medical equipment have been removed from the CAP 2008 to be part of the broader sector strategy within the PRDP framework. With this realignment, the health, nutrition and HIV/AIDS response plan now focuses more on emergency response, epidemic containment and implementing key quick-fix transitional activities aimed at providing basic health services, including reproductive health, in return areas. In reviewing the 2008 health CAP sheets, global health initiatives such as the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM) were also taken into consideration. Activities for which funds are being solicited from such initiatives have either been removed or scaled down to avoid duplication. One project on malaria control has an increased requirement in view of the earmarking of more than 50% of received funds for only one region.

3.3G Multi-Sector

Output Planned in CAP Achieved as of mid-yearRefugee boys and girls attending primary school

50% of boys and girls attend primary school

53% of boys and 47% of girls attended primary school

Refugee access primary health care 100% of refugees All refugees and nationals in the host community access primary health care

Availability of potable water per person per day

18 litres 15.2 litres

Asylum seekers willing to relocate to Nakivale are assisted

100% 100% of asylum seekers wishing to relocate have been assisted with transportation and non-food items (NFIs).

No asylum seeker is refouled 100% 100%

All refugees in settlements are registered 100% All refugees in settlements are registered. A verification exercise has been completed and new figures will be released after the completion of the appeal process.

Facilitate voluntary repatriation in safety and dignity

50,000 Sudanese, 4,000 Congolese and Rwandan refugees

35,635 Sudanese and 323 Kenyans have been repatriated.

The overall objective of the sector to ensure the delivery of protection for all refugees and asylum seekers in Uganda, including respect for the civil, social and economic rights, and to pursue opportunities for durable solutions has not changed. However, UNHCR has had to adapt its programming to the influx from Kenya, providing protection and assistance to over 2,400 refugees. With regard to this caseload, UNHCR facilitated the voluntary repatriation of 323 persons and the transfer of 2,011 persons to Kiryandongo refugee settlement in Masindi District, where they received a plot of land (50x100 metres) for residential and agricultural purposes.

As highlighted above, despite the lack of changes to the overall objective, the sector project has been adapted to the situation, i.e. the provision of protection and assistance to refugees from Kenya and the facilitation of voluntary repatriation to South Sudan. This project will continue to need financial support to ensure that refugees enjoy their basic human rights.

3.3H Protection

There are still some gaps with regard to achieving the cluster’s outputs as the population movement is still ongoing and, particularly in Acholi and Teso sub-regions, not all IDPs are in the place where they want to achieve a durable solution. There are three main protection concerns with regard to: 1) the voluntary character of the decision (where an IDP wants to achieve a durable solution); 2) housing, land and property (particularly land disputes); and 3) camp phase-out procedures and transformation of camps into viable communities.

20

UGANDA

Although the Protection cluster is relatively better funded than the average in the CAP 2008, there are still some funding gaps that should be filled to ensure that protection concerns are addressed and that durable solutions are achieved in Acholi and Teso sub-regions.

In Lango, all IDPs have returned to their villages of origin, except a limited number of EVIs / persons with specific needs. As specified in the protection strategy, a participatory assessment will soon be carried out in the sub-region to ascertain if the benchmarks contained in the IASC Framework for Durable Solutions are met and the displacement has ended. Upon the achievement of durable solutions and the end of displacement, the Protection cluster will phase-out from the sub-region.

In Karamoja, insecurity and out-migration patterns continued, as did worsening relations between the UPDF and local communities, reinforcing the need for human rights and protection activities. These concerns are further exacerbated by the lack of rain, resulting in worsening poverty, hunger, lack of agricultural outputs and the continued “embargo” on the migration of Karimojong livestock into neighbouring districts to the west and south that has impacted an estimated 1.2 million cattle regionally. If no alternative measures are put in place for access to grazing / pasture, inter-district relations could deteriorate to a new low.

