28/09/2020

Introduction

  • This is a summary presentation of the results of baseline study of the programme “Action for Livelihood Enhancement in Northern Uganda” (ALENU).

  • This study was implemented by a consortium of the German evaluation social enterprise movimentar GmbH and the Ugandan company, NaNa Development Consultants Limited.

  • The resulting dataset contains 471 variables including metadata from 899 participants (56% female).

  • Mean answering time per respondent: 60.5 minutes.

Methodology

  • The study employed a single-form approach using digital online/offline tools, which include a skip logic according to the type of interview and participant.

  • Digital forms reduce the risk of data-entry error exponentially compared with paper-based tools. Response validation code snippets ensured data quality by restricting the possibility of data-entry error.

  • The form combined both quantitative data (numbers and scale scores) and qualitative data (text), following a mixed-method approach.

  • A full table listing each one of the logical framework indicators and the used metrics is available at: https://movimentar.co/ALENU_metrics.

Methodology

  • Structured individual interviews at household level aimed to achieve statistical representation and included qualitative and quantitative data following a fully reproducible computer-based random sample.

  • Structured individual and group interviews took place with farmer groups and organisations, extension workers and other local government staff, health staff and micro, small and medium enterprises.

Sample design (households)

  • Following the UBOS definition, a household is defined as a person or group of people who normally cook, eat and live together (for at least 6 of the 12 months preceding the interview) irrespective of whether they are related or unrelated. A household head is defined as the person who manages the income earned and the expense incurred by the household and is considered by other members of the household as the head.

  • The project team filled out a data table in collaborative format which includes information concerning the number of 2,500 selected households in 92 villages in 24 parishes of 12 sub-counties in 6 districts.

  • The sample draw followed a four-stage design (1. sub-county, 2. parish, 3. villages and 4. single households).

Sample design (households)

  • The household sample included a total of 650 households (56% female household repres.) in 30 villages of 13 parishes of 7 sub-counties in 6 districts. This includes 500 households and a buffer of 30% to compensate for non-response.

  • In each household, the data-collection team was instructed to interview first the man (unless the woman is the head of the household) and then the woman between 15 and 49 years (two people from each household being one man and one woman).

  • Detailed sample documentation including computer syntax in R is available at: https://movimentar.co/alenu_sample_doc.

Sampling design (other participants)

For other participant types, for each of the 7 sampled sub-counties (Amuru, Atego, Athuma, Erussi, Odek, Packwach and Wol) the data-collection team aimed at interviewing:

  • 5 Farmer organisations (ex: group, association and cooperative) - Total: 35 interviews

  • 5 Health team members / health staff - Total: 35 interviews

  • 5 Government staff (incl. rural extension and veterinary services) - Total: 35 interviews

  • 5 Small and medium enterprises - Total: 35 interviews

This represents a total of 140 interviews with the other participant types listed above.

Key facts and figures

  • Total interviews: 899 interviews (56% female).

  • Household representatives: 801 interviews (58% female).

  • Nr. of households: 400 households.

  • Nr. of household members: 2,465 people.

  • Health staff: 29 interviews (55% female).

  • Government staff: 23 interviews (35% female).

  • Micro, small and medium enterprises: 18 interviews (33% female).

  • Farmer organisations: 26 interviews (19% female).

Location of interviews

Location of interviews

Location of interviews

Location of interviews

Location of interviews

Location of interviews

Demographics

Demographics

Demographics

Demographics

The following plot presents the percentage of respondents reporting to have an ID card. This information can be important to assess access to public services.

Demographics

Demographics

Demographics

Demographics

Household composition

Household composition

Household composition

Household composition

Household composition

Household composition

Household composition

Access to communication technology

Key issues

What are the three main problems faced by your household and neighbours nowadays?. Words with the same frequency have the same colours and sizes.

Key issues

The plot below presents a network plot with the co-occurrences of the top 30 most frequent problems mentioned by the participants. This plot helps to present the interrelations between key words.

Most urgent needs

Livelihoods cycles

The diagram below presents the seasonal calendar for a typical year in Uganda according to the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWSNET)1.

