· web viewprojektet har til formål at afrunde samarbejdet mellem lev og uppid, der blev...

The Danish Disability Fund

Application form: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT & DISABILITY MAINSTREAMING PROJECTS WITH EXTERNAL ACTORS (500.000 – 5 m. DKK.)

September 2013

This form must be used when applying for funding for Large Scale Development projects and Disability Mainstreaming Projects with external actors. The form is divided into four parts:

Part 1. Cover page Basic information regarding applicant, partners, title, and the amount applied for, etc.

Part 2. Application text The description of the development project. Each section provides an instruction (shaded grey) on what the section should contain. The application text in Part 2 must not exceed 20 pages. Applications exceeding 20 pages will be rejected.

Part 3. Budget summary

The main budget items. Please, note that the budget summary must be elaborated upon in the annex D2 ‘Budget format’.

Part 4. Annexes A list of the obligatory and supplementary annexes that support the application (reviews and evaluations of previous project phases must for example be enclosed).

Please, note: The project (and the project application) must be developed in collaboration between the pro-ject-implementing local partner organization and the Danish member organization. Consequently, a project document must be available in a language commanded by the local partner. The application, however, can only be submitted in Danish or English.

THE DANISH DISABILITY FUND – Large scale development projects & mainstreaming projects (500.000 – 5 m. DKK.)

The signed application form (including annexes) must be submitted in print to:

Danske Handicaporganisationer Afdeling for Internationalt Samarbejde Blekinge Boulevard 2 2630 Taastrup

In addition, the application form and Annexes must be sent electronically to: [email protected]

0

mailto:[email protected]


1. Cover pageLARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT & DISABILITY MAINSTREAMING PROJECTS WITH EXTERNAL ACTORS(500.000 – 5 m. DKK.)

Applied for (please tick):Large scale development project XDisability mainstreaming project

Project title: “Safari Bado- The Journey continues”.

Applicant Danish member organisa-tion (financial responsible)

Landsforeningen LEV

Other Danish partner(s), if any: N/A

Local partner organisation(s): Uganda Parents of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities (UPPID)

Country (-ies): Uganda Country’s GNI per capita:US $510 (World Bank, 2011)

Project commencement date:1st January 2014

Project completion date:30th June 2015

Total number of months: 18

Contact person for the project:Name: Lisbeth Rasmussen, Email address: [email protected], Telephone no.: 40303427Amount requested from the Disability Fund: 2.249.851 DKK

Annual project cost: 1.124.975 DKK(Total amount requested divided by number of project years)

Is this a re-submission? (i.e. a revised application, which has previously been submitted)[ X ] No[ ] Yes, previous date of application:Is this a:[ X ] A new project? (It is new, smaller, more focused and with a very clear cut Exit strategy)[ X ] A project in extension of another project previously supported by DH, CISU, Danida or others? (It draws on lessons learnt and continues what has been initiated by the JOMBOLA and the Self Advocacy In Action project).In which language should the response letter from the Danish Disability Fund be written (choose one):[ ] Danish[ X ] EnglishSynthesisProjektet har til formål at afrunde samarbejdet mellem LEV og UPPID, der blev indledt i 1998. Det er målet at sikre organisatorisk og finansiel bæredygtighed i UPPID – og dermed organisationens fortsatte arbejde for fuld inklusion af mennesker med udviklingshæmning i overensstemmelse med FNs konvention for mennesker med handicap. Der arbejdes med 3 delmål i projektet, som skal sikre dette: 1: Øget inklusion af mennesker med udviklingshæmning i UPPIDs ledelse, i fortalervirksomhedsaktiviteter samt i statslige tilbud/services, især uddannelse og fattigdomsorienterede programmer. 2: Øget national synlighed ifm fortalervirksomhed samt mere målrettet og strategisk fundraising 3: Øget demokrati og proaktiv ledelse i organisationen. Målene tager afsæt i UPPIDs strategiske plan (2013-2017) og projektet er tilrettelagt pba Exit strategi udarbejdet af ekstern konsulent, i forbindelse med teknisk review af LEV/UPPID samarbejdet, oktober 2013.

Date Person responsible (signature)

Place Person responsible and position (block letters)

THE DANISH DISABILITY FUND – Large scale development projects & mainstreaming projects (500.000 – 5 m. DKK.)

J.no. (to be completed by DPOD)HP

1

mailto:[email protected]


A. THE PARTNERS (indicative length 3 pages)A.1 THE DANISH MEMBER ORGANIZATION: The national organisation LEV was founded in 1952 by parents to persons with intellectual disabilities (PWIDs).The organisation is an umbrella organisation comprising more than 16,000 members, organised in 67 local groups as well as 17 smaller organisations working for the rights of specific groups of PWIDs, e.g. persons with Down Syndrome. The structure reflects the fact that intellectual disability covers a broad range of cognit-ive deficiencies, all affecting personal development to a varying degree.

LEVs mission is to advocate and lobby for improvement of the life conditions of PWIDs and their families, and the vision being full inclusion in all areas of life, in accordance with UNCRPD. LEV pursues thisas a representative in a number of official committees at local, regional and national level in Denmark and as member of the umbrella Disabled People´s organisation –Denmark (DPOD).

The organisation is governed by a National Executive Committee (NEC) (5 members) elected to-gether with the National Board (27 members) at the National General Assembly. All serve for a four years term. At the NEC one member in particular is responsible for LEVs engagement in develop-ment work. Day to day management of activities is taken care of by a national secretariat with a staff of 27 persons including 3 PWIDs.

Since 1984, LEV has been engaged in development work, supporting organisations of PWIDs and their families across Africa and Asia. In line with most other DPOs the approach has since start de-veloped and a focus on OD combined with income generation and some service provision – based on a medical perspective - been substituted by a more Rights based approach (RBA) including a more social perspective on development. Parents and relatives to PWIDs have always been in focus (to-gether with PWIDs of course) and through some service and a lot of capacity building it has been attempted to strengthen primarily their voice as advocates on behalf of PWIDs. Recently, the focus on PWIDs as self-advocates has gained higher priority. LEV and partners have realised the importance of placing right holders at the centre to let those who can voice own concerns (about 1/3 of all PWIDs). This is reflected in LEVs current project support to e.g. the Down Syndrome Association in South Africa, which addresses empowerment of self-advocates and strengthening of the Self Advocacy Movement of South Africa (SAMBA). This project develops and builds on experiences from the South Africa project. Generally, LEV has promoted establishment and strengthening of umbrella-like organisations of Parents and PWIDs based on Parents Self Help groups (PPSHG). It has been of high priority to gather all key stakeholders from the beginning to avoid conflicts. Activities have included training and support to PWIDs and PPSHGs, participation in advocacy activities of the national disab-ility movement and capacity building of staff and leaders. Throughout LEV has intended to develop self-sustained organisations, even if it at times has proved to be more challenging than expected.

LEVs core competencies in relation to development work in general and this project in particular in-clude vast experience with organising groups of parents; fora where parents and relatives can support each other in relation to living with PWIDs (socio-psycho support) and together develop a strong democratic organisation of advocates. Besides, LEV holds immense experience with Self advocacy, being one of the organisations that have pioneered the approach. Also, extensive skills within ad-vocacy and lobbying and solid experience with democratic organisational practice are important. Management of LEVs development work is the responsibility of a Programme Manager supported by the financial department and local consultants, when relevant. All are experienced within the field.

THE DANISH DISABILITY FUND – Large scale development projects & mainstreaming projects (500.000 – 5 m. DKK.) 2


A.2 OTHER DANISH PARTNERS: N/AA.3 THE LOCAL PARTNER ORGANIZATION: UPPID, formerly UPACLED (till May 2013), was founded and registered as a NGO on 3rd October 1998 to represent children with intel-lectual disabilities and advocate for their rights. Its mission is “to support and advocate for inclu-sion of PWIDs and their families to attain improved standards of living”. The organisation comprises about 10,000 members, organized in local Parents Self-help groups (PSHGs) and District Executive Committees (DECs) in 39 districts (of altogether 112 districts ) Self Advocacy Groups (SAG) have been established in 6 districts. Besides a few smaller organizations advocating for rights of specific intellectual disabilities e.g. Down Syndrome are members. The umbrella like structure is due to the fact that intellectual disability covers a wide range of cognitive deficits affect-ing personal development differently.

