ACDI/VOCA PL-480 TITLE II MONETIZATION PROGRAM 
FOOD SECURITY COMPONENT
FINAL REPORT
MID-TERM EVALUATION REPORT OF USAID FUNDED PL-480 AGRICULTURAL 
COMPONENT PROGRAM ON SAMPLED TARGETED HOUSEHOLDS IN 7 DISTRICTS 
OF UGANDA
September 2004
CENTRE
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES 3
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
1.0 INTRODUCTION 10
1.1 Report Structure 11
2.0 METHODOLOGY 12
2.1 Approach to the study 12
2.2 Sample size and sample selection 12
2.3 Data analysis and presentation 13
2.4 Study limitations 14
3.0 SURVEY FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 15
3.1 Program structure 15
3.2 Household characteristics 16
3.3 Land availability and utilization 17
3.4 Production and Productivity of the target crops 18
3.5 Rate of adoption of technologies 26
3.6 Causes of non-adoption of technologies 28
3.7 Access and utilization of market information 30
3.8 Credit accessibility and utilization 31
3.9 Farm gate prices and gross income from the target crops 33
3.10. Nutrition and Dietary Diversity 36
3.11 Major crop production constraints and suggested solutions 40
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 41
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
3
LIST OF TABLES
Table.1 Summary of PL-480 Title II Food Security Program at baseline, FY 2003 and Mid￾term Impact Indicators
8
Table.2 Mean area planted, output, yield, gross income and farm gate prices by crop 9
Table.3 Household indicators on socio-economic, farm planning and management and PHHS 9
Table.4 Distribution of sample beneficiaries by grantee and district 13
Table.5 Program structure and linkages since FY2003 to date 15
Table. 6 Percentage distribution of farmer group activities at base line, FY2003 and Mid-term 15
Table.7 Household characteristics at baseline, FY2003 and mid-term 16
Table.8 Mean size of land holding by ownership in seven districts of Uganda 17
Table.9 Percentage distribution of technology adoption by crop 26
Table.10 Major drying facilities during baseline, FY2003 and Mid-term 27
Table.11 Reasons why farmers did not adopt pest and diseases management 28
Table.12 Reasons why farmers did not adopt soil fertility management 28
Table.13 Reasons why farmers did not adopt use of plastic sheet for drying 29
Table.14 Reasons why farmers did not store in crib 29
Table.15 Reasons why farmers did not keep farm records/work plans 30
Table.16 Sources of market information for beneficiaries 31
Table.17 Percentage distribution of credit by type and purpose, at baseline, FY2003 and 
midterm
32
Table.18 Different forms of credit in kind obtained by farmers during FY2003 and Midterm 32
Table.19 Mean total output and level of crop prices at farm gate and local markets at baseline 
and mid-term
33
Table 20 Crop value and gross income per farmer from the target crops at baseline and mid￾term
33
Table.21 Farmers’ achievements from the target crops during FY2004 34
Table 22 Percent distribution of construction materials for walls, floor and roof 35
Table 23 Percent of children below five years who are stunted, wasted and underweight 39
Table 24 Farmers’ views of the main production and marketing constraints 40
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
4
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED
Grantee abbreviations
BUCADEF Buganda Cultural and Development Foundation
BUFA Bugangaizi United Farmers Association
CASHFARM Center for Advancement of Small Holder Farmers
CEDO Community Enterprises Development Organization
HA Hunger Alert
KYAWDA Kibaale Youth and Women Development Agency
MIS Market Information Services
MUBUKU Mubuku Irrigated Maize Seed Production Project
NALG Nakisenhe Adult Literacy Group
NSARWU The National Strategy for the Advancement of Rural Women in Uganda
UOSPA Uganda Oilseed Producers and Processors Association
Other abbreviations 
ACDI/VOCA Agricultural Cooperative Development International/ Volunteers Overseas 
Cooperative Assistance
BL Baseline
DB Direct beneficiaries
DDS Dietary Diversity Score
ELF’s Extension Link Farmers
FaaB Farming as a Business
FAL Functional Adult Literacy
FANTA Foods and Nutrition Technical Assistance
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization 
FEWS Field Extension Workers
FSC Food Security Committee
FY Financial Year
Ha Hectares
HH Household
MFPED Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development
MoG Ministry of Gender, Labor Affairs and Community Development
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
5
MT Metric Tones
N/a Not available (data)
NARO National Agricultural Research Organization
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
PHHS Post Harvest Handling and Storage
PL-480 Public Law 480
UBOS Uganda Bureau of Statistics
% Percentage
2002B Second growing season of 2002
2003A First growing season of 2003
2003B Second growing season of 2003
2004A First growing season of 2004
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The second phase of agricultural activities managed by ACDI/VOCA PL-480 Title II Monetization 
Program started in July 2002 and ends in 2006. The main goal of the program is to ensure improvement 
in food security situation and household incomes of the rural population by increasing production, 
marketing and consumption of maize, beans, cassava, upland rice, soybean and sunflower. It is now, 
September 2004, about two and a half years, halfway through the Life of Project. The Ssemwanga Center 
Ltd. was contracted by ACDI/VOCA to conduct a mid-term evaluation to assess progress of the program 
to-date. To capture data on the main program indicators, 359 program beneficiaries were interviewed 
from seven districts of the 34 districts of Uganda where the program operates.
By end of FY2004, the program worked with an accumulative number of 100,131 beneficiaries, which is 
83% of the target of 120,000 by end of Life of Project in 2006. 
The program achieved 82% of the targeted output of 100,000MT for grains, 33% of 40,000MT for beans, 
and 8% of 21,000MT for vegetable oil. The program fell short of its annual targeted yield of 1.8MT/Ha 
of maize, 0.9MT/Ha of beans and 1.2MT/Ha of sunflower by 17%, 36% and 50% respectively. Poor 
program performance was mainly attributed to erratic weather conditions particularly in 2004A season. 
Further, vegetable oil production figures were low due to civil strife that disrupted program activities in 
Lira and Apac districts, the main growing areas for sunflower. 
It was observed that in FY2004, there was an increase of 456% in the number of contact farmers who are 
doing their roles voluntarily. This reflects the increasing popularity of ACDI/VOCA extension
approaches, increasing number of participating farmers and ensures sustainability of the program
activities since they are the lead farmers. This points to the increasing coverage and outreach of the 
farmers, which translated to better services and increased adoption of technologies.
There was an increase in the number of groups commercializing and with formal structures from 15% to 
23% of 3,022 farmer groups. The program still needs to orient farmers/ groups to enhance their 
capacities. Adoption of improved agronomic technologies i.e. planting in lines and recommended
spacing, timely planting and weed management scored highly above 70% for all the target crops. 
In general, 52% of the respondents reported to plan and keep records because adoption is a gradual 
process. Piloting with few farmers/groups at a given time before expanding to other areas could improve 
adoption.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
7
The number of FEWS increased from 55 in FY2003 to 65 in FY2004. With this, the FEW: farmer ration 
improved from 1:1745 to 1:1,242 over the two periods. From FY2003 to FY2004/midterm, there was an 
increase of 122% in the number of farmer groups. Collectivity of activities reduces costs and improves 
bargaining power and hence increasing benefits. 
Though usage of cribs (19%) remained constant from FY2003, there was an improvement in the use of 
tarpaulin of 19%, 238% in the use of granary and 172% of separate houses. This shows increased
awareness of quality issues that affect prices and therefore profitability attributed to FaaB training
By mid-term, 65% and 66% of the beneficiaries reported to establish vegetable and fruits gardens
resulting from grantees’ training and extension services. The average number of meals consumed
increased from 3.0 at baseline to 3.9 in FY2004 and dietary diversity score (DDS) improved to 5.5 from 
4.3 at baseline. This reflects a variety in consumption of different food types and is attributed to the 
nutrition information given by the grantees.
The level of stunting in children below five years dropped by 23%, from 39% to 30.4%, while the 
percentage of underweight children reduced from 25% to 19.7%, which shows progress in the nutrition 
status resulting from improved household diet and grantee trainings.
Prolonged drought, high labor costs related to farm inputs and inadequate investment capital were the 
main constraints reported by the farmers. Farmers’ income would improve if they penetrated better 
markets, diversified to other income generating activities then, they would address other constraints like 
labor shortage and cost of other farm inputs. 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
8
Table 1. Summary of major PL-480 Title II Food Security Program, Baseline, FY 2003 and Mid-term (FY2004) Impact Indicators
Baseline 5
Production (MT) T A A% T A A% T A A%
Grain 68,957 72,000 181,338 252 78,000 34,589 44 100,000 81,869 82
Beans 9,894 25,000 36,686 147 33,000 8,348 25 40,000 13,310 33
Cassava 38,609 10,000 124,972 1,250 50,000 n/a n/a 100,000 n/a n/a
Vegetable oil 1
2,238 18,000 13,349 74 18,000 1,401 8 21,000 1,827 9
Annual Yield (MT/Ha.)
Maize 1.4 1.4 4.4 314 1.6 2.2 138 1.8 1.7 93
Beans 0.6 0.6 1.0 160 0.7 0.8 114 0.9 0.6 64
Cassava n/a 8.2 27.4 334 12.0 27.5 229 20.0 n/a n/a
Oilseeds (sunflower) 0.7 1.0 0.8 76 1.2 0.7 58 1.2 0.6 50
Crop Value (Million USD)
Grain 2.7 3.6 13.6 378 4.3 3.6 85 5.5 9.4 171
Beans 1.6 3.4 5.6 165 4.5 1.8 39 5.5 3.1 56
Cassava 4.3 0.5 13.9 2,778 2.7 n/a n/a 5.5 n/a n/a
Oilseeds 0.9 6.6 8.2 124 8.0 1.8 23 8.0 1.8 23
No. of households with improved practices 7
35,000 0 42,000 24,860 59 49,000 56,510 115
Dietary Diversity Score 4.3 5 n/a 5.5 6.4 116 5.5 5.5 100
Percent of female beneficiaries n/a 40 n/a 50 44 88 50 50 100
Children <5 that are stunted (%) 39 n/a 35 34 30 88
Children <5 that are wasted (%) 1 1 1 1 100 1 4.2 420
Children <5 that are underweight (%) 25 25 23 13 57 22 19.7 90
Increase in vehicle traffic by type ( %) 20 20 20
Increase in mills/shops along roads% TBD TBD TBD
Km. of farm-market roads rehabilitated 30 100 120
Performing : total loans - % 8
98 99 99 100 101
% NGOs/groups commercialising 0 0 10 15 150 15 23 153
FY 2002 2
 FY 2003 FY 2004 3
T = Target A = Achieved A% = Achieved as a percentage of Target n/a = not available
1. Vegetable oil production is calculated as 10% MT soybean + 25% MT sunflower seed, these being the respective yields of oil in an average mill.
2. During FY2002, 1 US $ averaged at Ushs. 1,800.
3. During FY2003 1 US$ averaged at Ushs 1,900.
4. For FY2004, the dollar rate was US$1,728 at the time of compiling this report.
5. Baseline farm-gate prices were Ushs. 70,000/MT for maize, Ushs. 289,000/MT for beans, Ushs. 188,000/MT for sunflower. 
6. Actual farm-gate prices in July-September 2004 were Ushs. 200,000/MT for maize, Ushs. 400,000/MT for beans, Ushs. 150,000/MT for cassava, Ushs. 300,000/MT for sunflower oil. 
7. FY2004 impact results indicated that 70% of households practiced at least three improved practices i.e. timely planting, recommended spacing, timely weeding, and planting improved seed. The figure 
was extrapolated to the entire scheme.
8. % Loan performance is relevant to STANCHARTERED bank farmers.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
9
Table 2. Mean area planted, output, yield, gross income and farm gate price by crop
Maize Beans Cassava 1
Indicator Soya bean Upland rice Sunflower
Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term Baseline FY
2003
Mid￾term
Baseline FY
2003
Mid￾term
Baseline FY
2003
Mid￾term
Baseline FY
2003
Mid￾term
% of farmers growing crop 72 63 85 76 68 72 35 38 57 N/a 23 20 6 8 6 11 31 18
Mean area planted, pure stand (Ha) 0.6 0.8 0.96 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 N/a 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.6 1.3 0.9 0.6 0.6
Mean area planted, mixed stand 
(Ha)
0.5 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.5 N/a 0.3 0.5 0.0 0 0 0.5 0.8 0.4
Mean output pure stand (MT) 0.8 1.7 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 N/a N/a N/a N/a 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.4
Mean output mixed stand (MT) 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 N/a N/a N/a N/a 0.2 0.2 N/a N/a 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.1
Mean yield pure stand (MT/Ha) 1.4 2.2 1.3 0.6 0.8 0.5 N/a N/a N/a N/a 0.8 0.5 1.8 1.2 1.5 0.7 0.7 0.6
Mean yield mixed stand (MT/Ha) 1.3 1.1 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.5 N/a N/a N/a N/a 0.5 0.4 N/a N/a N/a 0.5 0.4 0.4
% Quantity of grain sold of total 
output
61 55 69 30 69 55 N/a N/a N/a N/a 89 52 86.0 54 26 57.0 97.0 66
Farm gate price per MT (Ushs 000) 70 104 304 289 388 410 N/a N/a N/a N/a 355 579 336 810 600 188.0 245 333
Gross income per farmer (Ushs 000) 44 76 244 47.0 93 81 N/a N/a N/a N/a 89 146 293.0 319 101 87.0 107 66
Table 3: Household indicators on socio-economic, farm planning and management and PHHS 
Baseline FY2003 Midterm
Dietary diversity and Nutrition
Dietary score 4.3 6.4 5.5
Mean number of meals taken per day 3.0 3.8 3.9
Socio economic indicators Percentage 
Female headed households 10 16 15
Household heads that did not attend school 13 8 8
Household members under 16 years of age 62 57 56
Farm planning and management
Households keeping records 17 64 52
Households planting improved planting material N/a 88 84
Households planting in rows N/a 92 98
Households accessing extension services 28 89 87
Households belonging to farmer group 32 95 100
Post harvest handling
Households drying on bare ground 84 55 63
Households storing in cribs 29 19 19
Households selling at farm gate 53 52 52
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) n/a: Not available
1
 Cassava is harvested in piece meal so farmers were unable to quantity 2003B harvest. Cassava for 2004A season was still young. 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
10
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The second phase of agricultural activities managed by ACDI/VOCA PL-480 Title II Monetization 
Program in Uganda started in September 2001. The main goal of the program is to ensure improvement 
in food security situation and household incomes of the rural population by increasing the production, 
marketing and consumption of maize, beans, cassava, upland rice, soybean and sunflower. To achieve the 
above goal, ACDI/VOCA collaborates with grantees to:
ß Increase agricultural productivity by way of encouraging farmers to adopt improved
agricultural practices and inputs;
ß Increase access to rural financial services for inputs, production and marketing;
ß Increase commercial capacities of farmers;
ß Increase local and regional market access; and,
ß Improve nutritional practices at household level.
