Outcome Evaluation Report: Uganda - Kiboga Epicenter

Outcome Evaluation Report: Uganda - Kiboga Epicenter June 2014 Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014 2 KYANKWANZI DISTRICT MAP Po...
Author: Camron Newton
16 downloads 1 Views 4MB Size
Outcome Evaluation Report: Uganda - Kiboga Epicenter June 2014

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

2

KYANKWANZI DISTRICT MAP

Population Density Persons per Sq Km 13 - 29 30 - 50 51 - 81 82 - 161 162 - 590

NSAMBYA KYANKWANZI

BUTEMBA

WATTUBA KAPEKE

NTWETWE GAYAZA

KIBIGA

N

10

MULAGI KIBOGA TC

0

10

20 Kilometers

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

LWAMATA

MUWANGA

DWANIRO

BUKOMERO

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Outcome Evaluation Report highlights the major outcomes achieved by Kiboga Epicenter as the necessary preconditions for triggering impact in the epicenter community. The Outcome Evaluation of The Hunger Project Uganda - Kiboga Epicenter program was made possible with funding from the Netherlands investors. This report was written by Paul Muliika and Drake Namanya from the THPU Monitoring and Evaluation Department with support from Nick Sens, a Masters Student intern from Wageningen University Netherlands, and Marissa Strniste, the M&E Consultant at the THP Global Office. The authors are very grateful to THPU staff especially the Country Director Dr. Daisy Owomugasho, Program Officer Ms. Dorothy Nabwire and Ms. Megan Colnar M&E Specialist for THP Global Office for their technical support and active participation in the evaluation processes. We would especially like to thank the participants in the evaluation - the staff of Kiboga Epicenter, Enumerators, the District Local Council leaders, epicenter partners and leaders that participated in the interviews and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs).

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................ 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................... 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 8 INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT ............................................................................................ 11 Study Objectives ................................................................................................................... 11 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 12 Sample Strategy ................................................................................................................... 12 Sampling Frame and Unit ......................................................................................................... 12 Sampling Approach .................................................................................................................. 13 Sampling criteria and participant selection................................................................................ 13 Sample Size ............................................................................................................................. 14 Qualitative Strategy............................................................................................................... 14 Focus Group Discussion .......................................................................................................... 14 Key Informant Interviews .......................................................................................................... 14 DATA COLLECTION PROCESS .................................................................................................. 15 Enumerator Training & Piloting the Questionnaire ................................................................ 15 Field collection and survey submission ................................................................................. 15 Quality check, data entry, and data review............................................................................ 16 Limitations and Challenges to the study ................................................................................ 16 STUDY RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 17 Demographics....................................................................................................................... 19 Water, Sanitation, and Environment...................................................................................... 20 Literacy & Education ............................................................................................................. 22 Food Security & Agriculture .................................................................................................. 25 Community Mobilization ........................................................................................................ 28 Health & Nutrition .................................................................................................................. 32 Microfinance & Livelihoods ................................................................................................... 36 STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 41 Water, Environment and Sanitation....................................................................................... 41 Literacy & Education ............................................................................................................. 42 Food Security & Agriculture .................................................................................................. 42 Community Mobilization ........................................................................................................ 43 Health & Nutrition .................................................................................................................. 43 Microfinance & Livelihoods ................................................................................................... 44 ANNEX.. ............................................................................................................................................ 45 Annex A: List of Focus Group Discussions held .................................................................... 45 Annex B: List of key informants interviewed .......................................................................... 46 Annex C: Key collaborating partners ..................................................................................... 47 Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

5

Annex D: Percentage distribution of household toilet type and ownership ............................. 48 Annex E: Distribution of water sources and processes through which water is prepared before drinking ................................................................................................................................. 49 Annex F: Percentage distribution of land use with participation in agriculture workshops...... 50

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

6

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AIDS

Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

FAL

Functional Adult Literacy

FGD

Focus Group Discussion

HEP

Hydro Electric Power

HIV

Human Immunodeficiency Virus

KII

Key Informant Interview

MDGs

Millennium Development Goals

M&E

Monitoring and Evaluation

PBB

Program Based Budgets

PPI

Progress out of Poverty Index

SPSS

Statistical Package for Social Scientists

TC

Town Council

THP

The Hunger Project

THPU

The Hunger Project Uganda

VCA

Vision Commitment and Action

VHT

Village Health Team

WASH

Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

WEP

Woman Empowerment Program

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Hunger Project (THP) is an international NGO committed to the sustainable end of world hunger. THP has offices in 21 countries around the world. THP has been working in Uganda since 1999 empowering partners to end their own hunger and poverty using the Epicenter Strategy, a multi-sectoral approach to development where women and men from rural villages, called epicenters, are mobilized to create and manage their own programs to meet basic needs. Currently, THP Uganda has established eleven epicenters in nine districts: Kiboga, Kyankwanzi, Iganga, Kiruhura, Mbarara, Mbale, Mpigi, Butambala and Wakiso. An Outcome Evaluation Study of the Kiboga epicenter was conducted from March 3rd to 14th 2014. The purpose of the study was to collect midline data on THP programs to establish the epicenter’s progress and set realistic targets and milestones for each program component; to examine the epicenter achievements and outcomes; and to re-confirm the epicenter coverage area. The study was conducted in five Sub Counties of Kiboga, representing two districts. The evaluation team used both quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection. A sample size of 400 households was randomly selected and surveyed, representing 2% of the total households in the Kiboga epicenter. This data was supplemented by 10 Focus Groups Discussions (FGDs) and 21 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). The target population included grassroots partners in the catchment area, district local government officials, and political and opinion leaders in the community. The findings in this report are organized along THP’s Impact and Outcome Indicators. The major findings are presented by sector below. Water and Sanitation •

86% of households are using an improved drinking water source, although concerns were expressed about long queues and borehole maintenance.



45% of households are using an improved sanitation facility, although this proportion varied widely between Sub Counties and was quite low in some villages.



There was a high dependency on using firewood as cooking fuel (82%).

Literacy and Education •

65% of households have at least one literate person.



88% of children ages 4 – 18 are enrolled in school.



The gender parity ratio of girls to boys is 1.03, which signifies that more girls are enrolled than boys.



The majority of young children are attending the epicenter nursery school, but there were concerns about the quality of the facility and its staff.



82% of adults have never attended a THP literacy class.

Food Security and Agriculture •

The women’s dietary diversity score, or average number of food groups eaten, was 1.84. Cereals, roots, and tubers (for example, maize, sorghum, cassava, and potatoes) were the most common foods eaten, while organ meat and oils and fats were the least common.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

8



9.5% of households reported moderate food insecurity, while 1% of households indicated severe food insecurity.



The average crop yield reported by farmers was 2350 kg/hectare for cassava, 630 kg/hectare for legumes, and 1431 kg/hectare for maize. This results means that Kiboga farmers are achieving relatively high yields for cassava, low yields for legumes and average yields for maize.



61% of households are implementing agricultural practices to improve resilience to climate change



92% of smallholder farmers are applying improved management practices and technologies.



The proportion of smallholder farmers selling their produce is 62%.



There are constraints to accessing markets in Kiboga, such as distance, fees, lack of transportation, and low sale value of crops.

Community Mobilization and Leadership •

76% of individuals feel that they have the ability to change their communities. However, there was a substantial difference in gender on this question, with 86.2% of males responding that they have the ability to change their communities as compared to 70.5% of females.



69% of community members perceive leaders to be successful in addressing community concerns.



92% of men and 89% of women voted in the most recent national or local election.



It is estimated that 35% of the population participates in epicenter activities.

Health and Nutrition •

89% of households responded that a household member used a clinic or health worker while sick.



The majority of respondents, approximately 74.93%, are aware of their HIV status.



55% of children under 5 are sleeping under a bednet.



88% of pregnant women visited a health clinic or health worker during their pregnancy at least once. The average number of antenatal visits was 2.



91% of births were attended by a licensed healthcare professional.



The proportion of the population with comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS, which is measured by answering 5 questions correctly, is 33%.

Microfinance and Livelihoods •

15.2% of households in the Kiboga epicenter are living in poverty, as defined by living below $1.25/day (PPP).



14% of households have a non-farm business. 56% of these businesses are owned by women.



6.1% of females in Kiboga own businesses.