Governance of the organization is currently taken care of by board of 11 members, elected by gen-eral assembly for a period of 5 years. (5 members of the current board will resign and be substituted by new members at the coming Assembly (Jan/Feb 2014), as they have served the organization for several terms. The board has 5 subcommittees focusing on advocacy, fundraising etc. At district level the PSHGs and SAG are governed by District Executive Committees elected by local mem-bers every 3 year. Each district sends 2 representatives to the AGM. (see Annex C)

Day to day management is taken care of by a small secretariat currently placed outside the capital -supported by 3 regional staff placed at small premises at regional capitals closer to members. All have worked with UPPID for several years and holds considerable capacity regarding knowledge of intellectual disability. At district level UPPID makes use of well qualified volunteers, typically re-cruited among teachers and social workers, altogether more than 1000. The volunteers support ac-tivities for PWIDs (and their parents). From 2014 it is planned to move the national secretariat to the capital, where free space has been offered by Action for Disability in Development (ADD). Be-sides, the total staff will be reduced and a short term Consultant with a strong fundraising profile/fu-ture Director hired to ensure gradual retirement of the current ED (cf. annex Q) This is part of the Exit strategy prepared recently; a recommendation provided by the Consultant (cf. annex I).

UPPIDs core activities include mobilization and training of parents to PWIDs and PWIDs, coaching of PSHGs and SAG, sensitization, awareness raising, lobbying and advocacy. Over the years UP-PID has also collaborated with key ministries and jointly with NUDIPU and other DPO’s managed to influence important policies and reports, e.g. Disability Act 2006 and the UNCRPD “Shadow Report). Both at national and local level UPPID works as an independent organization as well as together with allies in relevant networks.

A main ally is the national disability umbrella NUDIPU. Since inception UPPID has followed NUDIPU closely and in 2008 managed to obtain formal membership. Till today representation at the board has been shared with Mental Health Uganda (MHU) and Epilepsy Support Association (ESAU), but from 2014 UPPID will have a seat on its own. Also collaboration with NUWODU, the umbrella for WWDs (and a member of NUDIPU), is important.

A.4 THE COOPERATIVE RELATIONSHIP AND ITS PROSPECTS: The co-operation is known by DPOD and the Grant Committee. However, a few additional remarks based on recent review needs to be added. The HP no. is 141- 030



Formal collaboration between LEV and UPPID (formerly UPACLED until May 2013) dates back to 1998 (see Annex F). Considering this, it is fair to say that LEV has contributed to UPPID’s grad-ual growth and recognition as the national voice of PWIDs by authorities and the disability um-brella NUDIPU (cf. review report, Annex H).

According to the Review report essential common experiences and results achieved include: Wide coverage at district level: UPPID today operates in 39 districts where District Executive Com-mittees (DECs) have been elected. Most of these now have self-help advocates represented. Within each district, 25 Parents self-help groups (PSHG) have been formed and the majority is still active. About 10,000 members have filled out registration forms although the number of active members paying fees is lower (see Annex J for further details on selected districts).

Successful self- help tool provided to Parents to PWIDs: A self-help kit for involvement and organi-zation of parents to PWIDs in PSHGs at community level has been prepared and already contrib-uted to some results and outcome, e.g better understanding of PWIDs by parents and communities.

Successful advocacy at district level: 21 DECs have managed to get office space (in most cases free) from the government. Besides, several of the 39 districts have gained access to one or more of the governmental programs, e.g. the National Agricultural Advisory Service (NAADs).

Presence at regional level: UPPIDs strategy of establishing regional offices has been successful and brought the organization closer to its membership. All regional offices have premises made avail-able by district authorities so only limited support to running costs has been contributed by UPPID.

Full membership of the disability movement: UPPID has since 2008 been part of the national um-brella NUDIPU and is taken into account in it´s advocacy work. From 2008 till today one seat of the board has been shared with MHU and ESAU, but onwards UPPID will hold an own seat.

These important steps towards visibility and recognition of the rights of PWIDs and their families by society at large - and the disability movement of Uganda in particular are vital and have together with lessons learnt (e.g. the need for aggressive fundraising) informed focus of this project. The project attempts to make full use of what has worked well and been achieved already, e.g. advocacy at district level, full recognition by NUDIPU and establishment of Self Advocacy groups.

Given that UPPID manages to sustain organisational and financial capacity as expected, further sharing of the good practices with like-minded organisations in the region could be considered in the future, e.g. in relation to final evaluation. Collaboration between UPPID and LEV will no doubt continue, but under no circumstances in a similar way as over the past 15 years.

B. PROJECT ANALYSIS (indicative length 7 pages)B.1 PREPARATION: May 2013, The LEV/UPPID proposal “Empowerment Through Partner-ship” (HP 141-011) was disapproved by the Grant Committee of the Disability Fund. Remarks ad-ded recommended that LEV/UPPID could further explore design and implementation of a possible exit strategy with the help of an external review. This should include a look at the LEV and UPPID collaboration (1998-2013). UPPID/LEV followed the advice and has carried out the review, Oct.13.



The Review report (Annex H) states as its no 1 Recommendation that UPPID and LEV should “…immediately initiate preparation for a final project based on UPPID’s strategic plan, including the exit strategy .. “ (p. 21). Based on this – and the rest of the report, this proposal has been prepared. As such the project is neither a re-submission of the disapproved proposal (as it is different, smaller and shorter) nor an extension of a previous project in the strict understanding of the word. It is first and foremost an attempt to exit the 1:1 partnership between LEV and UPPID in a gradual and re-sponsible way with strong focus on how UPPID can be sustained organisationally and financially – and investments of Danida support used well. In response to the remarks of the Grant Committee, it has been decided to make extensive use of learning in the project, align budget and logframe closer and strictly follow what the external consultant has recommended regarding design, duration and volume of a possible exit project after having assessed the capacity of UPPID.

Both UPPID and LEV have realised that the review was valuable and appreciate the recommenda-tion from the Grant Committee and the work delivered by the Consultant. With this input it has been easier to grasp the actual core of main challenges, their nature and what needs to be under-taken in order to overcome them. It has been made clear to all that governance is crucial and stra-tegic and pro-active planning and action in all areas a key to success. The challenges in this relation are however not a legitimacy issue as previously stated (and questioned in the feedback to the disap-proved proposal), but rather a question of democratic participation and unfulfilled needs of poor members in need of service vs. the fact that UPPIDs main mission is to advocate for rights. In order to do so it has been made clear that strong allies, aggressive fundraising and evidence based writing is a must. Without the chance of getting noticed as a credible agent by authorities and donors is lim-ited.

As part of the review UPPID and LEV met, including all levels of UPPID (PSHG representatives, selected volunteers, Self-advocates, staff, DECs and the national board of UPPID) (LEV was rep-resented by the PM during the first part of the review). As a matter of fact no project was prepared in this connection, but during the review activities, the Consultant touched upon important issues, and opportunities and challenges in relation to sustainability were widely discussed. This means reflection had already been initiated by all involved as it was concluded that an exit project could be recommended. As such the review has been a very important part of the project preparation and the report a crucial guide to preparations. However, it should be noted that objectives of the project are NOT newly set goals by an external consultant (or LEV), but objectives based on UPPIDs own strategy developed with a participatory approach some time ago. All are in agreement that this is the best way to ensure ownership and success. In proposal writing UPPID has taken the lead while LEV has played a co-ordinating and advisory role. Following the review, UPPID and LEV have had the opportunity to discuss the proposal once more in connection with training of Self– advocates. This has made it possible to refine log frame, budget, implementation plan and different other annexes. A lot of issues have been discussed and attempts made to make the implementation plan very efficient.

National and local authorities of Uganda rarely disapprove potential support to disadvantaged groups like PWIDs. In this case consent to implementation of a possible project was expressed by Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) as well as local district authorities of e.g. Masaka District. At a meeting with the latter, it was specifically suggested that UPPID should engage in sensitization of teachers to improve inclusion of PWIDs in primary education.

B.2 CONTEXT ANALYSIS: Uganda has about 35 million inhabitants. According to the Uganda National Household Survey 2009/2010 app. 16 % of the population aged 5 years and above



has a disability and of those 0,5 – 0,8 % are estimated to be PWIDs1-Of these approximately 1/3 can voice own concerns, when supported. It is estimated that 90 % of the population lives in rural areas and less than 2 % all children with disabilities (CWD) go to school.