The table below represents a synthesis of the progress made in achieving protection outputs with regard to child protection (CP) and gender-based violence (GBV). It is important to note that a funding gap of 75% for GBV-related projects has reduced the scope of protection / prevention and case management initiatives; exacerbated by the absence of adequate capacity building for local governmental and non-governmental structures appropriately to prevent, manage or minimise GBV.

21

UGANDA

Outcomes Planned in CAP Achieved as of mid-yearIncreased protection for women and children from gender-based violence in community and institutional settings (e.g. schools)

There is increased awareness of GBV issues at a multi-sectoral level; an increase in the demand for services within these communities is a degree of evidence

Based on comprehensive assessments, UNICEF together with the Ministry of Education and Sports (MoES), the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD), local government and NGO partners initiated through a participatory process the development of tools and policies to address violence, abuse and exploitation in schools. The safe school initiative is to be rolled out in the third and fourth quarters of the year

Improved response services for survivors of gender-based violence.

There is an increase in geographical coverage for GBV prevention and response in sub-counties in Pader and Kitgum (expanded activities by the American Refugee Committee (ARC) and Cooperazione Internationale (COOPI)) and in Moroto (International Rescue Committee (IRC)). There is an increase in GBV coordination in Gulu, Lira, Pader, Kitgum and Moroto: UNFPA has deployed four District GBV Coordinators

Expand and strengthen local government and community-based structures and mechanisms to address child protection issues and concerns

Overall CP systems coverage has increased. In Amuru 62.5% of sub-counties have CP systems in place, which entails at a minimum one community development officer, one CP lead agency and one functional child protection community-based structure in a given sub-county. The rates in other areas are: Gulu, 46.6%; Kitgum, 40%; Lira, 48%; Pader, 37%; Apac 14%; Oyam, 14%; Katakwi, 12%; Amuria, 11%. For the five Karamoja districts, no CP system is yet in place. It is estimated that less than half of these CP systems are fully functional, i.e. with the capacity to adequately identify, support, refer, follow-up and report on CP cases. An IASC/MGSLD CP capacity building programme was developed. So far, the CP core competencies training and master training course was completed for government and NGO officials. Roll-out at the district and sub-county level will take place in the second half of the year. CP coordination at the sub-county level was standardised, bringing greater accountability for both government and NGOs. Referral mechanisms require improvements, and lack of funding for livelihoods projects linked into CP systems has hampered both prevention and response

The priorities and approaches outlined in the protection strategy remain in essence unchanged. However, to achieve the target set in the CAP 2008, some modifications to the cluster architecture are being implemented. In this framework, the district protection clusters are in the process of merging with the District Human Rights Promotion and Protection Sub-Committees under the chairmanship of the Uganda Human Right Commission, the co-chairmanship of UNHCR and the secretariat of OHCHR.

The 2008 GBV sub-cluster strategy was revised in March 2008 explicitly to reflect this time of transition and recovery. GBV sub cluster members maintain the humanitarian imperative to save lives and minimise all potential harmful after-effects of GBV, while simultaneously being fully engaged with government and civil society (community-based structures) to strengthen the capacity of central and district structures and systems in line with national development plans and related coordination forums.

As there are no major changes in the protection cluster objectives and response plans, consequently there are no changes in the cluster’s projects.

3.3I Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)

Despite poor funding, WASH cluster members have facilitated ongoing support to returnees in transit sites and villages of origin where water and sanitation conditions are much worse than in the camps. As a result of the ongoing movement of IDPs out of camps, more water has become available to the remaining IDPs, varying between 14 to 18 l/p/d in the Acholi sub-region. The sanitation situation remains grave.

22

UGANDA

The table below depicts implementation status to date in the transit sites and villages of origin in the Acholi and Lango sub-regions, where the water and sanitation situation remains very much below national and international standards.