17% of adults have accessed THP’s loans or savings services.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

9

The study recommendations call for increased community sensitization on a wide range of topics, including THP programs, women’s empowerment, sanitation, maintenance of water sources, sustainable environmental practices, nutrition for women and young children, collective marketing agreements, the use of mosquito nets, HIV/AIDS, income-generating activities, and microfinance programs. Other recommendations called for increased access to sanitation facilities, improvement of the epicenter nursery school, increased participation in adult literacy classes, scaling down the epicenter catchment area so that programs can be more easily accessed by partners, access to mosquito nets, improvement of HIV/AIDS services, and increased microfinance coverage.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

10

INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT The Hunger Project (THP) is an International NGO committed to the sustainable end of world hunger. THP has offices in 21 countries around the world, including Uganda, and a Global Office in New York, USA. THP has been working in Uganda since 1999 empowering partners to end their own hunger and poverty using the Epicenter Strategy. Currently, THPU has established eleven epicenters in nine Uganda districts: Kiboga, Kyankwanzi, Iganga, Kiruhura, Mbarara, Mbale, Mpigi, Butambala and Wakiso. Kiboga Epicenter was initiated in 2002 and operates in two districts in five Sub Counties. Kiboga district consists of Kapeke, Kiboga Town Council and Kibiga Sub Counties; Kyankwanzi district includes Wattuba and Mulagi Sub Counties. These Sub Counties account for 28 parishes across 156 villages with a total population of 68,889 people (33,802 female and 35,087 male) as a catchment area. THPU has implemented a number of catalytic programs under the framework of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) through the Epicenter Strategy. Programs implemented include: Health and Nutrition; Literacy and Education; Food Production and Food Security; Community Mobilization; Microfinance and Livelihoods; Women’s Empowerment Program (WEP); Public Awareness; Advocacy and Alliances; Water, Environment and Sanitation; and Monitoring and Evaluation. In 2013, THP Netherlands submitted a Proof of Concept proposal to De Koornzaayer Foundation, Stichting Wees een Kans and SoLogical Foundation from Netherlands in consultation with the Global Hunger Project and THPU. As a result, the Kiboga Epicenter Program Based Budget (PBB) was considered for funding from 2014 - 2016 to build selfreliance. It is against this background that THPU conducted an Outcome Evaluation in Kiboga Epicenter to collect baseline and outcome data to inform planning, decision-making, and setting realistic milestones and targets to guide implementation for the coming period of 2014 – 2016.

Study Objectives The overall objective of the study was to examine the household and community-level results of THP's program interventions through the lens of THP's outcome and impact indicators. The following were the specific objectives: • To collect midline data on THP programs to establish the epicenter’s progress and set realistic targets and milestones for each program component. • To examine the epicenter achievements and outcomes. • To re-confirm the epicenter coverage area according to the Epicenter Strategy guidelines of 5 - 10 Km radius range.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

11

METHODOLOGY A mixed method approach was employed in this study including randomized household sampling, focus groups and key informant interviews to collect both qualitative and quantitative data points. Information was gathered using iPod Touch devices via iFormBuilder for the household surveys and using iTalk to record interviews and focus group discussions. The following section describes the statistical methods applied to identify household respondents. Sample Strategy Sampling Frame and Unit The study used a distinct sampling frame for three stages of the selection process. The sampling frame for the first stage was the five Sub Counties in the epicenter catchment area. The Sub Counties were purposively considered for the study to be able to address the forth study objective: Re-confirm the epicenter coverage area according to the Epicenter Strategy guidelines of 5-10 km radius range. Within the Sub Counties, 10 parishes were randomly selected for the sample. The sampling frame for the second stage was 156 villages1 in the predetermined catchment area surrounding Kiboga epicenter. The sampling frame for the third stage was 400 of the 2,494 households within the 21 randomly selected villages (see Table 1). Table 1: Sampling frame Village Kyetume Kagobe Lwaminyoli Maggi Kirinda Kyato Bugabo Nasuuna Bamusuta Kikabala Luwawu Kasambya A Kasambya B Kibike Kisolooza Kikajjo East A Goyero Kambugu Buyambi Ndabiriza Zanyiro

# of households surveyed 10 3 1 10 26 6 6 27 60 43 18 17 23 20 15 13 20 20 20 20 21

Distance to epicenter (km) 9 7 5 14 10 9 1 2 7 10 8 16 16 16 16 22 15 20 23 22 25

1

Based on the results of this study and further discussion around the concept of achieving self-reliance, the new catchment area for Kiboga’s interventions has been reduced to only 40 villages in a 7km radius surrounding the epicenter.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

12

Sampling Approach A multistage sampling technique was used to identify 400 target households. Multistage sampling is a standard practice employed to identify and diagnosis representative characteristics across large populations. Table 2 outlines the sampling approach. In the first stage of selection, a list of all 5 Sub Counties was created. Each Sub County was assigned a probability that depended on its population, and this probability was used to determine the sample from each Sub County. Therefore the bigger the population, the larger the sample selected. Within the Sub Counties, each parish had an equal probability of selection. A total of 10 Parishes were randomly selected (Kagobe, Kasega, Kyayimba, Buzibwera, Bamusuta, Luwawu, Kisolooza, Nabulembeko, Kajjere and Nkandwa). In the second stage, 21 villages were randomly selected from the 156 villages surrounding Kiboga epicenter. Each village had an equal probability of selection. A total of 400 households were randomly selected for interview from the 21 villages in the Sub Counties of Kapeke, Kiboga Town Council, Mulagi, Wattuba and Kibiga. Each household had an equal probability of selection. Table 2: Sampling approach used Sub County Kapeke

Parishes Kagobe

Kasega

Kyayimba Kiboga Town Council

Buzibwera Bamusuta

Mulagi

Luwawu

Wattuba

Kisolooza

Nabulembenko Kibiga

Kajjere Nkandwa

Villages

Sample Size

Kyetume Kagobe Lwaminyoli Maggi Kirindi Kyato Bugabo Total Nasuuna Bamussuta Total Kikabala Luwawu Total Kasambya A Kasambya B Kibike Kisolooza Kikajjo East A Total Goyero Kambugu Buyambi Ndabiriza Zzanyiro Total

10 3 1 10 26 6 6 62 27 60 87 43 18 61 17 23 20 15 13 89 20 20 20 20 21 101

Sampling criteria and participant selection All the households in the study area had an equal chance of being selected to participate in the survey irrespective of whether they were a direct THP partner or not. To ensure randomization, the enumerators would skip every 5 households when entering one of the selected villages, Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

13

using the same side of the road. If a household declined to participate or no one was home, the enumerators would proceed to the next household that had a resident present and willing to take the survey. Some sections of the survey however had special instructions on who should and should not participate. For instance, questions on balanced diet and nutritional foods were asked to only women within the age of 15-49 years. Questions on health and nutrition were asked to only respondents above 15 years while questions on gender perspectives were asked to both female and male respondents but in separate sessions. All respondents were required to sign a consent form consisting of their picture and a signature. Sample Size The sample size for this study was determined using purposive sampling. First, the minimum number of households needed was determined (157). Then, it was decided to triple the sample size to be able to stratify the data by Sub County. The sample of 400 was then identified using probability proportional to size. Qualitative Strategy Focus Group Discussion 10 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were conducted to gain in-depth understanding of perceptions on household and community changes as a result of THP programs. In total, 109 partners (57 female and 52 male) participated in the FGDs. Each of the 5 Sub Counties conducted 2 focus group discussions with females and males separated (see photos below). Notes and voice recordings to aid qualitative data analysis were taken using the iTalk software on the iPods. The participants were selected from the participating parishes that were considered knowledgeable about the community. These include survey participants as well as non-participants.

Photos (left to right): FGD for men in Mulagi, FGD for women in Kiboga Town Council, KII for CDO in Wattuba and KII for Parish Chief in Mulagi Sub County.

Key Informant Interviews 21 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) comprising of 5 females and 16 males were conducted to collect first-hand information and knowledge about THP programs from experts and community leaders in the 5 Sub Counties. 4 people were interviewed per Sub County and these included Local Council III Chairpersons, Sub County Chiefs, Community Development Officers and Councilors for Production. In the event that these individuals were not available, they were substituted by other Sub County leaders and officers.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

14

DATA COLLECTION PROCESS Enumerator Training & Piloting the Questionnaire The enumerator team comprised of 10 people (7 females and 3 males) who were all university students or graduates. Of these, 3 had participated in the previous study in Kiruhura Epicenter and hence had experience about the concept of Outcome Evaluations and the use of the iPods and iFormBuilder for data collection. A five-day enumerator training was held at the THPU Head Office from 24th-28th, February 2014 including THP staff (see photos below). The participants were briefed about THP Epicenter Strategy, the Outcome Evaluation process, and the iPod touch device/iFormBuilder technology. The training was officially opened by the Country Director and was facilitated by the M&E Program Officer, Program Officer and Data Entrant. The household questionnaire, FGD and KII guides were piloted in Wakiso Epicenter (a neighboring epicenter with the Head Office). The main purpose of the pilot was to practically prepare the enumerators for the field data collection exercise. Test trials using the household questionnaire and the iPod were done and a feedback session was conducted to develop final tools.

