EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS LEARNT FROM NUSAF PROJECT

1. 1 EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS LEARNT FROM NUSAF PROJECT

2. 1. PREAMBLE The Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF) is a Government of Uganda Project established as a transitory tool and funding mechanism to assist the North to catch up with rest of the country in matters of development. This was after the Government realized that despite significant gains in reducing poverty recorded throughout most parts of Uganda, the North has continued to lag behind and indeed fallen further into poverty. NUSAF Project was launched on 5th February, 2003. Initial Project Closing Date was 31st March, 2008 but extended to 31st March, 2009 to allow for accessing balance of the credit and smooth completion of all funded subproject 2. NUSAF PROJECT GOAL To use targeted investments in a participatory, equitable and sustainable manner to promote reconciliation and thereby contribute to eradicate poverty in 18 districts in the North and Eastern region � Northern Uganda.

3. 3 3. NUSAF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE To empower communities in 18 districts in Northern Uganda by enhancing their capacity to systematically identify, prioritize and plan for their needs within their own value system, and implement sustainable development initiatives that improve socio-economic services and opportunities; thereby contributing to improved livelihoods by placing money in the hands of communities. 4. COMPONENTS Community Development Initiatives (CDI) � to finance demand driven community based initiatives to construct and rehabilitate small-scale socio economic infrastructure guided by a subproject menu that conforms to the specific sector policies and norms. Vulnerable Groups Support (VGS) � to provide support to vulnerable groups; local authorities, community service organizations, non-government organizations and community-based organizations and institutions that directly work with the groups. Community Reconciliation and Conflict Management (CRCM) � to provide support to traditional and non-traditional approaches to peace building and conflict management. Institutional Development (ID) � to support the staffing of small autonomous NUSAF Management Unit (NUMU), capacity building and training, IEC, M&E/MIS for different sets of stakeholders.

4. 4 5. DISTRICT RESOURCE ALLOCATION Whereas NUSAF overall is a targeted intervention, a targeting framework was established within which indicative resource allocation for districts was done in a transparent and objective manner. The criteria used for arriving at district resource envelopes included:- - poverty levels - accessibility to social services - vulnerability Ranking Index - conflict Ranking Index - population Targeting below the District was based on the District level statistics. The resource allocation was supposed to be reviewed annually. Ceilings per subproject were also established not to exceed; - CDI : US$ 20,000. - VGS : US$ 10,000. - CRCM : US$ 5,000. However, multi-community subprojects could be funded beyond US$ 20,000 but not exceeding US$ 50,000 after approval by the National Steering Committee (NSC).

5. 6. NUSAF PROJECT FINANCING The Government of Uganda received a credit of SDR 80.1 million from World Bank (equivalent to US$ 100 million at the time of approval � 7th June, 2002). Government of Uganda counterpart funding was supposed to be equivalent to U$ 13.3 million. Community contributions were expected to be equivalent to US$ 20.2 million. 80% of the credit was for direct subproject funding. 7. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Key sector indicators, outcome / impact indicators and output indicators were stated in the Logical Framework for the NUSAF Project. In particular, the number of subprojects to be funded over the project period were stated as:- CDI - 2,500 VGS - 3,000 CRCM - 1,000

6. 6 8. GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS The development approach used in implementation of NUSAF Project has been the Community Demand Driven (CDD) Approach. This approach allowed communities to take centre stage in identification, prioritization and planning for their needs as well as implementing and managing the subprojects generated. In essence the approach allowed the communities to determine their destiny. NUSAF Project has been implemented through the decentralized structures of Local Governments as it was expected to contribute to deepening of the decentralization process. NUSAF subproject cycle was largely managed by the Local Governments (LGs); that made them the �engine� of the NUSAF Project implementation processes.

7. 8. SUBPROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS It was planned that NUSAF Project would be implemented through three (3) methods, namely:- - The community themselves through their CPMCs, CPCs. In other words, the community would manage their own processes of implementation. - CSOs, NGOs, CBOs and the private sector selected by the communities themselves and vetted by the districts. This would be in scenarios where the communities have low capacities to implement their identified subprojects. - Districts could also implement multi-community subprojects on behalf of the communities. 9. CRITICAL ASSUMPTIONS MADE ABOUT NUSAF PROJECT There will be cessation of civil strife in Acholi and Karamoja sub regions. Communities will participate in implementation of funded NUSAF subprojects. The current LGDP framework will not undermine direct community funding. Local governments, CSOs, NGOs and CBOs will be willing to cooperate, support and implement funded NUSAF subprojects. There will be transparency, accountability and technical quality in subproject management.

