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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

approaches through which it can stimulate a debate on transitional issues among therelevant actors in Uganda in order to bring some coherence to the process .Strengthening Local Capacities: At an operational level, GFD is building the capacity oflocal structures (albeit on a limited scale) that are expected to direct future developmentefforts within the community. Whereas it created its own distribution structures (the FMCs)which have been accused of undermining the authority of local structures, NRC isincreasingly working with local officials at the parish level in the transit sites and return a reas.Parish chiefs and local council officials are more involved in the food distribution processesand have been trained and equipped with community mobilization and leadership skills 168 .During the first quarter of 2008, a training programme was conducted in all sub counties forFMCs, sub-county leaders and some LC members. The training tackled topics on the roles ofFMC/LCs, distribution processes, role of food aid during return and recovery, hygienepromotion and domestic violence 169 .Linkages with Other NRC Programmes: NRC has a portfolio of programmes includingsupport to food security & livelihoods (FSL); support to Information Communication andLegal Aid (ICLA); support to Food For Education (FFE), support to Education, in particularthe Youth Education Pack (YEP) and support to Shelter and Camp Management. All theseprogrammes have a longer-term perspective that would complement the GFD programme.Interestingly GFD is credited for creating a special status for NRC, which has offered somelevel of protection for the other programmes 170 and yet until recently, there have been noefforts to strengthen the linkages between these programmes and GFD and maximise on this‘good will’.The FSL project which offers a variety of livelihood options through agricultu ral production;income generating activities (IGAs); and environmental conservation, was initiated towardsthe end of 2005 with the aim of increasing IDPs’ self sufficiency, following reductions of WFPfood rations 171 . The programme picked pace in 2006. The FSL project targets both NEVIsand EVIs and is today (2008) working with a total of 7613 households in Gulu, Amuru andKitgum districts, but would like to expand its target group, as the needs are great. Support tofarmer groups has so far included input provision (seeds, oxen, ploughs) and training toincrease appropriate knowledge and skills. By creating knowledge on, strengthening anddeveloping sources of food and sources of cash, the project assists IDPs and returnees tocope with their current situation in the short term as well as to gain skills that will benefit themwhile returning to their places of origin 172 . The FSL project in its current scope is fully fundeduntil April 2009.The number of households so far reached by the FSL project appear rela tively small in lightof the high unmet need for livelihoods support in the three districts, and hence the need toexpand these interventions. As noted in earlier sections, NRC’s GFD and FSL componentscould complement each others’ efforts more than has be en the case, given their commoninterest in food security. Apart from a few occasions, the two have to some degree beenworking in parallel. While their approaches to food security are somewhat different with theFSL component requiring more technical back stopping and close monitoring, GFD bringscertain strengths to the table (logistics, mobilization skills, a broad network, regular contactwith, and knowledge of communities in all sub-counties) some of which could be harnessedto inform and/ or support expansion of the livelihoods’ interventions.168FFL/FFE Quarterly report, April 2008169Ibid170Interview with ICLA, NRC171Based on recommendations from a WFP EFSA conducted in March 2005172NRC: Food Security & Livelihoods leaflet48
9.4 Lessons Learnt♦♦♦♦♦Strong and effective leadership is critical for articulating the link between relief andrecovery and for galvanizing early recovery efforts. Lack of leadership in a postemergency situation creates a sense of paralysis amongst actors.In a complex situation such as that in northern Uganda, the beneficiaries’ perspectivesand needs of the communities should be the driving force to avoid pushing people intofurther destitution. Needs’ assessments should be the basis for decision-making inhumanitarian situations.There seems to be few and disperse funds available for the much needed recoveryactivities. Availability of funds in a predictable, timely (more than 6 months) and coherentfashion can improve planning for recovery and assist in implementation of usefullivelihoods programmes.Co-operation and close collaboration between the different actors: government/donors/humanitarian agencies/NGOs is critical for successful recovery efforts. At presentstakeholders do not seem clear of their roles and responsibilities and this hampers asmooth gear-shift into recovery.Humanitarian organisations working on the ground have sound knowledge of the realitiesand needs of the ground and which if pr operly packaged can be used to influenceprogrammes and policy.9.5 Recommendations♦Strong leadership is needed to facilitate the recovery process. As time passes IDPs areleft in a vacuum and the consequences may be difficult to handle. With the resources,capacity and goodwill NRC has in Uganda, the organisation should take a lead inadvocating for concerted recovery efforts. The current lack of leadership from GoU aswell as the humanitarian community should not prohibit NRC from exercising its mandateand leverage as an independent, capable and important NGO to move forward and setexamples for the recovery process.♦♦♦NRC should advocate for targeted and needs based interventions. This will imply carryingout research and studies (of which some recommendati ons have been made in thisreport) so as to have a credible evidence base for future programming. Time is not inanybody’s favour. For every delay a farming season for the IDPs may be missed.In the current transition from the humanitarian to the recovery phase, NRC should alongside GFD activities engage more widely and strategically in Food Security and Livelihoodactivities. During the coming months it should be explored how to maximise the synergiesbetween the GFD team/structure and the FSL programme objectives.If there is limited and unsustainable funding for livelihoods/self reliance activities NRCshould request advocacy support from the food security cluster lead or higher up in theUN humanitarian system.49
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 and 44: 7.3 Project Objective 3:To safeguar
Page 45 and 46: 7.3.4 A Future Strategy for EVIs?Se
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: expected of them. From their perspe
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?