Photos (left to right): FGD guide pretest by enumerators, KII guide pretest by female enumerators & KII guide pretest by male enumerators

Field collection and survey submission Field data collection took 10 days. At the end of the exercise, a total of 401 questionnaires were completed with an average of 50 questionnaires completed and submitted to the iFormBuilder per day. The number of days was increased from 5 in previous studies to 10 to allow more time for data collection and attainment of the study interview targets.

Photos (left to right): Enumerator conducts interview in Kapeke, enumerators conducts interview in Mulagi, respondent signs consent form on iPod and enumerator conducts interview in Kibiga Sub County.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

15

Quality check, data entry, and data review Using the iPod touch device, responses were directly entered and uploaded daily to the iFormBuilder website. The data collection team was supervised by the M&E Program Officer with support from the Kiboga Assistant Program Officer and Data entrant for the Global Climate Change Alliance project Kiboga. The team supervised the field data collection; checked for questionnaire completeness, validity, and accuracy; and handled administrative issues. The data, including respondents’ photographs and consent signatures, was downloaded from the iFormBuilder in Excel and exported to Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) and MS Excel for analysis. The M&E team with support from Mr. Nick Sens, a student intern from Wageningen University Netherlands, conducted the data checks, cleaning, coding and analysis. Limitations and Challenges to the study •

Some partners were not willing to take their photos and signatures as a form of consent to participate in the interview. The enumerators however managed to convince the majority of the respondents to have their photos taken and signatures.



Although the enumerators were given THPU introductory letters, some partners demanded for THPU identity cards. In future temporary identity cards can be issued to the enumerators.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

16

STUDY RESULTS Table 3: Outcome Indicator Summary Indicator Impact Indicators Proportion of households with at least one literate person Percent increase in individuals reporting the ability to change their communities*

Unit

Female Male Women’s Dietary Diversity: Mean number of food groups consumed by women of reproductive age (15-49 years) Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger Moderate Severe Percent change in use of clinics/health workers during illness* Proportion of population aware of their HIV status PPI: Proportion of households below the poverty line

65.1% 75.8% 70.5% 86.2%

Percent

1.84

Number (0-9 food groups)

10.5% 9.5% 1% 88.6% 74.9%** 15.2%

Percent

Percent Percent Percent Percent of households below $1.25/day PPP

Percent change in yields per hectare for farming households* Cassava

13,300

Legumes

611

Maize Percent of households implementing risk-reducing practices/actions to improve resilience to climate change Outcome Indicators Water and Sanitation Proportion of households using an improved drinking-water source Proportion of households using an improved sanitation facility

kg/hectare

1,316 61%

Percent

85.8% 44.5%

Percent Percent

*This outcome indicator reports percent change, but as this is the first outcome evaluation of Kiboga the current percent, not percent change, is recorded. **This is not the number that was reported in the first released version of this report, but was recalculated later. The text of the report has been updated to reflect this figure.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

17

Literacy and Education Proportion of children age 4-18 attending school Girls Boys Primary Secondary Gender parity ratio: Percentage of girls to boys enrolled at primary school Food Security and Agriculture Proportion of smallholders applying improved management practices and technologies on farms Percent change in number of smallholders selling farm produce* Community Mobilization and Leadership Proportion of community members who perceive leaders to be successful in addressing community concerns Female Male

87.7% 89.6% 85.7% 92.2% 75.8% 1.03

Ratio (girls/boys)

91.7%

Percent

62.4%

Percent

69%

Percent

69% 69.7%

Proportion of adults who voted in the most recent national or local election

89.9%

Female Male Proportion of population participating in epicenter activities, committees, workshops, and meetings Female Male Health and Nutrition Proportion of children under 5 who sleep under a bednet Percent change in use of clinics/health workers during pregnancy* Average number of antenatal visits Proportion of births attended by licensed health care professional Percent change in knowledge of exclusive breastfeeding practices* Proportion of population over 15 years old with comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV & AIDS Microfinance and Livelihoods Proportion of female small business owners Proportion of rural households with non-farm businesses Proportion of adults accessing financial services

88.6% 92.4%

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

18

Percent

Percent

34.7% 34.8% 34.5%

Percent

54.8% 88% 2.19 90.7% 29.6%

Percent Percent Number Percent Percent

32.6%

Percent

6.1% 13.7% 16.8%

Percent Percent Percent

Demographics Overall, the study represented a total of 2,168 people from the 400 households sampled. The findings revealed that the median household size is 5 people. Household size ranged from 19 people to 1. 49.4% of households are headed by both an adult female and an adult male. However, 40.1% of households are headed by only females. Figure 1: Percentage distribution of household structure

Household members were asked to give their age in completed years. The age groups were categorized as 0-10, 11-20, 21-30, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60, 61-70, 71-80, 81-100. Figure 2 below presents the percentage distribution of household members by age group. The largest age group is 0-10 years (37.8%) while the smallest age group is 81-100 years (0.3%). Figure 2: Member age

Within the entire population, 21.27% are children under 5. This is an important target group for THP especially in regard to implementation of the maternal and child health and nutrition programs. Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

19

Water, Sanitation, and Environment Water, Sanitation and Environment is one of the THP program components that aims at increasing partners' access to clean water and sanitation while improving awareness on environmental sustainability issues. Households using an improved sanitation facility According to the MDGs, an improved sanitation facility is defined as one that hygienically separates human excreta from human contact. The proportion of households in Kiboga Epicenter using an improved sanitation facility stands at 45%, which includes private pit latrines with slab, VIP pit latrines with slab and composting latrines. 54% of households are using unimproved toilet facilities (pit latrine with no slab), while only 1% of households have no toilets. Over 91% of the toilets within Kiboga communities are owned privately although there are some public toilets. On average, at least 3 people share a public toilet. It should be noted that there is great variation in sanitation conditions between Sub Counties. For example, 66% of households surveyed in Kiboga TC are using improved sanitation facilities, compared with only 29% in Mulagi. Similarly, Mulagi Sub County has the highest percentage of public toilets (18%). More details on the type of toilet by Sub County can be found in Annex D. Households using an improved drinking-water source Over 85.8% of households are using an improved water source, defined as a borehole, protected spring/well, and tap water. The results indicate that 73.5% of the households use boreholes as the main source of drinking water followed by protected wells (10%) and unprotected water sources (14.5%). Annex E presents detailed results at the Sub County level. However, information from FGDs reveals that there is more time spent collecting water from a borehole because all the community members use the same source. Most people go to the borehole at 3:00 am in the morning in order to avoid the long queues during the day. Some parents and men were not happy with the borehole as a source of water since their daughters use it to meet boys and wives use it as a meeting place to discuss all the home fights. Additionally, boreholes are poorly maintained leading to breakdowns, yet communities do not have sufficient funds to fix them. “Because of the problems with our water sources, we now get water from unprotected sources which are also used by our animals,” commented men from Kapeke. FGD participants therefore underlined the need for construction of protected wells as an alternative to boreholes. Besides drawing water from improved sources, 93% of the respondents treated water before consumption. They boil, filter and treat, and use water guard tablets to kill germs in the water. 6% of the respondents did not boil water at all because they believe that untreated water causes no harm. “I have been taking unboiled water for so many years and I have never experienced any problem,” said a Local Council I Chairperson from Kisolooza village.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

20

Percentage of population aware of environmental issues Based on the data, we can evaluate the environmental awareness of the population on sources of cooking fuel and waste disposal. 81.8% of the households use collected firewood as their main source of cooking fuel, followed by charcoal (17.5%). Generally, there is overdependency on nature for firewood, resulting in depletion of the forest cover. Some of the negative effects of deforestation include increasing climate change effects and the destruction of tree species and wildlife.