Uganda has signed and ratified all major Human Rights Conventions, including the UNCRPD (2008) and reflected key principles in the 1995 Constitution, which together with the Local Govern-ment Act, 1997 provides for affirmative action2. In order to promote and monitor human rights Uganda Human Rights Commission was established in 1996. As such Uganda has been a frontrun-ner in ensuring legal rights for PWDs. Only implementation has lacked as no apparent mechanisms are in place to ensure enforcement of existing legislation3. PWIDs are in general overseen and at times excluded – probably, because they hold limited capacity to voice own concerns. The formal national framework listed below is important, but far from fully implemented: The Uganda Constitution (1995) recognizes rights of PWDs and provides for affirmative ac-

tion. The Local Government Act (1997) provides for representation of PWDs at the various local

council levels as well as decentralized governance and service delivery targeting rural poor. The Universal Primary Education Policy (UPE) (1997) provides free schooling for CWDs. The UNISE Act (1998) provides for establishment of the Uganda National Institute of Special

Education responsible for training of teachers for children with special needs, but was repealed and replaced by the Universities and Other Tertiary Institutions Act 2001

Basic Education Policy and framework for Educationally Disadvantaged Children (2002). The National Council for Disability Act (2003), ensures monitoring and evaluation of the ful-

fillment of rights of PWDs as set out in international conventions and legal instruments. The National Policy on Disability (2006) provides ahuman rights based framework for re-

sponding to the needs of persons with disabilities. The People with Disabilities Act (2006) provides for elimination of discrimination against

PWDs and for equal opportunities National Development Plan (NDP) 2011 – 2015

Disability is the overall responsibility of the Department of Disability and Elderly under the Min-istry of Gender, Labour and Social Development. They manage among other support to PWDs the Special Disability Grant (SDG), distributed at district level. Practically, the different sectors are responsible for mainstreaming of disability in all activity and local governments providing most of the actual service delivery. Implementation is monitored by The National Disability Council, estab-lished in 2003. The council is represented nationally and in most districts but functions ineffec-tively. Something, which has been amplified by the increase in number of districts over the last years.

BUDGET provision for implementation of approved legislation is limited and dependent on na-tional resources, e.g. revenues, political priorities (MGLSD is currently among the least prioritised ministries) and support from international development partners with different (shifting) thematic priorities, e.g. HIV/Aids and vulnerable children. Besides, financial management practice of the Ugandan government (cf. the Auditors General Report 2012) and local over-reliance on conditional 1 Uganda defines disability as a “permanent and substantial functional limitation of daily life activities caused by physical, mental or sensory impairment and environmental barriers resulting in limited participation … “ (cf. DPOD Country Strategy 2007-2011)2 This is reflected in a quota ensuring that PWDs are politically represented at Parliament and in political bodies at all levels.3 Recently international organisations have stated that documentation on how legislation has in fact been put into practice is difficult to obtain eg Human Rights Commission Report.



central government grants limits the actual budget available. The most important consequence is an enormous gap between needs and legalized rights on the one side- and available funding together with actual implementation on the other side. CIVIL SOCIETY at large often addresses the gap between rights and reality – and it is generally considered uncomplicated when issues picked do not threaten the ‘power’ i.e. child rights, development plans, general human rights etc. Meanwhile, there is a ‘shrinking space’ for civil society’s engagement on more contentious issues as corruption.

In disability related issues the main voice of PWDs is the umbrella body NUDIPU, the National Union of Disabled People Uganda, representing PWDs in general and persons with ID, visual im-pairment, physical disability, hearing impairment, epilepsy and mental disorders – and WWDs in particular. NUPIDPU is considered the main dialogue partner of the government and international development partners in all issues re. PWDs at both national and local level, and “The Union” con-sidered a key player far into very political issues. However, the government also engages in discus-sions with single disability organisations like UPPID re. issues pertaining to disability specific chal-lenges, e.g. formal education of PWIDs. Signing of special MOU is in such connections widely used. Besides, various networks of CSOs provide platforms for voicing issues of a thematic type related to PWDs, e.g. Uganda Child Network, Education Network and the NGO Forum.

Attempts to close the gap through special support exist, but are far from providing adequate assis-tance to disabled right holders, mainly surviving on farming. The government runs schemes and programs for vulnerable groups, e.g. NAADS, CDD, DSG, Social Protection Scheme (SPS) and The Youth Livelihood programme (cf. Annex H and I) Access to such funding, usually, requires submission of a proposal on behalf of a formally registered group (CBO) e.g. Parents Self Help Groups (PSHGs), but often it takes time to become a grant as funding is insufficient.

Partners in development, e.g. Denmark, Holland and Canada, INGOs and NGOs also contribute to elimination of the gap independently of the government and general basket funding, but with a stronger focus on human rights and capacity building of vulnerable groups in order to strengthen civil society and a RBA to development. Especially post-conflict problems of northern Uganda has been in focus over the past years, partly benefitting PWDs in some districts, e.g. Gulu district. Funding is usually distributed through own offices, NGO mechanisms and special funds. However, the competition for this funding is high. Applications must be based on evidence and demonstrate knowledge, strategic clarity and profound experience, as stated by the NUDIPU Director.

Generally, the approach among donors to development has changed over the past 10-15 years. Sup-port to service delivery has decreased and a RBA applied instead, promoting that themselves de-mand access to service, rights, justice etc. Some few big organisations like The World Vision as well as church and charity organisations l however, still provide limited support to the services not provided by the state, but requested by the poorest , e.g. livelihood. As it remains a high priority to reach the poorest and most disadvantaged, these actors often work hand in hand with organisations like UPPID, which can provide easy access to the people and support with specific knowledge.

EDUCATION is a sector that for many years has received much attention from all including sub-stantial financial support from the Danish government, to establishment of a special education unit at the Kyambogo University (formerly UNISE). However, the promising results following national approval of Universal Primary education (1997)4 have not been sustained. Very few PWIDs attend school, far less ever complete it and huge problems remain re. sufficient finances, appropriate in-4 (enrolment proved to double in a very short time)



structional materials like easy- to-read- material, qualified teachers and curricula adjusted to the special needs of the different PWIDs5. This was reported to UN as late as 2011 as part of the “Joint Submission to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) for Uganda.” In this connection the following was stated by NUDIPU (based on input from UPPID): “Curriculum design does not consider the specific needs of children who are deaf or blind, or with mental and intellectual disabilities. The government of Uganda should recruit more special needs teachers in all primary and secondary schools to provide meaningful in -centives to motivate them, and train more teachers in order to alleviate the current high pupil-to-teacher ratio. Regarding vocational training, which is often most relevant for PWIDs a similar pattern can be ob-served. 5 institutions are to take care of all training in Uganda and hardly any PWIDs are among the students.

As such the strong linkage between INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY and POVERTY is maintained – despite National Development Plan, UPE etc. According to an UN estimate more than 80 % of all PWDs live below the poverty line6 and most PWIDs of Uganda are among those. Reduced IQ, lim-ited stimulation during childhood, often unusual behavior and inadequate support from profession-als – combined with the very limited access to formal schooling and vocational training means PWIDs are generally “left behind” and marginalised if not excluded in their community and own family), having difficulties to grasp what happens, being slow at learning, holding no particular skills, having no income and contributing little in financially terms to their household. A natural consequence of this is lack of self-confidence, limited social competencies no social status of im-portance and difficulties in stating and defending even basic personal rights to e.g own body. Adding to this many PWID live in female headed households comprising a high number of children and youth and are in this way even more challenged in terms of poverty. All over the country it is widely seen that men leave a household when a child with intellectual disability is born.

This is related to the fact that The Ugandan society is male dominated. Males hold the main power, are widely respected socially, have the privilege of several wives, leave the majority of work in ru-ral areas to women including upbringing of children etc. Families, lineages, clans, ethnic groups, organisations, politics and society at large are organized around patriarchal values including a hier-archy favoring males and elderly - and surely boys before girls. This means that girls with intellec-tually disability are among the most vulnerable at all. At the same time it is widely expected that authorities are listened to and respect paid to their decisions independently of the quality. There is limited tradition for pro-active action, democratic activity and participation on equal terms. People are not familiar with demanding their rights, but rather used to adjust to ruling power.

Ugandans are predominantly Christians (more than 3/4), the minority left being mainly Muslims. Churches are well visited, pastors significant local authorities and congregations an important plat-form for voicing issues of moral/human importance like respect for PWIDs. Ethnically speaking a number of groups speaking more than 8 languages inhibit the country, but do not play a significant - known - role in connection with intellectual disabilities (please see Annex N for stakeholders).

B.3 Problem analysis The main problem that the project addresses is that Persons with Intellectual Disabilities and their families do not exercise their Rights through full participation in the develop-ment agenda, as envisaged by UPPID in their Strategic plan 2013-2017. This relates to insufficient organisational and financial capacity of UPPID; the organization is not able to sustain itself at a level and in a way allowing for powerful and full scale exercise of rights and democratic participa-

5 Previously teachers were trained in specific disabilities whereas now they need broad competences in order to include all. 6 www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=1470


http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=1470


tion. Voicing of rights tends to be partial, not sufficiently proactive and lacks strategic planning and direction. As mentioned in the review report a number of problems contribute to this serious situation calling for immediate action. First and foremost governance and democratic participation of all members of the organization appears very challenging and is reflected in a democratic deficit at national level; the board has not provided sufficient strategic direction during 2013 and left the staff of the organi-zation without proper guidance, the national advocacy insufficiently attended, documentation and learning under-prioritised, Self-advocates insufficiently included in the organisation, local parents and PWIDs in need for support AND the fundraising far down the list of very important issues to attend. This has increased related problems as limited visibility and success within national advo-cacy, insufficient and not properly prepared fundraising for core costs and lack of support to linkage of members to socio-economic support.

