evaluation of general food distribution in northern uganda: gulu ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

extremely vulnerable, simply by being extremely poor or for other reasons excluded fromsociety. NRC, WFP and other stakeholders agree that several cases of extremely vulnerableindividuals are left out of the group to receive 98% simply because they do not fit the presentcategory.Many EVIs have not been captured in the last verification exercise due to problems in thementioned data collection and date entry process. In effect this means that they are not onthe WFP print-list and no longer eligible for food. Although EVIs have complained about thisWFP has not rectified the problem and as described by some of the NRC volunteers: “Whenan EVI loses out it puts the person in an even more vulnerable position”.NRC has discussed the above problems frequently with WFP sub-offices in Gulu andKitgum. WFP sub offices have expressed willingness to support NRC in developing asolution that can capture the missed targets of the extremely vulnerable and has also arguedthat more food will be sourced for those cases where needs are extreme and should behandled swiftly 118 .7.3.3 Empowering Women in a Disempowered SituationMany years of food aid has pushed women in the forefront of decision-making andmanagement at household level and in communities. Half of the representatives and half ofthe executive-level members (vice chair person, secretary etc) on the food distributioncommittees are women. The election is carried out in the respective camps and theelectorate is composed by the Chairperson and the bene ficiaries. NRC has provided trainingin community participation and leadership skills to women who take part in food distributioncommittees. NRC has monitored the developments in monthly and quarterly reports 119 andsome of the positive findings are:♦♦♦♦A positive attitude amongst people towards women embracing leadership positions;Women participate not only in the distribution activities, but also in administrativemanagement of the camp;Women’s participation in food management committees gradually exceeds that of men,both in terms of membership as well as active participation (in 75 -85% of the camps theVC of the GMC is a women and 35-45% of the FMCs is constituted by women;Women participating in the scooping exercise at each point of distribution made i t easierfor volunteers and staff to monitor and manage the distribution.Women have been encouraged to get actively involved in food distribution, since they are theones preparing the food at home. Being in control of the food rations will assist in red ucingthe complaints that men collect food and sell or trade it in return for alcohol or money forgambling. Some reports say that more than 60% of the people who collect food rations arewomen. During the food distributions observed by the Evaluation Team this figure seemedcloser to 80%.Despite regular reporting on participation and collection of food, however, the NRCmonitoring efforts do not capture some of the more in depth effects of household dynamicswhich food distribution brings about by giving women a more powerful role in the family. SeeChapter 10 for assessment of impact on household level.118As an example: A group of some 9000 extremely needy IDPs were discovered late 2007 in Nakwanya Village in Orom Sub-County in Kitgum. They had fled from Sudan, through Kabong in Karamoja and had been displaced since 1986. Th ey arrived inKitgum with no food stocks and were surviving on wild fruits and dirty water when found and were ‘quite vulnerable’. Due tobureaucracy and procedures an assessment of this vulnerable population was only made in March 2008, upon which they wereincluded in the WFP print list and served as late as April 2008.119NRC Monthly and Quarterly Reports from 2005-2008 (some are more elaborate and analytical on the issues of femaleparticipation than others) + Post Distribution Monitoring reports from 2008.38
7.3.4 A Future Strategy for EVIs?Separating the most vulnerable individuals in a group by itself has its advantages anddisadvantages. It helps targeting and directing the reserved rations to the ones in need in acontrolled way ensuring that, their right to food is exclusively protected. In a time of crisis andchaos where thousands are fighting for food this may be the only sensible approach.However at the same time the separation of individuals also changes the dynamics ofcommunities and families. Those individuals, who perhaps previously (before the conflict)were taken care of by family members (elderly, orphans, disabled etc) have been ‘taken careof’ for 10 years. The problem may arise, when reductions in food aid continue and EVIscease to be an eligible ‘category’. Acknowledging that Government plans are consideringattention to this group in the recovery efforts 120 , the Evaluation Team posed questions tovarious stakeholders to find out what the interventions on the ground would be.Some maintained the position that the IDPs of Northern Uganda are a resilient people. Socialstructures may have changed, but perhaps not so much as expected, and are to some extentstill intact 121 . Reviving and supporting social structures that might have weakened after yearsof displacement in camps was one idea: “lets revitalise the traditional mechanisms of healingand taking care of the people” 122 . This was also emphasised by some concerned districtofficials. 