Photos (left to right): Cooking food using firewood; woman making a fire using firewood

Figure 3: Percentage distribution of the main source of cooking fuel

With regards to waste disposal, the statistics indicate that there is poor waste management in the epicenter area. As shown in Figure 4 on the next page, more than half of households burn or bury their waste, and the rest dump their waste into the environment.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

21

Figure 4: Percentage distribution of the main destination of waste

Burning waste is detrimental to the environment because it causes air pollution. Burying and disposal in banana plantations affects the soil fertility especially if the waste is not sorted. Literacy & Education Proportion of households with at least one literate person It is estimated that 65% of households in the Kiboga Epicenter have at least one literate person. In this case, a person is considered literate if he/she reported an education of primary school or higher. The results indicate that THP should focus on its literacy efforts, as the overall levels of education are low. Proportion of children age 4-18 attending school A large proportion of the children aged 4-18 years (87.7 %) attend school, although 12.3% do not. In general a higher percentage of girls are attending school as compared to boys (90% and 86%, respectively). There is also a large proportion of students attending primary school (92%) than secondary school (76%). During the study, a number of reasons were given for not attending school: (1) some parents or guardians cannot afford school fees; (2) children stay home to help with farm or households chores; (3) the child has received enough schooling; (4) the child is too old; (5) the child is too young; (6) the child wasn't doing well in school; and (7) no particular reason given. The frequency of each of these reasons can be seen in Figure 5 below, broken down by gender. There were some reasons that were more applicable to boys, such as staying home to help with chores, while others were more common with girls, like saying that the child has had enough education.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

22

Figure 5: Percentage distribution of reasons why children are not at school by gender

The FGDs and KIIs revealed others reasons that children did not attend school, such as: mental or physical problems; the child refused to go; the child got pregnant; the child completed school; or the father died and the child needed to take over household responsibilities. The other issues with school attendance were about the long distances to the schools and the inability to pay school fees: “Even with presence of free, universal primary education, we still have to pay some money to the school. Every term we are asked to contribute at least Ush 5,000 ($2) for the school development Fund. For poor households, this cost can become too high if you add it to the cost of uniforms and books. Many times we ask these children to stay home for some time as we work together to get this money. Some children end up not going back to school anymore.” (FGD, women in Mulagi) The epicenter has contributed to children’s education through promotion of early childhood education at the epicenter nursery school. According to the survey results, 73.9% of the children between the ages of 4-6 attend nursery education and 26.1% do not. However, some men expressed dissatisfaction during the FGDs: “The epicenter nursery school is very poor and cannot be compared with any school in the area because there is no staff at the school and even the school itself is not there it is like a collection center for young children who cannot go with their mothers at work.” Women in the Kiboga TC FGD also expressed concerns, stating, “At the nursery school, children do not have play equipment and materials and generally the school has a low standard compared to other schools in the community.” Gender parity ratio: Percentage of girls to boys enrolled at primary school The gender parity ratio is a measure whether the sexes are equally represented in primary school enrollment. The study reveals that the ratio of girls and boys aged 4-13 years attending school is 1:03, which means that boys and girls are enrolling at approximately the same rate. Of the children who attend school, 52% are girls and 48% are boys. Household member education level The majority of the respondents (56.8%) have some primary education, but far fewer have completed primary school. The second largest group has no formal education (13.2%), 9.4% have some secondary education, 6% completed only primary education and 4.2% have Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

23

some junior high education. The results show that the levels of education are almost equally divided amongst females and males. For instance, 13.4% of the males report no formal education/illiteracy, while for females this percentage is 12.4%. The proportion of individuals who have completed college or university is 1.5% for males and 0.7% for females. Figure 6: Household member education level

With regards to the education levels within each village, the results were similar to the epicenter overall. The highest proportion of respondents had only some primary education. For most of the villages, the second largest proportion of people had no formal education. Only 0.85% of respondents have completed university. The levels of education are almost equally divided amongst females and males. The qualitative analysis revealed that the literacy levels seem to be improving due to adult education, but overall the quality of education is still very poor. Proportion of adults attending Functional Adult Literacy (FAL) classes by THP 82.1% of respondents have never attended a literacy class organized by THP, while 11.5% did participate. The attendance is quite low due to the limited availability of classes in the communities. Attendance could be increased by mobilization of new classes in the epicenter area and intensify collaboration with the district Community Development Office to target those who have never attended FAL classes. Results from FGDs indicate that the FAL classes have contributed greatly to the reduction in illiteracy levels in the communities. As a result, women are more empowered, more children are receiving immunizations, and nutrition is improved. The Hunger Project has certainly contributed to these achievements.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

24

Availability of additional adult literacy classes in the community Table 4: Percentage distribution of adult literacy class availability in the community Adult Literacy Classes Available? Yes No No, but they are available in a nearby community Don't know

Percent 35.4% 57.0% 3.8% 3.8%

As shown in Table 4, the majority of the respondents reported that adult literacy classes were not available in their communities, although 35.4% of respondents did report that classes were available. Adult literacy is a key component of THP programs, which is implemented in partnership with the district community development office. One of the major challenges faced by the program is limited funding from the district, as reported by the Community Development Officer of Mulagi Sub County. The solution to this challenge is to increase mobilization and funding through other stakeholders like THP in order to increase the availability of adult literacy classes.

Food Security & Agriculture Women’s Dietary Diversity The Women’s Dietary Diversity (WDD) score shows how many food groups, on average, women of reproductive age consume daily based out of 9 total food groups. The average number of food groups consumed the day prior to the survey was 1.84. This result implies that dietary diversity in Kiboga is extremely poor, since women are eating less than 2 food groups per day. The most commonly consumed groups were starches such as cereals, roots and tubers; fruits and vegetables rich in Vitamin A; and legumes, nuts, and seeds. Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger In order to measure the percentage of households experiencing moderate or severe hunger, respondents were asked a series of questions that indicate their food security. These questions were: 1) In the past 4 weeks (30 days), how often were there instances when the household went a whole day and night completely without food due to a lack of resources to get food? 2) In the past 4 weeks (30 days), how often did you or any household member go to sleep at night hungry because there was not enough food? 3) In the past 4 weeks (30 days), how often did you or any household member go a whole day and night without eating anything at all because there was not enough food? The more frequently a household reported experiencing hunger, the higher their score was on a scale from 0-6. The results for the 3 questions indicate that the majority of households (89.5%) scored less than 2, which implies that most households were food secure. However, 10.5% of households reported moderate food insecurity and 4 households (1%) reported severe food insecurity.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

25

During the FGDs, food security at the household level was attributed to THP interventions such as training in food security, post-harvest handling, support to the revolving food fund, and provision of improved planting materials such as cassava, beans and maize to smallholder farmers. Respondents revealed that they are now able to store some food for future use and sale the surplus to earn income.

Percent change in yields per hectare for farming households Since this survey was Kiboga’s first outcome evaluation, the data does not exist to calculate a change in yields per hectare. However, it was possible to measure the average yields for different crops. Crop yields were determined on the basis of farmer recall. Data was collected on 15 food crops and no distinction was made between monocrops and intercrops. The three major crops that are grown in Kiboga are cassava, legumes, and maize2. The yield per hectare for each of these staple crops is listed in Table 5 below. Table 5: Major crops by average hectares cultivated and average yield Crop Cassava Legumes Maize

Average Hectares Cultivated 0.61 0.44 2.29

Average Yield (kg) 8,166 kg 269 kg 1,600 kg

Average yield per hectare (kg) 13,300 kg 611 kg 2,127 kg

As shown in the table above, most farmers are cultivating relatively small areas of land, less than 1 hectare. This results means that farmers are achieving relatively high yields for cassava, low yields for legumes, and average yields for maize.

Percent of households implementing risk-reducing practices/actions to improve resilience to climate change 61% of farming households reported agricultural practices that improve resilience to climate change. The practices that were considered include soil erosion prevention, rainwater harvesting, plant spacing, planting hybrid or improved seeds, crop rotation, applying appropriate levels of fertilizer, applying mulch or compost, and soil testing prior to planting. The most common practices adopted were crop rotation and planting improved seeds. No households reported soil erosion prevention, rainwater harvesting, or soil testing prior to planting. Proportion of smallholders applying improved management practices and technologies on farms The proportion of households implementing at least one improved practice is 92%. These practices include those mentioned above for climate change resilience as well as planting in raised beds, applying post-harvest preservation chemicals, seedling nurseries, integrated pest management, irrigation, using appropriate post-harvest storage facilities, and animal drawn ploughs. The percentage of farmers who are applying each of these improved agricultural practices is detailed in Figure 7.