A baseline study was carried out in 10 districts of Uganda between March and June 2002. The purpose of 
the study was to provide a basis for tracking the impact of the PL -480 program activities on food 
security, rural household incomes and nutrition of the target population. An assessment study of program 
activities during FY2003 was done in August 2003. Results of the baseline and impact study during 
FY2003 are shown in Tables 1, 2 and 3. It is about two and a half years, halfway through the Life of 
Project. This mid-term assessment study was conducted to assess progress of the program to-date.
Specifically, this report shows the:
i. Changes in agricultural production in terms of acreage, output and yield and 
income distribution among the targeted populations between the period FY2002-
2004.
ii. Changes and effects in price differentials between farm-gate and market prices 
obtained by farmers.
iii. Changes in level of accessibility and utilization of improved technologies, 
practice and use of market information.
iv. Performance and sustainability of farmer groups, and the level at which the 
groups are formalized.
v. Changes in the level of awareness of proper food utilization, nutritional status, 
and dietary diversity of the targeted population.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
11
vi. Changes in the level and quality of record keeping and farm planning as a 
management tool.
vii. Constraints encountered by the rural households in the production of target crops 
and what their views are on addressing them.
viii. Aspects of the external environment under which the program has operated since 
the second phase started, the lessons learned and how best to improve the 
Program before year 2006, when it winds up.
1.1 Report Structure
The report has five sections and they are presented as follows:
1. Introduction and background;
2. Methodology;
3. Survey findings and discussions;
4. Conclusions and recommendations;
5. Annexes.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
12
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Approach to the study
To ensure consistency, accuracy, and reliability of information collected, a combination of quantitative 
and qualitative methods were used in the study. Household interviews using a structured questionnaire 
(See Appendix 4) were conducted to generate the quantitative data, while discussions with key contact 
persons of grantee organizations and farmers in small groups were used to generate qualitative data (See 
Appendix 5.
To obtain complete information since the program started, only grantees whose activities started in 
FY2002 were included in the study. All grantees collaborate with MIS and IITA for dissemination of 
market information and distribution of improved cassava planting material to farmers. Specific questions 
related to market information were included in the questionnaire. Other grantees like CEDO, KYAWDA, 
NALG, and NSARWU were excluded because their operations started a year after the inception of the 
program, i.e., their activities, if any, before ACDI/VOCA funding cannot directly be attributed to the 
program. 
2.2 Sample size and sample selection
Sample size determination
Sample size was determined on the basis of the level of precision required from the data collected. For 
this study, the confidence level of 95% assumes that data obtained does not differ by 5% from the actual 
figures obtained in the districts. Hence our allowable error was 5%. To determine the sample size, the 
proportion of households who kept farm records was used because it is one of the valid indicators of 
adoption and impact of the project, particularly on the FaaB component. In FY2003 it was found that 
64% of the respondents kept records. 
For the program area,
n = [Z x {P(1-P)}½
/s]2
Where:
n = sample size
P = the proportion of the population who kept farm records. P =0.64
s = maximum allowable error, expressed as percentage points. s = 0.05 (i.e. 5%),
Z = 1.96 (from statistical tables) and 
giving a sample size of 354. 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
13
Sample selection procedure
i) In each district, one sub-county was randomly selected. From each sub-county, two parishes 
were randomly selected. 
ii) Lists of beneficiary households in each parish were obtained from the grantees.
iii) Using beneficiary lists at household level, respondents were purposively sampled by selecting 
households with children below five years of age. 
 A sample of 359 program beneficiaries was interviewed from seven districts out of 34 districts of Uganda 
where the program operates as shown in Table 3 below and Appendix 6.
Table 4. Distribution of sample beneficiaries by district and grantee
District Grantee No. of beneficiaries 1
Sample size 
(Direct beneficiaries)
Lira/Apac UOSPA 10,764 131
Mbale BFA 3,381 59
Kiboga BUCADEF 4,206 52
Kasese MUBUKU 119 30
Kibaale BUFA 1,056 42
Kamuli CASHFARM 4,625 45
Total 359
Districts were purposively selected basing on size of grantee scheme coverage and approach to extension 
delivery. The total sample size was apportioned in such a way that the sample size for each grantee was 
proportional to the number of farmers who were participating in the production activities by June 2004. 
In total, the team collected anthropometrical data from 225 children below five years. To verify, qualify 
and confirm data from household interviews, six group discussions were carried out in Kamuli, Kiboga 
and Kibaale districts with numbers ranging between 7-11 members per group.
2.3 Data analysis and presentation
Combinations of qualitative and quantitative methods were used for data analysis. SPSS was used for 
analysis and tabulation, EpiInfo 2000 for nutritional data analysis, and Microsoft Word for word
processing. Data is presented using tables, graphs and descriptive analysis. 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
14
2.4 Study limitations
1. Given that production data collected was for the previous two seasons, some farmers had a problem 
of memory lapse where they could not instantly remember their achievements. So more time was 
spent to capture the required data.
2. To minimize error, resulting from inaccurate reporting on age, only 225 of 575 children be low five 
years whose immunization cards were available were included for anthropometrical measurements.
3. Due to poor road networks in Kibaale and Kiboga districts, the bumpy conditions of the roads caused 
the weighing scales to break down due to shock effect so more time was spent in the field to collect 
reliable anthropometrical data. 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
15
3.0 SURVEY FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
3.1 Program structure 
Table 5. Program structure and linkages since FY2003 to date
Indicators FY2003 Mid-term
Number of farmer groups 1,362 3,022
Number of beneficiaries 96,473 100,131
Number of FEWs 55 65
Number of voluntary contact farmers/ELFs 543 3,022
Number of paid contact farmers/ELFs 4 4
Number of groups with formal structures e.g., bank accounts, 
constitution, by-laws, registered. 668 697
Number of groups that are commercially oriented i.e., with group 
savings and credit schemes, do collective purchasing and ownership 
of inputs and assets, and sell collectively 61 69
(Source: Grantee reports)
Cumulatively, the program had contact with 100,131 beneficiaries, 83% of the program target of 120,000 
by end of Life of Project (LOP) in 2006. An increase from FY2003 by 4% was due to the expansion of 
program activities resulting from grantee mobilization efforts. Given the subsistence nature of agriculture 
in Uganda at present, organizing farmers into small active groups is an imperative step to early adoption 
of the technologies promoted by any developmental program. There was percent increase in the number 
of groups by 122% and voluntary contact farmers of 456%, which ensures sustainability when the
program winds up. Not only does it ease the FEW’s role of accessing farmers in groups, it is usually a 
prerequisite of many micro finance providers in accessing funds that could be used as farm credit. 
In addition, collective group storage and produce marketing would shield individual farmers from
exploitative middlemen offering prices usually below the prevailing market prices. Table 5 shows the 
types of activities carried out by farmers at baseline survey and mid-term. 
Table 6. Percentage distribution of farmer group activities at baseline, FY2003 and Mid-term 
Activity Baseline FY2003 Midterm 
Percentages
Collective marketing 10 35 44
Trainings 27 17 40
Farm input procurement 7 24 18
Savings and credit 18 62 24
Collective farming 59 32 38
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Unlike the scenario at the baseline survey, majority of the respondents reported collective marketing 
(44%), as their main activity in groups, followed by collective training (40%), and collective cultivation 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
16
as the third most important. The highest percentage of farmers having collective farming (68%) were 
sunflower growers in Lira and Apac districts, where UOSPA and other oilseed players like Mukwano set 
up collecting centers for marketing sunflower. To an extent other grantees, BUFA, BUCADEF, NALG 
and CASHFARM carried out collective marketing activities. The prioritization of collective marketing at 
mid-term is a positive manifestation of the grantee efforts in ensuring better prices for their farmers, thus 
boosting household incomes. The proportion of groups with propensity to save dropped to 24% from
62% at mid-term, because of limited incomes resulting from poor harvests; most of the output was 
reserved for food.
With respect to extension support offered by the program 30% of the respondents report grantee services 
as very adequate, 59% as adequate/average and 11% felt the services were inadequate. The proportion of 
respondents who found extension services as adequate increased from 45% to 59% indicating an 
improvement in extension delivery. The level of farm visits was reported as low as 15% compared to 
other services like trainings (93%) and extension advice reported by 85% of the beneficiaries. The two 
services are carried out at group level. A closer analysis of the program structure data shows that the 
FEW : farmer ration at the mid term was 1 : 1,242. It is a reduction from 1:1754 during FY2003. The 
high ratios explain the fewer farm visits FEWs had to make to individual farmers.
3.2 Household characteristics
Table 7. Household characteristics at baseline, FY2003 and mid-term
Household characteristics Variable Percentage
Baseline FY 2003 FY2004
Sex of household head Male
Female
90
10
84
16
85
15
Marital status Single
Married
Widowed
Separated
6
86
8
0
1
84
10
5
2
90
11
2
Education level of household head None
Adult education
Primary
Secondary
Post secondary
13
0
59
23
5
8
1
56
30
5
8
1
57
25
8
Household age distribution Baseline
0-18yrs
18-25yrs
25-49yrs
>50yrs
FY2003
0-5 years
6-15 years
16-65 yrs
>65yrs
62
13
19
6
21
37
40
1
20
36
42
2
Mean household size (Number) Person/ household 6 7 7
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) Age brackets are changed to compare survey findings with national figures reported by UBOS.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
17
The head of household is an important member of the household in terms of day-to-day running of the 
household. Further, the sex of the household head determines the nature of household activities and the 
extent of overall participation in development (MoG, 1998). It was found that 85% of sampled
households were male -headed. A similar trend was observed at baseline and FY2003. This depicts that 
physical and financial resources are predominantly owned and controlled by men. While the program 
strongly advocates for women participation as one of the ways of spearheading socio-economic welfare at 
household level, it should not overlook the fact that as beneficiaries acquire the desired skills, they may 
not at all times adopt and apply them due to the above reason. About 56% of the respondents is below 15 
years compared to the national figure of 52% of the population of Uganda. This implies that the 
dependency ratio is still high among the target population. This affects the way resources are allocated 
and negatively impact on production (UBOS, 2003).
Education plays a vital role in promoting sustainable development through capacity building of the 
population. It raises awareness of various issues of national importance and improves general standards 
of living. Over 50% of the sampled household members attained primary education, which is
significantly different from the national figure of 55% of the total population above 15 years. The 
average household size was reported at 7 compared to the national figure of 5.1 (UBOS, 2003).
3.3 Land availability and utilization
Table 8. Mean size of land holdings by ownership in seven districts of Uganda, baseline, FY2004 
& FY2004
District Mean cultivated land (Ha) Mean land owned (Ha)
Baseline FY2003 FY2004 Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Apac 4.1 2.6 2.4 3.9 2.7 2.0
Kibaale 4.7 3.6 2.8 4.7 3.5 2.5
Kamuli 1.9 2.6 2.5 1.7 2.1 2.4
Kasese N/a 3.3 3.4 N/a 3.3 2.0
Lira 3.5 3.2 2.3 3.2 3.0 1.8
Mbale 1.8 2.4 1.9 1.5 2.3 1.7
Kiboga 7.6 N/a 2.7 3.2 N/a 2.3
Total 
Mean 
3.3 2.8 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.0
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Land is one of the main factors of production; its availability has a direct influence on the level of 
agricultural production and development. The average land holding per household was reported above 
2Ha, and 80% of it was self owned. The trend was almost similar at baseline and FY2003. A comparison 
between districts shows that Kibaale district reported the highest figure of land availability. A reduction 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
18
in cultivatable land was a result of insecurity in northern Uganda and probably unfavorable weather in 
FY2004, there was not much increase in land opened for crops.
3.4 Production and Productivity of the target crops
Production of the target crops was analyzed basing on the major program indicators, namely output 
obtained, area planted and productivity per unit area. Information on mean area per farmer under each 
target crop, mean output and mean yield per hectare are shown in Table 1, appendix 2 and graphs. 
(Figures 1-6).
Except for a few irrigation schemes, agriculture in Uganda is rain fed so it is prone to adverse weather 
conditions. Rains in seasons, 2003B and 2004A were unpredictable; and this had a negative effect on 
output and yield levels. While parts of the north, central and eastern districts suffered from serious 
drought some parts in Kibaale district, the main bean growing area, received excessive rains and affected 
the crop at podding/flowering hence reducing the output and quality as well. Political instability in the 
northern and eastern regions of Uganda remained a detrimental factor to program activities because 
beneficiaries had to migrate for safety and could not fully concentrate on agricultural activities.
3.4.1 Maize
Owing to the long drought period that occurred during the 2004A-growing season as reported and
confirmed by 71% of the respondents, there was a general reduction in the production and productivity 
indicators for maize in FY2004. It was found that crop management was better in terms of using 
recommended spacing, timely weeding and use of improved seed (See section 3.5). Poor weather thus 
had a bearing on the downward trends observed on the maize production and productivity as illustrated 
below. The program achieved 82% of the targeted output of 100,000MT for grains (maize and upland 
rice). Total output was above baseline and FY2003 output by 18% and 134% (Refer to Table 1) 
respectively.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
19
Target grain figures compared to actual output figures 
at mid-term
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
Maize &upland rice
 Targeted output 
Actual output
Mean maize area per farmer
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Period
Pure stand 
Mixed stand
Mean maize yield per farmer
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Period
Pure stand 
 Mixed stand 
Mean maize output per farmer 
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Period
Pure stand
Mixed stand
Total actual figures= % of farmers growing the crop*80,728 beneficiaries* mean output for maize and upland rice.
Figure 1: Production parameters for maize
Although there was a 20% increase in the mean area planted for maize in pure stand, there was a 29% 
reduction in output. Correspondingly, there was a 20% decrease in area planted for maize under mixed 
stand during FY2004, compared to FY2003, resulting in a 43% reduction in maize output from mixed 
stand. Compared to the transition from the baseline survey to FY2003, there was a decrease in the 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
20
number of farmers growing maize as mixed stands in FY2004. This demonstrates that more beneficiaries 
of this program are adopting the practice of growing crops as pure stands for increased productivity.