8. 8 B. PROJECT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY SUBPROJECT FUNDING STATUS 9,339 sub-projects (i.e.143.7% of the planned 6,500) have been funded to-date. Ushs. 164.1 billion disbursed directly to community bank accounts. This reflects 98.6% of shs. 166.5 billion earmarked for direct sub-project funding. The balance of shs.2.4 billion (1.4%) earmarked for direct subproject funding is committed as follows: 2nd tranches � shs.0.7 billion. Variations and Functionality � shs.1.4 billion. Approved new YOP subprojects � shs. 0.3 billion. Overall subproject completion rate as at 31st August, 2008 was 78% i.e. 7,096 completed of funded 9,273 by then while the accountability was at 89% i.e. shs.143.3 billion already accounted.

10. 10 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS: FUNDED ASSETS UNDER CDI (AS AT 31st AUGUST, 2008) Education sector subprojects (2,118 classrooms, 1,165 teachers houses, 58 Science laboratories, 25 dormitories, 7 libraries, 63 community halls, supply of school furniture (7,902 chairs/desks). Water and sanitation sector subprojects (891 boreholes, 67protected springs and piped water extensions and tanks,872 latrine stances). Health sector subprojects (44 Health Units, 78 units of staff houses, 31 wards/OPD, 3 fences) Community Infrastructure subprojects (53 roads, 25 bridges/culverts). Production sector 10 cattle dips, 12 produce stores, 10 markets, 42 animal traction and 15 agro-forestry).

11. 11 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS: FUNDED ASSETS UNDER VGS (AS AT 31st AUGUST, 2008) As a result the communities purchased the following assets: 36,631 heifers (mainly indigenous ones). 8,657 bulls. 22,748 oxen for ploughing. 8,936 ox-ploughs. 22,076 goats (mainly indigenous ones). 8,386 pigs. 114,615 chicks. 9,962 bee hives. An assortment of 8,699 tools for Vocational Training under VGS. 177 fish ponds.

12. 12 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS: FUNDED UNDER CRCM  Community meetings and dialogue (161) Support to CSOs (127) Peace Reconciliation activities (108) Psychosocial support (203) Support to War affected (136) Support to traditional institutions (110) Support to cultural institutions (3)

13. 13 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS: FUNDED ASSETS UNDER YOP The component had funded 188 subprojects by 30th June, 2008. Just concluded YOP baseline study of approved subprojects and funded 381 more subprojects by end of August, 2008. Completed 186 subprojects by 30th June, 2008 and the skills imparted include: Carpentry (42 youth groups) Metal Fabrication (15 youth groups) Tailoring (48 youth groups) Hair-dressing/beauty saloon (14 youth groups) Motor mechanics (5 youth groups) Block laying (8 youth groups) Mixed skills (33 youth groups) Retooling (13 youth groups) Other skills (10 youth groups)

14. C. LESSONS LEARNT AND BEST PRACTICES (GENERAL) Poor Communities can participate in planning, management and implementation of investments suited to their needs, once they are supported adequately. Committed leadership ensures successful implementation and maximization of benefits to communities. Collaboration and networking with development partners in implementation and monitoring of sub-projects is a very useful strategy of ensuring effectiveness and efficiency in resource allocation and utilization. Communities require constant capacity building through out the subproject cycle. Group size is an important factor in subproject performance. Single or double tranche modality leads to faster completion rates of subprojects as opposed to multiple tranche disbursement.

15. Contd. A well executed extended PRA process is an effective means of reaching the real poor. Groups with higher proportions of women tend to perform better. CSOs/CBOs perform better in community planning, capacity enhancement, monitoring and evaluation than in direct implementation of community subprojects. Individual ownership and management of assets acquired under VGS subprojects is key to sustainability and maximization of benefits to target beneficiaries. Karamoja sub region needs special or tailored implementation modalities (different from the other sub regions) due to low capacities of CPMCs, CPCs and limited capacities of CSOs and district technical staff.

16. 16 D. CHALLENGES (GENERAL) Immense demand for support from communities. Inadequate Technical support to communities. Realising local contribution from the communities. Limited capacity of Local Governments to support communities in operation and maintenance of investments created under NUSAF Project. Leadership and governance issues (i.e. transparency and accountability). General Price increase/changes. Unstructured interference. Slow community accountabilities. Insecurity.

17. E: LESSONS LEARNT & CHALLENGES BY SECTOR EDUCATION Lessons: Demand for education infrastructure is increasing by year as school enrolment increases under UPE and Universal Post Primary Education and Training (UPPET) Effective community participation led to satisfactory implementation without cost overruns Challenges: Very high demand for education infrastructure Low technical capacity of the engineering departments in some districts Inadequate budgets of local governments to support communities in O&M of education infrastructure Provision of electrical power and water to science laboratories in remote rural communities