123 To some, the revitalisation of the social structures was seen as a ‘hands off’strategy for the humanitarian and development community, leaving the development t o occurnaturally as communities find their roots, justified by the hope that “EVIs will automatically behelped as NEVIs become stronger” 124 .Although more careful, a basis for strategising was expressed by a stakeholder encouragingthe conduct of a large scale household survey that looks exclusively at household dynamics,including targeted needs for EVIs and also other groups in society: the youth, the childrenetc, with the aim of creating interventions that ‘build on the existing strengths and structure sin society 125 . Others also confirmed that: “there is a need to think out of the box… targetingwith different activities” 126 . Acknowledging that EVI households are very insecure and needprotection, but not incapable of taking care of themselves in a dignif ied way one respondentsaid: “Most of them cannot get involved in very heavy work…. You have to target them withincome generating activities such as beekeeping, grinding mills or give them boar goats” 127 .Despite being told that the challenges regarding EVIs has been discussed extensively byfood security stakeholders, the Evaluation Team did not find a clear or coherent strategyamongst the current actors in the ground to address the multiple needs of thousands of EVIsas food rations continue to be subject to funding cuts and recovery interventions are slow topick up.7.3.5 Lesson Learned♦ When EVIs lose out of the food distribution system they become even more vulnerable.♦Discussions have as of recent been devoted to the topic of EVIs and their future,however, there seems to be little concerted planning made or actions taken by the actorson the ground. The categorisation of EVIs – still maintained - may becomecounterproductive if efforts are not put into defining and designing a transitional120The PRDP under its Strategic Objective 2 should cover assistance to extremely vulnerable individuals in the North.121 Interview AVSI, Kampala122Interview with OCHA Kitgum123Interviews with district official Amuru and Gulu124Interview with OCHA Gulu125Interview with AVSI, Kampala126UNHCR Gulu127Interview with NRC FSL PC, Gulu. It should be noted however that some EVIs have said that even grinding mills and goats istoo heavy work for them.39
Page 4 and 5: List of Contents1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 6 and 7: 9.3 NRC’s Efforts Towards Connect
Page 8 and 9: tools; however it ensures food secu
Page 10 and 11: ♦♦♦♦With the ration reducti
Page 12: 1.4 CoordinationNRC’s approach to
Page 15 and 16: NRC coincided the field phase of th
Page 17 and 18: Juba talks have been perceived as t
Page 19 and 20: Table 2: 2004 Global Food Aid Deliv
Page 21 and 22: 4 PROTECTING THE RIGHT TO FOOD - TH
Page 23 and 24: 5 PROJECT RELEVANCE & APPROPRIATENE
Page 25 and 26: 5.3 Lesson Learned♦♦♦‘Being
Page 27 and 28: schedules and working long hours to
Page 29 and 30: The complaints about the failed ver
Page 31 and 32: 7 PROJECT EFFECTIVENESSHaving asses
Page 33 and 34: most and mothers observed the nutri
Page 35 and 36: 7.1.7 Lesson Learned♦ Food aid ha
Page 37 and 38: By 2005 the profile of the crisis i
Page 39 and 40: Recent studies 95 on global food se
Page 41 and 42: From the 2007 EFSA 104 it transpire
Page 43: 7.3 Project Objective 3:To safeguar
Page 47 and 48: 8 COORDINATION8.1 A Co-ordinated Re
Page 49 and 50: some extent also GoU through distri
Page 51 and 52: 9 RELIEF AND RECOVERY - CONNECTEDNE
Page 53 and 54: expected of them. From their perspe
Page 55 and 56: 9.4 Lessons Learnt♦♦♦♦♦St
Page 57 and 58: dependency among the IDPs and unwil
Page 59 and 60: establish the food security situati
Page 61 and 62: ANNEX 1: Terms of Reference for the
Page 63 and 64: • Desk studies. As a general back
Page 65 and 66: F. Time frame and budget considerat
Page 67 and 68: Annex 2: Evaluation Programme - inc
Page 69 and 70: Annex 3: List of Documents Consulte
Page 71 and 72: Expert OpinionsMr. Joe OloyaMr. Gra
Page 73 and 74: Typical Menu:BREAKFAST:• Millet p
Page 75 and 76: NRC objectives andTOR objectivesTo

evaluation of general food distribution in northern uganda: gulu ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?