3.4.1 Beans
At least 75% of the grantees promote bush beans for consumption and sale, though much of what is 
produced is reserved for food security. The crop is prone to unfavorable weather conditions, which were 
common throughout FY2004, and affected the crop at all stages.
Target bean figures compared to actual output figures 
at mid-term
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
Beans
Targeted output 
Actual output 
Mean bean ouput per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Period
Pure stand
Mixed stand
Mean bean yield (MT) per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Period
Pure stand
Mixed stand
Mean area for beans per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Period
Pure stand
Mixed stand
Total actual figures= % of farmers growing the crop*80,728 beneficiaries* mean output 
Figure 2: Production parameters for beans
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
21
Program wide, 33% of the targeted output of 40,000MT of beans was obtained during FY2004. The 
amount of beans obtained during FY2004 exceeded the baseline figure of 9,894MT by 34%. The mean 
area planted for beans under pure stand during FY2004 was similar to FY2003 figure of 0.5 Ha, though 
there was a 33% reduction in the area planted to beans in mixed stand. There was a 50% reduction in 
output for beans in pure stand, and a corresponding 56% reduction for beans in mixed stand. During 
FY2004, beans grown as pure stand had a 38% reduction in yield compared to FY2003 and 17%
reduction compared to baseline. 
However, a 33% increase in yield for beans grown in mixed stand was observed in FY2004 compared to 
both FY2003 and the baseline. The general reduction in bean output and yield was due to the erratic 
weather conditions experienced during FY2004. It was also observed that 42% of respondents used home 
saved seed (42%) or bought seed from shops or local markets (23%) due to high cost of improved seed of 
Ushs.1500 per kilo compared to local/home saved seed whose prices ranges between Ushs. 500-700 per 
kilo. Use of such uncertified seed also contributed to the downward trends for bean output and yield in 
FY2004. 
3.4.2 Cassava
mean cassava area planted per farmer
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Pure stand
Mixed stand
Figure 3: Production parameters for cassava
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
22
Since baseline, cassava under pure and mixed stand almost had a similar trend. However, there was a 
slight increased in area planted for both stand compared to FY2003. No data is presented on mean output 
and yield per farmer. Farmers could not quantify actual harvests for 2003B season because they harvest 
in piece-meal and cassava planted in 2004A season was still young.
3.4.4 Soybean 
There was a 25% increase in mean area planted for soybean in pure stand, and a corresponding 60% 
increase in the area planted for soybean in mixed stand in transition from FY2003 to FY2004. 
Mean soybean area per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand 
Mixed stand 
Mean soybean output per farmer
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand 
Mixed stand 
Mean soybean yield per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand 
Mixed stand 
Figure 4: Production parameters for soybean
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
23
Soybean output grown under pure stand increased by 33% since FY2003, while conversely, there was a 
38% reduction in yield for the same crop in FY2004. Output for soybean under mixed stand remained 
constant at 0.2 MT in FY2004, though there was a 16% decline in yield. 
3.4.5 Sunflower
Two grantees UOSPA and HA promote sunflower production in 12 districts of Uganda. The major 
sunflower districts of Lira, Apac, Gulu, Kitgum and Pader were insecure due to civil strife. This reduced 
the number of farmers growing the crop with eventual reduction in production levels.
Target vegetable oil figures compared to actual 
figures at mid-term
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
Vegetable oil
Targeted output 
Actual output 
Mean sunflower area per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand
Mixed stand
Mean sunflower yield (MT/Ha) per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand
Mixed stand
Mean sunflower output per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand
Mixed stand
.
Figure 5: Production parameters for sunflower
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
24
About 9% of the targeted vegetable oil of 21,000MT was achieved during FY2004. Research shows a 
reduction in all production and productivity parameters for sunflower from FY2003 to FY2004. The 
average area planted for sunflower in pure stand remained constant at 0.5Ha, coupled with a 50%
decrease in area planted for sunflower in mixed stand. A 25% reduction in average output for sunflower 
under pure stand was observed in transition from FY2003 to FY2004, and 66% reduction in output for 
mixed stand. 
A similar trend was observed for sunflower yield, having a 9% reduction in yield for pure stand with 
constant yield of 0.4MT/Ha for mixed stand crop respectively compared to FY2003. However, actual 
output and yield figures would be higher if it wasn’t for late and unevenly distributed rains particularly in 
2004A season resulting in poor yields.
3.4.6 Upland Rice
The crop is predominantly promoted by three grantees, NALG, BUCADEF and H/A. But NALG farmers 
grow more of paddy than upland rice, which is traditionally known by the farmers and consumers. It is 
after intervention, when the grantee expects that farmers would gradually appreciate and adopt upland 
varieties. Of the total production, upland rice contributed 6% of 81,896MT output of grains. MUBUKU 
farmers took advantage of favorable conditions within the scheme and grew upland rice for commercial 
purposes. The land area under upland rice was doubled from FY2003 to FY2004. No rice crop was 
planted in mixed stand.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
25
Mean upland rice yield MT/Ha per farmer
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand 
Mean upland rice area per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand
Mean upland rice output per farmer
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Baseline FY2003 FY2004
Period
Pure stand
(MT/Ha)
Figure 6. Production parameters for upland rice
Upland rice output had an increase of 29% from FY2003 to FY2004, and a 50% increase in transition 
from the baseline to FY2004. Similarly, upland rice yield increased by 25% in transition from FY2003 to 
FY2004. The increase in rice output and yield in FY2004 was attributed to the use of certified seed
(100%) and better crop management particularly in MUBUKU scheme whose yield level was as high as 
2.8MT/Ha in 2003B season.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
26
3.5 Rate of adoption of technologies
In order to enhance agricultural productivity, all grantees have been advocating improved agronomic 
practices. This is done through trainings, field demonstrations and provision of extension services. With 
exception of pest and disease and soil fertility it was found that there was a high adoption of improved 
agronomic technologies. Despite the trainings, other technologies related to post harvest handling and 
marketing, farm planning and record keeping registered low adoption rates. Section 3.6 discusses the 
barriers to technology adoption specifically with low percentages, which were highlighted by
respondents.
3.5.1. Crop agronomy and farm planning
Table 9. Percentage distribution of technology adoption by crop
Technology Maize Beans Cassava Soybean Sunflower Upland rice
Base
line 
Mid￾term 
Base
line 
Mid￾term 
Base
line 
Mid￾term 
Base
line 
Mid￾term 
Base
line 
Mid￾term 
Baseli
ne 
Mid￾term 
Timely 
planting
85 77 84 81 76 85 n/a 96 82 82 74 92
Row line 
planting
95 99 56 92 89 95 n/a 100 50 99 9 100
Recommended 
spacing
50 92 29 91 49 91 n/a 99 20 96 9 100
Weed 
management
87 91 86 88 78 83 n/a 86 82 83 66 93
Pest/disease 
management
11 22 6 23 7 13 n/a 13 3 17 18 39
Soil fertility 
management
25 69 23 62 25 62 n/a 65 26 69 21 80
Planting 
improved seed
30 83 5 59 26 72 n/a 94 26 95 24 100
Farm work 
plan
n/a 47 n/a 50 n/a 38 n/a 46 n/a 42 n/a 73
Record 
keeping
n/a 49 n/a 55 n/a 40 n/a 54 n/a 43 n/a 72
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Over 80% of the farmers interviewed carried out timely planting for all the target crops as soon as it 
started raining, while over 90% of the respondents planted in lines. Similarly, 90% of the respondents 
planted the target crops following the recommended spacing, while over 83% of them carried out 
weeding. This is a general improvement for the farmers at mid-term compared to the baseline situation. 
Although the percentage of farmers carrying out pest management at mid-term was greater than at 
baseline, the figures are still low, the highest being 39% in upland rice production. . Pest infestation and 
damage tends to increase during long dry spells, as was the situation particularly in 2004A season. Given 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
27
that a few respondents did not control pests, high crop damage and loss could have happened and this 
could explain the low output and yield for almost all the target crops in FY2004. 
There was a general improvement of farmers (over 60%) carrying out proper soil fertility management, 
notably for crop rotation rather than improved fertilizers in FY2004 compared to baseline. Similarly, 
more farmers in FY2004 used improved seed material for the target crops (over 50%) compared to the 
baseline. However, it should be noted that 59% of the farmers grew improved beans, which was lowest 
compared to other crops. This could explain the low figures for output and yield for this crop at mid￾term.
Farming as a business is hinged upon the premise of proper farm planning and record keeping. It was 
generally noted that program-wide, not many farmers prepared individual farm work plans and production 
records. Percentages of farmers carrying out these practices were generally below 46%, with the 
exception of those growing upland rice mostly in MUBUKU. Much as respondents attested to the fact 
that they were taught by the FEWs how to prepare farm work plans and records, but were (the farmers) 
reluctant to document and use them. 
3.5.2 Post harvest handling and Storage and marketing 
Table 10. Major drying and storage facilities during Baseline, FY 2003 and Mid-term
Facility Percentage
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term 
Drying facilities
Tarpaulin 9 26 31
Crib 3 14 16
Bare ground/none 84 56 63
Papyrus mat 6 2 20
Storage facilities
Crib n/a 19 19
Granary n/a 8 27
Separate house with 
earth floor
4.3 11 30
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
There is a direct relationship between quality and economic benefits, therefore grantees tried to improve 
farmers’ awareness and skills in proper handling of produce through training seminars and practical
demonstrations in using better PHHS technologies. Percentage of farmers using cribs remained constant 
and farmers with separate stores increase by 172% from FY2003. Further, there was an improvement in 
the usage of tarpaulin sheet from 26% to 31%, though drying on bare ground was still common among the 
targeted population. Indeed, poor post-harvest handling was mainly observed in Apac, Mbale and Kamuli 
districts. This factor still remains a challenge to the program, if farmers’ incomes are to improve. The 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
28
fact that traders/middlemen, the main buyers at farm gate (the main marketing outlet) do offer the same 
price regardless of quality, may affect the level of adoption. Limitations to adoption are discussed in 
section 3.6.
3.6 Cause of non-adoption of technologies
Across technologies, labor constraint and financial resources were reported as the major limitations to 
adoption. This implies that individually, incomes obtained from the target crops are not sustainable 
enough for re-ploughing back into farming. 
Table 11. Reasons why farmers did not adopt pest and disease management
List of reasons % of respondents during FY2003 % of respondents during FY2004
Reported low pest damage 15 41
Lacked money for buying inputs 50 44
Lack of knowledge 11 9
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Focus group discussions reported a wide range of pest and diseases like leaf bright for soybean, stalk 
borer and monkeys that commonly attacks maize. Kamuli farmers pointed out the striga weed, which is 
common in cereal fields and greatly, reduces yields. Focus group discussions confirmed that whereas 
maize farmers control pests and diseases by rouging; they have no remedy for beans. They urged that 
more money is used at planting time and by the time pest infestation occurs, they have no money to 
purchase pesticides.
Table 12. Reasons why farmers did not adopt soil fertility management
List of reasons % of respondents during FY2003 % of respondents during FY2004
Lacked money for buying inputs 31 31
Soils still fertile/No need 67 62
Lack of knowledge 14 8
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Whereas some farmers from all the six focus group discussions reported to plant both local and improved 
seed. They affirmed that none of them used improved fertilizers on their individual fields. Some believe 
the soils were fertile enough while others didn’t have money to buy them. So when they consider other 
costs like hiring labor, they opt to omit costs for fertilizers as one of the ways to reduce costs.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
29
Table 13. Reasons why farmers did not adopt use of plastic sheet for drying
List of reasons % of respondents during FY2004
It is costly to construct 83
No need 5
Had other drying facility 6
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Table 14. Reasons why farmers did not use store in crib
List of reasons % of respondents during FY2004
It is costly to construct 46
Produces small quantities 5
Lack of knowledge 21
No need 11
Thefts 10
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Focus group discussions confirmed that whereas grantees constructed cribs for demonstration individual 
farmers had not replicated them. While some participants reported not to use cribs for fear of thieves, 
others perceived the cost of constructing cribs as high. It was estimated that a 3MT- crib costs about 
Ushs. 200,000. Farmers reported that they produce small quantities therefore it was not cost effective to 
construct cribs. Though farmers perceived the cost of PHHS technologies as high, they tend to sell 
immediately after harvest (34%) and others sell as need arose (47%). With the liberalization of the 
economy farmers had options to sell to any market. The need for future storage therefore may not arise as 
majority produce at subsistence level. 
In Kamuli district, sensitization on the use of a hand sheller and a motorized maize sheller was done by 
the grantee. Although farmers expressed that they had shown interest in buying the hand sheller, they 
were not clear on the procurement procedure, where farmers had to order with cash payment and not cash 
on delivery. But the grantee does not facility of procuring equipment for farmers to pay later. Farmers 
explained the advantages of using a hand sheller like having clean maize i.e. no broken grain, they cited 
one disadvantage of the hand sheller as time consuming since small quantities are shelled at time while 
shelling using a stick, the activity is accomplished in a short time. With respect to tangible technologies 
particularly for PHHS, farmers still expected the program to provide them freely; even if some machines 
cost as less as Ushs.1,500/- per unit.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
30
Table 15. Reasons why farmers did not keep farm records/work plans
List of reasons % of respondents during FY2003 % of respondents during FY2004
Lack of adequate knowledge 50 18
Not important N/a 17
Reluctant/no individual commitment 38 32
Illiteracy 16 23
Others N/a 5
All participants of the focus group discussions recognized the benefits of keeping such that they are able 
to compare expenses to incomes, know why they make losses and adjust accordingly to increase on profit. 
Whereas Kamuli and Kibaale farmers admitted having been trained on the practice, they affirmed that 
they do not keep records. The main reasons given for non- adoption were illiteracy and lack of individual 
commitment. Though some farmers insisted that they sought assistance from literate friends to write for 
them, it was not very useful because they could not read. But the proportion of non-committal farmers 
slightly dropped showing that farmers are gradually realizing the importance of records.
On the use of Project Income Statement, one farmer commented that it does not make sense for one to 
plan if he has no money while others gave up on records because whenever they attempted to record, their 
projections reflected losses. For those reasons, farmers prefer to operate their farm activities without a 
clear picture of results. A participant in Kibaale district reported to have invested Ushs.250,000 in bean 
production, harvested 300kgs and her gross income was Ushs.60,000. But her explanation appeared
unrealistic. At price of Ushs.400 per kilo BUFA offers her farmers, she would get a gross income of 
Ushs.120,000/-. This shows her projections were not conclusive and she did not properly grasp FaaB 
concepts.
