public disclosure authorized ugandadocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/... · saber r. school...
TRANSCRIPT
THE WORLD BANK
UgandaSCHOOL FEEDING
SABER Country Report
2014
Policy Goals Status1. Policy Frameworks
School feeding is not included in the published PRSP or discussion. Apublished national policy on school feeding does not exist.
2. Financial CapacitySchool feeding is included in the national planning process, yet there is nonational, regional, or local budget line for school feeding. These funds are notdisbursed in an effective manner.
3. Institutional Capacity and CoordinationThere is a multisectoral steering committee that includes developers from atleast three sectors to coordinate implementation of school feeding. Anational level school feeding unit exists, yet it lacks sufficient staff,knowledge, and resources.
4. Design and ImplementationThe M&E plan is in place, yet it is not integrated into a wider nationalmonitoring system. National standards on food modalities and the foodbasket are set, yet there are no national standards on food management,procurement and logistics.
5. Community Roles-Reaching Beyond SchoolsA system of regional workshops is in place for consultation with parents andcommunity members on the design, monitoring, and feedback of schoolfeeding.
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 2
IntroductionThis report presents an assessment of school feedingpolicies and institutions that affect young children inUganda. The analysis is based on a World Bank tooldeveloped as part of the Systems Approach for BetterEducation Results (SABER) initiative that aims tosystematically assess education systems againstevidence based global standards and good practice toassist countries reform their education systems forproper learning for all.
School feeding policies are a critical component of aneffective education system, given that children's healthand nutrition impact their school attendance, ability tolearn, and overall development. A school feedingprogram is a specific school based health service, whichcan be part of a country’s broader school health program,and often a large amount of resources are invested in aschool feeding program. SABER School Feeding collects,analyzes, and disseminates comprehensive informationon school feeding policies around the world. The overallobjective of the initiative is to help countries designeffective policies to improve their education systems,facilitate comparative policy analysis, identify key areasto focus investment, and assist in disseminating goodpractice.
Country OverviewUganda is a low income country in Sub Saharan Africawith a population of 37.6million people and a populationgrowth rate of 3.3 percent in 2013.1 GDP per capita in thecountry has been rising since 2000 when it was $883 to$1,365 in 2013 (constant 2011 international dollar) dueto macroeconomic and political stability 2 Despitepositive economic growth and rising GDP per capita,poverty is widespread and particularly prevalent in ruralareas. 3 The poverty gap at $2 a day (PPP) was 27.4percent in 2009, which is lower than it was in 2006 (36.4percent). 4 Uganda’s human development index in 2013ranked it number 161 out of 187 countries, placing it inthe low human development category. 5 Despite theimprovement in life expectancy from 48 years in 2000 to59 years in 20126, the prevalence of undernourishment
1 World Bank. 2014a.2 Ibid.3 U.S. Global Health Programs, 2011.4 World Bank. 2014a.5 UNDP, 2013.
has increased from 27 percent of the population in 2000to 30 percent in 2012.7
Education and Health in Uganda
Uganda has significantly expanded access to educationsince the implementation of the Universal PrimaryEducation (UPE) reform in 1997. The gross primaryenrolment ratio dramatically increased from 70 percentin 1996 to 117 percent in 1997. 8 By 2011, primaryenrolment was estimated at 8.1 million children (50percent girls), resulting in a gross enrolment ratio of 110percent, the lowest it had been since the passage of theUPE reform in 1997. 9 Following a similar trend, theexpected primary completion rate has been declining. In2011, the expected primary completion rate was 35percent, which was lower than the previous year’s rateof 48 percent.10 In general, completion and achievementrates are low. Over 50 percent of primary pupils in grades3 and 6 performed below the desired minimum average(50 percent) for numeracy and literacy.
Student absenteeism in Uganda is high. One in threechildren in primary school does not attend school everyday (Figures 1 and 2). In island and fishing communitydistricts (Apac, Kalangala), and districts with agriculturalestate or plantation based livelihoods (Mityana,Kyenjojo), absenteeism may be higher than one out ofevery two children. Low attendance affects learning andhinders effective use of educational inputs. Teacherabsenteeism is estimated at 27 percent. Other problems,some identified by the head teachers, include: poortextbook utilization by both teachers and learners, theirlimited availability notwithstanding; high number ofschool drop outs as reflected in the low completionrates; and low learner attendance. Irregular studentattendance has been partly attributed to: lack of mid daymeals at school; low teacher attendance; low societalappreciation of the long term benefits of schooling andhence low learner support, as manifested in the lack ofbasic scholastic materials (books and pens/pencils); andlate enrollment for school (Figure 2).
6 World Bank. 2014a.7 Ibid.8 World Bank. 2014b.9 Ibid.10 Ibid.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 3
Figure 1: Learner Absenteeism by Grade, UNPS 2009/10
Source: Data from the Uganda Bureau of Statistics and computed byauthors in “Improving Learning in Uganda Vol. 1: Community LedSchool Feeding Practices” in 2013.11
Figure 2: Most Serious Problems Faced by Schools asIdentified by Head Teachers, UNPS 2009/10
Source: Data from the Uganda Bureau of Statistics and computed byauthors in “Improving Learning in Uganda Vol. 1: Community LedSchool Feeding Practices” in 2013.12
The government is thus faced with the dual challenge ofmaintaining high enrolment levels and ensuring qualityservice delivery in order to reach both nationaldevelopment goals and the Millennium DevelopmentGoals on education. Government and developmentpartners’ efforts are currently focused on improving theprovision of key inputs for quality teaching and learningprocesses, especially with regard to qualified teachers,instructional materials, and curriculum reforms, and
11 Najjumba, I.M., Bunjo, C.L., Kyaddondo, D., and C. Misinde, 2013.12 Ibid.13 UNESCO, 2014.14 World Bank, 2014b.15 Ibid.16 World Bank, 2014a.17 Government of Uganda, 2010.
reinforcing school infrastructure developments tosupport the expansion.
As a share of GDP, public expenditure on education was3.3 percent in 2012.13 In 2012, expenditure on educationwas 14 percent of total government expenditure. 14
Expenditure on primary education as a percentage ofgovernment spending on education was 54 percentwhile secondary education received 25 percent in2012.15
HealthUganda faces several health challenges. In 2012,approximately 60 percent of deaths were caused bycommunicable diseases in addition to maternal,prenatal, and nutrition conditions while 27 percent ofdeaths were caused by non communicable diseases.16
Prevalent communicable diseases in Uganda includeHIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected tropicaldiseases (NTDs). 17 For example, approximately 7.2percent of individuals between the ages of 15 and 49were infected with HIV in 2012.18 Health problems areexacerbated by inadequate access to clean water andsanitation facilities. Approximately 34 percent of peoplein Uganda use improved sanitation facilities with nomajor differences between urban and rural areas.19 Thedifference in living conditions for rural and urbanresidents becomes apparent when comparing these twopopulations’ access to an improved water source.Roughly 95 percent of the urban population had accessto an improved water source in 2012 when only 75percent of the rural population had access.20
Maternal and child health conditions account for a largeproportion of Uganda’s health burden althoughmorbidity andmortality rates for these groups have beendeclining. 21 The fertility rate has decreased over timefrom an average of 6.9 children per woman in 2000 to 6children per woman in 2012.22 The infant mortality ratesignificantly decreased from 89 percent in 2000 to 45percent in 2012.23 Deaths were caused by pneumonia,asphyxia, prematurity, congenital abnormalities, andother health conditions. 24 In addition, malnutritiondecreased from 45 percent in 2000 to 34 percent in 2012
18 World Bank. 2014a.19 Ibid.20 Ibid.21 UBOS. 2002. UDHS. Kampala: UBOS22 World Bank. 2014a.23 Ibid.24 Government of Uganda, 2010.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 4
among children five years old and younger. There hasalso been increased access to deworming andmicronutrient supplementation programs. 25 Theprevalence of wasting among children under five years ofage was 4.8 percent in 2011 while the prevalence ofanemia among children in the same age group was 56percent in 2011, both lower than the previous years’rates.26
Physical and psychological abuse remains an issue inUganda. In particular, sexual and gender based violenceis common. 27 Limited funding and transportationresources reduce health workers’ capacity to addresssexual and gender based violence.28
The Case for School Feeding
School feeding programs, defined here as the provisionof food to school children, can increase schoolenrolment 29 and attendance—especially for girls. 30
When combined with quality education, school feedingprograms can increase cognition 31 and educationalsuccess. 32 With appropriately designed rations, schoolfeeding programs can improve the nutrition status ofpreschool and primary school aged children byaddressing micronutrient deficiencies. Combined withlocal agricultural production, these programs can alsoprovide small scale farmers with a stable market. Schoolfeeding programs can provide short term benefits aftercrises, helping communities recover and build resilience,in addition to long term benefits by developing humancapital.33 School feeding programs can be classified intotwo main groups: in school feeding (when children arefed in school) and take home rations (when families aregiven food if their children attend school regularly). Amajor advantage of school feeding programs is that theyoffer the greatest benefit to the poorest children. Severalstudies34 have indicated that missing breakfast impairseducational performance.