2

The other crops measured were coffee, cotton, fruits, groundnuts, potatoes, millet, plantains, sorghum, sugar cane, sweet potato, tobacco, and vegetables. These were not used in this analysis because there were few households that cultivated these crops.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

26

Figure 7: Percentage of households applying improved agricultural practices

Percent change in number of smallholders selling farm produce The results show that on average 62.4% of respondents sold their farm produce to earn extra income. In total, 2,185,629 kilograms of produce was sold for $158,953 (USD). This is approximately $811 (USD) per household. Notably, maize was the most commonly sold crop, while the least sold crops were tobacco, cotton, and fruits. Agricultural Demographics 78% of households reported that the main job of the household head is agriculture. At least 84.3% of households had cultivated some farmland and over 56.8% of this land is owner operated. Over 90.6% of respondents who had cultivated their land had participated in THP agriculture workshops. This shows that THP has conducted food security trainings for partners who are actively involved in agriculture. There are some differences between Sub Counties that are notable. For example, in Kibiga 95% of heads of households list agriculture as their main job, compared with only 58% in Kiboga TC. Nearly 70% of land is owner operated in Kibiga, but this number drops to approximately 50% in Kapeke. For more details on agriculture by Sub County, please see Annex F. The median amount of land cultivated was 2 acres, with plots ranging from 40 to 0.25 acres. The average amount of income earned from leasing a plot was $20 USD. The main use of land during the last growing season was agriculture/crop production (57.23%) followed by grazing livestock (13.9%), while 0.3% left the land as a bush. Results from the FGDs, household interviews and general community observations show that maize, beans and cassava are the three main crops grown in the epicenter area. Maize and beans are the most frequently grown crops because of their high market demand in the region, and cassava is popular because it can be eaten for a long time especially during the dry season. Respondents added that soil in the Kiboga area is very suitable for these types of crops. Overall, few vegetables and other seasonal crops like millet and sorghum are grown.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

27

The results show that only 16% of households were supported by THP in terms of seeds, fertilizers and other training and that the majority of respondents were not supported by THP. Approximately 52% of households own livestock, and THP provides microfinance support to 11% of them. The evaluation revealed that there are constraints to accessing markets in Kiboga. These include long distances, market dues, poor transport options, low market value for their crops, and limited availability of markets. Household expenditure on livestock owned and income from sale The table below shows the average number of livestock owned by households and the average amount of money households spent to purchase a particular type of livestock. The results show that chickens and other domestic birds are the major type of livestock owned by households. Table 6: Household expenditure on livestock owned and income from sale

Types of livestock owned

Average Number

Cattle Chicken Goats Duck, turkey, other fowl Pigs Rabbits Sheep

3 14 3 10 2 7 3

Average income households spent to purchase this livestock in last 12 months (USD) $129.28 $34.34 $31.14 $9.94 $19.81 $0 $9.56

Average total value received from sale of this type of livestock in last 12 months (USD) $517.66 $46.04 $35.33 $47.80 $48.61 $0 $0

Cattle are the most expensive livestock to purchase at $129 (USD), and they generate the highest revenue of $518 (USD), which is four times more than the purchase price. This seems to be a profitable business, contributing to increased household incomes. THP can support livestock owners through improving partners’ access to improved animal species (cattle, pigs, chicken and goats). The results further indicate that rabbits and sheep are rarely kept and have fetched zero income for the households; therefore, there is no need of increasing investment in these animals. Use of products from livestock Livestock products are typically used for home consumption (rabbits for food, chicken/domestic birds for eggs and cattle for milk, meat and cow dung as organic fertilizer). Goat and sheep products are used for both home and external consumption. Although pigs are the most popular household livestock, their products are majorly for sale, not for home consumption.

Community Mobilization The goal of the THP community mobilization program is to increase leadership, capacity, knowledge, confidence and infrastructure within the community so that community partners are better equipped to initiate and sustain their own development. During the study, a number of questions were asked to assess the extent to which THP has achieved this goal.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

28

Proportion of respondents who feel that they can change things in their community Most of the respondents (75.8%) strongly agree or agree that they can change things in their community. The distribution by gender is shown below: Figure 8: Percentage distribution of those who feel that they can change things in their community, by gender

There are many more males (61%) than females (42%) who strongly agree that they can change their community, suggesting that the answer to this question is influenced by gender. Nearly 95% of people who participated in VCA workshops strongly agree or agree that they can change things in the community, while 0% of participants strongly disagreed. This shows that VCA workshops have positively impacted partners with regards to community change. Proportion of community members who perceive leaders to be effective in addressing community concerns Respondents were interviewed on how they perceive the effectiveness of their community leaders in addressing community concerns. The proportion of individuals who strongly agree or agree that their leaders are effective is 69%. In general, both women and men feel that their leaders can successfully address community concerns. 36% of men strongly agree that leaders are successful in addressing community concerns, as compared to 30% of women. These results are mainly attributed to THP’s VCA workshops aimed at changing people’s mindset, creating effective and action-oriented leadership and the women empowerment program that emphasizes women’s participation in leadership, planning and decision making.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

29

Figure 9: Respondent’s perception on success of community leaders

Support for community leadership was also expressed during the FGDs at Kiboga TC: “Communities within Kiboga Epicenter are working together to solve common problems. Through local council leaders, people have formed solidarity groups to help themselves like “munomukabi” (The groups that help in case a member is in trouble) and village saving groups where members save and borrow from to solve their problems. The level of collaboration between villages and village leadership has also increased in all the five Sub Counties.” Proportion of adults who voted in the most recent national or local election The majority of respondents (89.9%) voted in the most recent national or local election. 88.6% of females voted in the most recent election whereas 92.4% of males voted. Through THP’s Women’s Empowerment Program (WEP), sensitization and training workshops are conducted for partners about their fundamental human rights such as the right to vote. This high voting behavior could have been influenced by THP workshops. Over 500 partners have participated in WEP workshops to date. Proportion of population participating in epicenter activities, committees, workshops, and meetings Participation is defined as attendance at community meetings, workshops, or trainings hosted by THP or a THP animator. The proportion of the population participating in epicenter activities in the previous 12 months is 34.7%. The distribution was nearly equal between males and females; both reported approximately 35% participation rates. More than two-thirds of the respondents (65%) stated that they have never participated in any THP program. The participation in THP programs varies across the villages from 8.6% to 100%. 8 of the 12 villages scoring 35% or more are located within the 10 km radius, so distance from the epicenter may be an essential factor in participation. Based on the data from the FGDs, one of the reasons why some female partners had never participated in a THP activity is due to the lack of information about the activities. “We only know about The Hunger Project Microfinance Program (MFP) but we are not aware of other program or projects,” said women in a Mulagi FGD.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

30

The data from the FGDs revealed that some people perceive that epicenter leaders are not performing to their expectations. The major reasons for this perception are that epicenter volunteers do not receive sufficient water/refreshments during activities, transportation to reach out to partners, or incentives such as animator tags/t-shirts. The data further shows mixed perceptions on the presence of the epicenter leadership in the communities. Some people were able to mention the names and the exact roles of the epicenter leaders, while others were not aware of these leaders. “We have not heard about The Hunger Project leadership in our community. Maybe they work in other villages,” said a chairperson in Kisoloza village. Similar feelings were echoes by men in a FGD in Watuga. Proportion of respondents who feel comfortable speaking in community meetings and public forums Figure 10: Percentage distribution of those who feel comfortable speaking in public, by gender

The proportion of respondents who strongly agree or agree that they feel comfortable speaking in community meetings and public forums is 75.3%. This is a positive attribute to THP programs that aim at empowering both women and men to participate fully in community development and leadership. First, there is an almost equal proportion of females and males (49.7% and 50.3% respectively) who feel comfortable speaking in community meetings and public forums. Second, 75% of the people who participated in VCA workshops strongly agree that they feel comfortable speaking in public, contrasting with 48.2% of non-participants. Moreover, 0% of the people who participated in a VCA workshop strongly disagree. Third, of respondents who are part of a THP committee, two-thirds state that they strongly agree that they feel comfortable speaking in public, contrasting with 55.8% of non-committee members. However, of the people who feel uncomfortable speaking in public, 73.5% are female. This is an area of concern for THP. Therefore, more sensitization and leadership trainings should be conducted under the WEP program to build the confidence of more women to speak comfortably in community meetings and public forums.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