Chart VII. WASH Implementation Table for Transit Sites in Acholi and Lango Sub-Regions

INDICATORS ACHOLI LANGO AMURU GULU KITGUM PADER LIRA OYAM

Average water access (l/p/d) 10.8 7.5 14.3 17 26 26

Boreholes rehabilitated 23 53 18 23 51 32Average persons per latrine per household* 50 50 50 60 60 60

Average persons per latrine in Institutions** 75 75 75 75 75 75

Nº of water sources analysed for bacteriological contamination. N/A N/A 102 28 110 N/A

Latrine construction (institutional and household latrines) 1146 1419 92 218 305 N/A

Nº of training sessions(Hand Pump and Water and Sanitation Committees)

25 162 215 230 122 45

23

UGANDA

Table IV. List of Projects (grouped by sector) with Funding StatusTable

IV. List of

Appeal Projects (grouped by cluster), with funding status

24

UGANDA

25

UGANDA

26

UGANDA

27

UGANDA

28

UGANDA

29

UGANDA

30

UGANDA

31

UGANDA

32

UGANDA

33

UGANDA

34

UGANDA

35

UGANDA

36

UGANDA

37

UGANDA

38

UGANDA

39

UGANDA

40

UGANDA

41

UGANDA

42

UGANDA

43

UGANDA

4. NEW AND REVISED PROJECTS

All projects in the table below have been prioritised through the various clusters according to a three-tiered ranking:

A – Short-term, high-impact projects;B – Medium-term projects; and,C – Projects that do not respond to critical needs and/or needs that can be satisfied in the short- or medium-term.

The projects have also been classified by the phase to which they response, i.e. Humanitarian Action (HA), Early Recovery (ER) or Recovery (R). This classification has been made where HA = projects corresponding to the targets achievable during the humanitarian phase of the response; ER = projects corresponding to the targets achievable during recovery phase of the response; and R = projects corresponding to the targets achievable during the long-term, i.e. development phase, as defined by the clusters themselves.

One entirely new project has been added to the CAP 2008, presenting the WASH cluster response to the outbreak of Hepatitis E in Kitgum District and the threat of its spread to neighbouring districts. A second project sheet, for the revised food aid requirements of WFP, is also presented due to the size of the additional request. The third new project sheet, submitted by UN Habitat, represents the consolidation of three separate projects formerly included in the CAP 2008 (two of which have been withdrawn), with a cumulative revised requirement that takes into account the remaining timeframe for implementation in 2008.

Also, 19 projects have been eliminated from the CAP 2008 due to being purely recovery in nature; the activities envisaged under these former projects are planned to be captured within the United Nations PRDP Support Strategy. Additionally, the requirements of nearly half of all projects have been reduced to reflect the remaining timeframe for implementation before the end of 2008.

44

UGANDA

5. CONCLUSION

For the northern and north-eastern IDP-hosting districts, the imperative for the remainder of the year and throughout 2009 will be to consolidate the gains made over the past two years by supporting the Government of Uganda in its effort to achieve durable solutions. The peace dividends that have accrued since the original signing of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement in August 2006 have vastly improved daily life across northern Uganda; it is now essential to consolidate them and ensure their sustainability within the three-year framework of the PRDP.

Throughout the remaining months of 2008, humanitarian, recovery and development partners will work to complement Government efforts at all levels further to stabilise the vulnerable population and progressively to replace humanitarian with recovery programming, while mainstreaming this international component within Government sector strategies and programmes.

Indeed, humanitarian programming in northern Uganda will be sharply focused and tailored over the next 18 months, as stated in the new strategic priority outlined above – a priority that goes beyond the traditional scope of a single year to encompass all humanitarian action through the anticipated closure of the humanitarian phase at the end of 2009. The framework for durable solutions and the set of humanitarian and recovery targets agreed by the partners during the mid-year review process will help in clarifying the “tipping point” that indicates the completed transfer of an individual district fully into the recovery phase. For 2009, these indicators will be further refined on the basis of the integrated assessments to be undertaken in the second half of 2008.

Where possible, some of the more recovery-oriented programmes have been withdrawn, wholly or in part, from the current CAP in view of the finalisation of the sector strategies within the PRDP and additional frameworks such as the GFATM. During the next six months, as the PRDP becomes fully operational, recovery and development partners will engage in a discussion related to the United Nations framework for supporting the PRDP.