Present data suggests that almost every country isseeking to provide food to its school children. Therefore,especially for low income countries where most food
25 Ibid.26 World Bank. 2014a.27 Ibid.28 Government of Uganda, 2010.29 Ahmed, 2004; Gelli, Meir, and Espejo, 2007.30 Jacoby, Cueto, and Pollitt, 1996; Powell et al., 1998; Kristjansson et al., 2007.31 Whaley et al., 2003; Kristjansson et al., 2007; Jukes et al., 2008.
insecure regions are concentrated, the key issue is notwhether a country will implement school feedingprograms but rather how and with what objectives.
Social shocks of recent global crises led to an enhanceddemand for school feeding programs in low incomecountries as they could serve as a safety net for foodinsecure households through an income transfer. Inresponse to this amplified request, the United NationsWorld Food Programme (WFP) and the World Bankjointly undertook an analysis titled Rethinking SchoolFeeding. 35 This initiative sought to better understandhow to develop and implement effective school feedingprograms as a productive safety net that is part of theresponse to the social shocks, as well as a fiscallysustainable investment in human capital. These effortsare part of a long term global goal to achieve EducationFor All and provide social protection to the poor.
Five Key Policy Goals to Promote SchoolFeedingThere are five core policy goals that form the basis of aneffective school feeding program. Figure 3 illustratesthese policy goals and outlines respective policy leversand outcomes that fall under each goal.
The first goal is a national policy framework. A solidpolicy foundation strengthens a school feedingprogram’s sustainability and quality of implementation.National planning for school feeding as part of thecountry’s poverty reduction strategy (or other equivalentdevelopment strategies) conveys the importance thegovernment places on school feeding as part of itsdevelopment agenda. For most countries that areimplementing their own national programs, schoolfeeding is included in national policy frameworks.36
The second policy goal for school feeding is financialcapacity. Stable funding is a prerequisite forsustainability. However, where need is greatest,programs tend to be the smallest and themost reliant onexternal support. Funding for these programs can comefrom a combination of sources, such as non
32 Tan, Lane, and Lassibille, 1999; Ahmed, 2004; Adelman et al., 2008.33 WFP, 201334 Simeon and Grantham McGregor, 1989; Pollitt, Cueto, and Jacoby, 1998;Simeon, 1998.35 Bundy et al., 2009.36 Bundy et al., 2009; WFP, 2012.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 5
governmental organizations (i.e., WFP) and thegovernment. When a program becomes nationalized, itneeds a stable and independent funding source, eitherthrough government core resources or developmentfunding. In the long term, a national budget line forschool feeding is necessary for an effective and stableprogram.
The third policy goal is institutional capacity andcoordination. School feeding programs are betterexecuted when an institution is mandated andaccountable for the implementation of such a program.Effective programs also include multisectoralinvolvement from sectors such as education, health,agriculture, and local government, as well as acomprehensive link between school feeding and otherschool health or social protection programs andestablished coordination mechanisms.
The fourth policy goal is sound design andimplementation. In order to maximize effectiveness,school feeding programs should clearly identify countryspecific problems, objectives, and expected outcomes.The country’s context and needs should determine theprogram’s beneficiaries, food basket (menus), foodmodalities and supply chain. Countries and partnersshould work towards creating a delicate balance amonginternational, national, and local procurement of foodsto support local economies without jeopardizing thequality and stability of the food supply.
The last policy goal is community roles reaching beyondschools. School feeding programs that are locally owned,incorporate contributions from local communities, andrespond to specific community needs are often thestrongest. These programs are most likely to make asuccessful transition from donor assistance to nationalownership. Community participation should beconsidered at every stage, but without overburdeningcommunity members.
Use of Evidence Based Tools
The primary focus of the SABER School Feeding exerciseis gathering systematic and verifiable information aboutthe quality of a country’s policies through a SABERSchool Feeding Questionnaire. This data collectinginstrument helps to facilitate comparative policyanalysis, identify key areas to focus investment, and
disseminate good practice and knowledge sharing. Thisholistic and integrated assessment of how the overallpolicy in a country affects young children’s developmentis categorized into one of the following stages,representing the varying levels of policy developmentthat exist among different dimensions of school feeding:
1. Latent: No or very little policy development2. Emerging: Initial/some initiatives towards policy
development.3. Established: Some policy development4. Advanced: Development of a comprehensive
policy framework
Each policy goal and lever of school feeding ismethodically benchmarked through two SABER analysistools. The first is a set of scoring rubrics that quantifiesthe responses to selected questions from the SABERSchool Feeding questionnaire by assigning point valuesto the answers. The second tool is the SABER SchoolFeeding Framework Rubrics that analyzes the responses,especially the written answers, based on theframework’s five policy goals and levers. For moreinformation, please visit the World Bank’s website onSABER School Health and School Feeding and click on the“What Matters” Framework Paper under Methodology.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 6
Figure 3: Policy goals and policy levers for school feeding
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 7
Findings
Policy Goal 1: PolicyFrameworks in Uganda
Policy Lever:
Overarching policies for school feeding inalignment with national level policy
A policy foundation helps strengthen the sustainabilityand accountability of a school feeding program as well asthe quality of its implementation. Nearly all countrieswith national ownership of programs have wellarticulated national policies on the modalities andobjectives of school feeding.37
In Uganda, school feeding is not included in thepublished Poverty Reduction Strategic Plan (PRSP) andwas not discussed during the preparation of this PRSP.The government has not set targets for school feedingprograms in the PRSP either. There is also no schoolfeeding policy, but there is an implicit statement in theNational Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children Policythat school feeding programs can target vulnerablechildren.38 There is a draft of school feeding guidelineswritten by the education sector that a nationalmultisectoral taskforce can use to guide thedevelopment of a national school feeding policy.
There is apparent ambivalence in Uganda’s responsebecause it has a unique situation. While it does not havea national school feeding program, it does have atargeted school feeding program covering the Karamojaregion only. It also has a national secretariat (The ProjectManagement Unit) dedicated to all matters concerningfood that has changed much of the responsibility forexamining “sustainable” ways of feeding children atschool. However, this responsibility is within an explicitgovernment policy (Education Act 2010) that feeding achild at school is the responsibility of the parent.39
37 WFP, 201238 Government of Uganda, 2013.
1. Policy Frameworks is LATENT
Indicators Score Justification1A. National level povertyreduction strategy orequivalent national strategyas well as sectoral policiesand strategies identifyschool feeding as aneducation and/or socialprotection intervention,clearly defining objectivesand sectoral responsibilities
School feedingnot included inthe publishedPRSP ordiscussion
1B. An evidence basedtechnical policy related toschool feeding outlines theobjectives, rationale, scope,design, and funding andsustainability of theprogram andcomprehensively addressesall four other policy goals
There is nopublishedschool feedingpolicy.