Compared to other districts, MUBUKU farmers in Kasese district scored the highest percentage of 85% 
on record keeping for maize mainly because one needs to have proper farming records to benefit from the 
services of the revolving fund for accountability purposes. Farmers expect financial benefits in return; 
and appreciate them as a cost-benefit towards their farming activities. Other districts lack proper and 
organized facilities, as MUBUKU’s and this partly explains why farmers don’t bother to keep proper 
records. .
3.7 Access and utilization of market information
Half way through the program, 94% of program beneficiaries had access to market information related to
price and quality of agricultural produce from different sources as shown in Table 19. Farmers use 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
31
market information to decide which crops to grow in subsequent seasons, what, when and where to sell 
and improve quality as well.
Table 16. Sources of market information for the beneficiaries
Source FY2003 Mid-term
% %
Traders 25 29
Extension workers 47 27
Radio 29 18
Other farmers 10 15
Notices N/a 1.8
Newspapers 0.3 0.3
Other N/a 2
 (ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Similar to FY2003, traders were the most common source of market information, followed by extension 
workers and the radio. Although farmers reported extension staff as one of the major sources of market 
information, farmers recalled and quoted traders as the main source of information because traders were 
more involved in the actual buying of their produce than the grantees. However, in Kasese and Lira 
districts, where farmers largely sold their produce to MUBUKU and UOSPA, extension workers were 
quoted as the main source of market information. 
Farmers depending on region, quoted stations such as CBS FM, Open-Gate FM, Radio Lira FM and 
Radio Way FM, which MIS uses to disseminate price and market information. No respondent reported 
using the MTN-SMS market information facility launched during FY2004. As the program targets the 
rural poor, the facility is more relevant to big farmers, traders/produce buyers and other users who can 
afford mobile telephone services. The fact that farmers mainly rely on traders for market information and 
yet they are the main buyers at farm-gate, shows traders determine and set prices for the farmers, thus 
reducing their bargaining power. 
3.8 Credit accessibility and utilization
About 38% of the beneficiaries at mid-term accessed credit services for their agricultural activities 
compared to 14% at baseline. The main reasons for not accessing credit services include lack of credit 
services (69%), insufficient collateral (8%) and risk averseness (15%). Given the risks involved in 
production credit, a few financial institutions venture to lend money for agricultural activities particularly 
on a small-scale.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
32
Table 17. Percentage distribution of credit by type and purpose at baseline, FY2003 and mid-term 
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Indicator % % %
Credit type
Cash 
Farm inputs 
82
18
17
48
29
71
Loan use
Crop farming
Livestock
Trade/Business*
Household food items
Household non-food items
81
1
2
N/a
N/a
50
N/a
N/a
5
11
93
0
5
1
1
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
Whereas at baseline 82% received cash credit, 29% of the respondents received credit in cash form. A 
large proportion of respondents (71%) reported that they received credit in kind, in form of inputs. 
MUBUKU farmers received production loan in form of inputs and access the existing savings and credit 
scheme to meet their farm labor requirements. The amount of credit in monetary terms is then deducted 
from farmers’ earnings at the time of marketing. The average amount of credit in cash at mid-term was 
Ushs.171,182 compared to Ushs.194,300 in FY2003. More cash was spent on fertilizers at mid-term of 
Ushs.80,733 compared to Ushs.93,750 on FY2003 , followed by land clearance at Ushs.70,000. Other 
farm expenses, planting, first and second ploughing weeding, planting material and harvesting ranged 
between Ushs.27,500 and Ushs.67,000 compared to FY2003 when the same expenses ranged between 
Ushs.20,000 and Ushs.36,000.
Table 18: Different form of credit in kind obtained by farmers during FY2003-Mid-term
Loan usage FY2003 Mid-term
% %
Seed loan 44 85
Fertilizers 19 53
Pesticides 9 31
Herbicides 9 33
Farm implements 4 10
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
About 85% of farmers received credit in form of seed compared to 44% during FY2003. At mid-term a 
bigger proportion of farmers obtained fertilizers (53%) and herbicides (33%) on credit than last FY. As a 
result of grantee trainings, progressive farmers working with NALG, BUCADEF and MUBUKU
improved efficiency on their farms by using zero tillage. Zero tillage does not only reduce farm labor 
requirements but also permits timely management of field activities.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
33
3.9 Farm gate prices and gross income from the target crops
Mean gross incomes were computed by multiplication of the mean farm-gate prices and mean crop output 
sold in different forms, while crop value is the product between the total quantities of crop output 
obtained and mean farm gate prices. Table 19 shows the trend in gross income of the target crops. 
Table 19. Mean total output and level of crop prices at farm gate and local markets at baseline and 
mid-term situation
Crop Mean total 
Output per 
farmer 
(MT)
Mean total 
Output per 
farmer (MT)
Farm-gate 
price/Ushs/MT
Farm-gate
Price (Ushs/MT)
Market prices 
(Ushs/MT) 
Baseline Mid-term Baseline Mid-term Mid-term 
Maize 0.606 1.123 70,000 304,000 262,000
Beans 0.163 0.229 289,000 410,000 450,000
Soybean n/a 0.345 n/a 579,000 600,000
Sunflower 0.403 0.351 188,000 333,000 350,000
Upland rice 0.583 0.993 336,000 600,000 800,000
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
There was a shift in mean total output per farmer for maize and beans and a drop for sunflower and 
upland rice from the baseline. Similarly, there was an improvement in farm gate price for all crops. 
Market prices were higher than price at farm gate with percentage difference ranging between 4%-25%. 
Prices at farm gate for maize were higher in Kasese at Ushs.600 per kilo, where MUBUKU farmers grow 
maize on contract for FICA a local company multiplying hybrid maize seed leading to a higher increase 
in the mean farm gate price for maize. While Lira farmers reported the highest farm gate price for beans 
of Ushs.600 per kilo. Kibaale farmers reported the highest price of Ushs.420 at a local store because 
BUFA facilitates collective marketing to WFP and other big buyers.
Table 20. Crop value and gross income per farmer from the target crops at baseline and Mid-term 
Crop Mean crop 
value
(Ushs) 
Mean crop 
value 
(Ushs.)
Mean 
quantity sold 
as grain per 
farmer (MT)
Mean 
quantity sold 
as grain per 
farmer (MT)
Mean gross 
income
(Ushs.)
Mean gross 
income 
(Ushs.)
Baseline Mid-term Baseline Mid-term Baseline Mid-term 
Maize 42,420 341,392 0.367 0.779 44,000 244,329
Beans 47,107 93,890 0.047 0.127 38,000 81,338
Soybean n/a 199,755 n/a 0.178 n/a 146,363
Sunflower 75,764 116,883 0.231 0.231 87 65,756
Upland rice 195,888 560,400 0.503 0.243 293,758 101,000
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
34
In general, there has been an improvement in crop values for all the target crops since the baseline survey, 
however, the highest percentage at mid-term compared to the baseline survey was realized in maize 
(82%), followed by upland rice (66%), sunflower having the least (36%). This shift is attributed to an 
increase in prices and output sold since baseline. Increased production due to program intervention in 
form of training and extension support increased the surplus for sale. Similarly, the mean farm-gate price 
for maize as shown in Table 21 is higher than the current mean market price of Ushs.200,000/MT in 
Uganda due to the fact that MUBUKU farmers are contract seed producers for FICA Seed Company, and 
they sell their maize at 600/= per kilo. There was an improvement in gross income values except upland 
rice because farmers hadn’t sold much of their produce.
3.8.1 Farmers achievements from the incomes
Table 21. below shows major farmers’ achievements from the target crops during the FY2004.
Table 21. Farmers’ achievements from the target crops during FY2004 and Mid-term
FY2003 Mid-term
Achievement % %
Paid school fees 53 71
Re-invested in farming 27 55
Bought food for the household N/a 47
Bought animals 25 46
Built a house 15 27
Paid for land 5 15
Invested in a shop 2 6
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
There was an increase in expenditure on education (71%) from 53% during FY2003, re-investing in 
agriculture (55%) from 27%, house improvement, livestock in stock. Focus group discussions confirmed 
that beneficiaries bought pigs, chicken and paid schools dues for their children. The results in the above 
table are consistent with the findings of the Uganda Bureau of Statistics' from the National Household 
Survey for 2002/03, which reported that percentage of school children enrolled increases with increased 
household income. A large proportion of income was spent on education. 
Re-investing into farming and food purchases were some of the indicators of farmers' appreciation of food 
security principles that are being promoted by the program. Most of the food items bought were of the 
animal protein nature and they included eggs (87%), meat (84%), milk and milk products (77%), and fish 
(55%). (Refer to figure 9).
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
35
3.8.2 Dwelling units characteristics of the surveyed population
Dwelling unit characteristics as a household indicator are used as a proxy to measure the change in 
income and livelihood status of project beneficiaries. 
Table 22. Percent distribution of construction materials for a) walls, b) floor and c) roof
a) Wall material
Wall structure %
FY2003 Mid-term 
Burnt stabilized brick 23 32
Cement blocks 1 0.3
Unborn bricks 20 32
Pole and mud 54 35
Wood 2 0
b) Floor material
Wall structure %
FY2003 Mid-term 
Concrete 1 2
Cement screed 9 18
Rammed earth 85 81
Wood 6 0
c) Roofing material
Wall structure %
FY2003 Mid-term 
Iron sheets 41 61
Tiles 0 0
Asbestos 0 0
Papyrus 2 0.3
Grass 56 39
It was found that pole and mud walled, rammed earth and iron-roofed houses were the commonest 
dwelling units. However compared to FY2003 there was an upward trend of burnt stabilized brick, iron 
roofed and cemented screed dwelling units of 9%, 10% and 9% respectively. Use of pole and mud for the 
walls was declining while use of bricks was increasing, a positive indicator showing that beneficiaries are 
improving their housing conditions. About 26% of the beneficiaries reported to spend part of their 
income from proceeds of the target crops on house improvement. As expected, more than 80% of the 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
36
houses had rammed earth floor and is not significantly different from national figure of 83% of the total 
population (UBOS, 2003).
3.10. Nutrition and Dietary Diversity
The grantees enhance farmers’ awareness and utilization of food types available at household level by 
encouraging them to set up fruit and vegetable gardens and poultry units, consuming different food types 
in proper proportions promoting better feeding practices among young children, expectant /lactating 
mothers and the sick. In order to determine improvement in nutrition practices of the target population 
changes in DDS and level of stunting, underweight and wasted children were assessed.
Dietary diversity
Dietary diversity is a measure of the quality of diet of a given population and is measured by using the 
dietary diversity score (DDS). Dietary diversity is the number of major food groups consumed by a given 
population over a given period of time To determine the Dietary Diversity Score (DDS) of the targeted 
population, the 12 major food crops recognized by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the 
United Nations were used as the main yard stick as listed below. A 24-hour recall method was used to 
capture this data. Figures 7 and 8 illustrate the consumption of different groups and their sources at mid￾term.
Food Group 1: Cereals Food Group 7: Fish 
Food Group 2: Roots and Tubers Food Group 8: Oils/fats
Food Group 3: Pulses and Legumes Food Group 9: Sugar/ honey
Food Group 4: Milk and milk products Food Group 10: Fruits 
Food Group 5: Eggs Food Group 11: Vegetables 
Food Group 6: Meat and offal Food Group 12: Miscellaneous 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
37
DDS and number of meals eaten per day per household, 
Baseline, FY2003, FY2004
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Baseline FY2003 Mid-term
Period
Numbers
DDS
No. of meals per
day
It was found that the dietary diversity score (DDS) was not significantly different ranging between 5.1 
and 6.5 by district and the mean as 5.5. Though the mean score was below that of 6.5 during FY2003 it is 
a 100% achievement of the program target of FY2004 (mid-term situation.). A higher percentage of root 
tubers, cereals, legumes and oils were mainly consumed due to improved production resulting from 
grantee training programs. Observations and discussions showed low percentages for vegetables and
fruits were mainly due to the dry weather conditions.
Mean % consumption of food types at baseline compared to mid-term 
situation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Food groups
Percentages
baseline
Mid-term
Figure 7. Mean % consumption of food types of program beneficiaries at baseline compared to mid-term situation
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
38
Sources of food as at Mid-term situation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Food groups
Percentages
self-grown
 bought/donated
Figure 8. Sources of food as at Mid-term situation
In general, root tubers (87%), cereals (83%) and legumes (77%) were predominantly consumed at mid￾term compared to baseline situation because they are the ones mainly promoted by the program; they are 
grown and therefore readily available at household level. Beneficiaries supplemented their diet by
purchasing animal proteins foods that constitutes eggs, meat, milk products and fish. It was found that 
47% of the beneficiaries spent part of their income from sale of the target crops on food.
With regard to vegetable growing, 65% and 66% of the beneficiaries established vegetable and fruit 
gardens during FY2004. With the exception of Kibaale and Kamuli districts, other districts recorded over 
70% achievement. Grantees like BUCADEF, MUBUKU and UOSPA stepped up vegetable/fruit 
production by setting up multiplication gardens to ensure adequate supply of planting material. In Lira 
district, farmers took advantage of wetlands; they had better vegetable gardens even during the dry spell. 
On average, every household reported to grow 3 types of vegetable and fruits respectively. Green leafy 
vegetables, cabbages, tomatoes, eggplants, onions and carrots were the most popular types of vegetables 
at household level. Further, it was noted that farmers consume bean and cassava leaves and they serve the 
same purpose as green vegetables. It was observed that although 80% and 43% reported to grow fruits 
and vegetables, less than 10% consumed the two food types. This is because at the time of data 
collection, the weather was generally dry to allow sufficient growth of vegetables in particular.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
39
Breakfast fed to children below 5 years
Source FY2003 Mid-term
% %
Maize 25 34
Milk 20 23
Cassava/sweet potato 17 1.2
Black tea 13 17
Beans 6 N/a
Matooke/Banana 5 0.4
Roasted maize 3 0.4
Greens 1 N/a
Eggs N/a 2
(ACDI/VOCA surveys for FY2002-04) 
At mid-term beneficiaries fed their children more on maize porridge, milk and black tea. Children 
feeding on maize porridge and milk increased to 34% and 23% from 25% and 20% respectively, showing 
increased awareness and appreciation of nutrition knowledge given by the grantees. Indeed beneficiaries 
identified at least poor signs of feeding among children including swollen tummy (69%), loss of weight 
(15%), retarded growth (8%) and general weakness (4%) in that order. All respondents (100%)
acknowledged receiving information on child nutrition compared to 46% at baseline, signifying an
improvement in the level of awareness in nutrition education.
