A Lifesaving GBV, Women’s Leadership, and SRMH Support for Refugees, in Uganda, Arua District, West Nile, Endline Evaluation – Final Report, June 2021 – Uganda
CARE International in Uganda commissioned a final evaluation to establish the performance of the GAC 3 project on outcome indicators and related information to determine reasonable targets and a guide to assess the results of project interventions. This report presents the results of the end of term assessment for GAC 3. The results are from the two sampled refugee camps of Rhino and Imvepi in Madi Okolo and Terego District, formerly Arua District in West Nile in Uganda. Overall, the endline evaluation survey reached a total of 280 surveyed households (186F, 94M) at the two facilities.
The fieldwork was conducted over five days, using mixed methods of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. Quantitative data was obtained through a household survey using mobile data collection devices. A detailed questionnaire was developed, pre-tested for the incorporation of relevant information. Primary qualitative data was obtained through six focus group discussions (involving women, girls, boys and men) and twenty key informant interviews including GAC 3 project staff, local government officials district, health workers, health partners, the Prime Minister’s office, among others. Qualitative data mainly from key informant interviews and focus group discussions were analyzed using thematic analysis techniques and the results were used to strengthen the interpretation of the quantitative findings.
Final assessment results indicate that there is an improved sense of security and dignity. This was measured at the household and community level. There was an improvement in the feeling of safety and dignity as shown by the survey at 91% (92% F, M89%). On further questioning, respondents indicated that they felt safe at the household and community level. At the community level, people feel 86% secure (86% F, 86% M) and at the household level they feel 93% secure (94% M, 91% F). The results of the study indicate that men as agents of change and as clients of gender-based violence (GBV) seem to have succeeded, as evidenced by the high values.
It is however important to observe, that when the community has been unpacked (public latrines, fuel collection points, firewood and charcoal collection points, water collection points), men and women felt that public latrines, fuel collection points, firewood and charcoal collection points were not necessarily safe for all categories of respondents (men and boys, women and girls) . This is based on the answers to security questions from these categories in the community. Unsure, disagree and strongly disagree responses were found to be at or above 30%.
It is important to note that men’s responses regarding safety are in agreement or more positive than those of women, which is an indicator of their active participation or their appreciation of the project. This could be attributed to the RMMB (Role Model Men and Boys) approach.
Psychosocial support, community facilitators (CBFs), as well as community safety action groups (GCSAs) were helpful in improving beneficiary satisfaction. This could be linked to the participatory processes built into these approaches that reinforce ownership and the identification of relevant critical needs.
Measuring using the mean average, it was observed that on average 11.2% (9.3F, 15.1M) of targeted beneficiaries reverted to high-risk behaviors and coping strategies. adaptation, which is well below the 20% target. Unpacking high-risk behaviors indicates that the percentage of men returning to high-risk behaviors is higher at the end than at the start. For example, taking alcohol to forget problems is 17% (29.4% M, 10.2% F) compared to the baseline of 16% (15% F and 17% M). Sale of household items is still high at 35% (52%M, 27%F) which was the same at baseline which was 35% (35M, 35F) and psychological and emotional abuse at 33 % (41%M, 29%F) from baseline which was 17% (22%F, 9%M). The general reductions in women returning to high-risk behaviors could be attributed to two factors. The first factor could be COVID-19, pressures on men for household supplies due to reduced food ratios in the community, as indicated in focus group discussions. The second factor could be the project’s women-focused interventions in terms of psychosocial support (at individual and collective level) as well as livelihood support.
Overall, the target population was satisfied with GBV assistance at 81% (79% F, 86% M).
Achievement of this indicator can be attributed to psychosocial support, the RMMB approach, and the participatory nature of CBFs and CSAGs in particular.
The endline survey indicates that 75% (79% F, 70% M) demonstrated a positive attitude towards ending GBV. This too can be attributed to the RMMB approach on the one hand and on the other hand it takes time to overcome male dominance.
Overall, the project reached 3,350 people (2,252W, 987G, 47H, 62B) with GBV services, including psychosocial services, helping with dignity kits, among others. Awareness sessions reached a total of 34,350 people (19467W, 1488M), which was more than three times the target of 10,551 people.
The project generally increased women’s self-efficacy from 27% at baseline to 94% at the end of the term against a set target of 70%. It’s a great success given the COVID context. Men’s support for women’s empowerment is evident in the project (evidenced by an overall achievement of 56% against a benchmark of 45%) and this has been essential to all aspects of the project. Fostered by the RMMB approach and the inclusion of men in women’s committees has been essential to the success of the project. The different ways in which women’s empowerment include; women saying it has improved their savings in terms of income-generating activities and skills acquired. However, it takes time to overcome patriarchy, so the number of women in leadership spaces is still low at 32% compared to men at 43%.
Overall, beneficiaries reported being satisfied with SRMH services at an average of 78% (82% F, 72% M) compared to a satisfaction level of 64% at baseline. This level of satisfaction is related to the support provided directly to government health facilities, including the ambulance, support for health human resources, maternal health support equipment in maternity wards, construction of housing for the health unit staff, among others, which increased the morale/motivation of health workers on the one hand and the availability of actual services on the other. It is evident that the project’s focus on sexual and reproductive health has contributed to increased deliveries in health facilities, attendance at antenatal care and vaccination of children, among other achievements. However, the health units would benefit from more modern equipment in all aspects of the health centers.
In conclusion, therefore, overall, the beneficiaries declared themselves satisfied with the “Lifesaving GBV, Women’s Leadership, and SRMH Support for Refugees in Uganda, Rhino and Imvepi shelters” project with a rating of 77% (73% F, 80% M) as evidenced by the results obtained compared to the initial situation as mentioned in this report.