39 Scaling Up Nutrition, 2012.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 8
Policy Goal 2: FinancialCapacity in Uganda
Policy Lever:
Governance of the national school feedingprogram through stable funding and budgeting
Stable funding is necessary for the long termsustainability of a school feeding program, especially onethat transitions from being donor funded to governmentfunded. School feeding programs supported by externalpartners generally rely on food aid, government in kinddonations, and/or government cash contributions. Inorder for the program to be sustainable and nationallyowned, the school feeding program should have a budgetline and be part of the government’s budgeting andplanning process.
School feeding is included in the national planningprocess in Uganda but it is not funded through a nationalbudget. School feeding is included in general terms, butthere is no specific budget line for it. About US $220,000is budgeted for the school feeding and school healthProgramme Management Unit’s running costs per year.
At a regional level, districts do not have the capacity toplan and budget their needs. Regions do not have abudget line for school feeding. At a more local level,neither schools nor each ministry involved in theprogram have a budget line for school feeding.
The World Food Programme has financed a regionalschool feeding program for Karamoja, a chronically fooddeficient area and drought stricken region, but thisintervention terminated effectively in December 2013after 30 years of support.40 Other agencies like SNV andWorld Vision support a variant of homegrowninterventions in some parts of the country.
The government has not received funds from theEducation for All Fast Track Initiative for school feeding.There is no national school feeding program although apolicy is in place for a parent led school feedingprogram.41
40 Ariong, 2013.
2. Financial capacity is LATENT
Indicators Score Justification2A. National budgetline(s) and funding areallocated to schoolfeeding; funds aredisbursed to theimplementation levelsin a timely andeffective manner
School feedingincluded in nationalplanning process,but no national,regional, or localbudget line forschool feeding;funds not disbursedin effective manner
41 Najjumba et al., 2013.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 9
Policy Goal 3: InstitutionalCapacity and Coordinationin Uganda
Policy Levers:
School feeding inter sectoral coordination andstrong partnershipsManagement and accountability structures,strong institutional frameworks, and monitoringand evaluation
Implementing a school feeding policy requires significantinstitutional capacity because the program is a complexschool health intervention. The policy should clearlydefine the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders andactors at all levels. Methodically increasing governmentcapacity to manage a school feeding program isimportant to the program’s long term sustainability. Anational institution that is mandated and accountable forthe implementation of the school feeding program isconsidered to be a best practice. This institution shouldhave a specific unit that has adequate resources andknowledgeable staff to manage the school feedingprogram. Moreover, policies that detail accountabilityand management mechanisms can help ensure programquality and efficiency, especially if the school feedingprogram is decentralized.
The Ministry of Education carries the mandate ofmanaging and implementing the school feedingprogram. This concentrated leadership is a trait ofeffective implementation. Uganda has a multisectoralsteering committee coordinating the implementation ofschool feeding. Other sectors are also a part of thissteering committee, including education, health,agriculture, local government, and water. The steeringcommittee was set up to examine the possibilities andmodalities of a national school feeding program, but itdoes not have a clear work plan or objectives.
At the national level, there is a specific unit within theMinistry of Education in charge of the overallmanagement of school feeding and responsible forcoordination between the national, regional, and schoollevels. However, this responsible unit in charge ofimplementing school feeding does not have a sufficientamount of staff given the responsibilities that the unithas been given. There are 21 people working in the
national unit, with 19 of them fully dedicated to schoolfeeding. The staff are not fully trained andknowledgeable on school feeding issues. There areinformal coordination mechanisms in place betweencross government stakeholders. The program steeringcommittee draws representatives from ministries foreducation, local government, health, gender and WFP.This committee reviews operational plans, progressreports, and activities constrained by existing policyframework.
At the regional level, there are no pre or in servicetraining programs in place to train staff at each level onschool feeding program management andimplementation. Regional offices do not have sufficientstaff, knowledge, and resources to fulfill theirresponsibilities.
3. Institutional Capacity and Coordination in Uganda isESTABLISHED
Indicators Score Justification3A. Multisectoralsteering committeecoordinatesimplementation of anational schoolfeeding policy
Multisectoralsteering committeefrom at least threesectors coordinatesimplementation
3B. National schoolfeeding managementunit andaccountabilitystructures are inplace, coordinatingwith school levelstructures
School feeding unitexists at nationallevel, but lackssufficient staff,knowledge, andresources
3C. School levelmanagement andaccountabilitystructures are in place
Informalcoordinationmechanisms inplace; no pre or inservice training;regional officesdon’t havesufficient staff,knowledge, andresources to fulfilltheir responsibilities
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 10
Policy Goal 4: Design andImplementation inUganda
Policy Lever:
Quality assurance of programming andtargeting, modalities, and procurement design,ensuring design that is both needs based andcost effective
A well designed school feeding policy that is based onevidence is critical to the implementation of a qualityschool feeding program. The policy can include details ontargeting the correct beneficiaries, selecting the propermodalities of food delivery, and choosing a quality foodbasket. Over time, the school feeding policy may beredesigned or modified according to reassessments ofthe school feeding program.
A government led strategy for the monitoring andevaluation (M&E) of a national school feeding program isthe cornerstone for the development of a sustainableand efficient M&E system.42 Uganda has anM&E plan forthe school feeding program. This monitoring andevaluation plan is in relation to the special KaramojaProject. All important M&E components are coveredexcept a program baseline report. There is no statisticianin the project management unit, and progress ismeasured on the basis of previous performance inabsence of a base line study. The school feeding M&Eplan in Uganda has been used to refine and updatecomponents of the program. For example, take homerations for girls were discontinued when girls’ enrolmentand that of boys reached 50:50.
Experiences from the health sector convey that programeffectiveness is enhanced when the implementation of anational school feeding strategy is supported by anational M&E strategy agreed upon by all countrypartners and stakeholders. However, theM&E plan is notintegrated into a national monitoring or informationmanagement system.
Impact evaluations have been carried out andcompleted. In 2007, the FAO did an evaluation of schoolfeeding, and in 2010, the Ministry of Education M&E
42 Gelli and Espejo, 2013.
Department also undertook an evaluation. Progressreports and specific program implementationdocuments were produced, namely the document titledthe Plan of Operations (WFP). Its objectives were toincrease enrolment and attendance, especially that ofgirls at school, to improve cognitive performance in class,to reduce short term hunger, and to reduce dropoutsand absences.
Uganda’s program also has objectives that correspond tothe context of the country and the poverty reductionstrategy. These objectives, or targeting criteria, areimportant for two reasons: first, to keep the programwithin its budget constraints and maximize the effect ofthe spending line with the objectives, and second, toensure equity by redistributing resources to poor andvulnerable children.
National standards on food modalities and the foodbasket have been set in the nutrition plan. However,these standards do not address levels of detail thatinclude nutritional content requirements, local habitsand tastes, and the availability of local food. Foodmodalities have been chosen based on the objectives ofthe program, the duration of the school day, and thefeasibility of implementation in the context of the specialKaramoja program.
There are no national standards on food management,procurement and logistics. In the initial stages ofdiscussion of a homegrown school feeding program,there were discussions on possible procurementmodalities for school feeding that could be more locallyappropriate, including the possibility of linkingprocurement with agriculture related activities.
The Ministry of Agriculture has been involved in makingthe connection between school feeding and nationalagricultural production. The Ministry of Agriculture wasinvolved in the planning of a Home Grown SchoolFeeding program draft, including provision of statistics ofagricultural production. The involvement of governmentagencies aids a smooth implementation system alongnational, regional, and local levels. The private sector hasnot been involved in making the connection betweenfarmers and the school feeding market.In 2011, the special program for Karamoja had 104,000beneficiaries and about 12,000,000 primary school
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 11
children. Looking forward, a specific area for attention isto develop new ways for the agriculture and educationsectors to work together, including the construction of acoherent evidence base from which to evaluate specificoutcomes within each sphere (SABER Framework).