At present, however, it is essential that all partners, and especially the donors who have responded so generously to Uganda’s humanitarian needs in past years, fully support the CAP and strengthen their financial, material and human support for both the remaining humanitarian programmes and the increasing recovery programmes if we collectively are to avoid widening the gap in providing services to the population, prevent slippage on the humanitarian gains already achieved and ensure the successful transition to full recovery in northern Uganda.

Meanwhile, in view of the deteriorating food security and nutritional situation in Karamoja, particular attention will be devoted during the next six months to strengthening disaster response preparedness and, in the medium term, reinforcing pastoral communities’ resilience to cyclical shocks through the strengthening and diversification of pastoral and agro-pastoral livelihoods. In addition, in collaboration with local government, efforts will continue to increase and appropriately tailor the basic services available to the pastoralist population, including education, health and water and sanitation.

Based on current trends, humanitarian programming may be expected to significantly reduce in 2009, although some financing of humanitarian aid will still be needed throughout the year. The reduction in humanitarian programming will be more pronounced in the north, while in the northeast substantial humanitarian programming will remain necessary to tackle the consequences of two consecutive failed harvests (2006 – 2007) and the probable consequences of the current dry spell across northeastern Teso sub-region and the entire Karamoja sub-region where more than one million people could be in need of both immediate food aid and support for achievement of their right to live a dignified life.

45

UGANDA

6. NEW AND REVISED PROJECT SHEETS

Appealing Agencies UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN’S FUND (UNICEF), OXFAM, INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE (IRC), WORLD VISION (WVI), ACTION CONTRE LA FAIM (ACF), COOPERAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE (COOPI), UGANDA RED CROSS SOCIETY (URCS), MERCY CORPS, GOAL, POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL (PSI), COOPERAZIONE E SVILUPPO (CESVI), ASSOCIAZIONE VOLONTARI PER IL SERVIZIO INTERNAZIONALE (AVSI), MEDAIR and MSF-HOLLAND

Project Title Emergency WASH intervention to contain and reduce the Hepatitis E outbreak in Kitgum and surrounding districts

Project Code UGA-08/WS24A-N (new)District Kitgum, Pader and any other affected districtSub-County All affected sub-counties in the regionObjective Improve sanitary conditions to contain and reduce the outbreak of

Hepatitis E by November 2008Beneficiaries Total: 1,255,384

Kigum District – 365,575 peoplePader District – 293,679 peopleNorth Karamoja – 596,130 people

Implementing Partners OXFAM, ACF, COOPI, GOAL, MEDAIR, MSF-H, IRC, AMREF,URCS, LWF, PSI, WV, CESVI AND AVSI

Project Duration June – December 2008Funds Requested $6,900,000

NeedsAn outbreak of Hepatitis E that began in one sub-county in Kitgum in October 2007 has now spread to ten – affecting over 2,000 people – and to Pader district, where three cases have been cited. Not all cases are being identified at health facilities and, with an incubation period of four to eight weeks, it is expected that many more people could soon be infected.

Activities Comprehensive, hyper-chlorination of existing water sources; Rehabilitation and chlorination of old water sources; Drilling of new water points and assurance of the safe water chain; Water quality testing; Construction of new latrines; Intensive hygiene promotion using developed IEC materials with special emphasis on hand

washing; Provision of water and sanitation NFIs; Monitoring and evaluation of projects at sub-county level; Coordination of response.

Outcomes Reduction in Hepatitis E incidence and other WASH-related diseases; Women, children and men in affected districts have increased access to, and optimally use,

water and sanitation facilities; Local capacity in water quality monitoring and hygiene promotion is improved.

FINANCIAL SUMMARYBudget Items $

Project costs 4,140,000Project support costs 1,725,000Direct support costs 1,035,000TOTAL 6,900,000

The appealing agencies will implement the above mentioned activities according to their comparative advantage on the ground and according to the budget detailed below (see next page).