However, it would be fair to say that UPPID is aware of parts of the problem and has made attempts to address the issues, despite the democratic deficit at national level. Both staff and local members of the organization have proved to hold capacity to function (cf. review report p. 17) and tried to improve the situation. Only their action has been too vague, lacked full timeliness and strategic di-rection supposed to be provided by the Board. Besides, the attempts to improve upon the situation have not been based on a comprehensive understanding of the broader “development” context con-ditioning UPPID as an interest organization dependent on funding from outside; too little attention has been paid to the fact that high competition for political attention and funding demands well planned, systematic and strategic action. It should be recognized that the UPPID board has met, but not frequently enough to direct UP-PID properly. Similarly, Fundraising has been attempted and with some success (cf. review report p. 6). However, it needs to be more aggressive and based on evidence and substantial analy-sis of context. Also National advocacy has taken place, e.g. with NUDIPU in relation to education, but follow up generally delayed and strategic direction not been clear. Visibility and credibility of UPPID at the national stage is therefore limited. Locally efforts have been made to include PWIDs as self-advocates, but only recently with the help of the “Self Advocacy in Action” Project, initiated 2013. Regarding documentation and establishment of database important steps have been taken but not concluded. Much data has been collected and development of a database initiated. Besides, some attention has been paid to the poverty and acute need for socio economic support among local members, but strategic action towards inclusion in programs lacked. Altogether, this means that several issues need to be addressed in order to solve the main problem. To focus on only one or two selected issues at this point of time is not enough. In line with the rec-ommendations of the review report the project will therefore concentrate on strategic objectives of the UPPID strategic plan: obj. 2: Advocacy and lobbying based on the UNCRPD, obj. 3: Promo-tion of Self Advocacy and obj. 4: Consolidation of the Membership base - and partly obj. 5:socio-economic support to PWIDs and their families (through advocacy and lobbying). Thus, results and activities will be in line with the strategic plan and supplemented only where necessary in order to follow recommendations of the review and the Exit strategy. At the centre of the project will be support to Lobby and advocacy at local and national level and strengthening of external relations combined with promotion of self-advocacy, strengthening of membership base and leadership and support to improved documentation to enable that advocacy and fundraising becomes more evidence based and the credibility of UPPID increases. It is expected that this focus together with a narrowed geographical focus (6 promising districts) and the reduction



of running costs (cf. Annex I) will make it possible for UPPID to consolidate organizational and financial capacity within the project period and move closer to a solution of the overall problem. Besides, the project will consolidate important work already done in relation to promotion of Self Advocates within UPPID and make it possible to build on the positive experiences made in connec-tion with the project “Self-Advocacy in Action” (see annex M). Needs and interests of PWIDs are considered well reflected as point of departure is UPPIDs own strategic plan 2013-2017.

B. 4 Stakeholder analysis- The following is a brief introduction to the main stakeholders; strategic partners, right holders and duty bearers and their role in the project (Please also see annex N).NUDIPU The National Union of Disabled Persons of Uganda is an umbrella organisation formed in 1987. Its mission is promotion of equal opportunities and active participation of persons with dis-abilities in mainstream programs and processes. UPPID, as a member of NUDIPU sees itself as part of the DPOD Country Program and NUDIPU’s rights-based civic education on rights and demo-cratic procedures and would like its members to benefit from the experiences of NUDIPU’s eco-nomic empowerment programs specifically in the areas of livelihood and credit and saving schemes. In the six target districts of this project it is expected that parents of PWIDs will join the NUDIPU local boards. NUDIPU is recognised nationally and internationally as THE voice of PWDs in Uganda and UPPID plans to make strategic use of this in joint proposals for funding, as discussed in connection with the review.

NUWODU The National Union of Women with Disabilities of Uganda is an umbrella composed of women with various disabilities. It was formed November 1999 with the mission to promote social, cultural, economic and political advancement of girls and women with disabilities through advo-cacy for their effective participation in development. UPPID is a member of NUWODU and sees itself as a part of the DPOD Country Program components involving NUWODU i.e. Gender and Reproductive Health Rights. NUWODU is recognized nationally and internationally and UPPID intends to prepare joint proposals with the organization addressing rights of girls and women with ID At district level, UPPID will encourage female members to participate in NUWODU activities.

MGLSD Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development is the line ministry for disability. UPPID will formalize its relationship to MGLSD through a renewed Memorandum of Understand-ing (MOU). This will support UPPID and its district executive committees (DECs) influencing na-tional guidelines for relevant programs under the Ministry, e.g. the Youth Livelihood Program in order to ensure full inclusion of PWIDs. UPPIDs access to relevant national commissions for child and women’s rights (National Women’s Council and National Council for Children) will be eased with holding this MOU.

Local Government Local Government is the main duty bearer in regard to the right holders. The Special Disability Grant, the Youth Fund and the Community Driven Development Programme are all implemented at this level. In all districts a District Rehabilitation Officer (DRO) and/or a Com-munity Development Officer (CDO) are responsible for the welfare of PWDs. UPPID expect to strengthen its relationship with these authorities to promote inclusion of PWIDs in mainstream de-velopment programs as well as the social protection scheme. UPPIDs DECs benefits from free of-fice space provided by the local authorities in 21 districts.

Ministry of Education and Sports (MOES) / Kyambogo University / Teachers’ Training Col-leges Inclusion of PWIDs in all education is a key concern of UPPIDs membership. UPPID will prioritise the issue and expect to influence the situation in the targeted districts, e.g. curriculum ap-plied and training of teachers by Kyambogo University, and Teachers’ Training Colleges..



USDC Uganda Society for Disabled Children was formed in 1985 and managed from the UK. In 2006 USDC UK became Able Child Africa and USDC and Able Child Africa were separated and made independent. USDC works for welfare of CWIDs and nowadays apply a RBA to the work with focus on Child Right Clubs etc. In the field of education UPPID and USDC share interests and there is a clear potential for joining forces in advocacy for inclusive education. Disability Rights Funds (DRF) has recently encouraged UPPID and USDC to make a joint proposal

New Donors It is crucial for UPPID to attract new donors. In order to do so UPPID will package and promote successful practices as a model approach into an easily replicable model and present it to potential donors, e.g. World Vision and Disability Rights Fund who have already been positive. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (indicative length 7 pages)

C.1 Target group and participants The primary target group is female and male members of 60 parents’ self-help groups –approximately 600 parents; 48 female and male PWID’s aged between 16 and 26 years and active in Self-Advocacy Groups (SAGs) and the UPPID DEC’s. Leaders at national and district level are part of the group.

Persons targeted are spread over 3 regions of Uganda inhabiting 6 districts of the country. The dis-tricts are Kisoro and Ibanda in the WESTERN REGION; Rakai and Masaka in the CENTRAL RE-GION; and, Kumi and Lira in the NORTHERN/EASTERN REGION.

District Role Sex UPPID Leaders/PM’sPWID Parents Female Male Female Male

Kisoro 8 100 54 54 4 6Ibanda 8 100 54 54 4 6Rakai 8 100 54 54 6 4Masaka 8 100 54 54 5 5Lira 8 100 54 54 4 6Kumi 8 100 54 54 4 6National N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 7Total 48 600 324 324 31 40

This means the primary target group of the project comprises mainly the poorest of the poor from rural areas of the country; PWIDs and their families who in general are little educated, if at all, have limited income, live under difficult conditions and on the personally level are characterized by lim-ited self-confidence. Gender balance in numbers as well as active participation of both sexes is im-portant to the project and will be monitored (See Annex O). Self-Advocates included belong to the approximately 1/3 of all PWIDs holding intellectual capacity to pursue and voice own concerns.

The project is designed to develop a model approach to further inclusion of PWIDs, which can be used for replication by parents’ self-help groups, primary schools and other stakeholders in order to improve life of PWIDs and their families. Potential donors to replication of the whole or part of the model will be introduced to the contents together with key stakeholders and urged to take responsi-bility. It is the hope that the project in this way will benefit parents and children, youth and adult with intellectual disabilities in a greater number already from 2015.The project districts have been selected based on the criteria below. (All identified with close attention to promising practices of UPPID presented in the technical review, October 2013 (annex H).1: Active UPPID parents’ groups that are fully paid-up members of UPPID.2: UPPID DEC’s are registered as CSO’s in their respective districts and have a bank account.