4. Design and Implementation is ESTABLISHEDIndicators Score Justification
4A. A functionalmonitoring andevaluation system is inplace as part of thestructure of the leadinstitution and usedfor implementationand feedback
M&E plan includesmost componentsand is used to refineand updateprograms; however,M&E system notintegrated intonational monitoringor informationmanagement system
4B. Program designidentifies appropriatetarget groups andtargeting criteriacorresponding to thenational school feedingpolicy and thesituation analysis
Targeting criteriaand targetingmethodology existsand corresponds tocontext of thecountry and thepoverty reductionstrategy; M&Einformation used torefine and updatecoverage
4C. Food modalitiesand the food basketcorrespond to theobjectives, local habitsand tastes, availabilityof local food, foodsafety, and nutritioncontent requirements
National standardson food modalitiesand the food basket;standards do notcorrespond tonutritional contentrequirements, localhabits and tastes,and the availabilityof local food
4D. Procurement andlogistics arrangementsare based on procuringas locally as possible,taking into account thecosts, the capacities ofimplementing parties,the productioncapacity in thecountry, the quality ofthe food, and thestability of the pipeline
There are nonational standardson foodmanagement,procurement andlogistics
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 12
Policy Goal 5: CommunityRoles – Reaching BeyondSchools in UgandaPolicy Lever:
Community participation and accountability
The role of the community should be clearly defined in aschool feeding policy because community participationand ownership improves the school feeding program’schances of long term sustainability. If the governmentplaces the responsibility of sustaining the school feedingprogram on the community, the school feeding policyshould detail the guidelines, minimum standards, andsupport for the community to implement the program.The school feeding policy can also include mechanismsfor the community to hold the government accountable.
At the school level, there may be a school managementcommittee composed of parents, teachers, and studentsthat acts as a liaison between the school and communityand that manages the school feeding program. Careshould be taken not to overburden the community,because in some cases the communitymay introduce feesto support the local school feeding program, which cannegatively impact enrolment rates. Community assistedschool feeding programs are usually most successful infood secure areas.
Uganda has school management committees andparent teacher associations, but they lack the capacityand autonomy to manage a school feeding program.43
The community works with the school feeding programthrough contributing firewood, yet constraints appearwhen it comes to expectations of financial facilitation.The role of the community has also not been addressedin the national school feeding policy. Key stakeholderscan be involved to support community engagement,including the village and parish council leaders.
43 Najjumba et al., 2013.
5. Community roles reaching beyond schools isEMERGING
Indicators Score Justification5A. Communityparticipates in schoolfeeding programdesign,implementation,management andevaluation andcontributes resources
Systems andaccountabilitymechanisms are notyet in place forconsultation withparents andcommunitymembers on thedesign, monitoringand feedback of theschool feedingprogram
To view the scores for all indicators and policy goals inone table, please refer to Appendix 1.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 13
ConclusionBased on the above findings, there is a growingfoundation for essential school feeding programming inUganda. The targeted program in one region isencouraging. Still, there are areas that could bestrengthened moving forward. The following policyoptions represent possible areas where school feedingcould be strengthened in Uganda, based on theconclusions of this report.
Policy Options:Strengthen school feeding inclusion on the nationallevel by including it, along with specific goals, in thePoverty Reduction Strategic Plan.Establish national, regional and local budgets forschool feeding.Expand and strengthen implementation of schoolfeeding programs across several regions, includingregional capacity building through pre or in servicetraining programs at the management andimplementation levels.Establish specific work plan, objectives andprocedures for the national multisectoral schoolfeeding steering committee.Create national standards on food management,procurement and logistics.Strengthen local and community focused schoolfeeding, including establishment of localcommittees and implementing homegrown schoolfeeding where appropriate.
UGA
NDA
SCHO
OLFEED
ING
SABE
RCO
UNTR
YRE
PORT
|201
4
SYSTEM
SAP
PROAC
HFO
RBE
TTER
EDUCA
TIONRE
SULTS
14
Appe
ndix1
Table1.LevelsofDevelopmentofSABER
SchoolFeedingIndicatorsandPolicyGoalsinUganda
Syst
ems
App
roac
h fo
r Bet
ter E
duca
tion
Res
ults
: Sch
ool F
eedi
ng P
olic
y Fr
amew
ork
PO
LIC
Y L
EV
ER
IN
DIC
ATO
R
STA
GE
O
VE
RA
LLS
CO
RE
PE
R
DO
MAI
N
Late
ntE
mer
ging
E
stab
lishe
d A
dvan
ced
Polic
y G
oal 1
: Pol
icy
fram
ewor
ks
Ove
rarc
hing
pol
icie
s fo
r sch
ool f
eedi
ng -
soun
d al
ignm
ent
with
the
natio
nal
polic
y
Nat
iona
l-lev
el p
over
ty
redu
ctio
n st
rate
gy o
r eq
uiva
lent
nat
iona
l st
rate
gy a
s w
ell a
s se
ctor
al p
olic
ies
and
stra
tegi
es (e
duca
tion
sect
or p
lan,
nut
ritio
n po
licy,
soc
ial p
rote
ctio
n po
licy)
iden
tify
scho
ol
feed
ing
as a
n ed
ucat
ion
and/
or s
ocia
l pr
otec
tion
inte
rven
tion,
cl
early
def
inin
g ob
ject
ives
and
sec
tora
l re
spon
sibi
litie
s
Ther
e is
reco
gniti
on o
f sc
hool
feed
ing
as a
n ed
ucat
ion
and/
or s
ocia
l pr
otec
tion
inte
rven
tion,
bu
t sch
ool f
eedi
ng is
not
ye
t inc
lude
d in
the
