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

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