3: UPPID DEC’s have some experience in advocacy and networking.4: Self-advocacy groups have the potential of registering as a group at sub-county level.5: Capacity of parents’ groups and DEC’s to advocate for accessing governmental programmes and have in fact benefitted from those.6: Well established collaboration with NUDIPU district branch and staff, if any.

Thus, 4 of the 6 selected districts are districts experienced with “Self-advocacy In Action”, while 2 are new districts showing extraordinary capacity in the field of advocacy among others. Further, the districts are geographically placed in a way enabling UPPID to keep in touch with members in “not-targeted districts” and disseminate lessons learned to these members as well.

The secondary target group is duty-bearers at district and national level (see annex N for a com-plete list) as well as at least 1,200 community members who are expected to benefit through sensiti-sation and advocacy efforts designed to create change in the way the society at large perceive peo-ple with ID and their families – and include them in the community.

UPPID is the only organisation of parents and PWID with a national scope in Uganda. At national level, it is recognised by Ministries as the voice of PWIDs and by the disability umbrella NUDIPU since 2009 as the representative of PWIDs in Uganda. Locally, in the selected districts, UPPID is well known and respected by authorities and members.

C.2 OBJECTIVES AND INDICATORS Overall Development Objective: Persons with Intellectual Disabilities (PWIDs) and their families exercise their rights and participate fully in the development agenda. (From the UPPID Strategic Plan 2013-2017)Indicator A: By end of the project, a major part of UPPIDs strategic plan 2013-2017 has been successfully implemented. MOV: Quarterly progress reports, annual report 2014 and final project report.Indicator B: The exit strategy prepared in connection with Review 2013 has been successfully implemented and milestones passed. MOV: Quarterly progress reports, annual report 2014, final project report, MOUs signed and

Immediate Objective 1: PROMOTION OF THE SELF-ADVOCACY APPROACHBy July 2015 UPPID has embraced self-advocacy within the structures of the organisation, promote the approach in min. 6 districts and has devel -oped a replicable model approach on self-advocacy ready for use by local governments/NGOs and others. ( cf. OBJ 3 of UPPID strategic Plan)

Indicators OBJ 1 MOV1.1 By July 2015 A replicable self-advocacy model is in place based on documentation of lessons learnt from formation and support to self-advocacy groups and their efforts to advocate for inclusion in especially education and socio-economic support delivered by the Government.

Model and progress reports captur-ing lessons learnt and learning compiled at reflection workshops.

1.2 By end of 2014 An experience sharing workshop has been held to compile best practices from all project districts in relation to use of self-advocacy and testing of the self-advocacy kit.

Workshop report and best practices paper.

1.3 By July 2015 the model approach has been presented to key stakeholders and 2 stakeholders and 2 donors have taken on the self-advocacy model and will finance parts or full implementation.

MOUs and other kind of agree-ments/contracts.

1.4 UPPID Board and DEC meetings reflect inclusion of PWID. List of members of BOD and DECs in project districts. Minutes and agendas of meetings

Immediate Objective 2: ADVOCACY; EXTERNAL RELATIONS AND FUNDRAISING By July 2015 UPPID actively lobby and advo-cate for inclusion of PWIDs and their families in relevant development programs (with special focus on education and socio economic support at community level) based on the UNCRPD and is able to cover related costs without support from LEV. (cf. OBJ 2 of UPPID strategic plan).

Indicators OBJ 2 MOV2.1 By July 2015 UPPIDs prime advocacy issues are included in the advocacy agenda of both NUWODU and NUDIPU.

NUDIPU and NUWODU strategic pla minutes of NUDIPU board meetings.

2.2 By end of 2014 UPPID members in min. 4 project districts have attended proposal writing workshops organised by NUDIPU where possible ( covered by the DPOD/NUDIPU program) and accessed the trust fund within the same program.

Reports/records from DECs and APMs.

2.3 UPPID has managed to raise sufficient funds to finance their core activities including necessary staff by July 2015. From the end of 2014, no contribution to rent of office from LEV is needed.

UPPID Annual report, final accounts and contracts with other donors.

2.4: By July 2015 government programs have been accessed in all project districts (Min. 2 in each district) Records on parents/PWIDs benefit-



and parents/guardians are allowed in training related to CDD (guidelines do currently not allow others than the youth to be trained).

ting from government program and CDD trainings.

2.5 By July 2015 selected key stakeholders (Kyambogo University/MOES, MGLSD and World Vision) support UPPID and PWID: E.g. training of teachers on PWID rights have been carried out in 3 districts.

MOUs and other kind of agreements/contracts.

Immediate objective 3 : DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATIONBy july 2015 UPPID has strengthened its internal democracy and participation and is directed by an operational national Board providing strategic direction for staff and members. Besides, UPPID is actively participating in relevant fora of the disability sector and represented where relevant. (cf. OBJ 4 of UPPID Strategic Plan)

Indicators OBJ 3 MOV3.1 By April 2014 the UPPID BOD is reconstituted and relevant sub-committees revitalised, and at the end of 2014 the reconstituted BOD and committees have met min. 4 times to discuss general direction of UPPID as well as progress and challenges of the project.

Minutes of AGM 2014 and BOD meet-ings.

3.2 By end of 2014 the UPPID BOD and DECs of the project districts have completed training in democ-racy including roles and responsibilities as elected representatives of the organisation. The strategic plan has also been amended and self-advocates included in the organisational activities where possible. .

Democracy manual, quarterly reports, strategic plan of UPPID and advocacy strategy.

3.3 By end of the project parents to PWIDs have taken up elected positions in NUDIPU and NUWODU District structures in 4 out of 6 project districts.

Reports from DECs and APMs, records of NUWODU and NUDIPU.

3.4 By end of 2014 the 6 project districts have managed to increase their income from membership fees by 10%, At the end of the project the income has increased min. 15 %.

Records of membership fees paid.

3.5 By end of 2014 UPPID pays all expenses in relation to general assemblies, BOD and DEC meetings, including transport expenses and from July 2015 UPPID covers all expenses related to communication, allowances and participation in international events. Part of the expenses will be covered by member-ship fees.

Budget and accounts.

C.3 OUTPUTS AND ACTIVITIES (for full details see annex K). Regarding objectives

Expectedoutputs

Activities

In pursuit of objective 1

1.1. By July 2015 6 model clubs of self-ad-vocates have been formed, supported in self-expression and empow-ered - and a model ap-proach towards inclusion of PWIDs through self- advocacy developed and shared with selected stake-holders and donors.

1.1.1 Inception meeting with parents and stakeholders in Kisoro and Lira. (The 2 districts that were not targeted by Self-Advocacy In Action)1.1.2. Identification, assessment and recruitment of 4 new Support Persons. (8 Support Persons are recruited already)1.1.3Identification and assessment of suitable Self Advocates for 2 model clubs in the new districts.1.1.4 Train Support Persons in Self Advocacy (8 Support Persons are trained already)1.1.5 Support and facilitate SAG meetings, 2 meetings per month over 14 months (music, dance, drama, art handicrafts and advocacy issues)1.1.6 Hold monthly (14 months) counseling and sensitization meeting with 48 parents1.1.7Conduct training camps for youth and adults with Intellectual Disabilities (Self Advocates) at district (6 + 2 camps) and national level (1 camp).1.1.8 Support and Monitor SAG activities, (2 visits per district over 14 months by Nat Sec.) (14visits per district over 14 months by APMs).1.1.9 Establish a National SAG (6 PWIDs + 6 SP)and conduct 4 national SAG meetings (2 combined with AGM + 1 Nat. Camp / 1 independent)1.1.10Conduct 1 internal reflection workshop to generate experiences on how self-advocates can create visibility in the local communities and promote inclusion in regard to education and socio-economic empowerment (Basing on the testing on fine tuning of the concept – Activity 1 to 8)1.1.11Review the kit from ‘Self Advocacy in Action’ and experiences with self-advocacy to develop a comprehensive model approach on self-advocacy and print additional manual/kit.1.1.12 Conduct 1 national stakeholders’ workshop about the Self-Advocacy Model Approach.1.1.13 Arrange follow up meetings with key stakeholders and review plan of action.

1.2 July 2015, UPPIDs visibility at district level has increased by the help of Self Advocates.

1.2.1Identify and plan 12 local advocacy events in line with UPPID advocacy strategy (2 per district).1.2.2 Prepare 6 key advocacy messages (1 for each district) and plan actual content of the advocacy events (Issue, target group, advocacy activity).1.2.3 Support Self Advocates to participate in 2 events per district.