publ
ishe
d na
tiona
l-lev
el
pove
rty re
duct
ion
stra
tegy
, equ
ival
ent
natio
nal p
olic
y, o
r se
ctor
al p
olic
ies
and
stra
tegi
es
Sch
ool f
eedi
ng d
iscu
ssed
by
mem
bers
and
par
tner
s du
ring
prep
arat
ion
of
natio
nal-l
evel
pov
erty
re
duct
ion
stra
tegy
, eq
uiva
lent
nat
iona
l po
licy,
or s
ecto
ral p
olic
ies
and
stra
tegi
es b
ut n
ot y
et
publ
ishe
d
Sch
ool f
eedi
ng in
clud
ed
in p
ublis
hed
natio
nal-l
evel
po
verty
redu
ctio
n st
rate
gy
or e
quiv
alen
t nat
iona
l po
licy
(incl
udin
g sp
ecifi
catio
ns a
s to
whe
re
scho
ol fe
edin
g w
ill b
e an
chor
ed a
nd w
ho w
ill
impl
emen
t); p
ublis
hed
sect
oral
pol
icie
s or
st
rate
gies
hav
e cl
early
de
fined
obj
ectiv
es a
nd
sect
oral
resp
onsi
bilit
ies
Sch
ool f
eedi
ng in
clud
ed in
pu
blis
hed
natio
nal-l
evel
po
verty
redu
ctio
n st
rate
gy
or e
quiv
alen
t nat
iona
l pol
icy
(incl
udin
g sp
ecifi
catio
ns a
s to
whe
re s
choo
l fee
ding
will
be a
ncho
red
and
who
will
im
plem
ent a
nd
acco
mpa
nied
by
targ
ets
and/
or m
ilest
ones
set
by
the
gove
rnm
ent);
pub
lishe
d se
ctor
al p
olic
ies
or
stra
tegi
es h
ave
clea
rly
defin
ed o
bjec
tives
and
se
ctor
al re
spon
sibi
litie
s,
incl
udin
g w
hat s
choo
l fe
edin
g ca
n an
d ca
nnot
ac
hiev
e, a
nd a
ligne
d w
ith
the
natio
nal-l
evel
pov
erty
re
duct
ion
stra
tegy
or
equi
vale
nt n
atio
nal s
trate
gy
LATENT
UGA
NDA
SCHO
OLFEED
ING
SABE
RCO
UNTR
YRE
PORT
|201
4
SYSTEM
SAP
PROAC
HFO
RBE
TTER
EDUCA
TIONRE
SULTS
15
An
evid
ence
-bas
ed
tech
nica
l pol
icy
rela
ted
to s
choo
l fee
ding
ou
tline
s th
e ob
ject
ives
, ra
tiona
le, s
cope
, de
sign
, and
fund
ing
and
sust
aina
bilit
y of
the
prog
ram
and
co
mpr
ehen
sive
lyad
dres
ses
all f
our o
ther
po
licy
goal
s (in
stitu
tiona
l cap
acity
an
d co
ordi
natio
n,
finan
cial
cap
acity
, de
sign
and
im
plem
enta
tion,
and
co
mm
unity
pa
rtici
patio
n)
Ther
e is
reco
gniti
on o
f th
e ne
ed fo
r a te
chni
cal
polic
y re
late
d to
sch
ool
feed
ing,
but
one
has
not
ye
t bee
n de
velo
ped
or
publ
ishe
d
A te
chni
cal p
olic
y an
d si
tuat
ion
anal
ysis
und
er
deve
lopm
ent b
y th
e re
leva
nt s
ecto
rs th
at
addr
ess
scho
ol fe
edin
g
A te
chni
cal p
olic
y re
late
d to
sch
ool f
eedi
ng is
pu
blis
hed,
out
linin
g th
e ob
ject
ives
, rat
iona
le,
scop
e, d
esig
n, fu
ndin
g an
d su
stai
nabi
lity
of th
e pr
ogra
m a
nd c
over
ing
som
e as
pect
s of
all
four
ot
her p
olic
y go
als,
in
clud
ing
links
with
ag
ricul
ture
dev
elop
men
t
A te
chni
cal p
olic
y re
late
d to
sc
hool
feed
ing
is p
ublis
hed,
outli
ning
the
obje
ctiv
es,
ratio
nale
, sco
pe, d
esig
n,
fund
ing
and
sust
aina
bilit
y of
the
prog
ram
and
co
mpr
ehen
sive
ly c
over
ing
all f
our o
ther
pol
icy
goal
s w
ith a
stra
tegy
for l
ocal
pr
oduc
tion
and
sour
cing
, in
clud
ing
links
with
ag
ricul
ture
dev
elop
men
t an
dsm
all h
olde
r far
mer
s; p
olic
yis
info
rmed
by
a si
tuat
ion
anal
ysis
of n
eeds
and
al
igne
d w
ith n
atio
nal
pove
rty
redu
ctio
n st
rate
gies
and
re
leva
nt s
ecto
ral p
olic
ies
and
stra
tegi
es
Polic
y G
oal 2
: Fin
anci
al C
apac
ity
Gov
erna
nce
of th
e na
tiona
l sch
ool
feed
ing
prog
ram
- st
able
fund
ing
and
budg
etin
g
Nat
iona
l bud
get l
ine(
s)
and
fund
ing
are
allo
cate
d to
sch
ool
feed
ing;
fund
s ar
e di
sbur
sed
to th
e im
plem
enta
tion
leve
ls
(nat
iona
l, di
stric
t and
/or
scho
ol) i
n a
timel
y an
d ef
fect
ive
man
ner
Ther
e is
reco
gniti
on o
f the
ne
ed to
incl
ude
scho
ol
feed
ing
in th
e na
tiona
l pl
anni
ng p
roce
ss, b
ut th
is
has
not y
et h
appe
ned;
the
gove
rnm
ent i
s fu
lly re
liant
on
ext
erna
l fun
ds a
nd
does
not
hav
e pr
ovis
ion
in
the
natio
nal b
udge
t to
allo
cate
reso
urce
s to
sc
hool
feed
ing;
ther
e is
re
cogn
ition
of t
he n
eed
for
mec
hani
sms
for
disb
ursi
ng fu
nds
to th
e im
plem
enta
tion
leve
ls, b
ut
thes
e ar
e no
t yet
in p
lace
Sch
ool f
eedi
ng is
in
clud
ed in
the
natio
nal
plan
ning
pro
cess
and
na
tiona
l fun
ding
is
stab
le th
roug
h a
budg
et
line
but u
nabl
e to
cov
er
all n
eeds
; the
re is
no
budg
et li
ne a
t reg
iona
l an
d sc
hool
leve
ls;
exis
ting
scho
ol fe
edin
g fu
nds
are
disb
urse
d to
th
e im
plem
enta
tion
leve
ls in
term
itten
tly
Sch
ool f
eedi
ng is
incl
uded
in
the
natio
nal p
lann
ing
proc
ess
and
is fu
lly fu
nded
th
roug
h a
natio
nal b
udge
t lin
e; a
ll m
inis
tries
invo
lved
in
the
prog
ram
im
plem
enta
tion
have
a
budg
et li
ne o
r fun
ds
allo
cate
d; b
udge
t lin
es
also
exi
st a
t reg
iona
l and
sc
hool
leve
ls; s
choo
l fe
edin
g fu
nds
are
disb
urse
d to
the
impl
emen
tatio
n le
vels
in a
tim
ely
and
effe
ctiv
e m
anne
r
Sch
ool f
eedi
ng is
incl
uded
in th
e na
tiona
l pla
nnin
g pr
oces
s an
d is
fully
fund
ed
thro
ugh
a na
tiona
l bud
get
line
cons
iste
nt w
ith th
e sc
hool
feed
ing
polic
y an
d si
tuat
ion
anal
ysis
incl
udin
g op
tions
for e
ngag
ing
with
th
e pr
ivat
e se
ctor
; bud
get
lines
and
pla
ns a
lso
exis
t at
regi
onal
and
sch
ool l
evel
s,
suffi
cien
t to
cove
r all
the
expe
nses
of r
unni
ng th
e pr
ogra
m ;
scho
ol fe
edin
g fu
nds
are
disb
urse
d to
the
impl
emen
tatio
n le
vels
in a
tim
ely
and
effe
ctiv
e m
anne
ran
d im
plem
ente
rs h
ave
the
capa
city
to p
lan
and
budg
etas
wel
l as
requ
est
reso
urce
s fro
m th
e ce
ntra
l le
vel
LATENT
UGA
NDA
SCHO
OLFEED
ING
SABE
RCO
UNTR
YRE
PORT
|201
4
SYSTEM
SAP
PROAC
HFO
RBE
TTER
EDUCA
TIONRE
SULTS
16
Polic
y G
oal 3
: Ins
titut
iona
l Cap
acity
and
Coo
rdin
atio
n
Sch
ool f
eedi
ng
coor
dina
tion
- stro
ng
partn
ersh
ips
and
inte
r-se
ctor
coor
dina
tion
Mul
tisec
tora
l ste
erin
g co
mm
ittee
coo
rdin
ates
im
plem
enta
tion
of a
na
tiona
l sch
ool f
eedi
ng
polic
y
Any
mul
tisec
tora
l ste
erin
g co
mm
ittee
coo
rdin
atio
n ef
forts
are
cur
rent
ly
nons
yste
mat
ic
Sec
tora
l ste
erin
g co
mm
ittee
coo
rdin
ates
im
plem
enta
tion
of a
na
tiona
l sch
ool f
eedi
ng
polic
y
Mul
tisec
tora
l ste
erin
g co
mm
ittee
from
at l
east
tw
o se
ctor
s (e
.g.
