investing more than a decade and millions of dollars in capacity
building, governments and other humanitarian actors still face
significant capacity challenges in order to effectively manage
humanitarian response. key among these challenges include the
short-term, ad-hoc and disconnected nature of the training agenda,
aggravated by lack of a systematic, sector wide, capacity needs
assessment and strategic capability strategy and training/education
framework. As such; June 2018, the Humanitarian Platform for Local and
National Organisations in Uganda undertook a Capacity Needs Assessment
to establish the core strengths and weaknesses of the local and national
organizations to prepare and respond to the humanitarian needs for the
affected communities in Uganda. According to the report, only 37% of the
CSOs assessed were functioning well on the component of networking,
coordination and advocacy in relation to humanitarian emergency response
forming the baseline for the capacity development training.
On 3rd December 2018, the Humanitarian Platform opened the
2 days capacity development training at Esella Country Hotel, Kampala;
with ‘advocacy’ as one of the areas still weak in the humanitarian
sector, most especially in Uganda. This training featured over 30
members of the Humanitarian Platform who initially scored relatively low
during the Capacity Needs assessment carried out by the platform.
According to what has been noted over the years, the topic of advocacy
has been biased and perceived to be a “fight back” tool especially
between civil society organizations and government entities due to the
pressure to account. However, it also important to note that projects
which involve people affected by policy change in developing,
implementing and monitoring advocacy work are more likely to achieve
concrete change on the ground due to effective advocacy.
With the support from professional facilitators, members were taken
through intense yet participatory hand on exercises which included
experience sharing, brainstorming, open forum discussions and references
of the real life scenarios in the Uganda context. During the advocacy
training, participants were taken through the legal and institutional
framework for advocacy and humanitarian and; where they generate the
mandate to conduct advocacy. It’s very important to understand the kind
of issues one is intending to advocate for. Participants were taught to
differentiate between humanitarian concepts like disaster, hazard,
emergency and risk, a mistake many have made and continuously make. In
addition, participants were taught to differentiate between advocacy,
lobbying and activism to avoid using them interchangeably.
On 4th December 2018, participants were taken through one
of the most imperative blocks not only of advocacy but also other
project/ programme areas like fundraising, reporting, storytelling among
others. It is important to note that how one tells their story is what
determines the perception or image from the external environment.
Documentation is broad and to mention but a few, entails reporting on
activities and achieving the visual attention from various stakeholders,
how to tailor messages for different audiences, video documentation,
photography, organizational branding/ profiling and other avenues of
documentation that bring about effective change in society such as
policy briefs, issues papers, data among others. While local
humanitarian actors continuously transform the lives of marginalized
populations through their work, telling the story of this invaluable
work to the world, remains a big challenge.
As such participants were taken through the winning power of writing
for change, understanding the important formats of documenting,
tailoring the message for different audiences. Participants had a
knowledge café that involves grouping participants and having them
rotate around different humanitarian communication products and
answering questions on their importance to improving beneficiary
From the documentation session, participants were able to construct
success stories which will be featured in the quarterly newsletters.
According to the end of training evaluation, participants appreciated
the opportunity and recommended that the Humanitarian Platform should
extent this support to regional platforms and allocate more time;
partner with INGOs to conduct exchange visits intended to enhance
capacity among members of the platform; follow up on members trained and
continuously hold refresher trainings to be able to realize the
impact. At end of the 2 days capacity development training,
participants were able to link advocacy and documentation; and further
deeply understand how, where, why and when the two concepts are applied.
Therefore with the recommendations aforementioned considered, the
Humanitarian Platform will be able to support all the local and national
NGOs to influence the Humanitarian Agenda.
is such an important milestone to mark in the humanitarian sector in
Uganda, most especially the local and national organisations celebrating
the first year of working together as a collective. The Humanitarian
Platform was launched on 7th March 2018 by the Minister of
Disaster Preparedness Relief and Refugees, Hon. Eng Hilary Onek. The
platform has within a relatively short time registered imperative
footsteps with the guidance of a passionate and committed steering
committee. The Humanitarian Platform Steering Committee includes,
CAFOMI, DRT, InterAid Uganda, LIPRO Uganda, Uganda Red Cross Society,
TPO Uganda, Legal Aid Clinic, DENIVA, CEFORD, URDMC, AWYAD, OXFAM Uganda
and Uganda National NGO Forum.