46

UGANDA

FINANCIAL SUMMARYAgencies $

UNICEF 2,000,000OXFAM 300,000IRC 80,000WORLD VISION 240,000ACF 390,000PSI 500,000CESVI 450,000AVSI 400,000COOPI 440,000URCS 500,000MERCY CORPS 300,000MSF-H 500,000GOAL 350,000MEDAIR 450,000TOTAL 6,900,000

47

UGANDA

Appealing Agency WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME (WFP)Project Title Targeted food assistance for relief and recovery of refugees,

displaced persons and vulnerable groups in UgandaProject Code UGA-08/F01 (revised)Cluster Food Security and Agricultural LivelihoodsProject Objective and Relevant CHAP Strategic Priority

1) Diversify and strengthen pastoral and agro-pastoral livelihoods in Karamoja through emergency aid, rehabilitation, early warning and a transition to longer-term safety nets; 2) Support both voluntary returning and camp-based IDPs in Teso, Lango and Acholi through combining food and cash transfers with agricultural productivity enhancement; 3) Support self-reliance of refugees and IDPs in West Nile and southwestern Uganda through improved agricultural production and continued food transfers; 4) Address emergency food security needs caused by sudden onset crises wherever these may occur in the country

Beneficiaries and Target Area Target Group Beneficiaries MTs

IDPs 939,180 76,582Refugees 187,000 21,198Supplementary Feeding 13,951 1,441Therapeutic Feeding 5,580 161Emergency Feeding 650,002 23,400MCHN 259,479 26,809HIV/AIDs 173,404 20,620Food For Assets 519,000 11,522Contingency 842,000 44,902Total 3,589,59612 226,635

Implementing Partners Government: OPM, MoES, MAAIF, MoH; NGO Partners: NRC, WVI, AAH, IRC, Samaritan’s Purse, DED

Project Duration 2008 (one year in PRRO 10121.1/2 for April 2008 – March 2011)Funds Requested $185,291,769

NeedsIn addition to the needs in Acholi region and for refugees identified in the original project sheet, in the Karamoja region, based on the IPC report of March 2008, at least 707,000 drought-affected people in Karamoja are in need of food assistance this year. A CFSAM report indicated that 135,000 flood-affected individuals in Teso sub-region require food assistance through the next harvest. This number of people in need is far above the planned contingency of 200,000 for responses to natural disasters. The net effect has been an increase in the total number of beneficiaries from 1,326,180 to 1,968,180 and of tonnage from 190,913 MTs to 226,635 MTs. At the same time, soaring food and oil prices have added to the cost of providing this assistance.

Activities1) Emergency response through relief rations; 2) Emergency response through supplementary and therapeutic feeding; 3) Recovery response through food-based activities.

Outcomes1) GAM maintained within acceptable levels; 2) Delivery of basic services supported; 3) Returnees’ livelihoods enhanced and rehabilitation of infrastructure supported; 4) Reduced vulnerability and impact of HIV/AIDS on household food security.

FINANCIAL SUMMARYBudget Items $

Total food costs 94,724,077Total external and landside transport and handling costs 59,852,334Total other operational and direct support costs 18,593,466Total indirect support costs 12,121,892TOTAL 185,291,769

12 This figure represents the sum of the beneficiaries for individual activities. However, in some cases, a beneficiary can receive food from two activities (e.g. GFD and FFE). Without this ‘double-counting’, the total is about 2,749,448 people.