educ
atio
n, s
ocia
l pr
otec
tion,
agr
icul
ture
, he
alth
, loc
al g
over
nmen
t, w
ater
) coo
rdin
ates
im
plem
enta
tion
of a
na
tiona
l sch
ool f
eedi
ng
polic
y
Mul
tisec
tora
l ste
erin
g co
mm
ittee
from
at l
east
th
ree
sect
ors
(e.g
. ed
ucat
ion,
soc
ial
prot
ectio
n,
agric
ultu
re, h
ealth
, loc
al
gove
rnm
ent,
wat
er)
coor
dina
tes
impl
emen
tatio
nof
a n
atio
nal s
choo
l fee
ding
polic
y; th
is g
over
nmen
t-led
co
mm
ittee
pro
vide
s co
mpr
ehen
sive
coor
dina
tion
(acr
oss
inte
rnat
iona
l ag
enci
es, N
GO
s, th
e pr
ivat
ese
ctor
and
loca
l bus
ines
s re
pres
enta
tives
as
wel
l) an
dis
par
t of a
wid
er c
omm
ittee
on s
choo
l hea
lth a
nd
nutri
tion
ESTABLISHED
Man
agem
ent a
nd
acco
unta
bilit
y st
ruct
ures
, inc
ludi
ng
staf
fing
- stro
ng
inst
itutio
nal
fram
ewor
ks fo
r im
plem
enta
tion
Nat
iona
l sch
ool f
eedi
ng
man
agem
ent u
nit a
nd
acco
unta
bilit
y st
ruct
ures
are
in p
lace
, co
ordi
natin
g w
ith
scho
ol le
vel s
truct
ures
A s
peci
fic s
choo
l fee
ding
un
it do
es n
ot y
et e
xist
at
the
natio
nal l
evel
; co
ordi
natio
n be
twee
n th
e na
tiona
l, re
gion
al/lo
cal (
if ap
plic
able
), an
d sc
hool
s is
lack
ing
A s
choo
l fee
ding
uni
t ex
ists
at t
he n
atio
nal
leve
l, bu
t it h
as li
mite
d re
sour
ces
and
limite
d st
aff n
umbe
rs a
nd la
cks
a cl
ear m
anda
te; w
hile
co
ordi
natio
nm
echa
nism
s be
twee
n th
e na
tiona
l, re
gion
al/lo
cal (
if ap
plic
able
), an
d sc
hool
le
vel a
re in
pla
ce, t
hey
are
not f
ully
func
tioni
ng
A fu
lly s
taffe
d sc
hool
fe
edin
g un
it w
ith a
cle
ar
man
date
exi
sts
at th
e na
tiona
l lev
el, b
ased
on
an a
sses
smen
t of s
taffi
ng
and
reso
urce
s ne
eds;
co
ordi
natio
n m
echa
nism
s be
twee
n th
e na
tiona
l, re
gion
al/lo
cal (
if ap
plic
able
), an
d sc
hool
le
vel a
re in
pla
ce a
nd
func
tioni
ng in
mos
t in
stan
ces
A fu
lly s
taffe
d sc
hool
fe
edin
g un
it ex
ists
at t
he
natio
nal l
evel
, bas
ed o
n an
as
sess
men
t of s
taffi
ng a
nd
reso
urce
s ne
eds,
with
a
clea
r man
date
, and
pre
- an
din
-ser
vice
trai
ning
; co
ordi
natio
n m
echa
nism
s be
twee
n th
e na
tiona
l, re
gion
al/lo
cal (
if ap
plic
able
),an
d sc
hool
leve
l are
in
plac
ean
d fu
lly fu
nctio
ning
Sch
ool l
evel
m
anag
emen
t and
ac
coun
tabi
lity
stru
ctur
es a
re in
pla
ce
Mec
hani
sms
for
man
agin
g sc
hool
feed
ing
at th
e sc
hool
leve
l are
no
n-un
iform
and
nat
iona
l gu
idan
ce o
n th
is is
la
ckin
g
Nat
iona
l gui
danc
e on
re
quire
d m
echa
nism
s fo
r man
agin
g sc
hool
fe
edin
g ar
e av
aila
ble
at
the
scho
ol le
vel,
but
thes
e ar
e no
t yet
im
plem
ente
d fu
lly
Mos
t sch
ools
hav
e a
mec
hani
sm to
man
age
scho
ol fe
edin
g, b
ased
on
natio
nal g
uida
nce
All
scho
ols
have
a
mec
hani
sm to
man
age
scho
ol fe
edin
g, b
ased
on
natio
nal g
uida
nce,
with
pr
eand
in
-ser
vice
trai
ning
for
rele
vant
sta
ff
UGA
NDA
SCHO
OLFEED
ING
SABE
RCO
UNTR
YRE
PORT
|201
4
SYSTEM
SAP
PROAC
HFO
RBE
TTER
EDUCA
TIONRE
SULTS
17
Polic
y G
oal 4
: Des
ign
and
Impl
emen
tatio
n
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
e of
pr
ogra
mm
ing
and
targ
etin
g,
mod
aliti
es, a
nd
proc
urem
ent d
esig
n,
ensu
ring
desi
gn th
at
is b
oth
need
s-ba
sed
and
cost
-effe
ctiv
e
A fu
nctio
nal m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatio
n (M
&E
) sy
stem
is in
pla
ce a
s pa
rt of
the
stru
ctur
e of
th
e le
ad in
stitu
tion
and
used
for
impl
emen
tatio
n an
d fe
edba
ck
The
impo
rtanc
e of
M&
E is
re
cogn
ised
, but
go
vern
men
t sys
tem
s ar
e no
t yet
in p
lace
for M
&E
of
sch
ool f
eedi
ng
impl
emen
tatio
n
A g
over
nmen
t M&
E p
lan
exis
ts fo
r sch
ool f
eedi
ng
with
inte
rmitt
ent d
ata
colle
ctio
n an
d re
porti
ng
occu
rrin
g es
peci
ally
at
the
natio
nal l
evel
The
M&
E p
lan
for s
choo
l fe
edin
g is
inte
grat
ed in
to
natio
nal m
onito
ring
or
info
rmat
ion
man
agem
ent
syst
ems
and
data
co
llect
ion
and
repo
rting
oc
curs
recu
rren
tly a
t na
tiona
l and
regi
onal
le
vels
The
M&
E p
lan
for s
choo
l fe
edin
g is
inte
grat
ed in
to
natio
nal m
onito
ring
or
info
rmat
ion
man
agem
ent
syst
ems
and
data
col
lect
ion
and
repo
rting
occ
urs
recu
rren
tly a
t nat
iona
l, re
gion
al a
nd s
choo
l lev
els;
an
alys
ed in
form
atio
n is
sh
ared
and
use
d to
refin
e an
d up
date
pro
gram
s;
base
line
is c
arrie
d ou
t and
pr
ogra
m e
valu
atio
ns o
ccur
pe
riodi
cally
ESTABLISHED
Pro
gram
des
ign
iden
tifie
s ap
prop
riate
ta
rget
gro
ups
and
targ
etin
g cr
iteria
co
rres
pond
ing
to th
e na
tiona
l sch
ool f
eedi
ng
polic
y an
d th
e si
tuat
ion
anal
ysis
The
need
for t
arge
ting
is
reco
gnis
ed, b
ut a
si
tuat
ion
anal
ysis
has
not
ye
t bee
n un
derta
ken
that
as
sess
es s
choo
l fee
ding
ne
eds
and
neith
er
targ
etin
g cr
iteria
nor
a
targ
etin
g m
etho
dolo
gy
has
been
est
ablis
hed
as
yet
Targ
etin
g cr
iteria
and
a
targ
etin
g m
etho
dolo
gy is
be
ing
deve
lope
d co
rres
pond
ing
to th
e na
tiona
l sch
ool f
eedi
ng
polic
y; a
situ
atio
n an
alys
is a
sses
sing
ne
eds
is in
com
plet
e as
ye
t
Targ
etin
g cr
iteria
and
a
targ
etin
g m
etho
dolo
gy
exis
ts a
nd is
impl
emen
ted
corr
espo
ndin
g to
the
natio
nal s
choo
l fee
ding
po
licy
and
a si
tuat
ion
anal
ysis
ass
essi
ng n
eeds
Targ
etin
g cr
iteria
and
a
targ
etin
g m
etho
dolo
gy
exis
ts a
nd is
impl
emen
ted
corr
espo
ndin
g to
the
natio
nal s
choo
l fee
ding
po
licy
and
situ
atio
n an
alys
is
(incl
udin
g co
stin
gs fo
r va
rious
targ
etin
g an
d de
sign
s); M
&E
info
rmat
ion
is u
sed
to re
fine
and
upda
teta
rget
ing
and
cove
rage
on
a perio
dic
basi
s
Food
mod
aliti
es a
nd
the
food
bas
ket
corr
espo
nd to
the
obje
ctiv
es, l
ocal
hab
its
and
tast
es, a
vaila
bilit
y of
loca
l foo
d, fo
od
safe
ty (a
ccor
ding
to
WH
O g
uide
lines
), an
d nu
tritio
n co
nten
t re
quire
men
ts
Ther
e is
reco
gniti
on o
f the
ne
ed fo
r nat
iona
l st
anda
rds
for f
ood
mod
aliti
es a
nd th
e fo
od
bask
et, b
ut th
ese
do n
ot
exis
t yet
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds o
n fo