On 5th December 2018, the platform held the end of year
steering committee meeting to reflect, take note of the challenges,
consolidate key lessons and look out for opportunities to strengthen the
platform. During this meeting, the platform committee was privileged to
host Anna Maria Leichtfried, Lezlie Velez and Michael Nabugere, all
from the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) Secretariat,
Office of the Prime Minister. The team presented the CRRF roadmap which
was launched in 2017 and adopted in January 2018 during the 2nd
CRRF steering committee meeting as one of the opportunities the
platform can tap into to influence the humanitarian agenda. Most
importantly, this was to begin a fundamental conversation between the
CRRF secretariat and the Humanitarian Platform; understanding the role
of the local and national organisations in the CRRF roadmap 2018/2020;
and ensuring that the efforts of the local and national organisations
are strategically intentional to Humanitarian response.
During the steering committee meeting, members also agreed that the
platform further describes its structure more strategically and where
it’s heading not forgetting the exit strategy by putting into place a
proper strategic plan. The platform to step up and engage in policy
development and advocacy, but most importantly to prove intentional
relevancy and point of reference in the humanitarian sector and as a
point of reference
“We cannot resurrect people with money; financing should be before and not after the disaster…” Hon. Martin Owor, Commissioner Department of Relief, Disaster Preparedness and Management Office of the Prime Minister during the dialogue
Defining the word contingency will direct you to a common
understanding as a future event or circumstance which is possible but
cannot be predicted with certainty. The topic of having a contingency
fund to respond to emergencies, most especially disasters, has been the
same talk year in year, out landing on seemingly deaf ears.
The 2016 World Disasters Report indicates that a total of 1,244
people were killed by disasters between the period 2006 and 2015 in
Uganda. Over the same period, 4,345,797 people were affected by
disasters, representing an 11% increase from the number of those
affected in the preceding reference period of 1993 – 2005.
Supported by OXFAM, on 24th
October 2018, the Civil Society Budget Advocacy Group (CSBAG) in
partnership with the Humanitarian platform for Local and National
Organizations in Uganda held a dialogue that sought to create space to
have an in-depth discussion on the issue of Disaster Preparedness,
Mitigation and Prevention in Uganda. Who is not playing their role and
what is the way forward, is it lack of political will or coordination
issue amongst government Ministries, Agencies and Departments, Should
the government empower the Uganda Red Cross Society to coordinate
disaster related interventions. This dialogue attracted over 50
participants who included Members of Parliament, OPM, Local Government
officials, Civil Society Organizations, Academia and Media
“If we agree and are on the same page at level of identifying the
problem, we will get to the solution and implement it on the same page,
George Francis Iwa, Chairperson Humanitarian Platform in his remarks
during the dialogue”
Commissioner, Hon. Martin Owor, informed participants that much as the
government is mandated to finance these disasters, citizens at the
individual level should take precautionary measures, report any unusual
signs or risks in their areas. He however decried the manner in which
the government responds to disaster issues. He said that the Office of
the Prime Minister has done their part, the team has carried out hazard
mapping and profiling and completed the resettlement plan together with
experts, however the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Development is
not releasing funds to implement this plan,
“this year we have had 66 landslides in Uganda and next year in
June, we will have more landslides in Bududa according to the
meteorologists, so the government should be working out this financing
issue today, Deputy CAO Bududa district, at the dialogue”.
Is it absence of frameworks or lack of harmonization which has created a gap in the implementation?
The National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management
designates the Department of disaster Preparedness and Management under
the Office of Prime Minister as the lead agency responsible for disaster
preparedness and management. However, while the department coordinates
all the MDAs in the DRR sector, mitigation and prevention is primarily
undertaken by other MDAs in the DRR sector which has implications on the
financing of disaster preparedness, prevention and mitigation.