2.1 By July 2015 UPPID has increased its national visibility and credibility as a strong ad-vocacy organiz-ation with clear advocacy targets, mes-sages and strategies.

2.1.1Revise and specify the UPPID advocacy strategy at BOD meeting to further specify UPPID key advo-cacy issues, advocacy success criteria, advocacy target groups (MP’s, decision makers, general public etc.) and advocacy methods.2.1.2 Print and introduce advocacy strategy at district level.2.1.3 Drafting TOR for advocacy committees, establishment of committees (1 national and 6 district based, 3 pple at national level, 3 at district level).2.1.4 Train 21 committee members and 5 staff in lobbying and advocacy and develop plan of actions for the committees.2.1.5 Support Committee members to engage local authorities in accordance with advocacy plan of action.2.1.6 Plan and conduct 6 national advocacy events include Self Advocates where appropriate.2.1.7Run radio messages (6 messages (1 per district) on 5 radio stations for 1 month x 2) 6 advocacy meetings with high profile legislators and decision makers in relation to advocacy events.2.1.8Prepare policy briefs on key advocacy issues in advocacy strategy i.e. analysis of education needs for PWIDs, socio-economic issues and gender issues.

2.2. By July 2015 UPPID has established strategic part-nerships with Kyambogo University/ MOES, MGLSD, World Vision, NUDIPU, NU-WODU and selected Local Government Programes and taken first steps towards sharing of lessons learnt.

2.2.1 Select key issues based on advocacy strategy/policy briefs for collaboration with Kyambogo Univer-sity, MOES, MOGLSD, World Vision, NUDIPU, NUWODU and selected Local Government Programs and sign MOUs for promoting of these issues. I.e. teachers training with Kyambogo University. MOES, inclu-sion of parents/guardians of PWIDs in training related to the CDD etc.2.2.2 Conduct regular follow-up meetings with each of the above stakeholders to pursue intensions of MOUs.2.2.3 Attend meetings in relevant networks like Child Right, Education and CRDP-reporting group to share and promote policy briefs.2.2.4 Map relevant teachers training colleges for collaboration in project districts and arrange meetings to agree on possible collaboration on model training of teachers re. ID.2.2.5 Participate and support the training events for the teachers.2.2.6 UPPID to follow-up on the implementation of the NUDIPU strategic plan developed in 2013 to ensure implementation of the UPPID issues.2.2.7 Renovate /redesign the UPPID web site and establish relevant online networking for a, i.e. Face-book and Twitter.2.2.8 Maintain sites and post news regularly, at least once a month from 4th project month.

2.3 By July 2015 UPPID has gained important experience regarding evidence based fundraising and tested the approach at both national and local level with success.

2.3.1. Document and share best practices and impact of UPPID in order to promote UPPID model approaches towards donors.2.3.2. Update list of relevant donors and get requirements/proposal guidelines both at national and district levels.2.3.3.Make arrangements for joint proposal writing with NUWODU, NUDIPU and USDC and submit 3 proposals before May 20152.3.4. Develop and submit 12 individual UPPID proposals.2.3.5 .Map government programs in the 6 districts, check requirements and prepare prioritized list of programs to be accessed by DEC’s, PSHG and SAAGs.2.3.6 .Train DECs in basic proposal writing and fund raising with support from NUDIPU staff were possible.2.3.7. Conduct 1 donors’ conference presenting UPPID impact and model approaches for replication.




3.1 By July 2014 UPPIDS BOD has been reconstituted and improved the level of operation. Also democratic participation at local and na-tional level has increased

3.1.1 Board to review UPPID strategic plan (SP) in order to include DECs and PPSHG and review the Con-stitution and prepare descision agenda for the AGM 2014 (Constitution, Amendment to SP, election of Nat. BOD)3.1.2 Conduct AGM and reconstitute new BOD and key standing committees with inclusion of self-advo-cates.3.1.3 LEV to develop good governance and democracy manual for discussion and approval by BOD. Print and disseminate good governance and democracy manual to BOD members and DECs.3.1.4 Train new BOD on democracy (based on the manual) and support the new board to make rule and procedures for conducting board meetings (Code of Conduct) and BOD and committees to develop plan of action for 2014 and 20153.1.5 Nat. Director ensure that board meetings are conducted in accordance with good governance manual supporting BOD to give strategic directions on fundraising, advocacy and sustainability3.1.6 Support and facilitate DEC to increase local networking and take up positions in NUDIPU and Dis-trict Disability Councils.

3.2 By end of 2014 Parents’ / DEC members’ leadership skills and knowledge on local develop-ment oppor-tunities strengthened.

3.2.1 Select best 10 PPSHG in each of the 6 districts for training.

3.2.2 Plan and conduct trainings/exchange workshops democracy and good governance including design of action plans for PPSHG and DECs.

3.2.3 Share action plans with BOD and DECs (Self-financed BOD and DEC meetings)

3.3 July 2014 UPPID systems and routines for learning, documentation and sharing are operational.

3.3.1 Maintain and update database on membership and lessons learned/best practices. (Relevant mate-rials on advocacy/self-advocacy, case stories and check lists/templates for activities etc.)

3.3.2 Make guidelines for monitoring including frequency, focus and registering.

3.4 By 31.12 2014 project districts have increased income from membership fees with 10%.

3.4.1 UPPID staff and DECs to sensitise PSHGs on membership obligations to collect membership fees and do follow up where needed

3.4.2 Printing of membership cards and up-date membership registers.

3.4.3Produce t-shirts for easy identification of membership fee collectors and guide them on best approach to collection of fees and registering members.

C.4 Strategy The project supports a per se poor and marginalised group and has a strong focus on inclusion and promotion of the right holders themselves, the PWIDs. This means PWIDs and their families are ensured full involvement expected to generate ownership, as well as certain benefits of different kinds, e.g. increased access to socio-economic support. Besides, the project is based on UPPIDs own strategic plan and as such focusing on issues owned by its members and recognized as important by also other stakeholders. In fact key stakeholders as NUDIPU and NUWODU have already welcomed the planned project and further collaboration, as has the line ministry MGLSD along with Ministry of Education and Sports and World Vision. The general approach of the project has a strong focus on organisational capacity building and ad-vocacy. It is based on the premise that improved capacity by governing board, local members and in particular the PWIDs themselves can generate a stronger organisation with stronger governance, more pro-active staff, more effectual advocacy towards duty-bearers and more evidence-based and aggressive fundraising towards all potential donors. There is no service delivery to the target group



included, though it is recognised that UPPID members as all poor and marginalised groups are in need of service. UPPID will actively seek agreements with other donors who can provide services. Implementation of activities will generally be participatory, action oriented, learning focused and with due attention to gender issues. Cost effectiveness and use of local resources will play an im-portant role and include that activities will take place locally and be combined, whenever possible.

The project has 3 main components addressing promotion of 1: Self-advocacy 2: advocacy, lobby-ing and external relations 3: Democratic participation. The areas are interlinked and it is expected that a simultaneously focus on all will increase UPPIDs general exercise of rights considerable.

SELFADVOCAY- PLACING THE RIGHTHOLDERS AT THE CENTREAs an interest organization working for the rights of PWIDs it is crucial to include and involve the right holders to the furthest extent possible: internally in the organization through inclusion/repre-sentation in governing structure – AND in advocacy towards local communities and district authori-ties. This is expected to empower PWIDs, make them visible and pave the way for broader inclu-sion in a more effectual way. Parents to PWIDs can speak with a more convincing voice when PWIDs are along and voice own concerns. Besides, a stronger and more systematic focus of self-advocacy will enable UPPID to document successful cases and practices and develop a model for inclusion of PWIDs with Right holders at the Centre. This can provide important input to advocacy, lobbying and fundraising and be replicated fully or partly, funded by new donors and/or duty bear-ers. As such the promotion of self-advocacy also includes testing of self-advocacy kit (expected to be complete by December 2013) and development of a model approach to further inclusion of PWIDs in particular education and socio economic support.