od m
odal
ities
and
the
food
bas
ket h
ave
been
de
velo
ped
and
corr
espo
nd to
two
or
mor
e of
the
follo
win
g:
obje
ctiv
es, l
ocal
hab
its
and
tast
es, a
vaila
bilit
y of
lo
cal f
ood,
food
saf
ety
(acc
ordi
ng to
WH
O
guid
elin
es),
and
nutri
tion
cont
ent r
equi
rem
ents
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds o
n fo
od m
odal
ities
and
the
food
bas
ket h
ave
been
de
velo
ped
and
corr
espo
nd
to o
bjec
tives
, loc
al h
abits
an
d ta
stes
, ava
ilabi
lity
of
loca
l foo
d, fo
od s
afet
y (a
ccor
ding
to W
HO
gu
idel
ines
), an
d nu
tritio
n co
nten
t req
uire
men
ts
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds o
n fo
odm
odal
ities
and
the
food
ba
sket
hav
e be
en
deve
lope
d an
d co
rres
pond
to
obj
ectiv
es, l
ocal
hab
its
and
tast
es, a
vaila
bilit
y of
lo
cal f
ood,
food
saf
ety
(acc
ordi
ng to
WH
O
guid
elin
es),
and
nutri
tion
cont
ent r
equi
rem
ents
; M&
Ein
form
atio
n is
use
d to
refin
ean
d up
date
food
mod
aliti
esan
d fo
od b
aske
t on
a pe
riodi
c ba
sis
UGA
NDA
SCHO
OLFEED
ING
SABE
RCO
UNTR
YRE
PORT
|201
4
SYSTEM
SAP
PROAC
HFO
RBE
TTER
EDUCA
TIONRE
SULTS
18
Pro
cure
men
t and
lo
gist
ics
arra
ngem
ents
ar
e ba
sed
on p
rocu
ring
as lo
cally
as
poss
ible
, ta
king
into
acc
ount
the
cost
s, th
e ca
paci
ties
of
impl
emen
ting
parti
es,
the
prod
uctio
n ca
paci
ty
in th
e co
untry
, the
qu
ality
of t
he fo
od, a
nd
the
stab
ility
of t
he
pipe
line
Ther
e is
reco
gniti
on o
f the
ne
ed fo
r nat
iona
l st
anda
rds
for
proc
urem
ent a
nd lo
gist
ics
arra
ngem
ents
, but
thes
e do
not
exi
st y
et
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds o
n pr
ocur
emen
t and
lo
gist
ics
arra
ngem
ents
ha
ve b
een
deve
lope
d an
d ar
e ba
sed
on th
ree
or m
ore
of th
e fo
llow
ing:
pr
ocur
ing
as lo
cally
as
poss
ible
, tak
ing
into
ac
coun
t the
cos
ts, t
he
capa
citie
s of
im
plem
entin
g pa
rties
, th
e pr
oduc
tion
capa
city
in
the
coun
try, t
he
qual
ity o
f the
food
, and
th
e st
abili
ty o
f the
pi
pelin
e
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds o
n pr
ocur
emen
t and
logi
stic
s ar
rang
emen
ts h
ave
been
de
velo
ped
and
are
base
d on
pro
curin
g as
loca
lly a
s po
ssib
le, t
akin
g in
to
acco
unt t
he c
osts
, the
ca
paci
ties
of im
plem
entin
g pa
rties
, the
pro
duct
ion
capa
city
in th
e co
untry
, th
e qu
ality
of t
he fo
od, a
nd
the
stab
ility
of t
he p
ipel
ine
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds o
n pr
ocur
emen
t and
logi
stic
s ar
rang
emen
ts h
ave
been
de
velo
ped
and
are
base
d on pr
ocur
ing
as lo
cally
as
poss
ible
, tak
ing
into
ac
coun
tth
e co
sts,
the
capa
citie
s of
im
plem
entin
g pa
rties
, the
pr
oduc
tion
capa
city
in th
e co
untry
, the
qua
lity
of th
e fo
od, a
nd th
e st
abili
ty o
f the
pipe
line;
M&
E in
form
atio
n is
us
ed to
refin
e an
d up
date
pr
ocur
emen
t and
logi
stic
s ar
rang
emen
ts
Polic
y G
oal 5
: Com
mun
ity ro
les-
-rea
chin
g be
yond
sch
ools
Com
mun
ity
parti
cipa
tion
and
acco
unta
bilit
y -
stro
ng c
omm
unity
pa
rtici
patio
n an
d ow
ners
hip
(teac
hers
, par
ents
, ch
ildre
n)
Com
mun
ity p
artic
ipat
es
in s
choo
l fee
ding
pr
ogra
m d
esig
n,
impl
emen
tatio
n,m
anag
emen
t and
ev
alua
tion
and
cont
ribut
es re
sour
ces
(in-k
ind,
cas
h or
as
labo
r)
Sys
tem
s an
d ac
coun
tabi
lity
mec
hani
sms
are
not y
et
in p
lace
for c
onsu
ltatio
n w
ith p
aren
ts a
nd
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs o
n th
e de
sign
, mon
itorin
g an
d fe
edba
ck o
f the
sc
hool
feed
ing
prog
ram
A s
choo
l fee
ding
m
anag
emen
t com
mitt
ee
exis
ts b
ut p
aren
t and
co
mm
unity
mem
ber
parti
cipa
tion
coul
d be
st
reng
then
ed a
nd
awar
enes
s on
the
oppo
rtuni
ty to
mon
itor
and
feed
back
on
the
scho
ol fe
edin
g pr
ogra
m is
la
ckin
g
The
scho
ol fe
edin
g m
anag
emen
t com
mitt
ee
com
pris
es
repr
esen
tativ
es o
f te
ache
rs, p
aren
ts, a
nd
com
mun
ity m
embe
rs a
nd
com
mun
ities
hav
e ac
coun
tabi
lity
mec
hani
sms
to h
old
scho
ol fe
edin
g pr
ogra
ms
acco
unta
ble
at th
e sc
hool
le
vel
The
scho
ol fe
edin
g m
anag
emen
t com
mitt
ee
com
pris
es re
pres
enta
tives
of
teac
hers
, par
ents
, and
co
mm
unity
mem
bers
and
ha
s cl
early
def
ined
re
spon
sibi
litie
s an
d pe
riodi
ctra
inin
g. A
ccou
ntab
ility
m
echa
nism
s ar
e in
pla
ce
by
whi
ch c
omm
uniti
es c
an
hold
scho
ol fe
edin
g pr
ogra
ms
acco
unta
ble
at th
e sc
hool
, re
gion
al, a
nd n
atio
nal
leve
ls
EMERGING
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 19
AcknowledgementsThis SABER—School Feeding Report was prepared froma SABER—School Feeding questionnaire completed bystaff of the Ministry of Education and Sports and theMinistry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries.
We thank all the Ugandan participants at the 4th annualmeeting of the Eastern and Southern African Network ofEducation Sector School Health, Nutrition and HIV focalpoints, that took place in Kampala, Uganda, fromDecember 6 8, 2011; and particularly, Dr. Daniel Nkaada,Commissioner of Basic Education, Ministry of Educationand Sports; Ms. Santa Ojok, Principal Education Officer,School Health and Nutrition, Ministry of Education andSports; Ms. Nancy Adero, Nutritionist, National PlanningAuthority; Susan Oketcho, Focal Point Person, SchoolHealth, Nutrition, and HIV, Ministry of Education andSports; Ms. Harriet Mary Ajilong, Ministry of Educationand Sports; and John B. Z. Adonga, Finance and LiaisonOfficer, Ministry of Education and Sports.
We also thank Fahma Nur and Amina Denboba for datacollection during the meeting, Paula Trepman andAngela Ha (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) fortheir significant contributions to the data analysis andreporting. We thank the many people that have servedas reviewers including Donald Bundy, Andy Tembon,Innocent Mulindwa, Michelle Louie, and Janet Holt(World Bank); Carmen Burbano (World FoodProgramme); and Lesley Drake and Kristie Watkins(Partnership for Child Development).