48

UGANDA

Appealing Agency UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME(UN-HABITAT)

Project Title Sustainable return, integration and recovery for communities in Acholi, Teso and Lango sub-regions in northern Uganda

Project Code UGA-08/ER/I34 (revised) Cluster Early Recovery (Governance, Infrastructure and Livelihoods)Relevant Sector Objectives

Promote sustainable return, integration and recovery through the resolution of land-related issues, service provision and shelter support based on partnerships between local authorities, private sector and local communities

Specific Objectives Organise/strengthen local communities and authorities jointly to facilitate social reintegration, including for EVIs, to resolve land conflicts and support infrastructure/service development

Accelerate provision of teachers’, health workers’ and police houses using the private sector and local communities

Systemise the introduction of environmentally friendly building techniques such as use of interlocking stabilised soil blocks

Transform – where needed and desired – transitional sites / camps into viable sustainable communities

Promote environmental rehabilitation linked to livelihoodsTarget Beneficiaries IDPs returning to villages of origin or settled in transit sites and local

authorities Implementing Partners OPM, Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development, local

authorities, private sector, local NGOs, local communities and United Nations agencies working with IDPs

Project Duration July – December 2008Total Project Budget $1,500,000

NeedsThe return process has progressed but remains incomplete and fragile due to an increasing number of land-related conflicts, understaffed educational and health facilities, rising criminality, continued insecurity in some areas and incapacity of some of the most vulnerable to resettle. There is also a lack of appropriate building techniques to allow for further upgrading of shelters. Environmental degradation caused by the conflict (e.g. cutting of trees) risks to accelerate due to the growing demand for burnt-clay bricks and fire wood. In the transition phase, more pilot projects are needed to feed into the PRDP.

Activities Map the typology of land-related conflicts and set-up resolution mechanisms for those that can be

tackled at the local level; Build capacities of local authorities in settlement and infrastructure planning and management; Institutionalise capacity to promote more environmentally friendly building techniques; Construct 100 teachers’, 50 health workers’ and 50 police houses, taking lessons learnt from

ongoing pilots; Develop strategic participatory plans to guide infrastructure investments and permanently

integrate selected transitional sites / camps into sustainable settlements and implement small-scale priority projects;

Organise tree planting campaigns (10,000 trees) to mark boundaries, provide food and sources of future construction materials.

OutcomeReturn and re-integration process accelerated while reducing the risk of renewed conflict. IDP families with better access to adequate shelter, tenure security, and basic services; environmental degradation reduced; strengthened role/capacity of local authorities, local communities and private sector.

FINANCIAL SUMMARYBudget Items $

Human resources, technical assistance and capacity building 200,000Sub-contracts (infrastructure, 200 housing units, environmental rehabilitation) 1,100,000Operational and administrative costs 200,000TOTAL 1,500,000

49

UGANDA

ANNEX I

ADDITIONAL FUNDING TABLES

50

UGANDA

51

UGANDA

52

UGANDA

53

UGANDA

54

UGANDA

ANNEX II

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONSAAH Action Against HungerABEK Alternative Basic Education for KaramojaACF Action Contre la FaimAMREF African Medical and Research FoundationARC American Refugee Committee ARV AntiretroviralASTU Anti Stock Theft UnitAVSI Associazione Volontari per il Servizio Internazionale

CAP Consolidated Appeal ProcessCBO Community Based OrganisationCBPP Contagious Bovine PleuropneumoniaCCCM Camp Coordination and Camp Management CESVI Cooperazione e’ SviluppoCFSAM Crop and Food Security Assessment MissionCFR Case Fatality RateCOOPI Cooperazione InternazionaleCP Child Protection CSO Civil Society Organization

DDMC District Disaster Management CommitteeDED German Development AgencyDHRPP District Human Rights Promotion and Protection DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo DPT Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus

ECHO European Commission Humanitarian Aid DepartmentEFSA Emergency Food Security AssessmentERW Explosive Remnant of WarEVI Extremely Vulnerable Individual

FAO Food and Agriculture OrganizationFFE Food for EducationFFS Farmer Field SchoolFSAL Food Security and Agricultural Livelihoods FSMS Food Security Monitoring System

GAM Global Acute MalnutritionGAVI Global Alliance for Vaccines and ImmunizationGBV Gender Based ViolenceGDP Gross Domestic ProductGFATM Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and MalariaGFD General Food DistributionGIL Governance, Infrastructure and Livelihoods