31

Health & Nutrition Percent change in use of clinics/health workers during illness The study sought to find out how many members of the households suffered from illness in the previous 6 months and, of those, how many sought treatment. Of those who reported illness, 88.6% visited a clinic or sought treatment from a health worker. The results show that 59% of household members visited clinics because of various reasons other than illness such as check-ups, follow-ups, antenatal visits, injuries, and vaccinations. However, it is important to note that 41% of the people interviewed did not visit other than for illnesses. Proportion of population aware of their HIV status The study found that 74.9% of primary respondents knew their HIV status and that the proportion of males who know their HIV status (75.6%) was slightly higher than the proportion of females (74.6%). However, about a quarter of respondents did not know their status. The majority of the respondents (99.3%) have heard of HIV/AIDS, most of the primary respondents (79.1%) have tested for HIV, and 93.3% of the respondents who participated in HIV/AIDS and gender inequality workshops have tested for HIV. Almost the same proportion of males (77.6%) and females (79.9%) has tested for HIV. The positive results could be attributed to THP activities such as VCA workshops and HIV/AIDS and gender inequality workshops, promotion of Voluntary Councils and Testing, and condom distribution. Proportion of children under 5 who sleep under a bednet Approximately 55% of children under 5 slept under an insecticide-treated mosquito net the night prior to the survey. THP has played a big role in increasing partners’ access to mosquito nets through sensitization of parents about the use of mosquito nets and lobbying the government and other NGOs to provide mosquito nets to children and pregnant women through the Epicenter Health Unit. The statistics further show that the highest number of children who slept under insecticide-treated mosquito nets was in Kibiga Sub County, followed by Mulagi and Kiboga TC. However, Watuba and Kapeke Sub Counties have more children who did not sleep under an insecticide-treated mosquito net. The percentage of children who do not sleep under an insecticide treated mosquito net is quite high (45%) and this puts children at a high risk for malaria, which is the main cause of morbidity among children in Uganda today. The statistics in the table below indicate the illness with the highest incidence is malaria (32.7%), followed by cold/cough. This further confirms that malaria is still the number one illness suffered by most people.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

32

Figure 11: Percentage distribution of Illnesses suffered by households in the past 6 months

Percent change in use of clinics/health workers during pregnancy The results indicate that 21.4% of the women surveyed had given birth within the last year and 88% of those visited a clinic or health worker at least once during their pregnancy. The average number of antenatal visits women received was 2.19. Figure 12 shows that the majority of women had one visit or less, and only 27% had the required 4 visits or more. Figure 12: Percentage distribution of women’s antenatal visits during pregnancy

Proportion of births attended by licensed health care professional The results show that 90.7% of the women gave birth with the assistance of a licensed health care professional either at home or in a health facility. Only two respondents provided reasons why the birth was not attended by a professional: one stated that the reason was the lack of money, while the other one said the baby came unexpectedly.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

33

Percent change in knowledge of exclusive breastfeeding practices (1,000 Days Promotion) The study assessed partners’ knowledge about the length of time infants are to be exclusively breastfed. The results indicate that only 29.6% of respondents were able to give the correct answer of “at least 6 months”. This indicates that majority of the partners are not knowledgeable about the recommended breastfeeding duration. Given that 37% of women surveyed are in their childbearing years and 15.5% have children under 2, it is essential that individuals have the correct knowledge on optimal breastfeeding practices. Therefore, there is need for continuous sensitization of mothers on the importance of exclusive breastfeeding as part of child health promotion under the 1,000 Days program. Figure 13: Pyramid showing percentage of children within the 1,000 days

Proportion of population over 15 years with comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS The study determined the percentage of the population over 15 who demonstrated comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS. In order to show comprehensive knowledge, a person must correctly identify the two major ways of preventing the sexual transmission of HIV (using condoms and limiting sex to one faithful, uninfected partner), reject the two most common local misconceptions about HIV transmission, and know that a healthy-looking person can transmit HIV. The findings are highlighted in detail in Figure 14 on the next page. The results show that only 32.6% of the population has a comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS. Overall, respondents were able to identify the two major ways of HIV transmission. 85.3% correctly identified that always using a condom is a preventative measure, and 90.9% of respondents know that one should have sex with only one uninfected partner. Respondents who had participated in THP’s HIV/AIDS training were much more likely to identify the major ways of HIV transmission compared to those who had not. In response to the misconceptions that mosquitos can transmit the HIV virus, more than half of respondents (51.8%) know that mosquito bites cannot give a person HIV. It is notable that 25.6% of respondents did not know and 22.6% believe that mosquitos can transmit the virus. In addition, 40% of the HIV training participants failed to give the correct answer. This calls for more sensitization and training of partners about the basics of HIV/AIDS.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

34

Figure 14: Percentage of population answering questions about HIV/AIDS correctly, by gender

69% of the respondents know that sharing food with someone who has HIV will not get you infected with the virus. 11.5% believe that one can get HIV by sharing food with an infected person and 19.5% does not know. Only 13.3% of the people who participated in HIV training failed to give correct answers, contrasting with 31.8% of non-participants who answered incorrectly. 83.7% of respondents know that a healthy looking person can have HIV whereas 6.6% answered “no” to this question. 9.6% of respondents did not know. However, 83.4% of the people who did not participate in training also know that a healthy-looking person can have HIV. Interestingly, the people who “do not know” the answer to the question are only nonparticipants. 93.3% of the people who have participated in HIV training answered this question correctly. In practice, however, the study found that the majority of respondents (57.1%) do not use a condom during sex, while only 37% reported using condoms and 5.8% did not respond to this question. Although respondents were able to correctly answer that condoms can reduce the risk of getting HIV, very few are actually using condoms. Some of the reasons given for not using condoms include: that there is no need if you are married; condoms are for people who cheat on their spouses; condoms make sex less enjoyable; condoms are not easily accessible in communities. Respondents who have participated in HIV training had a higher proportion of condom users than non-participants (46.7% and 36.7%, respectively). Proportion of population who have access to a health clinic within walking distance: 84.7% of the households surveyed walked less than 5 km (or less than 60 minutes) to a health clinic. This indicates that the majority of the population has access to a health clinic within walking distance. However, FGD data shows that one of the main health care problems in some communities is the long distances to the nearest clinic. Men in Watuga Sub County noted, “We have no health facility in our area. We have to travel 8 miles to Kiboga and another 6 miles to the nearest clinic.” It is further noted that there were respondents who did not know the distance

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

35

from their homes to the nearest clinic, and these were mostly in the Sub Counties of Watuba, Mulagi and Kiboga TC. Perceptions on health care THP wanted to find out how the respondents felt about the vaccination of children, giving birth with support of a professional attendant, and antenatal services. Results show that most respondents thought that it was extremely important to vaccinate children under the age of five, to give birth with the assistance of a trained professional, and to receive antenatal care. This indicates that communities are willing to participate actively in government programs that promote immunization of children and vaccination of all pregnant women. This attitude is expected to contribute to the successful implementation of THP’s maternal and child health and nutrition program and the 1000 Days promotion campaigns. FGD data reveals that individuals feel that some health workers are negligent and not committed to delivering good services to their patients. Moreover, in all FGDs high costs and drug shortages were reported as key problems in their community. Women in Kapeke commented, “Even the Village Health Teams (VHTs) in the area do not have enough medicine because the medicines do not arrive there in time.” Microfinance & Livelihoods Progress out of poverty index: mean score for household characteristics and asset ownership The Progress out of Poverty Index (PPI) uses household characteristics to assess whether a household is below the poverty line. 15.16% of Kiboga households are living in poverty based on the criteria of living on less than $1.25/day (PPP). When examined against Uganda’s national poverty line, which uses a different criterion, only 4.6% of households are living in poverty. As THP aims to supply loans to partners to improve their dwellings, the study aimed to investigate the status of these dwellings, considering roof material, floor material and the main source of lighting. The majority of households (90.5%) use iron sheets as roofing material, while 8.5% use thatched grass and 1% use other materials such as wood and plastic sheeting.

Photos (left to right): Grass thatched roof; Iron sheet roof

More than half of the households surveyed (54%) use mud as floor material in their dwellings, followed by concrete cement (44.8%), tiles/bricks (1%) and wood (0.3%).

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

36

Households who have thatched roofs typically also have mud floors (15.3%), while most respondents who have cement floors have iron sheets as their roofing materials. Figure 15: Percentage distribution of floor materials

The majority of the households (51%) use paraffin candles, “Tadooba”, as the main source of lighting followed by lanterns (25.3%). The rest of the households (23.7%) use solar panels, candles, and hydroelectric power (HEP). Considering the different types of lighting per village, paraffin is still the main source of lighting used. The use of paraffin is considered detrimental to the health of household members and poses a high risk of burning down a house especially if left to the children. Table 7: Percentage distribution of household main source of lighting Main source of lighting Paraffin candles “Tadooba” Lanterns Solar panel Fire lit sticks, grass or pit Candles HEP Other Total

Percent 51.0 25.3 7.2 0.5 6.5 5.5 4.0 100%

The majority of households in the epicenter own materials/assets such as bicycles, lanterns, chairs, and radios. Proportion of rural households with non-farm businesses / Proportion of female small business owners 13.7% of households reported non-farm businesses, of which 56.4% are owned by women. Of all women, only 6% are business owners, as compared to approximately 7% of males. The majority of non-farm businesses were in Kibiga Sub County

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

37

Proportion of adults accessing financial services Only 16.8% of individuals 18 years and older have accessed financial services from THP. Therefore, 83% of respondents have not received financial service support from THP. The results also indicate that 84% of respondents had never taken a loan from THP’s microfinance program, 14% of households had one member who has taken a loan from THP and only 2% of households had 2 members who have received a loan from THP. This was explained in an interview with the Bank Manager. She reports the population of Kiboga and Kyankwanzi districts is large compared to the funds available to give out loans. Other community members expressed negative perceptions of loans in FGDs: “Loans are a curse; some people have run away from their homes because they cannot pay back the loan. When you get a loan, bad luck set in, you grow crops and do not harvest anything. In the end you give up your land or property to the banks or Microfinance Institution” (Male, FGD Kapeke). The following additional issues concerning the access to loans were mentioned in the FGDs and KIIs: • Some farmers were afraid that they will not be able to pay back agricultural loans because of high interest rates and their unpredictable yields. The bank/credit institutions also charged high interest rates between 20 to 25%. •

Some partners did not know how they could pay back loans and some feared losing their property if they were not able to make payments.