The limited funding or lack thereof at Local Government level
directed towards disaster management, preparedness and prevention
renders the implementation of the District Contingency Plans highly
The Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) establishes a Contingencies
Fund in section 26. The Contingencies Fund make provision for the
allocation of funds where urgent and unforeseen needs have arisen and it
is in the public interest that funds should be provided to meet the
need. From the above it can thus be argued that the PFMA, through the
Contingencies Fund makes ample provision for funds in the event of a
disaster occurring. Section 26, however, is silent on the use of the
Fund for disaster risk reduction purposes. This is one area which might
need more attention in a new disaster risk reduction and management
What are the recommendations participants raised
government must be at the centre of this process, then other
stakeholders complement. Hon. Lyandro Komakech, Parliamentary Forum on
Disaster Risk Reduction, in his closing remarks”
As the discussions heated up raising emotions, a number of
suggestions were brought to table for all stakeholders as mentioned in
the Sendai Framework to which the government of Uganda is signatory, to
rise and walk the talk. The government to ensure that the contingency
fund is visible, tangible and accessible to mitigate disaster risks; the
private sector to get involved because at the end of the day these
disasters affect the economic performance of the country, Civil Society
Organisations to contribute to the knowledge base, support public
awareness and lead on advocacy, put pressure on decision makers to play
their role , the government to domesticate the Kampala Convention
formerly the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance
of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa and lastly citizens to respect
the laws that govern nature.
“If you don’t belong to the river then don’t be in the river; if you don’t belong to the swamp then don’t live in the swamp”.
As part of the Annual National Youth Festival that took place on 11th August 2018 at Makerere University, the Humanitarian Platform for Local and National Organisations held a session dubbed the Plight of Female Urban Refugees.
This was to contribute to the ongoing discussions about the fate of
urban refugees in Uganda, with more focus on female refugees. The
outcome document highlights the issues that affect the female urban
refugees and what works to address the issues in their particular
To download the outcome document please click here
‘Uganda is spending the bulk of its budget managing and responding to disasters instead of managing and reducing risks’ Sophie Nampewo, CSBAG, Learning Event Mbale 2018.
Globally, disasters are on the increase as a result of natural
hazards, political unrest and economic hardships. Subsequently, this has
greatly contributed to increased poverty, food insecurity, and social
disintegration especially in drought and flood prone areas. In the
recent past, a number of global frameworks have been developed for
disaster risk reduction. The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction, adopted in Japan in March 2015, provides general guidance for
reducing risks from natural hazards.
The Agenda 2030 further recognizes and reaffirms the urgent need to
reduce the risk of disasters. At national level, The Government of
Uganda has demonstrated a commitment towards disaster risk reduction as
indicated in its various legal, policy and planning and institutional
frameworks like the Second National Development Plan, the Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Policy. There are bills in the pipeline for
approval such as the Disaster Management Bill Climate Change Policy,
Wetland Bill for sustainable Ecosystem. However, amidst all these
policies, how have the victims or communities in disaster prone areas
been involved? Is their need for a 50 page wordy document with the
language they can hardly articulate?
“With the inevitable continued population growth
rate, Uganda and the entire world will continuously be prone to
disasters…” Johnson Kagugube, DRT, Learning Event, Mbale 2018.
On 25th September 2018, the Humanitarian Platform for
Local and National Organisations in Uganda held a Learning Event
focusing on Strengthening Disaster Risk Reduction and Management at
district level, in Mbale District. The event was timely and located
strategically – Eastern Uganda is recognised as the most disaster prone
region. The Learning Event attracted humanitarian actors in the region
such as the Uganda Red Cross Society, the District Disaster Management
Technical Committee heads & other Local Government leaders,
Community Based Organisations, media and Civil Society Organisations who
hailed from the districts of Manafwa, Bududa, Sironko, Bulambuli,
Butalleja and Mbale.