HEV Hepatitis E VirusHIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus

IASC Inter Agency Standing Committee IDP Internally Displaced PersonIDSR Integrated Diseases Surveillance and ResponseIEC Information, Education and CommunicationIFPRI International Food Policy Research InstituteIGA Income Generating ActivityIMF International Monetary FundIPC Integrated Phase ClassificationIRC International Rescue Committee

KIDDP Karamoja Integrated Disarmament and Development Programme

LC Local CouncilLRA Lord’s Resistance Army

55

UGANDA

LWF Lutheran World Federation

MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and FisheriesMCHN Mother Child Health and NutritionMDG Millennium Development GoalsMGLSD Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social DevelopmentMoES Ministry of Education and SportsMoH Ministry of HealthMSF Médecins sans FrontièresMT Metric TonnesMYR Mid-Year Review

NFI Non-Food ItemNGO Non-Governmental OrganisationNRC Norwegian Refugee Council

OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian AffairsOHCHR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human RightsOPM Office of the Prime Minister

PPR Peste de Petits RuminantsPRDP Peace, Recovery and Development PlanPSI Population Services International

QIPs Quick Impact Projects

RDA Recommended Daily Allocation

SAM Severe Acute Malnutrition

UHRC Uganda Human Rights CommissionUMAC Uganda Mine Action CentreUNDAC United Nations Disaster Assessment and CoordinationUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNFPA United Nations Population FundUNHCR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s FundUPDF Uganda People’s Defence ForcesURCS Uganda Red Cross SocietyUXO Unexploded Ordnance

VAM Vulnerability Analysis and MappingVHT Village Health Team

WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WFP World Food ProgrammeWHO World Health OrganizationWVI World Vision International

56

Consolidated Appeal Process (CAP)

The CAP is a tool for aid organisations to jointly plan, coordinate, implement and monitor their response to disasters and emergencies, and to appeal for funds together instead of competitively.

It is the forum for developing a strategic approach to humanitarian action, focusing on close cooperation between host governments, donors, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, International Organization for Migration (IOM), and United Nations agencies. As such, it presents a snapshot of the situation and response plans, and is an inclusive and coordinated programme cycle of:

Strategic planning leading to a Common Humanitarian Action Plan (CHAP); Resource mobilisation leading to a Consolidated Appeal or a Flash Appeal; Coordinated programme implementation; Joint monitoring and evaluation; Revision, if necessary; Reporting on results.

The CHAP is the core of the CAP – a strategic plan for humanitarian response in a given country or region, including the following elements:

A common analysis of the context in which humanitarian action takes place; An assessment of needs; Best, worst, and most likely scenarios; A clear statement of longer-term objectives and goals; Prioritised response plans, including a detailed mapping of projects to cover all needs; A framework for monitoring the strategy and revising it if necessary.

The CHAP is the core of a Consolidated Appeal or, when crises break out or natural disasters strike, a Flash Appeal. Under the leadership of the Humanitarian Coordinator, and in consultation with host Governments and donors, the CHAP is developed at the field level by the Humanitarian Country Team. This team includes IASC members and standing invitees (UN agencies, the International Organisation for Migration, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, and NGOs that belong to ICVA, Interaction, or SCHR), but non-IASC members, such as national NGOs, can also be included.

The Humanitarian Coordinator is responsible for the annual preparation of the consolidated appeal document. The document is launched globally near the end of each year to enhance advocacy and resource mobilisation. An update, known as the Mid-Year Review, is presented to donors the following July.

Donors generally fund appealing agencies directly in response to project proposals listed in appeals. The Financial Tracking Service (FTS), managed by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), is a database of appeal funding needs and worldwide donor contributions, and can be found on www.reliefweb.int/fts.

In sum, the CAP is how aid agencies join forces to provide people in need the best available protection and assistance, on time.

OFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS(OCHA)

UNITED NATIONS PALAIS DES NATIONSNEW YORK, NY 10017 1211 GENEVA 10

USA SWITZERLAND