ADVOCACY, LOBBYING AND STRENGTHENING OF EXTERNAL RELATIONSIn order to get to the point where full attention is given to PWIDs and their rights by all stakehold-ers and particularly GoU – and this attention is reflected in concrete support, UPPID must also strengthen its planning of advocacy, the approach and relations to key stakeholders who can support promotion of issues. It is expected that this can take place when the board of UPPID is reconsti-tuted, a strategy has been made and capacity of board members and key actors of the 6 districts been increased. Based on this a more active and strategic engagement with relevant ministries, key allies like NUDIPU and NUWODU, Kyambogo University and national and international NGO´s can be developed. Focus should mainly be on education, access to socio-economic support and justice. Partly through frequent visits and relevant follow up nationally and locally (e.g. in order to sign MOUs), partly through participation in key events, national and local networks (e.g. NUDIPU, NUWODU and networks addressing childrens rights). Besides the increased focus on systematic documentation, testing of self- advocacy kit and development of a model approach for replication (mentioned above under the self- advocacy component) is expected to provide essential input to a more solid and evidence based engagement with the stakeholders mentioned. Cases of PWIDs, evi-dence on some success – and challenges ahead will increase UPPIDs credibility as a knowledgeable voice of PWIDs, and help it to compete for the attention crucial to sustain organizational and finan-cial capacity. However, the credibility and visibility is also dependent on full participation and strong voices of UPPIDs governing bodies, based on internal coherence. This is addressed through the third area.

GOOD GOVERNANCE AND FULL PARTICIPATION



Full participation of the governing bodies in order to support full scale exercise of rights will first of all need that the Board of UPPID is reconstituted and that all new members become fully aware of their democratic duties towards the organization as well as roles and responsibilities. In this connec-tion a small manual will be developed and capacity building take place accordingly. It is expected that it will support internal coherence and collaboration between politically elected bodies and also between board and staff, general visibility of the organisation, pro-activeness of all staff , system-atic collection of evidence on PWIDs and appropriate and timely attention to fundraising. Also the regular contact between the Board and local DECs is expected to benefit from this, as a fuller un-derstanding of democratic duties by board members along with frequent meetings will increase flow of information and improve the contact between national and local level of the organization.

SEQUENCINGAs UPPIDs challenges are related to several problems and the time to solve them limited, a number of the planned activities will take place simultaneously. Optimal sequencing will not be possible due to time constraints and limited finances. However, some activities will need to take place before others can be initiated, so focus is on getting going from day one-. Please see Annex L.

First of all it will be crucial to ensure proper governance of the organisation, which means Annual general Meeting (AGM) 2014 will be one of the first major activities together with training of the board, review of key documents and comprehensive guidance of staff. Besides a short term con-sultant/possible future ED will have to be employed to fundraise and support day to day manage-ment. Moving from there promotion of Self advocacy, documentation of learning, planning of ad-vocacy, capacity building of Board and DECs, contact to key stakeholders and possible funders will take be in focus and afterwards implementation of MOUs and aggressive fundraising will be pre-pared and contact to key allies strengthened. Meanwhile it is expected that self-advocacy material already developed is tested through use, making it possible to develop a model approach to inclu-sion of PWIDs based on lessons learnt. A reflection workshop including the right holders them-selves will be important in this connection. Towards closure of the project the self-Advocacy kit and model will be compiled and presented to stakeholders like MOES, Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) and other potential donors for replication.

C.5 SUSTAINABILITY UPPID will follow the recommended Exit strategy attached, develop several sub-strategies and thus gradually take over payment of some key expenses, such as staff and administration, general Assembly etc. in order to achieve financial sustainability. This is expected complete was has been initiated with the UPPID sustainability strategy 2010-2013.

Organisational sustainabilityOrganisational sustainability will first and foremost be pursued through strengthening of democratic participation within the organisation, as well as transparency, accountability and administrative capacity, as reflected in the log frame of the project (annex K). It is expected that empowered Self Advocates will remain a vital asset to UPPID after completion of the project and their inclusion in governance of the organisation continue to influence it´s direction and activities. Besides, the development of a self-advocacy model approach for inclusion of PWIDs at local level - made for replication- will most probably lead to further consolidation of the self -ad-vocacy approach to inclusion of PWIDs. The strengthened governance of UPPID including making the Board operational is expected to impact the future along with stronger ties to key allies who also voice the rights of PWIDs.



Financial sustainability Experience shows that it is difficult to ensure that a local partner like UP-PID will not remain dependent on external funding. Even an organisation as NUDIPU is still de-pendent on DPOD funding after more than 18 years of support. In order to minimize dependency on external funding, spread remaining dependency and ensure use and maintenance of the expected results of the project, UPPID will through the project focus on a number of different approaches recommended by the review and described explicitly in the attached exit strategy (Annex I). Alto-gether 6 complementary approaches partly mentioned in the UPPID strategic plan will be applied:

1: Support from local or national authorities. UPPID will systematically visit relevant Ministries (agriculture, education, gender) at a central level and make efforts to establish MOUs specifying support to be obtained. At district level it will be attempted to link up with national programmes, e.g. NAADS (National Agriculture Advisory Services).

2: Own income. Attempts to increase the income from membership fees will take place in order to sustain mainly local activities and sponsorships for e.g. radio programmes and events be pursued. Where possible, handicraft products of self -advocates/PSHGs will also be marketed at special oc-casion to generate a small income for the producers.

3: New international contacts and donors. One of the main approaches will be preparation of pro-posals for funding from potential donors, individually as UPPID and together with key allies as NUDIPU and NUWODU.

4: Decentralisation (empowerment of districts and fundraising to be taken on by UPPID dis-trict offices receiving support from district authorities). In order to minimise core costs at cent-ral level and promote a higher degree of self-sustainability at district level, the DECs will increase their support to PSHGs and also SAGs to enable the groups to apply for socio economic support provided by local governments (this implies formal registration of all DECs and PSHGs, which already has been effected). Besides, it will be pursued to get free office/meeting space provided by local governments, where not already achieved.

5: Increased use of volunteers as support persons: UPPID already makes use of volunteers to support activities and intend to increase this. Volunteers are mainly recruited among well-educated persons, e.g. teachers and social workers and therefore in a position to contribute easily and with high quality to UPPID activities.

6: Decrease in expenses or activities. UPPID is currently lobbying for free office space in a build-ing owned by Ministry of Health and the probability to succeed is assessed as high. If, against all odds, they fail, the national secretariat will shift from Entebbe to an office rented by ADD in Kam-pala). This will reduce expenses related to rent etc. remarkably.

Furthermore the increased focus on systematic documentation of learning including development of a model approach will make sure that achievements do not evaporate, but can be shared with inter-ested stakeholders and potential donors and hopefully continue to be of benefit to UPPID, LEV and other DPOs working for PWIDs.

C.6 Assumptions and Risks: The project is based on 3 key assumptions; that the new UPPID Board has capacity, interest and motivation to perform its duties and a strong commitment to sustain



UPPIDs activities, that the current staff of UPPID continues to be motivated and feel committed towards implementation of the exit project and that UPPID is able to attract new donors and main-tain their interest. Assumptions are considered realistic, as they are based on an external assessment and recommendations included in the review report as well as the facts below (see also annex R):

- The UPPID Board have initialized change of leadership to be complete at AGM beginning of 2014 (see annex S). The new board will consist of 9 members (7 parents and 2 PWIDs, including 5 new parents and 2 new PWIDs). - As stated in the review report, the mobilization of 20 new districts under the Jombola project has created a new breed of potential leaders among parents, supporting the transition of leadership. - The new Board of UPPID will receive intensive training in leadership and democracy – and roles and responsibilities will be spelled clearly out immediately after the AGM. . -The Jombola project has generated a good platform for transition and provided UPPID with some basic experience with fundraising. - The uncertainty related to the decrease of LEV contribution to staff salaries after 6 months has been thoroughly discussed with the UPPID board and its staff and a strong commitment to genera-tion of funds established, e.g. through strong involvement of staff in design of the project and its activities. Ownership to the Safari Bado project is assessed to be very solid.-Staff of UPPID has already identified USAID as a likely donor and initiated writing of proposal to be submitted January 2014.-Staff of UPPID has approached Disability Rights Funds (DRF) and initiated writing of proposal for funds together with USDC, based on recommendation from the DRF representative.-Staff of UPPID has initiated headhunting of a short term consultant to support the organization with fundraising and transition of management of the organization. The consultant will be hired for 6 months and possibly continue as Director while the current ED gradually decreases his involve-ment in the day to day management over a period of 12 months (see annex Q) . The current Director will remain on board (on a volunteer basis) to ensure stability in contact with all stakeholders. - Roles and responsibilities of LEV and UPPID have been reviewed by the partners and a clear agreement about how best to collaborate and make use of capacity available reached, e.g. LEV will play an advicing and supervisory role regarding proposals to be submitted. - Signing of MOU with MGLSD has been initiated and now awaits action of Ministry of Justice.- LEV and UPPID agrees that monitoring of assumptions/risks must be prioritized and the short term consultant followed closely with attention to the set benchmarks (see annexQ)

D. PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND FOLLOW UP (indicative length 1 ½ pages)

D.1 Division of roles in project implementation UPPID will be responsible for IMPLEMENTA-TION of the project including planning, conduction review and documentation of activities, logistic arrangements, regular monitoring, documentation of main learning, bookkeeping and general finan-cial management. Besides administrative tasks it will involve on-going assistance and attention to members and political leaders (PSHGs, Self-advocates, DEC members) to consolidate a more pro-active, rights centred and strategic approach towards inclusion of PWIDs in primary education, Government programmes, international donor programmes as well as activities run by local NGOs and the disability umbrella NUDIPU. Also regular contact to key stakeholders and constant atten-tion to potential future donors forms part of the work.