“There are no funds to facilitate and capacitate the
District Disaster Management Technical Committees to integrate DRR into
the district plans, as a result they event don’t meet, they are
dormant…” Local Government respondent, Learning Event, Mbale 2018.
the discussions, it was found out that actually the government is
financing relief for victims way more than prevention or preparedness,
according to the study carried out by CSBAG. The Outturns overshot the
budgeted allocations in FY2016/17 with a supplementary budget of UGX
25bn directed to the provision of relief to disaster victims. This
raised concern among participants most especially the Local Government
leadership who just hear but never get hold of any funds to facilitate
contingency planning at the district level. Issues around political
sabotage kept rising as the reason improper practices persist affecting
several interventions from progressing.
However, this does not mean that the Government is not doing a great
job. The problem is failure to diversify different target groups for
different interventions. As Uganda realigns it’s spending towards risk
management and reduction, Local Governments are best placed to spearhead
this under the auspices of the OPM. Funding should therefore be
directed to them to fulfil this mandate through a Forecast Based
Financing Mechanism of disaster risk management and reduction. This
therefore calls out for coordination between the state and other
non-state actors to collectively focus on addressing these underlying
issues together for benefit of the citizens.
The Humanitarian Platform for Local and National Organisations
is mandated to hold monthly meetings to strengthen the coordination,
review progress on various platform undertakings, identify areas of
synergy and plan on participating in different spaces at national,
regional and international level. On 16th August 2018, the
platform held a steering committee meeting at NGO Forum Offices and in
attendance was TPO Uganda, CAFOMI, DENIVA, LIPRO Uganda, DRT, Uganda
National NGO Forum and OXFAM.
Some of the issues discussed hinged around platform membership
composition to match the ongoing UNHCR Inter-agency coordination
mechanism, issues around participating in the Grand Bargain (GB) work
stream platforms with other networks; and mobilization of resources to
support the Humanitarian Platform. The platform secretariat intends to
organize members into sectors according to the Refugee Response Plan
2019/2020 to be able to widen the scope of participation of the local
and national actors in the humanitarian response. From the discussion,
the platform will establish ways of acquiring and sustaining funding
through a self-assessment process by identifying issues affecting the
platform, strengths and gaps where capacity is needed and have an issues
paper that can be presented on various influential platforms. This is
to ensure the local actors build the muscle to be front bearers of the
localization agenda rather than the international community. There was a
question on how the platform can participate or link with the
discussions at the global level; and the Chair, Mr George Francis Iwa
was tasked to map out those different upcoming global events where the
platform can either send participants or organize side events to feed
into the same. On that note, the platform plans to organise a side event
alongside the 73rd session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 73) in
The Humanitarian Platform participates in the Livingstone Formula on “Silencing the Guns in Africa by 2020” Forum: Tracking Progress on the Implementation of Lusaka 2016 Master Roadmap
“All African states must sign, ratify and fully domesticate all AU instruments relating to the promotion of peace, justice, governance and development”
The Economic, Social and Cultural Council of the African Union (ECOSOCC) through its Peace and Security Cluster organized a Civil Society Forum from 11-13 September 2019 at the Mombasa Continental Resort in Mombasa, Kenya to track progress on the implementation of the Lusaka 2016 roadmap for silencing the guns in Africa by 2020. This brought together fifty-five (55) Participants from twenty-one (21) different countries made up of: -ECOSOCC CSOs, Peace and Security Cluster members, Experts from the Diaspora and the Wider Civil Society, Representatives of Regional Economic Communities (RECS) and Representative from Peace and Security Department (PSD).
The main purpose of the 2019 Livingstone Formula Consultative Meeting was to assess progress and identify challenges to the implementation of the 2016 Master Roadmap on Practical Steps and Modalities for Mobilizing Actions for Silencing the Guns in Africa by 2020. The meeting particularly focused on tracking progress and challenges to the implementation of peace, security and stability related tasks which were assigned to ECOSOCC/CSO in the roadmap.
Among the things that were line up for discussion was the adoption of the 2019/20 Work plan of the ECOSOCC Peace and Security Cluster, Perspectives on the effectiveness of the Livingstone Formula- PSC-CSOS dialogue and engagement in the promotion of peace and security in the continent and it emerged that the AU definition and use of the concept of Peace and Security is very state centric, and justice is ignored; but also the role and contribution of Civil Society to Peace and Security in Africa is not systematically documented or highlighted.