Finally, we thank the Ministers of Education and Sportsof Uganda for allowing the Ministry staff members toattend the focal points’ meeting in Kampala, and to themany others who contributed in one way or the other tothe production of this report.
Acronyms
EFA Education for AllGDP Gross Domestic ProductHGSFP Home Grown School Feeding ProgramM&E Monitoring and EvaluationNAP National Action PlanPPP Purchasing Power ParityPRSP Poverty Reduction Strategic PlanSABER Systems Approach for Better Education ResultsUBOS Uganda Bureau of Statistics
UNAP Uganda Nutrition Action Plan, 2012 2017(UN)FAO (United Nations) Food and Agricultural OrganizationUNPS Uganda National Population SurveySHN School Health and NutritionSSA Sub Saharan AfricaUPE Universal Primary EducationWFP World Food Programme
ReferencesAdelman, S., H. Alderman, D. O. Gilligan, and K. Lehrer. 2008.
“The Impact of Alternative Food for Education Programson Learning Achievement and Cognitive Development inNorthern Uganda.” IFPRI, Washington, DC.
Ahmed, A. U. 2004. “Impact of Feeding Children in School:Evidence from Bangladesh.” International Food PolicyResearch Institute, Washington, DC.
Ariong, Steven. 2013. “Karamoja schools to miss lunch afterWFP pulls out”. Daily Monitor. Accessed fromhttp://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Karamojaschools to miss lunch after WFP pulls out//688334/1685898/ /1415qc/ /index.html.
Bundy, D. A. P., Burbano, C., Grosh, M., Gelli, A., Jukes, M., andDrake, L. 2009. “Rethinking School Feeding: Social SafetyNets, Child Development, and the Education Sector.”World Food Programme and World Bank, Washington,DC.
Education (Pre Primary, Primary, and Post Primary) Act.FAO. 2007. Evaluation Report of the WFP Uganda Country
Program.Gelli, A., and F. Espejo. 2013. “School feeding, moving from
practice to policy: reflections on building sustainablemonitoring and evaluation systems”. Public healthnutrition 16 (6); 995 9.
Gelli, A., U. Meir, and F. Espejo. 2007. “Does Provision of Foodin School Increase Girls’ Enrollment? Evidence fromSchools in Sub Saharan Africa.” Food and NutritionBulletin. 28 (2): 149 55.
Government of Uganda. 2013. “National Orphans and OtherVulnerable Children Policy”. Accessed fromhttp://www.mglsd.go.ug/wpcontent/uploads/2013/07/policies/National%20OVC%20Policy.pdf.
Government of Uganda. 2010. “Health Sector StrategicPlan III”. Accessed from
http://www.health.go.ug/docs/HSSP_III_2010.pdf.Government of Uganda. Ministry of Education & Sports. 2010.
Evaluation Report on the Karamoja School FeedingProject.
Government of Uganda. Ministry of Education & Sports. 2004.Homegrown School Feeding Program.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 20
Government of Uganda. Uganda Bureau of Statistics. 2010.Statistical Abstract.
Government of Uganda. Uganda Development Plan.Government of Uganda. “Uganda Nutrition Action Plan 2011
2016”. Accessed fromhttp://www.unicef.org/uganda/Nutrition_Plan_2011.pdf.
Jacoby, E., S. Cueto, and E. Pollitt. 1996. “Benefits of a SchoolBreakfast Programme among Andean Children in Huaraz,Peru.” Food and Nutrition Bulletin 17 (1): 54 64.
Jukes, M. C. H., L. J. Drake, and D. A. P. Bundy. 2008. “SchoolHealth, Nutrition and Education for All: Levelling thePlaying Field.” CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.
Kristjansson, E., V. Robinson, M. Petticrew, B. MacDonald, J.Krasevec, L. Janzen, T. Greenhalgh, G. Wells, J.MacGowan, A. Farmer, B. J. Shea, A. Mayhew, and P.Tugwell. 2007. “School Feeding for Improving thePhysical and Psychosocial Health of DisadvantagedElementary School Children.” Cochrane Database ofSystematic Reviews 1.
Najjumba, Innocent Mulindwa, Charles Lwanga Bunjo, DavidKyaddondo, and Cyprian Misinde. 2013. ImprovingLearning in Uganda Vol. 1: Community Led SchoolFeeding Practices. Washington, DC: World Bank.doi:10.1596/978 0 8213 9743 5 License: CreativeCommons Attribution CC BY 3.0
PCD (The Partnership for Child Development). 2012.“Schoolsand Health: FRESH Homepage” PCD, London.http://www.freshschools.org/Pages/HealthRelatedSchoolPolicies.aspx.
Politt, E., S. Cueto, and E. R. Jacoby. 1998. “Fasting andCognition in Well and Under nourished Schoolchildren:A Review of Three Experimental Studies.” AmericanJournal of Clinical Nutrition 67 (4): 779s 784s.
Powell, C. A., S. P. Walker, S. M. Chang, and S. M. GranthamMcGregor. 1998. “Nutrition and Education: ARandomized Trial of the Effects of Breakfast in RuralPrimary School Children.” American Journal of ClinicalNutrition 68: 873 9.
UBOS. 2002. UDHS. Kampala: UBOS
Scaling Up Nutrition. 2012. “Uganda: SUN Country SummarySeptember 2010”. Accessed fromhttp://scalingupnutrition.org/wpcontent/uploads/2012/10/FINAL UGANDASUMMARY.pdf.
Simeon, D. T., and S. M. GranthamMcGregor. 1989. “Effects ofMissing Breakfast on the Cognitive Functions of SchoolChildren of Differing Nutritional Status.” AmericanJournal of Clinical Nutrition 49 (4): 646 53.
Simeon, D. T. 1998. “School Feeding in Jamaica: A Review of itsEvaluation.” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 67(4):790s 794s.
Tan, J. P., J. Lane, and G. Lassibille. 1999. “Student Outcomesin Philippine Elementary Schools: An Evaluation of FourExperiments.”World Bank Economic Review 13 (3): 493502.
Whaley, S. E., M. Sigman, C. Neumann, N. Bwibo, D. Guthrie, R.E. Weiss, S. Alber, and S. P. Murphy. 2003. “The Impact ofDietary Intervention on the Cognitive Development ofKenyan School Children.” Journal of Nutrition 133 (11):3965S 71S.
World Bank. 2014a. World Development Indicators 1990 2013[statistics]. “Uganda”. Available from the World BankWorld Development Indicators database.
World Bank. 2014b. Education Indicators 1990 2013[statistics]. “Uganda”. Available fromWorld Bank EdStatsdatabase.
World Bank, 2011. Strengthening school based managementin Uganda. Analysis of training programs and inspectionreports for emerging issues. Inception report. Submittedby Asiimwe John Bosco, March 2011.
World Health Organization (WHO). 2003. “Skills for Health,Skills Based Health Education Including Life Skills: AnImportant Component of a Child Friendly/HealthPromoting School.” Information Series on School Health.WHO, Geneva.
World Food Programme (WFP). 2013. ‘’WFP Revised SchoolFeeding Policy’’. World Food Programme, Rome.
World Food Programme (WFP). 2012. “Global School FeedingSurvey”. World Food Programme, Rome.
UGANDA SCHOOL FEEDING SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014
SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 2
The Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER) initiativeproduces comparative data and knowledge on education policies andinstitutions, with the aim of helping countries systematically strengthentheir education systems. SABER evaluates the quality of educationpolicies against evidence based global standards, using new diagnostictools and detailed policy data. The SABER country reports give all partieswith a stake in educational results—from administrators, teachers, andparents to policymakers and business people—an accessible, objectivesnapshot showing how well the policies of their country's educationsystem are oriented toward ensuring that all children and youth learn.
This report focuses specifically on policies in the area of School Feeding.
This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressedin this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent.The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and otherinformation shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of anyterritory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
www.worldbank.org/education/saber