The responsibility for implementation will be split between UPPIDs staff and its board and standing committees. The UPPID staff will implement the majority of activities and enact decisions taken by the board on a day to day basis - and generally support the board and its committees in their work according to quarterly plans and budgets .The staff holds several years of experience with imple-mentation of activities targeting PWIDs and their families/relatives and has a good understanding of the local context in the 6 selected districts, as they have worked there for long. In order to ease and speed up implementation at most and reduce costs 3 staff will be based close to the selected dis-tricts. The national board of UPPID will oversee the project implementation and day to day running of the secretariat and provide strategic guidance to staff and key politicians of the organisation. This will include regular discussions on progress/challenges of the project at board meetings and immediate action if redesign of the project is needed. Besides, the board and its committees will take the lead regarding strengthening of external relations, supported by staff, e.g. to NUDIPU and NUWODU along with line ministries and local governments. As the board of UPPID will change at the beginning of the project, the exact capacity of members is not known. However, training will ensure that members with less experience will be updated on good governance and advocacy.

LEV will be responsible for the overall management of the project including monitoring of progress and learning as well as correct use of funding provided. As the most experienced partner, LEV will as well play an advisory role and be responsible for e.g. development of a manual in democracy. Besides LEV will share international contacts and do what is possible to support UPPID in estab-lishment of new partner relations. LEVs Programme Manager is the main responsible person and supported by local consultants with immense experience within disability and development in Uganda including profound knowledge of both NUDIPU and NUWODU. All hold relevant degrees.

Within LEV one member of the NEC holds responsibility for close monitoring of development activities. She is very experienced regarding support to PWIDs.

D.2 Monitoring and evaluation The project activities will be frequently monitored by locally based staff and the Kampala centred secretariat of the organisation. At a slightly further distance the UPPID board and its committees will follow progress and challenges in terms of outputs and fulfil-ment of targets set and adjust design and strategic direction, if needed. Besides, the board will mon-itor contact to external relations/ potential donors closely and make sure that UPPID keeps a con-stant eye on this vital area in order to raise funds and promote inclusion. LEV will monitor the over-all compliance of progress with plans and budget as well as key learning – and dialogue with UP-PID about reasonable adjustment along implementation of the project. Especially assumptions and risks together with the shortterm consultant/future Director will be followed closely. Main informa-tion will be provided through quarterly reports on financial consumption and progress regarding set benchmarks along with emails. The local staff will monitor local activities through frequent participation, observations, dialogue with all stakeholders, reflection sessions and written reports provided by the organizers, but also DEC plans, activity programmes, participants list and other written documents from relevant actors will be studied to assess how far the project has come Documentation and detailed registration of important data will be the responsibility of staff, but it should be widely promoted that DECs and PSHGs themselves monitor progress, discuss learning and document key information, possibly in logbooks to be consulted by staff at visits. Based on this and special needs, minor adjustment of



activities will be made by the staff in dialogue with DECs, Self-advocates and PSHGs. National level staff will be informed, where needed.

At national level the UPPID staff will follow implementation of plans, use of budget and general progress in all districts and national level with due attention to indicators included in the log frame. Regular visits will be paid to the selected 6 districts and key activities at both national and local level be attended. In this way hard and soft data on general progress will be collected (and contact to key stakeholders sustained). Besides, national staff will monitor the project with the help of writ-ten reports provided by local staff, quarterly. These reports will contain information about key in-dicators and provide an update on progress and challenges so far.

The UPPID board will meet minimum quarterly and at this occasion discuss general progress and challenges based on the quarterly reports from staff and oral information provided by members. The discussion will be supported by staff input and result in adjustment of plans and budget, if relevant. Besides, relevant standing committees will discuss progress within specific areas as advocacy and education and plan further action, in order to meet the targets set. The board and its committees will rely on written material as reports along with specific input prepared by national staff including the shortterm consultant employed to promote evidence based and aggressive fundraising.

LEV will at an overall level monitor that progress of the project is in accordance with proposal, activity plans and budget. Monitoring will be based on quarterly reports provided by the national UPPID secretariat. In addition to this two monitoring visits to the project will be paid and data sup-plemented by personal testimonies, observation, dialogue with key stakeholders, talk with auditor and participation in key events. At these occasions verification of all data will take place, e.g. through original documents and dialogue with key stakeholders.

Generally the Log frame will be used for monitoring progress and adjusted, if needed. Methodolo-gically, a participatory approach will be prioritised throughout, placing right holders at the centre. Besides, attention will be given to success and promising practices, allowing all involved to realise and discuss how best to promote self-advocacy, raise funds, ensure inclusion and consolidate demo-cratic practice. Altogether two joint reflection events, aiming at capturing progress, challenges and learning will take place. They are included in order to ensure that experiences can be orally shared with many stakeholders at one time and possibly generate mutual learning of importance. At the end of the project a final evaluation of the Exit project will take place to ensure that lessons learned in the Exitphase of the partnership are captured for future use.

E. INFORMATION WORK (indicative length 1½ pages)E.1 Project related information work in Denmark –N/A No information work in Denmark



3. Budget summary

Budget summary Cur-rency

Indicate the total cost (i.e. including contributions from the Disability Fund as well as others)

2.249.851 DKK

Of this, the Disability Fund is to contribute2.249.851

DKK

Of this, indicate the amount to be contributed by other sources of fin-ance, including self-funding by the Danish organisation or its local partner, if any

0

Indicate total cost in local currency956.186.675 UGX

Indicate exchange rate applied1 DKK = 425 UGX

Main budget items:Financing plan

Full amount Of this, from the Disability Fund

Of this, from other sources

1. Activities 1.230.570 1.230.570 02. Investments 49.515 49.515 03. Expatriate staff 0 0 04. Local staff 391.046 391.046 05. Local administration 87.309 87.309 06. Project monitoring 80.755 80.755 07. External evaluation 93.828 93.828 08. Information in Denmark (max 2% of 1-7) 0 0 09. Budget margin (min 6% and max 10% of 1-

8)154.642 154.642 0

10. Project expenses in total (1-9) 2.087.665 2.087.665 011. Auditing in Denmark 15.000 15.000 012. Subtotal (10 + 11) 2.102.665 2.102.665 013. Administration in Denmark (makes 7% of

12)147.187 147.187 0

14. Disability compensation 0 0 015. Total 2.249.851 2.249.851 0



4. AnnexesOBLIGATORY ANNEXES

The following annexes must be submitted by post as well as electronically:

A. Factsheet about the local organisationB. Budget format

Please note that annex A should be filled in and signed by the local partner. The signed factsheet can be submit-ted in a copied/scanned version.

The following annexes regarding the Danish member organisation must be submitted electronically if not already submitted to DH:

A. The organisation’s statutesB. The latest annual reportC. The latest audited annual accounts

SUPPLEMENTARY ANNEXES: for example reports and analysis that directly support the project's objectives and rationale (max 30 pages)

Annex no. Annex titleA Factsheet UPPIDB Budget formatC Democratic structure of UPPIDF Complete list of common UPPID/LEV activities/projects 1998-2013G Strategic Plan of UPPID ( 2013-2017)H Technical review of UPPID and its collaboration with LEV 1998-2013I Exit Strategy (annex to the Review Report)J District DetailsK Log FrameL Implementation PlanM Case Studies Self Advocates in Masaka and Rakai DistrictN Stakeholder analysisO Monitoring plan for activitiesP TOR for Consultancies: development of model approach, advocacy strategy and Policy Briefs.Q TOR for short term consultancyR Assumptions and RiskS Minutes of UPPID Board meeting, November 2013

Notice: The application form inclusive of annex A – B must be submitted in print and electronically in one copy. If annex A is completed in Spanish or French, please attach a Danish or English translation.



All annexes should be submitted in a format allowing easy photocopying (i.e. no magazines, books, newspa-per cuttings - but A4 copies of relevant excerpts thereof).


· web viewprojektet har til formål at afrunde samarbejdet mellem lev og uppid, der blev...

Documents