Members suggested that ECOSOCC Peace and Security (P/S) clusters should (in addition to the submissions by the Presiding officer) prepare a briefing to the PSC on the normative framing of peace – as peace, JUSTICE and security – to better capture the accountability aspects and push out the “impunity” concept that is inherent in the current “Peace & Security” normative framework of the African Union. ECOSOCC to commission a study to document the Role/Contribution of CSOs to peace and security which would also be a landmark contribution to showcase the contributions made by youth, women, and religious communities towards standard treatment guidelines (STGs) on the continent. A similar study is being done on Youth Contribution to peace on the continent which will go a long way to be presented to the Peace and Security Cluster in November, 2019.
Other issues that emerged were that Conversations are only focusing on the demand side of weapons and not on the supply side realizing the need to bring a balance in this conversation and discuss it on both the demand and supply angles. That the Disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) and security sector reform (SSR) processes are overly militarized, and fixated on the role of formal, security forces at the expense of other actors in the Security sector for example Women and youth have a very important role to play in conflict situations so their roles should not be underestimated. Members therefore suggested that the ECOSOCC Peace & Security Cluster should also emphasize the importance of the non-military aspects of DDR and SSR (justice, police and prison workers) and Civil Society (youth, women, academia, religious leaders, etc.) and legislators who are then at the end of the day should rehabilitate former combatants, as well as provide oversight roles to military spending. The Justice and police sectors cannot be left aside.
At the end of the 3-day consultative meeting, participants adopted the ECOSOCC Peace and Security Cluster Work plan for 2019/20 and agreed on relevant inputs and suggestions from CSOs for the consideration of the AU PSC Secretariat in the process of drafting and finalization of the Annual report of the Peace & Security Cluster on the state of peace and security in Africa to be presented to the Assembly of Heads of States during the 2020 Summit.
African Regional Conference on Localisation Aid: Concerted Consolidated efforts needed
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 15&16 July 2019
In the recent past, there has been growing recognition for the need to empower local communities and organizations to effectively respond to humanitarian needs. Nevertheless, significant portions of humanitarian financing remains channeled to International NGOs leaving local communities and organizations inadequately funded. Despite commitments to reinforce local and national capacities, data reported to UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Financial Tracking Service shows that only 2% of international humanitarian assistance in 2016 went directly to local
Is more money being channelled directly to local actors or is localisation a newconvenient fundingwindow benefiting mainly INGOs? Participant
50% of the 25% channelled to local actors should go to women led organisations.Women arerequesting for 50/50 participation and benefit. Conference Participant
and national responders, and national and local Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) received just 0.3% directly.
At the World Humanitarian Summit, held in May 2016 UN Secretary General laid out his vision in his report One Humanity: Shared Responsibility and its annex, the Agenda for Humanity and called upon the international community to put local response at the heart of humanitarian efforts. The summit also triggered Charter for Change that sets a specific target of 20% of humanitarian funding to be passed to southern-based NGOs by May 2018. The Grand Bargain (GB), another major outcome of the summit, seeks to make emergency aid finance more efficient and effective, committing to “a global, aggregated target of at Least 25% of humanitarian funding to local and national responders as directly as possible” and principled humanitarian action as local as possible and as international as necessary.
How do we manage the challenge of perceived competition, political huddles or scramble for resources at national level? These are realities on the ground. Participant
Since 2016, significant efforts have been undertaken at the international, national and local level by the Grand Bargain signatories to achieve the goal of providing more support and funding tools for local and national responders (Workstream 2) to realise the Grand Bargain commitments, however this seems to have fallen on unprepared ground hence taking long to germinate most especially by local actors.
As such; as co-conveners of the localization workstream (a network of major donors, UN agencies, international non-governmental organizations and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement), on 15-16 July 2019, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and the Government of Switzerland convened over 100 delegates from all over Africa to discuss on how the already existing efforts can be harmonized to bring about more significant changes at system, strategic and operational levels.