Table 23. Percentage of children below five years who were stunted, wasted and under weight
Age 
months
Sex % stunted (<-2sd) % under weight (<-2sd % wasted (<-2sd)
Baseline Mid-term Baseline Mid-term Baseline Mid-term 
12-23.9 Male 42 28 21 44 0 0
Female 35 50 13 14 0 0
24-35.9 Male 38 21 28 25 2 0
Female 35 13 21 19 0 0
36-47.9 Male 40 21 7 20 0 7
Female 42 11 12 16 0 0
48-59.9 Male 39 17 14 7 0 3
Female 35 9 12 0 0 0
Sample 
mean
39 30 25 19.7 1 4.2
(ACDI/VOCA Impact assessment surveys for FY2003-04)
Information on nutritional status of sampled households was assessed by using indices on stunting, 
underweight and wasting for children less than five years of age. The 359 sampled households comprised 
of 2,896 members of which 575 (20%) were under five years old. In order to minimize error, resulting 
from inaccurate reporting on age, 225 (39%) children whose immunization cards were available were 
included for anthropometrical measurements. 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
40
The proportion of children less than fives of age with low weight for age decreased from 25% to 19.7% 
while percentage of children with low height for age decreased from 39% to 30%. Positive changes for 
stunting and underweight were more significant among children between 24-35.9 months and 48-59.9 
months respectively. This implies improved nutrition status among children less than five years of age. 
The increase in DDS (4.3-5.5), increase in percentage of households feeding their children on milk (23%) 
and porridge (34%), growing vegetables/fruits and better incomes due to program intervention may be 
contributing factors to the changes in nutrition status. However, nutrition status is affected by other 
factors like safe water availability and hygiene practices and disease control. The program does not 
directly address these factors.
3.11 Major crop production constraints and suggested solutions 
Crop production and marketing in the tropics and more especially, in the Ugandan situation, is
characterized by a series of constraints. Given that this is primarily a rain-fed type of agriculture, farmers 
tend to suffer from weather extremes. Outstanding problems were crop damage by drought, inadequate 
financial resources and high labor costs.
Table 24: Farmers' views of the main crop production and marketing constraints at mid-term by 
percentage
Constraints %
FY2003
%
Mid-term
Drought damage 26 28
Lack of capital n/a 14
High cost of labor 6 9
Poor road conditions 12 8
Low price of farm produce 17 8
Pests and disease damage 17 7
High cost of farm inputs 35 7
Labor shortage 21 6
Lack of farm credit facilities 2 5
Lack of storage facilities 23 5
Though percentages reported at mid-term were low, farmers raised almost similar problems and they have 
a direct impact on output and yield levels of the target crops. The program may not have a remedy for 
natural disasters like drought, but farmers (30%) felt that the program could address the problem of better 
markets and provide credit services. With the liberalization of the economy, it is the responsibility of the 
private sector and farmers as well to attempt and penetrate better markets. In the short run, the program 
could continue to lobby for better organized and strengthen the existing local structures i.e. farmers
groups.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
41
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. By end of FY2004, the program registered an accumulative number of 100,131, which is 83% of 
the target of 120,000 beneficia ries of the Life of the Project by end of 2006. Other production 
parameters namely mean output, area planted and productivity per unit area reduced compared to 
FY2003; but remained above baseline levels. This is attributed to the unfavorable weather
conditions in FY2004 as reported by most farmers.
2. Basing on survey results, the program achieved 82% of the target of 100,000MT of grains, 33% 
of 40,000MT of beans, and 8% of 21,000MT for vegetable oil. Poor program performance 
resulted from adverse weather conditions particularly in 2004A season and insecurity in the 
northern parts of the country.
3. There was high adoption in the use of agronomic practices including planting in line and
recommended spacing and weed management compared to other technologies. Drying on bare 
ground remained the main facility for drying produce and the percentage of farmers storing in 
cribs remained constant as during FY2003. However, using tarpaulin, granary and separate 
storage houses improved to 31%, 27% and 30% respectively.
4. Approximately, 94% of the farmers accessed market information, which helped farmers to select 
which crops to grow in a particular season, what price to sell at, where to sell and how to improve 
on quality. But traders were main source of information compared to FY2003.
5. There was an improvement in crop value and gross incomes from the crops mainly due high 
farm-gate prices at mid-term compared to baseline figures. Farmers (53%) still sold at farm gate 
as they produce and sell in small quantities. Except for upland rice, there was a general increase 
in the farm gate prices of all the crops from baseline to FY2004 (mid-term). The biggest increase 
was for maize due to MUBUKU prices, where farmers are seed producers and therefore obtain 
better prices than other areas. Retail prices in local markets were slightly higher than farm-gate 
prices.
6. Farm planning and record keeping activities were below 60% though were above baseline. It is 
proposed that the program pilots with a few farmers at a time taking note of limitations and 
lessons learnt by the beneficiaries before expanding to other areas. Functional Adult Literacy 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
42
(FAL) program may also be incorporated to refresh/equip farmers with better reading and writing 
skills. The program needs to give more attention to these areas in the remaining years. 
7. Sale proceeds were just enough to meet farmers’ basic needs such as education, food purchases 
and house improvement. Compared to FY2003, there was an upward trend of burnt stabilized 
brick, iron roofed and cemented screed dwelling units of 9%, 10% and 9%. A decline in the use 
of pole and mud for the walls and an increase in stabilized brick units is a positive indicator 
showing that beneficiaries are improving their housing conditions. 
8. The level of access to nutrition education for infants among program beneficiaries increased from 
46% to 100%. The number of stunted and underweight children dropped by 23% and 21%. The 
average number of meals consumed increased from 3.0 at baseline to 3.9, at mid-term. Likewise 
dietary diversity score (DDS) of the targeted population increased by 83% from baseline
indicating a high degree of consumption of different food types. This shows increased nutrition 
status among the targeted households as a result of grantee efforts in addition to other factors.
9. During FY2004, 65% and 66% of the beneficiaries set up vegetable and fruits gardens but the 
consumption of vegetables was 10%, which calls for more sensitization on maintenance of
backyard vegetable growing even during dry spells. 
10. Farmers raised almost similar problems as last year and baseline time. They include prolonged 
drought, high labor and input costs and inadequate capital. To tackle the problem of insufficient 
capital and high costs of production in the short run, the program could start with a few organized 
groups using the revolving fund system. But the strategy is only effective with proper
management and coordination, better records, accountability both at grantee and farmer level, a 
good marketing system and of course, favorable weather conditions.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
43
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Percentage distribution of source of farm inputs by crop at baseline, FY2003, and 
FY2004
Inputs Home saved Local market NGO/Grantee Stockiest Urban market
BL FY
03
FY
04
BL FY
03
FY
04
BL FY
03
FY
04
BL FY
03
FY
04
BL FY
03
FY
04
Maize seed 50 16 23 27 14 18 27 15 22 10 14 24 2 8 7
Beans seed 56 24 42 38 40 23 38 40 19 1 7 8 0 3 2
Cassava 
cuttings
50 63 64 4 1.8 0.5 4 2 5 2 n/a n/a 1 7 5
Soy beans n/a 20 14 n/a 23 10 n/a 23 46 n/a 5 10 n/a 10 5
Sunflower 
seed
30 9 10 35 4 4 35 4.3 51 3 13 16 3 22 6
Fertilizers, 
Pesticides,
Herbicides
2 4 44 2 44 2 53 10 0 n/a
Implements n/a 27 67 67 67 66.
7
5 1 1 1
Bags 8 18 89 56 89 56 2 1 n/a n/a
N.B. BL = Baseline; FY03 = FY2003; FY04 = FY2004
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
44
Appendix 2 Production parameters of target crops in pure stand by district during FY2004
District Maize Beans Cassava Soybean Sunflower Upland rice
Area 
(Ha) 
Output 
(MT)
Yield
(MT/Ha)
Area 
(Ha)
Output 
(MT)
Yield
(MT/Ha)
Area
 (Ha) 
Area
(Ha)
Output 
(MT)
Yield
(MT/Ha)
Area 
(Ha) 
Output 
(MT)
Yield
(MT/Ha)
Area 
(Ha)
Output 
(MT)
Yield
(MT/Ha)
Apac 0.80 0.70 1.10 0.50 0.21 0.48 0.50 0.50 0.22 0.56 0.40 0.28 0.72 0.29 0.06 0.07
Kibaale 0.96 1.51 1.77 0.60 0.22 0.48 0.37 0.20 0.07 0.35 - - - 0.37 0.09 0.45
Kasese 1.30 1.07 1.80 0.40 0.22 1.07 0.19 - - - - - - 0.40 1.86 2.78
Kiboga 0.70 0.95 1.42 0.30 0.24 0.85 0.30 0.10 0.02 0.19 - - - 0.30 0.21 0.39
Mbale 1.20 1.19 1.19 0.46 0.19 0.43 0.20 0.20 0.05 0.18 0.40 0.14 0.53 - - -
Kamuli 1.20 1.26 1.29 0.26 0.06 0.23 0.50 0.40 0.10 0.31 - - - - - -
Lira 0.70 0.32 0.47 0.60 0.12 0.25 0.60 0.50 0.18 0.41 0.50 0.22 0.54 - - -
Mean 0.96 1.03 1.30 0.47 0.19 0.53 0.40 0.50 0.17 0.45 0.50 0.25 0.64 1.30 0.889 1.44
Appendix 2 Production parameters of target crops in mixed stand by district during FY2004
District Maize Beans Cassava Soybean Sunflower FY2004
Area (Ha) Output (MT) Yield
(MT/Ha)
Area (Ha) Output (MT) Yield
(MT/Ha)
Area
 (Ha) 
Area
 (Ha)
Yield
(MT/Ha)
Yield Area (Ha) Output (MT) Yield
(MT/Ha)
Apac 0.45 0.38 0.82 0.48 0.34 0.45 0.50 0.40 0.19 0.38 0.34 0.28 0.29
Kibaale 0.45 0.19 0.79 0.38 0.43 0.45 0.30 - - - - - -
Kasese - - - - - - 0.10 - - - - - -
Kiboga 0.31 0.37 1.77 0.30 0.43 0.62 0.23 - - - - - -
Mbale 0.60 0.48 0.81 0.40 0.42 0.46 0.70 - - - - - -
Kamuli 0.45 0.60 1.64 0.10 0.06 0.26 0.40 0.40 0.33 0.35 - - -
Lira 0.45 0.17 0.75 0.46 0.27 0.37 0.68 0.50 0.35 0.46 0.37 0.20 0.38
Mean 0.45 0.31 0.99 0.40 0.34 0.46 0.47 0.50 0.29 0.42 0.36 0.23 0.35
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
45
Appendix 3. Production indicators by crop
Indicator Maize
Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term
% of farmers growing crop 72 63 86
Mean area planted, mixed stand (Ha) 0.6 0.8 0.96
Mean area planted, pure stand (Ha) 0.5 0.7 0.5
Mean output pure stand (MT) 0.8 1.7 1.2
Mean output mixed stand (MT) 0.6 0.7 0.4
Mean yield pure stand (MT/Ha) 1.4 2.2 1.3
Mean yield mixed stand (MT/Ha) 1.3 1.1 1.0
% Quantity of grain sold of total 
output
61 55 69
Production Beans
Indicator
Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term
% of farmers growing crop 76 68 72
Mean area planted, mixed stand (Ha) 0.3 0.5 0.5
Mean area planted, pure stand (Ha) 0.4 0.6 0.4
Mean output pure stand (MT) 0.2 0.4 0.2
Mean output mixed stand (MT) 0.2 0.3 0.2
Mean yield pure stand (MT/Ha) 0.6 0.8 0.5
Mean yield mixe d stand (MT/Ha) 0.4 0.4 0.5
% Quantity of grain sold of total 
output
30 69 55
Production Cassava
Indicator
Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term
% of farmers growing crop 35 63 86
Mean area planted, mixed stand (Ha) 0.4 0.8 0.96
Mean area planted, pure stand (Ha) 0.4 0.7 0.5
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
46
Indicator Soya bean
Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term
% of farmers growing crop N/a 23 70
Mean area planted, mixed stand (Ha) N/a 0.4 0.5
Mean area planted, pure stand (Ha) N/a 0.3 0.5
Mean output pure stand (MT) N/a 0.3 0.4
Mean output mixed stand (MT) N/a 0.2 0.2
Mean yield pure stand (MT/Ha) N/a 0.8 0.5
Mean yield mixed stand (MT/Ha) N/a 0.5 0.4
% Quantity of grain sold of total 
output
N/a 89 52
Indicator Upland rice
Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term
% of farmers growing crop 6 8 5
Mean area planted, mixed stand (Ha) 0.3 0.6 1.3
Mean area planted, pure stand (Ha) 0.0 0 0
Mean output pure stand (MT) 0.6 0.7 0.9
Mean output mixed stand (MT) N/a N/a 0.8
Mean yield pure stand (MT/Ha) 1.8 2 1.5
Mean yield mixed stand (MT/Ha) N/a N/a N/a
% Quantity of grain sold of total 
output
86 54 26
Production Sunflower
Indicator
Baseline FY
2003
Mid-term
% of farmers growing crop 11 31 65
Mean area planted, mixed stand (Ha) 0.9 0.6 0.5
Mean area planted, pure stand (Ha) 0.5 0.8 0.4
Mean output pure stand (MT) 0.5 0.5 0.4
Mean output mixed stand (MT) 0.2 0.3 0.1
Mean yield pure stand (MT/Ha) 0.7 0.7 0.6
Mean yield mixed stand (MT/Ha) 0.5 0.4 0.4
% Quantity of grain sold of total output 57 97 66
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
47
Appendix 4. Household questionnaire
Serial No._________
ACDI/VOCA PL-480 TITLE II MONETIZATION PROGRAM
SURVEY OF IMPACT ON FOOD SECURITY AND RURAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME DURING FY2004
1.0 IDENTIFICATION
1.1a Date of the interview_____________ b) Time started_________ c) Time ended_________
1.2 Interviewer’s code__________________
1.3 Name of Grantee___________________
1.4a Village___________________________ 1.4b) Parish____________________________ 
1.4c) Sub county________________________ 1.4d) District_________________________
2.0: HOUSEHOLD PARTICULARS
2.1a. Name of respondent _____________________________________________________
2.1 Name of household head___________________________________________________
2.2 Sex of household head 1 = Female 2 = Male
2.3 What is the age of the household head (years)?__________
2.4 What is the marital status of household head? 
1 = Single 2 = Married 3 = Widow/widower 4 = Separated/Divorced
2.5 What was the highest educational level attained by the household head? 
1 = None 2 = Adult education 3 = Primary 4 = Secondary 5 = Post secondary
2.6 Record in the table below number of members of the household (including the household head)
Sex Below 5 yrs 6-15 yrs 16-65 yrs Above 65 yrs
Male
Female
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
48
3.0 FARM PRODUCTION AND PRODUCTIVITY
3.1a) Total land holding (acres)_____ 3.1 b) Own land holding (acres)________
3.2 Show in the table below acreage and output during 2003B and 2004A.
CROP 2003B 2004A
Acreage Kg 
planted
Kg 
harvested*
Acreage Kg planted Kg 
harvested*
Maize Pure stand
Mixed
Beans Pure stand
Mixed
Cassava Pure stand
Mixed
Soybean Pure stand
Mixed
Sunflower Pure stand
Mixed
Upland rice Pure stand
(Unhusked) Mixed
*Kilos harvested include fresh, dry, consumed, bartered, and donated produce 
1 bag of fresh beans = 20 Kg dry beans; 140 fresh cobs of maize = 1 bag; Seven cobs of fresh maize is equal to 1kg of dry maize, 
1 bag of fresh of cassava=120-140 kgs of fresh tubers.