Some do not have collateral security such as land titles. This seems also to be the case with most Savings and Credit Cooperative societies such as the Epicenter Rural Bank.



Some respondents reported limited or no agricultural credit facilities in their Sub Counties.



Some women mentioned that their husbands did not allow them to take loans.

Savings mobilization by the partners is one of THP’s microfinance services provided. During the study, THP wanted to know how many people participated in THP’s saving program. The results show that over 15% of households have at least one person who has participated in THP’s savings program. Those who have participated expressed a positive experience, saying, “We have been able to save and borrow money from THP microfinance and this has helped us improve on our businesses and others have been able to pay school fees for their children and as well buy some tangible assets like land. To us THP is good because we have been able to get all these because of Hunger Project leaders who bring them to us.” The main purpose of loans from THP microfinance program The main purpose of loans from THP’s microfinance program was to start a non-agricultural business, followed by expanding agriculture work and improving existing businesses. Few people borrowed for household improvement. The distribution of answers is displayed below:

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

38

Figure 16: Main purpose of loans from THP microfinance program

The FGDs show that people in Kiboga have used loans to improve their livelihoods: “We used to stay in thatched grass houses but now most of the families are sleeping in houses with iron sheets. The microcredit service has helped us” (Women, FGD Watuba). Households’ main source of income Households’ main source of income is selling crops and vegetables (55%), followed by other businesses (13%). The main sources of income are depicted in the chart: Figure 17: Percentage Distribution source of income

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

39

There are some differences in income source between Sub Counties. For example, in Kibiga, 91% of income comes from crop and vegetable sales, as compared to only 25% in Kapeke and Kiboga TC. These Sub Counties receive larger percentages of income from activities such as livestock sales (16.3% in Kiboga TC and 23.8% in Kapeke) and other businesses (22.2% and 25.6%, respectively). Household expenditure The study sought to find out how households spent their money in the previous 12 months. The results show that households’ basic needs consumed 74.2% of income. After that, school fees consumed much of households’ expenditures (31.7%), followed by medical/health needs (27.5%) and then clothes and shoes (15%). About 10.8% of households reported that they did not make any additional expenditure because they did not have extra money, and none of the households visited made expenditures on household items, home improvement, lending money to friends and family, religious donations, social events, family visits or drinking alcohol. The findings suggest that THP should design loans to address some of the household's basic needs. Loan products could include school fees and asset loans. THP should intensify mobilization of savings by the partners to increase on the partners’ spending capacity.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

40

STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS

Water, Environment and Sanitation According to the survey, the proportion of households using an improved sanitation facility stands at 45%. However this varied widely between Sub Counties, and in some cases it was as low as 29%. Recommendations: • •

THPU, in partnership with the epicenter leadership and animators, should sensitize the communities on the construction of improved sanitation facilities. THPU should collaborate with the District Local Government, the District Health Department, and other development partners to increase household access to and use of improved sanitation facilities.

Over 85.5% of households are using an improved water source. However, the study revealed that households are spending a great deal of time collecting water due to long queues at community boreholes. Additionally, boreholes are poorly maintained, leading to breakdowns, and yet communities do not have sufficient funds to fix them. Recommendations: • • •

THPU, in partnership with the epicenter leadership and animators, should sensitize the communities on maintenance of the water sources. THPU, in partnership with the epicenter leadership and animators, should ensure that all the water sources have functional management committees. THPU should collaborate with the District Local Government, District Water Department and other development partners to increase access to improved water sources and to support the epicenter when major repairs are needed.

The study showed that there is a high dependency on firewood for cooking fuel, with approximately 82% of households using collected firewood. This dependency has resulted in depletion of the forest cover. Recommendations: • THPU should sensitize the communities on implications of climate change to the environment and agriculture. • THPU should sensitize and train the communities on the available sustainable environmental practices such as energy saving stoves, the introduction of tree nurseries, and agroforestry techniques.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

41

Literacy & Education The epicenter has contributed to child education through promotion of early childhood education at the epicenter nursery school. According to the survey results, 73.9% of the children between the ages of 4-6 years attend the epicenter nursery school. However, focus group participants expressed concerns about the poor quality of the facility and its staff. Recommendations: • •

THPU should improve the nursery school structure. THPU should ensure that the nursery school has trained staff to provide quality education.

The proportion of adults attending literacy classes organized by THP is low. In fact, 82.1% of the respondents have never attended a THP literacy class. Recommendation: •

Attendance could be increased by the mobilization of new classes in the epicenter area and the intensification of collaboration with the district Community Development Office to target individuals who have never attended FAL classes.

Food Security & Agriculture Women’s dietary diversity is lower than expected. The average number of food groups consumed the day prior to the survey was 1.84. The results imply that the dietary diversity in Kiboga is extremely poor, since women are eating less than 2 foods groups per day. Recommendation: •

More sensitization and trainings should be conducted on nutrition as part of the 1000 Days program.

The evaluation also revealed that there are constraints to accessing markets in Kiboga, such as distance, fees, lack of transportation, and low value for crops. Recommendation: •

THPU, in partnership with the epicenter leadership and animators, should sensitize the communities on collective marketing at the food bank. Since maize is the most commonly sold crop, it should be given top priority.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

42

Community Mobilization The proportion of the population participating in epicenter activities, committees, workshops and meetings in the previous 12 months is 35%. However, 65% of respondents stated that they have never participated in any THP program. Recommendations: •

Participation in epicenter activities could be increased by more mobilization and sensitization of communities about THP programs.



The use of the animators in program implementation should be emphasized.



THPU should scale down program implementation to a 7 km epicenter catchment area that can be more easily accessed by partners.

Very few respondents reported that they felt very uncomfortable speaking in public. However, of those who did feel uncomfortable, 73.5% were female. Recommendation: •

More sensitization and leadership trainings should be conducted under the WEP program to build the confidence of more women to speak comfortably in community meetings and public forums.

Health & Nutrition Based on the evaluation, approximately 45% of children under 5 do not sleep under an insecticide treated net. This puts children at a high risk for malaria, which is the main cause of morbidity among children in Uganda today. Recommendation: •

THP should increase access to mosquito nets through sensitization of parents about the use of mosquito nets as well as lobbying the government and other NGOs to provide mosquito nets to children and pregnant women.

The results indicate that only 29.6% of respondents were able to give the correct answer when asked about exclusive breastfeeding practices. This indicates that the majority of partners are not knowledgeable about the recommended duration of exclusive breastfeeding. Recommendation: •

There is a need for continuous sensitization of mothers on the importance of exclusive breastfeeding as part of child health promotion under the 1,000 Days program.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

43

The results show that only 32.6% of the population has a comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS. 57.1% reported that they do not use a condom during sex. Recommendation: •

There is need for continuous sensitization of partners on HIV/AIDS.



THPU should collaborate with the District Health Department and other development partners to improve HIV/AIDS services at the epicenter health clinic.

Microfinance & Livelihoods 13.7% of households reported owning non-farm business, of which 56.36% were owned by females. 6% of all women are business owners. Recommendation: •

There is need for continuous sensitization of partners on income-generating activities, particularly focused on women as business owners.

Only 16.8% of individuals 18 years and above have accessed financial services from THP. Recommendation: •

There is need for continuous sensitization of partners, especially women, to participate in the microfinance program.



THPU should collaborate with other development partners to increase microfinance coverage in the epicenter.

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

44

ANNEX Annex A: List of Focus Group Discussions held

No.