Addressing the participants, the Head of the AU’s Division on Humanitarian Affairs, Refugees and Displaced Persons, in the department of Political Affairs, Amb. Olabisi Dare highlighted that, localization of aid should aim at increasing the quantum of funding that reaches national actors including Community actors; and more importantly enhance the capacity development of the national and Community actors to effectively govern overall humanitarian assistance.
How do we ensure accountability of donors to commitments? How do we hold them accountable? Conference participant
Eve Amez-Droz, Deputy Head of International Cooperation, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation in Ethiopia, said: “A localised approach to aid has many benefits. It improves local ownership and awareness of aid, promotes its relevance, and allows for a more inclusive response, integrating the participation of affected people.”
What are the implications on the Humanitarian Principles of achieving a spirited localisation agenda? Participant
Among the agreed on key priorities to accelerate the localization agenda in Africa included greater and meaningful representation of local actors in humanitarian decision making bodies, more investment in local institutional capacities to ensure systems, mechanisms and necessary policies are in place to harness accountability and transparency; and more targeted humanitarian support for women-led organizations to address issues pertaining women holistically such as women leadership, economic empowerment and norm changes due to changes in contexts. They also highlighted the need for governments to support the development of their own civil society responders; to develop domestic laws and policies to facilitate and regulate international response; and to seize the opportunity of the African Union’s new Humanitarian Agency which will soon be established.
HUMANITARIAN PLATFORM STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT
Botanical Beach Hotel, Entebbe
4th -7th March 2019
Fifty National, Local and
International Organizations in Uganda representing various civil society
institutions, met at Bomah Hotel in Gulu District on 7th – 8th June 2017, to
discuss issues and concerns relating to the role of Local and National CSOs in
the refugee response. It is in this meeting that that the Humanitarian Platform
On 7th march 2018 the Humanitarian Platform for Local and National Organizations was
launched with a vision to see strong local and national organizations that are
well coordinated, informed and have the ability to influence the humanitarian
agenda. However, this vision cannot be realized until local and national
organizations have the requisite capacities to effectively prepare, respond and
engage in the humanitarian system.
One year down the road, it is very pertinent to highlight what the
journey has been and reflect on what led to successes but also the failures so
that clear key lessons are carried forward. In that light, the Humanitarian
Platform organized the strategic planning retreat 4th-7th
March 2019, to stimulate
discussions, debate and agree on the strategic focus of the Humanitarian
Platform. This brought together 16 members representing carious humanitarian
organizations and Office of the Prime Minister.
Taking stock and Reflecting
Since the inception of the
Platform, what has been the change in the external environment; and what has
been the relevance of the Platform in the changing context.
The refugee population has reduced. Towards end of 2017, the total population of refugees and
asylum-seekers in Uganda was 1,395,000 people, with 986,600 people
from South Sudan, some 236,400 from the DRC, and some 39,700 from Burundi.
Currently according to the 2019 January UNHCR report the number stands at
Coordination has been strengthened. Since the inception of the Humanitarian Platform, there
has been an effort to bring together humanitarian actors together and to
influence the humanitarian agenda collectively. Maximizing on the comparative
advantage of members to engage meaningfully.
3. Partnership and Engagement
spaces availed to local actors. Since 2016, UNHCR
has actively made an effort to meet the 25% Grand Bargain commitment and
piloted approaches to achieving this for
example, they initiated Partner-Equip-Coach Approach (PECA) – twinning INGOs
with Local NGOs as a requirement for funding, the Humanitarian Platform was
embraced by the INGO Directors Coordination Group , the Platform has presence
at CRRF Steering Group and several other entities like the Office of the Prime
Minister, Local Government, continue to
express interest to partner and support local humanitarian actors.
funding has shrunk;
Uganda is known to have one of the most
progressive refugee policy yet again Uganda is one of the worst funded refugee
hosting countries despite being third in ranking as a country hosting refugees
globally. The country’s funding gap was at 85% and by November 2018 it was at
Response Plan requirements 869,671,414(US $) – Funding received 352,307,881 (US
$)) according to UNHCR.