Seasonal Calendar for a typical year - Uganda

Most critical months

The chart below presents the results for the question Over the past 12 months, what were the two most critical months for your household to cover its food needs?.

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Agricultural production

Livestock

Livestock

Livestock

Livestock

Livestock

Markets

Markets

Markets

Markets

Markets

Food Consumption Score (FCS)

The Food Consumption Index (FCS) is a measure used internationally based on the methodology proposed by the World Food Programme - http://vam.wfp.org.

Poverty Probability Index (PPI)

Poverty Probability Index (PPI)

Selected key indicators

  • Ind. OO2a Prevalence of stunting among children under five: 67%.

  • Ind. OO2b Prevalence of underweight among children under five: 29%.

  • Ind. OO2c Prevalence of wasting among children under five: 24%.

  • Ind. SO1.2 % of children 6–23 months of age who received a Minimum Acceptable Diet the previous day and night: 2.15%.

  • Ind. SO1.3 % of children 6-23 months of age who received foods from ≥ 4 food groups the previous day or night: 8.6%.

  • Ind. SO1.4 Monthly monetary income reported by a given household in local currency (all members): 147,486 UGX/month.

  • Ind. SO1.5 % of the population with acceptable Food Consumption Score (FCS): 24%.

  • Ind. SO1.6 Average monthly net income (revenue minus costs) in Uganda shillings (UGX) during the current year reported by SMEs: 106,129 UGX.

Selected key indicators

  • Ind. SO1.7 Proportion of respondents assessing participation of women in decision making as “Very good” and “Good” from a scale of “Very good” (1) to “Very poor” (5): 69%.

  • Ind. R1.1.1 Average number of crops reported by households: 2.8.

  • Ind. R1.1.2 Productivity index based on normalised values of kilograms per acre of food commodities as reported by households (incl. different crops and animal products): 0.162.

  • Ind. A1.1.1.1 Proportion of households reporting to produce food crops and animal products: 59.

  • Ind. A1.1.1.2 Proportion of households reporting to have livestock: 56%.

  • Ind. A1.1.1.3 Proportion of households reporting access to extension services in the past year: 16%.

  • Ind. A1.1.1.4 Proportion of households reporting “Yes” to the question Are you applying soil and water conservation measures to your gardens and fields for both animal and crop production?: 19%.

Selected key indicators

  • Ind. A1.1.1.5 Area in hectares currently being used by households for production including crops and animal husbandry: : 2.4 hectares.

  • Ind. A1.1.2.1 Proportion of households reporting adoption of drought, pest and disease tolerant crop varieties of nutritious value: 40%.

  • Ind. A1.1.2.2 Proportion of households reporting adoption of agro-ecological practices: 18%.

  • Ind. A1.1.2.3 Proportion of households reporting adoption of improved livestock breeds or crossbreeds: 20%.

  • Ind. A1.1.2.4 Number of reported outlets for animal drugs & medicated feeds reported by households, farmer groups, SMEs and extension staff in the sub-county: : 7 outlets.

  • Ind. A1.1.2.5 Number of reported outlets for agro-input dealers reported by households, farmer groups, SMEs and extension staff : 14 outlets.

Selected key indicators

  • Ind. A1.1.3.1 % of households reporting to have received training in business management: 12%.

  • Ind. R1.3.1 % of children under 5 with anaemia: 26%.

  • Ind. R1.3.2 % of women of reproductive age with anemia: 21%.

  • Ind. A1.3.1.1 % of children & women de-wormed: 7.95%.

  • Ind. A1.3.1.3 % of sampled households reporting having any woman, children or adolescent who received orientation on maternal, infant, young child and adolescent nutrition practices during the current year: 20%.

  • Ind. A1.3.1.5 Proportion of households reporting members that practice of open defecation: 20%.

  • Ind. 1.3.2.1 Proportion of households using family planning methods: 32%.

Selected key indicators

  • Ind. 1.3.2.2 Proportion of households with cases of teenage pregnancies in the current year: 27%.

  • Ind. 1.3.2.3 Average child spacing computed based on the birth dates of children in the households: 27 months.

  • Ind. 1.3.2.4 % that answered “Yes” to the question “Have you or any member of your household ever received or attended any initiative about family planning methods during the current year?”: 28%.