3.3 Comments on table above e.g. Drought affected season etc.
2003B 
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__
2004A________________________________________________________________________________________
___
3.4a Mention in the table below the varieties of planting material used during 2003B, and 2004A for the 
target crops.
2003B
Varieties planted
Crop Name of Local variety Names of Improved variety
Bean seed
Maize seed 
Cassava material
Soya bean seed
Upland rice
Sunflower seed
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
49
3.4b
2004A
Varieties planted
Crop Name of Local variety Names of Improved variety
Bean seed
Maize seed 
Cassava material
Soya bean seed
Upland rice
Sunflower seed
3.5 What was the source and cost of the following farm inputs in 2004A season?
2004A Source of farm inputs If bought, state unit cost (UShs)
Maize seed (Kg)
Beans seed (Kg)
Cassava material (Ushs/bag)
Soybean seed (Kg)
Sunflower seed (Kg)
Upland rice (Kg)e
Fertilizers (Kg)
(e.g., DAP, UREA)
Herbicide (Ltrs) 
(e.g., Roundup)
Pesticides (Kgs/Ltrs) 
(e.g., Ambush, Bull dock)
Bag (No.)
Farm tools (e.g., hoes, slashers, 
pangas)
Others (specify)
Codes for source of farm inputs are:1=Stockist 2=Local shops/market 3=NGO (Specify) 
_________________
4 = Family owned 5 = borrowed from a neighbor 6 = Other (Specify) 
____________________________
3.6 What was the cost of the following farm operations during 2004A for ONE ACRE of Maize (for the districts 
of Kamuli, Kasese,, Kiboga,, Sironko ) or Sunflower (for the districts of Lira, Apac)
SELECTED CROP ______________________________(Indicate the crop)
Family Hired
Operation No. of 
people
Man days Oxen 
(Ushs)
Tractor
(Ushs)
Oxen 
(Ushs)
Hired labor 
(Ushs)
Land clearance
1
st ploughing 
2
nd ploughing
Planting
Weeding/thinning 
Fertilizer application
Spraying
Harvesting
Transportation*
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
50
N.B. Communal labor is treated as family labor; Transportation* = From the garden to the home.
3.7 What was the cost of these types of labor (Ushs/man-day) for ploughing during 2003B and 2004A? (This 
applies only to farmers who hired labor )
Type of labor 2003B 2004A
Casual
Permanent
Contract
3.7.1 Did you have access to extension services by the grantee? 
2003B 2004A
1 = Yes 2 = No
3.7.2 If yes, how many times in the season? 
3.7.3 What type of services do you receive from the grantee extension agent? (Multiple answers are possible)
1 = Farm visits 2 = Advisory 3 = Training 4 = Farm input purchasing
5.= Others (Specify)
3.7.4 How has the extension service delivery by the grantee been effected since the project started? 
1 = Very adequate
2 = Adequate
3 = Inadequate
3.8 a) During 2003B did you carry out any of the following farming practices? (Tick where appropriate)
Practice Crop
Maize Beans Cassava Soybean Sunflower Upland rice
Timely planting (Onset of rains)
Row/Line planting
Recommended spacing 
Weed management
Pest management
Soil fertility management
Planting improved seed
Farm work plan*
Record on farm activities e.g. planting 
dates, seed/acreage planted etc.*
Practice 1=Yes
2=No
If no, state ONE main reason why
Timely planting
Recommended spacing 
Row/Line planting
Weed management
Pest management
Soil fertility management
Planting improved seed
Farm work plan*
Record on farm activities e.g. 
planting dates, seed/acreage 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
51
planted etc.*
Soil fertility mgt incl. fertilizer application, mulching, crop rotation
*Note: enumerator should request the respondent for actual records
3.8 b) During 2004A season did you carry out any of the following farming practices? (Tick where appropriate)
Practice Crop
Maize Beans Cassava Soybean Sunflower Upland rice
Timely planting
Recommended spacing 
Row/Line planting
Weed management
Pest management
Soil fertility management
Farm work plan*
Record on farm activities e.g. 
planting dates, seed/acreage 
planted etc.*
*Note: enumerator should request the respondent for actual records.
Practice 1=Yes
2=No
If no, state ONE main reason why
Timely planting
Recommended spacing 
Row/Line planting
Weed management
Pest management
Soil fertility management
Planting improved seed
Farm work plan*
Record on farm activities e.g. 
planting dates, seed/acreage 
planted etc.*
Soil fertility mgt incl. fertilizer application, mulching, crop rotation
*Note: enumerator should request the respondent for actual records
3.9a) Did you receive any agricultural production credit during the two seasons 2003B and 2004A 
1 = Yes 2 = No 2003B 2004A
If NO, 
3.9b) State the major reason for not acquiring production credit
1= Lack of security 2 = No source of credit 3 = No need 4 = Other 
(Specify)_______________
If YES,
3.9c) If in cash form, what was the amount (UShs)? _____________________
3.9d) If in kind, state the form of the loan in the table below
1=Yes 2=No
Form of loan 2003B 2004A
Seed
Fertilizer
Pesticide
Herbicide
Agricultural implements
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
52
Others (specify)
3.9e) If the loan was in cash indicate how you utilized it.
Type of expense Amount allocated (Ushs)
Buying planting material/seed
Land clearance 
1
st ploughing
2
nd ploughing
Planting
Weed/thinning
Fertilizer/chemicals
Harvesting
Thresh/winnowing
Transport
House Hold food expenses
Non food House Hold expenses
Buying farm implements
Other (Specify)
3.9f) Do you belong to a formal and active farmer/marketing group or association? ( e.g. formally 
registered, with bank account and constitution , contact with produce buyer/ agent etc.) ( PLEASE TICK 
WHAT IS AVAILABLE WITH THE GROUP) 1=Yes 2=No
If NO, 
3.9g) State one major reason for not belonging to an active group
1= Lack of awareness/training 2 = Lack of trust/transparency 3 = No need 4 = Other 
__________
If YES,
3.9h) What type of activities do you carry out as a group? (Multiple answers are possible, tick where 
applicable)
1= Collective marketing 2 = Input procurement 3 = Savings and credit 4 = Attending Trainings
5= Collective cultivation 6= Other____________________
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
53
4.0 POST HARVEST HANDLING, STORAGE AND MARKETING
4.1a). Did you use any of the following drying facilities during 2003B?
Facility 1=Yes
2=No
If no, give ONE major reason why
Tarpaulin/plastic sheet
Papyrus mat
Bag outside house
Rock
Crib
None/bare ground
Others (specify)
4.1b). Did you use any of the following drying facilities during 2004A?
Facility 1=Yes
2=No
If no, give ONE major reason why
Tarpaulin/plastic sheet
Papyrus mats
Bag outside house
Rock
None/bare ground
Others (specify)
4.2 a) Did you use any of the following storage facilities during 2003B?
Storage facility 1=Yes
2=No
If no state ONE main reason why
Crib
Granary
Drums/tins
Floor of dwelling house
Separate house with earth/cement 
store
None 
Other (Specify)
4.2 b) Did you use any of the following storage facilities during 2004A?
Storage facility 1=Yes
2=No
If no state ONE main reason why
Crib
Granary
Drums/tins
Floor of dwelling house (earth)
Floor of dwelling house (cement)
Separate house with earth/cement 
store
None 
Other
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
54
4.3a) Indicate the value added activities carried out on your farm and the methods used
Activity Method
1 = Hand operated
2 = Motorized electric
3 = Motorized fuel
4 = Other, specify
1 = Grading
2 = Sorting
3 = Milling
4 = Packaging
5 = Other, specify
4.4.1 Did you use any of the following post harvest handling equipment?
1=Power sheller 2= Hand sheller 3=Grading machine 4=Stick 
5= Others (Specify)_______________
4.4a) Do you have access to market information? 1=Yes 2 = No
4.4b) If Yes, state type of information, from where/whom you get it and how you use it? 
(price, buyer quality demands, competing suppliers etc.)
Type of information Source How you use the information
Codes for source of information are:1=Other farmers 2=Extension worker 3=Traders
4 = Radio(Specify)_____________5 = Newspaper 6 = Notices 7 = Others (Specify) __________________
4.5a). What is the distance from your home to the nearest local market (km) _________
4.5b) Did you sell any crop produce in the seasons of 2003B__________ and 2004A? ________ 1= Yes 2= No
4.6. Please state the current cost of transport to the market for the various form (s) over the two seasons
(average cost for the 2 seasons)
Mode of transport Rate (Ushs/100Kgbag/km)
2003B 2004A
Head load
Wheel burrow
Bicycle
Motorcycle
Pick-up/Truck
Tractor
Donkey/oxen
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
55
5.0 HOUSEHOLD INCOME
5.1 Indicate household income from the target crops in the table below (Compare with Table 3.2).
SEASON 2003B Units/Type Amount sold kg Selling point* Unit price (UShs) Amount 
consumed/store
d (kgs)
Maize dry Kg
Maize fresh Cobs
Maize flour Kg 
Beans dry Kg
Beans fresh Kg
Soybean (dry) Kg
Fresh (bags)
Dry (bags)
Flour (kg)
Cassava
Cuttings bags)
Upland rice Hulled (kgs)
Unhulled (kgs)
Seed (kgs)
Oil (litres)
Sunflower
Cake (kg)
SEASON 2004A
Maize dry Kg
Maize fresh Cobs
Maize flour Kg 
Beans dry Kg
Beans fresh Kg
Soybean (dry) Kg
Fresh (bags)
Dry (bags)
Cassava
Cuttings bags)
Upland rice Hulled (kgs)
Unhulled (kgs)
Seed (kg)
Oil (litres)
Sunflower
Cake (kg)
Codes for selling point: 1=Farm gate 2=Local market 3=Urban market 4=Local store 
5=Others (specify)_____________
5.2. What did you achieve from the proceeds of the target crops as mentioned in question 5.1 (the target crops are 
maize, beans, cassava, upland rice soybeans and sunflower)
 1 = Yes 2 = No
Achievement 2003B 2004A
Built house (include unfinished structures)
Bought oxen/plough
Bought animals (cows, goats etc.)
Bought bicycle
Bought motorcycle
Paid school fees
Bought land
Re-invested in farming
Invested in shop/re-stocked
Food
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
56
6.0. CONSTRAINTS TO PRODUCTION
6.1. Mention THREEmajor constraints you still meet in producing and marketing the target crops in order of 
severity
Constraint
Rank 
1 = Very severe
2 = Severe
3 = Mild
ONE suggested solution
Low soil fertility
Flood/Drought damage
Pests, disease damage
Weed damage
Wild animal/Vermin damage
High cost of animal, mechanical power
Labor shortage
High cost of labour
Shortage of certified seed
Scarcity of farm inputs e.g. agro￾chemicals, fertilizers
High cost of farm inputs e.g. seed, 
fertilizers, agro-chemicals
Low price of farm produce
Poor road conditions
Lack of storage facilities
Lack of farm credit facilities
Lack of capital
Mention three areas where you think efforts to assist farmers by the grantees should concentrate in the 
coming years.
1
2
3
Did you use any of the following soil and water conservation measures in the last one year?
1= Fallowing 2= Crop rotation 3=Grass-stabilized/Open bunds along slopes
4=Tree planting 5= Others (Specify)________________
7.0 NUTRITION AND DIETARY DIVERSITY
7.1 Do you have any vegetable garden in your household that was established in the last 8 months?
1=Yes 2=No
IF YES
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
57
7.2 What vegetables do you produce on your farm?_________________ (state the number of types)
7.3 Estimate the area of the vegetable garden in square meters (m)2 
______________
7.4 Did you grow any new fruit trees in the last eight months? 1=Yes 2=No
IF YES,
7.5 How many type of fruits do you have?_____________________(state the number of types)
7.6 What are the signs of poor feeding amongst children between 0-5 years? (Multiple answers are 
possible)
1=Swollen tummy/cheeks 2=Loss of weight 3=Yellowing 4=Retarded growth 5= 
Brown hair
Notes: This section is intended to get information about what the household ate within the previous 24-
hour period. Try to ensure they recall this information as much as possible without asking intrusive 
questions. Look at the food waste, peelings and other food wrappers disposed of in the household 
garbage to find hints of what may have been consumed by the household but perhaps forgotten by the 
respondent(s).
Instructions for questions.( 7.7-8.2) Yesterday did you or anyone in your household consume…?
Eating occasion 1=Yes 2=No 
7.7 A morning meal
7.8. Any food between morning and lunch
7.9. Lunch 
8.0 Any food between lunch and supper
8.1 Supper
8.2 Any food after supper
8.3. (Instructions for questions 8.4-9.6). Did your household consume any of the following foods and what were 
their sources during the last 24 hours?
Food group Code Source of food Food group Code Sources of Food
Cereals:
Millet, Maize, 
Sorghum, Rice, 
Wheat, Fermented 
beverage
8.4.