The capacity among local and national actors has improved. Some local organizations
have gained the trust from donors and can be entrusted with relatively bigger
funds for example some local organizations from West Nile are receiving funds
directly after putting in place systems with required and recognized standards.
6. Shift in focus from
refugee response to addressing humanitarian issues holistically. Currently the humanitarian
system covers Internally Displaced Persons and disasters. In addition, there
has been an effort to shift from humanitarian response exclusively to focus on
recovery and development too.
Looking back at
the one year the Humanitarian Platform has existed, what hasn’t worked, why
hasn’t it worked and what should be done to address the existing gaps.
1. Identity. There has been an issue of identity of the Platform; who
are the members, what are their specialties, what sectors do they belong to,
what is the Platform agenda, where does it draw the mandate from. These kinds
of questions came as a result of lack of clarity among members and other actors
engaging with the Platform. As a result even members were hesitant to identify
themselves with the Platform in different spaces.
As the way forward, members suggested the
need to review the registration criteria. To introduce certificates with a
reasonably minimum price to ensure members have something to show as members of
the Platform but also to have a clear Platform agenda by the end of the retreat
The Platform to be proactive and work on
their visibility through involving media in their engagements and taking
advantage of big events to make presence and participate meaningfully
2. High expectations. From the inception of the Platform, members
realized that this was long overdue and recognized that INGOs and other
humanitarian agencies were thriving because of their coordinated and organized
systems. This created the thirst to see local actors doing the same without
considering the process. Secondly, other members expected grants extended to
them through the Platform which has not happened unfortunately; and as result
many have pulled out
One of the reasons why this keeps happening
is the fact as a loose coalition, members are free to enter and exit at no
cost. Members suggested a token membership by subscribing a fee to become a
registered member. As such members will attach value to the Platform and also
develop ownership and will to see it grow
3. Representation. The concern around the representation on
the Steering Committee was among the issues discussed. Representation in terms of the committee
composition and in terms of reflecting the Platform agenda in the individual
organizational engagements in various spaces.
As the way forward there is need to revamp
the regional Platforms and have them represented on the Steering Committee.
The need to develop a joint activity calendar
on the aspects to be delivered on jointly, for example the big events at
national and international levels such as the UN General Assembly, the World Refugee Day, International Day for Disaster Reduction
4. Funding. Humanitarian action is a costly venture that calls for
concerted efforts that draw on national and global resources. As such, local
and national organizations face difficulties in finding appropriate and
sustainable funding for humanitarian interventions. It was also noted that the
25% funding Grand bargain commitment is coming to an end in 2020. Therefore
there is need for the local humanitarian actors to think beyond and
One of the solutions is for
the Local and National Organisations to raise the issue of commitment to donors
in Uganda to take action through advocacy
Secondly is for Local and
National Organisations to start figuring out how to survive with the available
funds and consider the aspect of sustainability in various contexts
is been an issue of transparency and loss of trust amongst the humanitarian
local NGOs as a result of unhealthy competition due to shrinking funds ; but also the rise in
corruption cases in the sector
According to members this
calls for proper and recognized systems in place that match up to the donor
requirements; the need for self regulation through the Quality Assurance
Mechanism (QuAM) and ensuring.
question of capacity will keep coming up if there is no definition of what
exactly we mean by capacity as local humanitarian actors ; capacity compared to
what. As such we would still considered to have low capacity by the
There is need for the local
and national humanitarian actors to build consensus on what capacity we mean
and as such it is easier to address it uniformly.
Legal Framework. Part
of the unanswered questions is the issue about where the Platform draws its
mandate and its sustainability plan in the operation environment; when does it
stop being a loose coalition.
It was noted that this
concern be taken forward by the Steering Committee; have a discussion with the
Uganda NGO Bureau on the way forward
Membership criteria. The
issue of membership still lacks clarity to many; what does it take to become a
member of the Platform, who are the humanitarian actors, what is humanitarian
action, how and where do other sectors like the Private Sector, Academia,
INGOs, Government entities see themselves in the Humanitarian Platform for
Local and National Organisations . As such other organizations would understand
whether they can be part of the Platform.