Gender of FGD

Sub County

1

Female

Kibiga

11

2

Male

Kibiga

10

3

Female

Kapeke

12

4

Male

Kapeke

8

5

Female

Wattuba

13

6

Male

Wattuba

11

7

Female

Mulagi

10

8

Male

Mulagi

9

9

Female

Kiboga Town Council

13

10

Male

Kiboga Town Council

12

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

# Participants

45

Annex B: List of key informants interviewed No.

Name

Gender

Age (Years) Education level

Profession/role

Time taken

Sub-County

living/working in community (YRS) 1

Sarah Natureba

Female

26

Completed University

Asst. Community Development Officer

3

Wattuba

2

Peter Magoola

Male

35

Completed University

Secretary for Production.

12

Wattuba

3

Godfrey Kyambadde

Male

38

Completed University

Senior Administrative Secretary

3

Wattuba

4

Kadogo Herbert

Male

35

Completed University

Chairperson LC III

8

Wattuba

5

Jane Norah Najjingo

Female

57

Diploma

Community Devlopment Officer

40

Kibiga

6

Namuyanja Judith

Female

38

Senior Three

Secretary for production

6

Kibiga

7

Kigozi Denis

Male

45

Senior Four

Chairperson LC III

9

Kibiga

8

Kabuye David

Male

41

Completed University

Agriculture Advisory Service Provider

5

Kibiga

9

Ssebuyira Christopher

Male

55

Senior Two

LC1

18

Kibiga

10

Jackson Katusiime

Male

40

Completed University

District Commercial Officer

14

Kiboga Town Council

11

Kwizera Moses

Male

35

Completed University

Community Development Officer

5

Kiboga Town Council

12

Kakembo Wasswa Barru Male

70

Junior One

Council worker

40

Kiboga Town Council.

13

Kirunda Kakaire Habib

Male

45

CPA (U)

Town Treasurer

15

Kiboga Town Council

14

Ruguna Kosea

Male

54

Ordinary level Certificate

Leader

25

Kapeke

15

Namaganda Mary

Female

29

Completed University

Administrator

2

Kapeke

16

Walakira James

Male

27

Completed Tertiary Institution.

Agriculture Advisory Service Provider

3

Kapeke

18

Tegyeka Nathan

Male

57

Primary Five

Secretary for production

8

Kapeke

19 20 21

Obaire Emmanuel Mugoowa Betty Kasumba Simon peter Muzaaya Samuel

Male Female Male Male

40 27 41 60

Senior Two Chairman Epicenter Committee Diploma Business Administration Parish Chief Certificate Parish Chief Senior Administrative Secretary

40 1.5 1.5

Kapeke Mulagi Mulagi Mulagi.

22

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

46

Annex C: Key collaborating partners No.

Name of Organization/Institution

Area of collaboration

1

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

Establishment of Farmer Field Schools through the Global Climate Change Alliance project

2

Kiboga District Local Government

Technical program support especially in the area of Agriculture, Water and Sanitation, Community Mobilization, Health and Nutrition, Micro Finance etc.

3

Kyankwanzi District Local Government

Technical program support especially in the area of Agriculture, Water and Sanitation, Community Mobilization, Health and Nutrition, Micro Finance etc.

4

Swiss contact

Strengthening of the Micro Finance Project through the Micro-Leasing Project.

5

Uganda Cooperative Savings and Credit Union (UCSCU)

Technical program support especially in the area Micro Finance

6

Infectious Diseases Institute (IDI)

Sensitization and awareness creation about HIV/aids and Voluntary Counseling and Testing services

7

Kiboga District Farmers Association (KIDFA)

Technical support in Agriculture and food security

8

National Agriculture Advisory Services (NAADS)

Technical support in Agriculture and food security and provision of farm inputs.

9

World Vision Uganda

Technical support in Agriculture and food security

10

Child Fund International

Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition and child education

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

47

Annex D: Percentage distribution of household toilet type and ownership

Is this toilet public or private?

Main type of toilet used by households Sub County Composting toilet

No toilet (outside)

Others

Kapeke

0.0

0.0

0.0

Pit latrine with no slab 65.1

Kiboga TC

0.0

0.0

1.2

Mulagi

0.0

1.6

Watuba

0.0

2.2

If public, how many households share it?

30.2

Ventilated Pit Latrine with slab & air vent 4.8

32.6

23.3

43.0

97.7

2.3

0.0

0.0

50.0

0.0

50.0

0.0

68.9

26.2

3.3

80.3

18.0

33.3

55.6

11.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

41.6

48.3

7.9

93.3

5.6

0.0

60.0

20.0

0.0

20.0

Pit latrine with slab

Private

Public (communal)

2

3

4

5

6+

88.9

11.1

14.3

14.3

42.9

14.3

14.2

Kibiga

2.0

1.0

1.0

57.8

38.2

0.0

94.1

5.9

66.7

0.0

16.7

0.0

16.7

Total

0.5%

1.0%

0.5%

51.6%

34.2%

12.2%

91.8%

7.7%

27.6%

31.0%

24.3%

3.4%

13.7%

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

48

Annex E: Distribution of water sources and processes through which water is prepared before drinking

92.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0%

Kiboga TC 38.4% 2.3% 1.2% 0.0% 1.2% 5.8% 1.2%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 1.6% 3.2% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 17.5% 81.0% 100.0%

14.0% 29.1% 1.2% 2.3% 2.3% 0.0% 1.2% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% 0.0% 7.0% 88.4% 100.0%

Kapeke Process through which drinking water is prepared

Main source of drinking water

Boiling Boiling, Filter & boil Boiling, Iodine or other natural mineral treatments Boiling, No treatment Boiling, Other Filter & boil Filter & boil, Iodine or other natural mineral treatments Filtering Filtering, Boiling Filtering, Boiling, Filter & boil Filtering, Filter & boil Filtering, Other Iodine or other natural mineral treatments No treatment Other Total Other Protected well/spring Rain water collection River/ponds Shared or communal standpipe or tap Tap (piped into dwelling/plot/yard) Unprotected well Well or borehole Total

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

49

Mulagi

Watuba

Kibiga

80.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 0.0%

77.5% 0.0% 15.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

85.3% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 16.4% 0.0% 100.0% 1.6% 21.3% 4.9% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 1.6% 68.9% 100.0%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 2.2% 100.0% 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 97.8% 100.0%

1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 7.8% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 23.5% 0.0% 17.6% 3.9% 0.0% 16.7% 38.2% 100.0%

Annex F: Percentage distribution of land use with participation in agriculture workshops Sub County

Main job of head of household Do you cultivate any farmland?

What is the ownership status of the land?

Participation in Agriculture work shop

Kapeke

Kiboga TC

Mulagi

Watuba

Kibiga

Yes

Not in agriculture

15.9

41.9

23

22.5

4.9

15.3

In agriculture

84.1

58.1

77

77.5

95.1

84.7

Total %

100

100

100

100

100

100

No

6.3

34.9

13.1

20.2

3.9

9.4

Yes

93.7

65.1

86.9

79.8

96.1

90.6

Total %

100

100

100

100

100

100

Don't cultivate land

30.2

19.8

24.6

13.5

8.8

12.9

Borrowed (no payment)

9.5

7

1.6

3.4

3.9

9.4

Communal ownership

0

1.2

0

0

1

0

Lent out (no payment)

0

0

0

1.1

0

0

1.6

1.2

4.9

4.5

2

2.4

Other Owner operated

49.2

54.7

57.4

53.9

68.6

55.3

Rented (cash)

6.3

16.3

11.5

22.5

14.7

18.8

Rented out (cash)

0

0

0

0

1.0

0

Sharecropped out

3.2

0

0

1.1

0

1.2

Total %

100

100

100

100

100

100

Outcome Evaluation Report – Kiboga, Uganda June 2014

50

About The Hunger Project The Hunger Project is a global, non-profit strategic organization whose mission is to end hunger and poverty by pioneering sustainable, grassroots, women-centered strategies and advocating for their widespread adoption in countries throughout the world. The Hunger Project is active in Australia, Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, Canada, Germany, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Japan, Malawi, Mexico, Mozambique, Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru, Senegal, Sweden, Switzerland, Uganda, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Global Hunger Project is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization in the United States.

The Hunger Project Global Office 5 Union Square West, 7th Floor New York, NY 10003 USA Phone: + 1 212 251 9100 Fax: +1 212 532 9785 Email: [email protected]

The Hunger Project-Uganda Haruna Towers, 3rd Floor Wandegeya, PO Box 26393 Kampala, Uganda Phone: + 256 414 23 20 60 Fax: +256 414 232 236 Web: www.thp.org/uganda