1=Yes
2=No.
1= Self grown
2= Bought/donated
Legumes:
Peas, G.nuts, 
Soya, Pigeon 
peas
85.
1=Yes
2=No.
1= Self grown
2= Bought/donated
Root/Tubers:
Cassava, Yams, 
Irish/Sweet potato
8.6.
1=Yes
2=No.
1= Self grown
2= Bought/donated
Oil/Fat:
Sunflower, 
Simsim, Ghee
8.7.
1=Yes
2=No.
1= Self grown
2= Bought/donated
Meat: 8.8 1= Self grown Sugar /Honey 8.9. 1= Self grown
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
58
Beef, Mutton, 
Bacon, Pork, Liver
1=Yes
2=No
2= Bought/donated Sugarcane 1=Yes
2=No
2= Bought/donated
Milk /Milk 
products
9.0
1=Yes
2=No
1= Owned
2= Bought/donated
Fruits:
Water melon, 
Pineapple, 
Mango, 
Pawpaw, 
Guava, Jack 
fruit, matooke
9.1.
1=Yes
2=No
1= Self grown
2= Bought/donated
Vegetable:
Avocado, carrots, 
greens, Eggplant, 
Tomato 
9.2.
1=Yes
2=No.
1= Self grown
2= Bought/donated
Poultry:
Chicken, 
Duck, Guinea 
fowl, Turkey
9.3.
1=Yes
2=No
1= Owned/reared
2= Bought/donated
Eggs 9.4
1=Yes
2=No
1= Owned
2= Bought/donated
Fish 9.5.
1=Yes
2=No.
1= Self grown
2= Bought/donated
Miscellaneous
Spices e.g. salt, 
curry powder , tea, 
coffee
9.6
1=Yes
2=No
1= Self grown
2= Brought/donated
9.7 What breakfast did you feed your child of less than five years?
1= Porridge 2= Black tea 3= Milk 4=Food 5=Other_______________
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
59
9.8.Collect the following information for all the children below five years in the household. (This section can be 
skipped if there is no child under five in the household.)
Sex Age 
(in months)
Weight 
(in Kgs)
Height 
(in cm)
Child 1
Child 2
Child 3
Child 4
Child 5
10.0 DWELLING UNIT CHARACTERISTICS
Note: Observations are to be made by the enumerator about the dwelling unit characteristics. The enumerator need not ask the respondent.
10.1. What are the wall materials of the dwelling units? (Tick and use other columns if there are more than one dwelling unit.)
Wall material Dwelling units
1 2 3 4 5
Burnt stabilized bricks
Stone 
Concrete 
Cement blocks
Unburnt bricks
Pole and mud
Wood 
Other (specify)
10.2. What is the floor material of the dwelling unit? (Tick and use other columns if more than one 
dwelling unit)
Floor material Dwelling units
1 2 3 4 5
Concrete 
Brick
Stone
Cement screed
Rammed earth
Wood
Other(specify)
10.3. What is the roof material of the dwelling unit? (Tick and use other columns if more than one 
dwelling unit)
Roof material Dwelling units
1 2 3 4 5
Iron sheets
Tiles
Asbestos
Papyrus
Grass 
Banana leaves/fibers
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
60
Appendix 5
REPORTS OF FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS (FGD) FOR MID –EVALUATION SURVEY
Introduction
The Focus Group Discussions were to provide qualitative information to clarify, support and or
compliment the quantitative data got from formal interviews using a questionnaire. Areas of discussion 
were mainly on crop agronomy, post harvest handling and storage; farm planning and record keeping and 
marketing.
The discussions took place in three locations; Kamuli district with CASHFARM beneficiaries, Kiboga 
district with BUCADEF beneficiaries and Kibale district with BUFA beneficiaries. The locations were 
selected to provide insights if there was a difference in opinions and attitudes among the different grantee 
clients. A total of 6 FGDs, two in each district with different groups were conducted. Each group was 
composed of 6-10 beneficiaries of roughly equal mix of men of women and discussions lasted for about 
one and half to two hours.
A. FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION WITH CASH FARM BENEFICIARIES, NAWAIKOKE 
SUB-COUNTY, KAMULI DISTRICT
1.0 Crop agronomy
Use of improved inputs and fertilizers
For season 2004 A farmers reported planting maize, beans, soybean and a few planted cassava. Farmers 
used home saved improved seed for maize, soybean and beans (K132) and cassava (Akena and Omogole 
varieties). For farmers who did not use improved seed, lack of money to purchase seeds was cited as the 
main constraint.
Farmers applied fertilizers only in demos facilitated by grantee. Reasons for not using fertilizers in their 
gardens were lack of money to purchase fertilizers and that grantee does not provide fertilizers while 
others commented that if they were to apply fertilizers, the profit margin is small.
They used recommended spacing of 2 by 4ft and 2 by 2.5ft for maize and soybean respectively. 
However, a minority planted without observing the recommended for spacing beans citing that it requires 
a lot of labor to carry out activity.
Control of pests
Beneficiaries reported observing a wide range of pests and disease e.g.
ß Soya bean- leaf bright
ß Maize- Maize cob borer)
ß Maize –Striga weed (common in cereal fields)
Farmers reported depending on mechanical methods –uprooting of pest and diseased crops as the control 
measure but not spraying. They concluded by saying that usually when they think of using inputs like 
fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides farming is not profitable.
Planting on time
For season A 2004 farmers did not plant on time. Reason given is that CASHFARM delivered the seed 
for demos late and secondly the rains were irregular to start planting early.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
61
1.1 Post harvest handling and storage
 Ownership of cribs, shellers, tarpaulin sheets
All the focus group participants did not own a crib at household level. The only crib reported was the 
demonstration crib constructed with assistance from grantee and ACDI/VOCA. The reasons given for not 
using cribs/local granary was fear of thefts of produce and lack of money to afford constructing a crib if 
they look at materials used for the demonstrations crib.
None of the participants was using tarpaulin or owned one, again attributed to lack of money to afford the 
facility. However, they understood the importance of not drying on bare ground. Problem is that they 
expect the grantee to provide such facilities.
On the use of hand shellers farmers admitted having been taught (demonstrations) on their use and
explained the advantage like getting clean maize i.e. no broken cobs in grain and secondly the grain is 
whole unlike when it is shelled using sticks causing lots broken grain and pieces of cob mixed with the 
grain lot. They cited one disadvantage of the Sheller. It is time consuming since small quantities could 
be shelled at a time while shelling using a stick can be accomplished in a short time. They would like to 
use their time in other activities as well.
Though some farmers expressed interest in purchasing the hand Sheller they misunderstood the
procurement procedures of the grantee. The conditions were that the farmer makes the order with cash 
payment. The farmers on the other hand say they want the grantee to bring shellers and pay on delivery. 
But grantee does not have facility of procuring equipment for farmers to pay later. It seems farmers lack 
trust in the grantee to part with cash before delivery and vice verse. 
The farmers also acknowledged the availability of a fuel motorized maize Sheller that was demonstrated 
and all the participants appreciated its efficiency in terms of time spent shelling and the high quality of 
resultant maize grain (its cleanness, wholesomeness and absence of pieces of maize cobs) but none of 
them is using it. Conditions for use of Sheller were highlighted: - Farmer has to contribute fuel as well as 
a maintenance fee of Ushs 500 per bag of maize shelled. 
Farmers gave different opinions regarding factors affecting accessibility of the motorized Sheller: (i) 
Transport is an added cost from grantees office in Kaliro town to their area of operation, as they have to 
hire a car to bring machine. (ii) Maintenance fee of Ushs 500 is not popular with some members and it 
was suggested that grantee should wave it.
While some participants did not know the cost of motorized Sheller they suggested group procurement of 
machine and other facilities like tarpaulin sheet.
1.2 Farm planning and record keeping
Even though (old and new farmers) attended training in record keeping and planning none kept records 
except two who were ELFs.
Reasons given for not recording farm events: -
ß Illiteracy and lack of commitment. One farmer on his part said that he gave up on records 
because whenever he attempted recording farm operations losses were revealed in his operations. 
This discouraged him.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
62
ß Others nevertheless insist that if they seek assistance from literate friends to write for them it is 
not very useful because even then there are not in position to read what is jotted down to evaluate 
themselves.
ß The small scale farm operations they carry out to them do not warrant record keeping
ß On the use of PIS one farmer (ELF) commented that usually his planned expenditure falls short of 
the cash available to him. While others believe if they were to plan on paper it is not a reality 
(they do not have the money so it is does not make sense to write things down).
Suggestions given by participants on how to continue promoting practice of record keeping: -
ß Farmers said that where possible NGO should continue monitoring and encouraging them to 
effect the use of records (also to old farmers’ group)
ß Those that cannot write, contact literate friends to write for them (may be contradiction though 
suggested by other members)
1.3 Marketing
Farmers reported that though thoroughly trained in-group marketing, none of them use collective
marketing approach to sell their produce. Reasons highlighted for not practicing collective marketing 
included: -
1. Lack of trust among group members as for example members do no have stores so cannot 
entrust their produce to be bulked in other member’s house.
2. Different farmers wish to sell produce at different times due to difference in cash needs at 
particular times.
3. Lack of store and delayed payments in bulk/group marketing operations
4. Farmers also voiced concerns on the legacy left by co-op societies as farmers lost their money 
during that time. This has bred skepticism among farmers when it comes to collective 
marketing and delayed produce payment. 
Information provided to farmers about collective marketing and its relevance
The grantee conducted a demonstration on group marketing by actually collectively selling for farmers. 
The grantee was strict on quality and so farmers were supposed to sort the produce. Buyer was UGT Ltd 
(2003A) at Ushs 230 per kg and as policy of big buyers payment is deferred for some time.
Two (02) out 14 participants identified one advantage of collective marketing like getting a higher price. 
However, they made some observations regarding collective marketing that for unsorted maize they 
received Ushs 220 per kg at farm gate (season 2003A) and paid cash promptly. So the difference in price 
was small only Ush 10 per kg. They expressed a view that group marketing/ bulk selling to bulk buyers 
demands quality yet the price difference between clean grain and unsorted grain is small. So why bother 
with all the hassle.
Also transport cost to central collection center was cited as disincentive due to small difference between 
farm gate and collection center pric es.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
63
1.4 Effect of program on beneficiaries
FGD participants have been beneficiaries of Cash Farm for the last 4 seasons. Their view of the program 
on household food security and income situation was: -
Food security
ß Farmers acknowledged having learnt how to plan for what to sale and what to retain for food
ß Participants expressed that before the program they believed beans cannot be grown in their sub 
county, but now they have started growing beans.
ß They appreciate introduction of nutrition training in that they introduced vegetable growing for 
home consumption. A Wide variety of food is now consumed which knowledge was gained 
through nutrition training.
Income situation
On income situation participants reported that now they can afford household basics like salt and
medicine. Others reported assets acquired for example participant constructed a house, another bought a 
plot of land, bicycle, livestock and ox-plough, laid 5000 bricks and 90 pieces of timber for house 
construction.
1.5 Way forward-actions to improve performance
Farmers made suggestions below on what should be done by producers and grantee to improve on 
performance
Farmers
Farmers suggested they intend to form an association for sustainability of group cohesions when the 
project ends.
NGO (Cash Farm)
ß CashFarm should deliver seeds for demo on time in line with timely planting
ß There is need to streamline marketing of produce.
ß The grantee should not ignore old farmers groups
ß NGO should ease access to pesticides to farmers
ß Provide herbicides or ideas on how to deal with striga weed
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
64
B. FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION WITH BUCADEF BENEFICIARIES, 
KIBIGA SUB-COUNTY, KIBOGA DISTRICT
1.0 Crop agronomy
Farmers have group and individual gardens. Crop grown as group for season A 2004 were maize, beans 
and rice while on an individual basis they included cassava, maize, beans and rice. 
Use of improved inputs and fertilizers
Farmers reported using improved varieties; maize (Longe 5), beans (K132) and upland rice (abilony). 
Fertilizers were only applied in the group maize field. All inputs for group gardens were supplied by 
BUCADEF and for individual gardens seeds were bought from stockists. All participants have gardens of 
improved cassava varieties were Two (02) members planted the newly introduced varieties Nakigo and 
Omogole. However, no fertilizers were applied except in the group maize crop. Reasons given by 
participants for not using fertilizers were: -
ß Lack of money to purchase fertilizers
ß Other farmers believe the soils are still fertile so when they look at other unavoidable costs like 
hiring labour they opt to leave out fertilizers.
Recommended spacing
All farmers reported using recommended spacing for the three crops (maize, beans and rice) and were 
confident in demonstrating spacing used e.g. maize 2ft by 2 ft.
Pest and disease control
Farmers observed various pests and diseases:
ß Beans- Aphids
ß Maize- maize streak virus and stalk borer
ß Rice-No problem
ß Cassava- improved varieties are still okay
Farmers controlled pests and diseases by uprooting diseased crops while for beans no remedy was 
applied. Reasons given for not controlling pest for beans is that during planting a lot of money was used 
and by the time of infestation they had no money to purchase pesticides and area infested was wide. 
While for cassava those who had problems, others believed them to be due to soil fertility differences.
Timely planting
They always plant on time for the group garden while for individual garden sometimes they are unable to 
practice timely planting due to late delivery of seeds at stockist and when the onset of the rainy season is 
erratic. 
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
65
1.1 Post harvest handling and storage
Ownership of crib, shellers, tarpaulin and separate store
A group crib set up as a demonstration by grantee is available for members to use but has not yet been 
replicated by majority of participants except three (03) out of the 20 members who built cribs from local 
materials. For the majority reason for not establishing cribs was lack of finance, other cited lack of time 
to set up one but plan to hire someone to construct one.
Two (02) out of 20 members own tarpaulin while others use alternative drying facilities like polythene 
sheets, kadeya and papyrus mats. Farmers cited the benefit for not drying on ground that clean and 
quality maize and beans fetch a better price.
Though participants in the FGD do not own shellers they acknowledge that BUCADEF provided 30 Hand 
Shellers, to be shared by group. The farmers appreciated the use of the hand sheller because the resultant 
grain is clean. However, they cited some limitations: -
1. If the cob is big the size of shelles they have are difficult to use and others commented that for 
small cobs it is also a problem.
2. All members agreed that it takes a lot of time shelling maize for example shelling maize from one 
acre can take 2 months. For 1hr 30min one can shell 20kg (1 ‘debe’) this applies to men but for 
women it takes much longer, well as they have to do other household chores. To work faster one 
needs to employ workers and have access to many shellers, which they cannot afford at times.