Needs redefining the linkages
Relationship with the Government. It is known that the Government through the Office of the
Prime Minister coordinates humanitarian response at national level; therefore a
conversation about humanitarian interventions or localization agenda without
the arm and full support of the Government is likely hit the dead end. The
Humanitarian Platform has been embraced by the Government and established
working relations which justifies the Platform’s presence on the CRRF Steering
Group. However, the link between the two is not clearly defined most especially
on the contribution of the Platform into Government humanitarian response
Need to be redefined by the
Platform Steering Committee
Refugee programming still driven by donors. This has been noted as a result of lack
of confidence in the local actors capacity, both technical and operational
capacity. In terms of having proper and recognized systems in place.
This is a call for Local and
national humanitarian actors to work on our leadership and governance
structures to ensure that we have clear systems and policies that guide our
operations and programming. This might entail reflecting on the national and
international requirements and standards within our institutions, so that we
become more legitimate and credible
In the recent past, there has been growing recognition for the
need to empower local communities and organizations to effectively
respond to humanitarian needs. Nevertheless, significant portions of
humanitarian financing remains channeled to International NGOs leaving
local communities and organizations inadequately funded. Despite
commitments to reinforce local and national capacities, data reported to
UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Financial
Tracking Service shows that only 2% of international humanitarian
assistance in 2016 went directly to local and national responders, and
national and local Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) received just
0.3% directly (Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2017 Page 9).
At the World Humanitarian Summit, held in May 2016 UN Secretary General laid out his vision in his report One Humanity: Shared Responsibility and its annex, the Agenda for Humanity and
called upon the international community to put local response at the
heart of humanitarian efforts. The summit also triggered Charter for Change that sets a specific target of 20% of humanitarian funding to be passed to southern-based NGOs by May 2018. The Grand Bargain (GB),
another major outcome of the summit, seeks to make emergency aid
finance more efficient and effective, committing to “a global,
aggregated target of at Least 25% of humanitarian funding to local and
national responders as directly as possible” and principled humanitarian action as local as possible and as international as necessary.
Since 2016, significant efforts have been undertaken at the
international, national and local level by the Grand Bargain signatories
to achieve the goal of providing more support and funding tools for
local and national responders (Workstream 2) to realise the Grand
Bargain commitments, however this seems to have fallen on unprepared
ground hence taking long to germinate most especially by local actors.
As such; as co-conveners of the localization workstream (a
network of major donors, UN agencies, international non-governmental
organizations and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement), on 15-16 July 2019, the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and the
Government of Switzerland convened over 100 delegates from all over
Africa to discuss on how the already existing efforts can be harmonized
to bring about more significant changes at system, strategic and
Addressing the participants, the Head of the AU’s Division on
Humanitarian Affairs, Refugees and Displaced Persons, in the department
of Political Affairs, Amb. Olabisi Dare highlighted that, localization
of aid should aim at increasing the quantum of funding that reaches
national actors including Community actors; and more importantly enhance
the capacity development of the national and Community actors to
effectively govern overall humanitarian assistance.
Eve Amez-Droz, Deputy Head of International Cooperation, Swiss Agency
for Development and Cooperation in Ethiopia, said: “A localised
approach to aid has many benefits. It improves local ownership and
awareness of aid, promotes its relevance, and allows for a more
inclusive response, integrating the participation of affected people.”
Among the agreed on key priorities to accelerate the localization
agenda in Africa included greater and meaningful representation of local
actors in humanitarian decision making bodies, more investment in local
institutional capacities to ensure systems, mechanisms and necessary
policies are in place to harness accountability and transparency; and
more targeted humanitarian support for women-led organizations to
address issues pertaining women holistically such as women leadership,
economic empowerment and norm changes due to changes in contexts. They
also highlighted the need for governments to support the development of
their own civil society responders; to develop domestic laws and
policies to facilitate and regulate international response; and to seize
the opportunity of the African Union’s new Humanitarian Agency, which
will soon be established.