18. HEALTH Lessons Involvement of sector specialists in sub-project preparation is critical in Operationalisation and sustainability of investments under health sector Challenges: Operationalisation of health facilities especially in Amuria and Katakwi districts i.e. recruitment and/or posting of staff by the district / Ministry of Health Low ability of some districts to attract health workers for Operationalisation of health facilities PRODUCTION & ENVIRONMENT Lessons: Individual ownership and management of assets enhanced viability and sustainability of the community interventions i.e. for animal traction and agro-forestry sub-projects CSOs were better placed to play mobilization and facilitation roles than implementation Challenges: High death rate of livestock esp. in Acholi sub-region Enterprise selection Ensuring sustainability of investments Targeting the most vulnerable transient communities in Acholi and Karamoja sub-regions

19. WATER & SANITATION Lessons: Some of the water sources drilled under NUSAF have sufficient yield that could be distributed to nearby communities through small piped water schemes Challenges Low technical capacity of the water departments in some districts Presence of unlicensed drillers in Acholi and Karamoja who convince communities for contracts by offering lower rates than the licensed (quality control & data capture in the national statistics) Re-financing dry wells especially in the districts of Kitgum, Nebbi, and Yumbe NUSAF contributions in the water sector not captured and reported by the DWOs to DWD Inadequate supervision of the multi-community water sub-projects by Moroto district leading to suspected �exaggerations� of bills for payments

20. COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE Lessons: Cash transfers to able-bodied but unemployed under LBSNP ensured participation of more people in NUSAF activities and acceptability of other components that target the vulnerable and the socially disadvantaged Challenges Low capacities in the districts to implement complex sub-projects such as bridges in Nebbi, Moyo and Oyam districts Inadequate budgets in the sub-counties for operation and maintenance of completed community access roads Price escalations for critical inputs like cement during the subproject period

21. E: LESSONS LEARNT & CHALLENGES BY SUB-REGION TESO SUB-REGION Lessons: Local contributions enabled construction of 4 units of teachers houses instead of the budgeted 3 units. Furthermore, where full local contributions were realised, there were no cost overruns. Committed leadership resulted into quality investments and value-for-money practices. Challenges: Changes in engineering designs mainly in Kumi and Katakwi Political rivalries in Pallisa leading to allegations and counter allegations thus slowing down implementation Low technical supervision especially in the new districts of Amuria, Budaka and Bukedea. Insecurity in some parts of Amuria and Katakwi where some of the animals acquired have been raided.

22. ACHOLI SUB-REGION Lessons: Commitment by new leaders in Gulu and Pader resulted into increased subproject accountability. Effective subproject implementation and monitoring have been undertaken when peace returned to the sub region i.e. Peace is a prerequisite for development. Challenges: Low technical supervision. Low involvement of lower local governments (sub-counties) as most of the people were in IDP camps. Inadequate EPRA and sub-project appraisals. Isolated cases of poor targeting. Low capacity of CSOs to effectively support communities. High cattle death especially in Amuru district. Unlicensed drillers and shoddy work. Land conflicts among communities in camps were most of the sub-projects were located. Low local contribution and accountability Insecurity and unstructured interference

23. LANGO SUB-REGION Lessons: Commitment by new leadership in Dokolo and Amolatar districts resulted into improved value for money practices at subproject sites. Challenges: Errant contractors in some sub-projects Low technical supervision Low capacity of CSOs to support communities in implementing sub-projects Poor procurement and contract management Low community contribution Insecurity in areas bordering Acholi and Karamoja sub-regions Unstructured interference

24. WEST NILE SUB-REGION Lessons: Committed leadership provided enabling environment for implementation of NUSAF Project. Challenges: Low technical supervision. Poor enterprise selection especially in Nebbi district. High unit cost of investments due to Southern Sudan factor. Low community contribution. Slow accountability especially in Arua and Nebbi districts. Unstructured interference

25. KARAMOJA SUB-REGION Lessons: Involvement of established religious establishments resulted into realising value for money practices in the implementation of CDI subprojects. The CDD model can be manipulated by the elite to meet their own selfish needs i.e. the needs of the poor and needy living in manyatas were hardly addressed. Challenges: Insecurity Poor targeting Elite capture Low technical supervision Inadequate EPRA, sub-project appraisal Limited enterprise options as a result of harsh weather conditions Unlicensed drillers Low community contributions Low/slow community accountability Unstructured interference

26. 26 F. CONCLUSION NUSAF Project has been a learning experience to all the stakeholders. The design of NUSAF Project has been flexible to accommodate lessons learnt, best practices and changing community needs. NUSAF Project has demonstrated that poor communities can participate in planning, implementation and management of investments suited to their needs, once they are supported adequately. The CDD model worked well in some sub regions but Karamoja sub region needs special or tailored implementation modalities due to low capacities of CPMCs, CPCs and limited capacities of CSOs and district technical staff. It is our prayer that PRDP - NUSAF II, when it eventually materializes, will be better implemented and yield greater returns on investments to the beneficiaries while building on the achievements, best practices and lessons learnt from the current phase.

27. 27 T h a n k Y o u