1.2 Farm planning and record keeping
Twelve (12) out of 20 participants confirmed that they keep records i.e. work plans and records on farm 
activities. Those who did not were new members in the groups. The farmers attributed literacy levels 
among members to be due Functional Adult Learning (FAL) projects in the district. 
PIS –Some members use it but sometimes do not follow it because of eventualities for example sickness 
or demands at home to follow it through as planned.
Benefits cited by members on record keeping 
1. Time of planting is recorded and if they plant late they can adjust time of planting
2. Can compare expenses to income and can adjust accordingly to increase profit 
3. Records help them to know why they made a loss, may be late planting and hence can improve on 
work plan
4. If information is recorded well on expenditures and get losses one can reduce on unnecessary
expenditures to increase income.
To easy the activity of record keeping and farm planning some farmers suggested intensifying training on 
importance of records while others suggested making it a rule so that they are able to follow closely 
whether they are making a profit or loss.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
66
1.3 Marketing
All participants use a combination of group and individual marketing. For group gardens, members sell 
collectively while for produce harvested from individual gardens farmers reported selling a portion 
individually and bulk the rest with the group depending on the quantities they have, cash needs and home 
demands. Others expressed that although they would like to use group-marketing approach at all times 
they cannot because they are forced to sell individually to solve immediate problems such as school fees 
requirements.
On the relevance and or usefulness of collective marketing, farmers from their experience expressed
views outlined below. 
ß Group sells at a higher price than when sales are done individually
ß Sell produce in standard measurement (kg) but when they sell individually, buyers do not 
purchase in kg. Members seemed to trust the weighing scale of the group marketing approach to 
that of buyers who visit them at home.
ß Under group marketing money is got in lump sum than when they sell small lots over a period 
hence can invest for example buying a cow.
ß Can plan to plant bigger acreage because of market assurance through group marketing.
ß Group marketing encourages practice of proper storage measures because of standards set by
group
1.4 Effect of programm on beneficiaries
The majority of participants have been beneficiaries of BUCADEF for the last five (05) seasons and 
highlighted issues below concerning food security and income.
Food security
1. They are assured of food availability in the household because they plant bigger acreage and a 
variety of crops that is cassava, maize, beans and sweet potatoes.
2. Now observe cooking time for vegetables to preserve the nutrients
3. Understand the importance of fruits (mangoes, avocadoes, greens) unlike before the programme. 
Both old and young members of the household consume them.
4. They used to sell all the maize and beans but now they always budget for home consumption.
5. Reduced wastage and excessive donation of food
6. Have new methods of preserving sweet potatoes unlike before training when there was lot of 
wastage
Income situation
Members cited examples to show how their income situation has improved:-
ß Some members were able to buy cows from sale of maize and beans
ß They are able to meet children needs in school and one farmer bought piglets for children who are 
going to school.
ß Have been able to purchase farm tools e.g. hoes.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
67
1.5 Way forward-actions to improve performance
Farmers made suggestions below on what should be done by producers and grantee to improve on 
performance
Farmers
ß Increase on acreage and use improved seed and associated recommended technologies. 
ß Implement knowledge acquired through training
ß Diversify to other projects like livestock farming (cattle) or other income generating activities 
that they can rely on in old age when they are less energetic.
ß Should do farming with a vision not for the sake of it i.e. vision to generate income for other 
investments
NGO (BUCADEF)
Opinions on how NGO can improve: -
ß Provide improved cassava planting material for individual gardens as they had prepared the 
gardens but material was never supplied.
ß More training on improved techniques of farming as they become available
ß Improve on feeder roads for easier movement of produce
ß Provide loans to men as well, why do they provide loans to women only when training is attended 
by all?
ß Introduce dairy cows to farmers
ß Help with access to sprayers for herbicides because labour is expensive 
ß Provide calendars to be used for reference of dates for recording activities before they get time to 
record in books
ß BUCADEF should have a marketing system especially for potatoes because the crop does so well 
here (Kiboga district)
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
68
C. FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION WITH BUFA BENEFICIARIES, 
KISIITA SUB-COUNTY, KIBALE DISTRICT
1.0 Crop agronomy
All participants for season A 2004 planted improved bean seed (K132) provide by BUFA and local varieties (yellow 
beans) accessed individually. None of them applied fertilizers and they gave the reasons outlined below:
ß They believe the soils are fertile hence do not need fertilizers
ß Lack of money
ß Never been informed about them
ß Thought the grantee would provide seeds and fertilizers but never did so.
Recommended spacing
Unanimously farmers reported practicing recommended spacing of 2ft by 4 inches between plants.
Control of pests and diseases
Last season farmers observed no pests because before beans progressed to maturity they were completely destroyed 
by the drought. So they did not take any control measures because they realized the yield would be low. Hence they 
abstained from incurring cost of spaying since no profit was to be registered.
 For season B 2004 farmers have sighted aphids in their fields and reported being advised by grantee to spray. Lack 
of money to buy pesticed was given as main reason for not controlling pests. They requested grantee to provide 
pesticide on credit for them to pay later at time of selling but request was rejected by BUFA. 
Timely planting
All reported to have planted on time as the grantee provides the seeds in time for planting. However, the crop was 
affected by drought.
1.1 Post harvest handling and storage
Ownership of crib, tarpaulin sheet and separate store for produce
One (01) out of the ten (16) participants owned tarpaulin sheet. The rest dried on bare ground and others used 
alternative facilities like woven mats and polythene sheets. Main reason given for not using tarpaulin sheets is that 
they do not have money to purchase one.
They admitted being trained on the use of tarpaulin that it keeps the produce clean. Farmer’s opinion on usefulness 
of tarpaulin and other drying facilities (i.e. relevance of information on drying facilities) were: -
ß One farmer commented that clean beans fetch higher price e.g. UShs 400 per kg while dirty beans Ushs 
300 per kg and once BUFA rejected her beans for being dirty so she gave them to relatives.
ß Clean beans fetch better price and have higher demand
ß One may be able to sell beans when dried on bare ground during the dry period but during the rainy period 
the beans become soiled hence may be difficult to sell.
ß When sorting on tarpaulin it is easy to remove stones.
Crib
Though grantee does not promote maize farmers use local cribs
Separate store
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
69
All participants did not have stores because normally they sell immediately after drying but put beans in woven 
baskets for short storage.
1.2 Farm planning and record keeping
Currently only seven (07) out of the 16 participants kept records and others though they have ever tried are now not 
practicing record keeping. Reason being that they lost interest because they would discover losses. So now they 
prefer to operate without a clear picture of results. Do not want to know or remember results. All participants 
confirmed being literate but gave the view that other farmers are illiterate and may not have the time to go and call 
other people to write for them.
Type of information they used to record was, labour for ploughing, weeding, harvesting, threshing and transport to 
store. However, they expressed a few benefits of record keeping: -
ß Helps to know what they have spent and gained.
ß Is reminder of planting date so as to plan to plant on time in subsequent seasons
ß Helps to plan farm activities for example when to clear, plough and plant on time.
Farm planning
All participants do not to make plans with accompanying budgets because expenses for example labour costs keep 
changing hence they do not see usefulness of budgeting since what is expected is very different from the actual 
expenditure. And because of unpredictable labour costs they have resorted to pay for labour in kind which is not 
always reflected in the budget. 
To easy the activity of record keeping one participant proposed more training on planning and record keeping as 
may be it can stimulate them to begin the practice again but as per now they are still discouraged.
1.3 Marketing
All participants sell collectively through BUFA marketing system for beans. However, they sell other varieties 
(yellow beans) on individual basis to traders in the project area.
Farmers highlighted the following benefits from collective marketing: -
1. Collective marketing encourages them to budget and plan what is for sale and for home consumption
2. Selling in bulk helps then to get lump sum payment that can be used for household needs and re-investment 
in agriculture (Animal farming and other crops).
3. In collective marketing they are comfortable with weight measurement because the measurements are 
genuine.
4. They are offered a uniform price without segregation among members.
5. Are assured of income because they can get to know the price before planting
6. Brings healthy competition between group members, hence members aspire to work hard after observing 
benefits of higher sales from other members
7. Get paid a lump sum once and can buy cows, goats and even marry a second wife
Other bean varieties not promoted by grantee are marketed on individual basis because farmers expressed having 
different family needs, also planting is not so synchronized such that harvesting period is diverse to encourage 
bulking and that BUFA does not buy such beans. One disadvantage of collective marketing cited was that the time 
between harvesting and collection of produce, which farmers to belong as BUFA operates a produce collection 
schedule. 
1.4 Effect of programm on beneficiaries
The focus group participants have been beneficiaries of BUFA for one to six years and highlighted issues 
below concerning food security and income.
Food security
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
70
ß Last season was affected by drought and children are not eating well
ß The farmers expressed that they no longer feed on one variety of food. Children eat paw paws, dodo and 
eggplants.
ß Have learnt they must keep some food in the home and not eat everything
Income situation
ß The lady participants expressed that now they can afford to dress well.
ß Can afford to pay school fees
ß Income situation has now improved because after lump sum payment from sell of beans they can afford to 
buy a goat.
ß Are encouraged to invest some of the money in farming instead of buying only household items
1.5 Way forward-actions to improve performance
Farmers made suggestions below on what should be done by producers and grantee to improve on 
performance
Farmers
ß Practice storage in anticipation of better prices. However, at times they cannot because of demands at 
home
ß To open up other projects like animal farming and retail business
ß To have small production groups (collective gardening) to increase production.
ß Have diversified production e.g. pineapples and nakati for sale.
ß For maize they would like to add value. Processing into flour instead of selling grain
NGO
ß The grantee should offer a better price because at times other buyers offer higher prices that attract 
members to sell to traders
ß Would like grantee to reduce on the bean seed loan interest that is paid in kind, currently ratio is 1:2
ß Grantee should offer a better price. Farmers expressed that price has not changed since project started.
ß Provide loans and credit so as to have access to some technologies e.g. tarpaulin and pesticides and later 
deduct the money after selling beans.
ß Diversify crop types targeted by project. For example look for market for other crops like ground nuts, 
yellow beans and maize.
ß Train new farmers in the project area.
ß Provide a tractor as they spend a lot of money on labour.
Conclusion
1. Though participants do not keep records nor practice farm planning they expressed opinions on relevance 
of record keeping and suggested continued training on topic to encourage the practice. Illiteracy and 
discouraging farm results were cited as the key deterrents to practice.
2. All participants where collective marketing is active, they appreciated the approach except among 
CASHFARM beneficiaries were farmers did not comprehend benefits. 
3. The discussions demonstrated that beneficiaries feel very strongly about the need for a streamlined 
marketing system for their produce.
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
71
Appendix 6. List of respondents interviewed by district
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
OTTO JOAN TEAMAGA ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OLUM SELEVEIO AMONE PETIO AGULURIDE LORO APAC
OKIROR S ALOK B ADYEDA LORO APAC
PAUSI C. ALOK B ADYEDA LORO APAC
OKELLO CRANIMER ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
ALEX KALE OWALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OPWONYA FRANCIS OWALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
APINE ANNA ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
SOPHIA ODUK ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
ODONG J ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
ODIDU. M ACWECMIO ADYEDA LORO APAC
OGWAL K. AWEEINGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OKECH SERAFINO OWALO-IPING ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OLEMA J.A ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
ODONGO M. ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
OTM ALEX ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
AJUE ALDO AWENGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
ACUMA ALFRED AWENGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OGWANG ALFRED AWENGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
AKUL J.A OWALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
GEOFFREY OKELLO TEA MAGA ADYEDA AKALO APAC
ALEX ALELE TEA MAGA ADYEDA AKALO APAC
JUSPINE OKWIR ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
WILBETO APIL ONGOR AGULURIDE LORO APAC
PETRO MILDA ALIMO B' MAROLEBI LORO APAC
ONGU C. TE-AMAGA ADYEDA AKALO APAC
GEORGE OTUR ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
AKELLO SCOVIA OWALO-IPING ADYEDA AKALO APAC
ENON M OWALO IPING ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OGWNG H. OKUTU ADYEDA AKALO APAC
ECHENGA D. OWAL IMALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
ONAPA W. J OWLOIPING ADYEDA LORO APAC
OMARA JAMES ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
OREC B. OBELA ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OCULI J. OWALO IPING ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OBUKU A. IGEL AKALO ADYEDA APAC
OKIO TONNY ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
OLOT J ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
SELESTINO OGWANG AWEI NGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OKELLO JURABEL AWEI NGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OKOO PATRICK AWENGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OKELLO R. AWEINGGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
ADOL B. ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
EBWOL A. ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
ODONGO G. ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
ONGOM WILBER OWALO AMALU ADYEDA AKALO APAC
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
72
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
ODONG JACKSON AWEI NGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
ARAPU SAMUEL ALOK B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
OYUR J. ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
KONSI APENA AWENGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OKAO A. OWALO IPING ADYEDA AKALO APAC
JACKSON ORINGA OWALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OLOT B. OWALO IPING ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OKUJA VICTOR AKAIDEBE ADYEDA AKALO APAC
ALELE ALEX TEAMAGA ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OKELLO J B TEAMAGA ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OCHEN GEOFFREY OWALO AMALU ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OPWONYA FRANCIS OWALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OKELLO SARAFINO OWALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
OCHEN D. OWALO IPING ADYEDA AKALO APAC
ELOR F. OWLO IMALO AKALO ADYEDA APAC
JUVENTINO ACHAR AWENGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
SOPHIA ABAL AWEI NGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OROO J AWEEINGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
ELEM M. ALOK-B ADYEDA LORO APAC
AKELLO P ALOK B ADYEDA LORO APAC
OGALI N ALIMO B' AGULURIDE LORO APAC
IBWOL A. ALIMO B AGULURUDE LORO APAC
OGWANGA N ONGOR AGULURUDE LORO APAC
OKELLO NELSON AWENGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
OKELLO JASPER AWE NGWEC ADYEDA LORO APAC
ALELE TOM OWALO ADYEDA AKALO APAC
LWASA B. NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
BANGOZA L. NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
KARWEMERA JOHN KYAKAGINANA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
KOMWERO P, NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
SALIMANA M. MWITANZIGYE BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
BASIMAKI A. NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
MATAYO ZINTURATIIRE NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
TUSIGWIRE W. NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
KOOJO S. MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
TWINOMUJUNI J. MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
JACKSON JACK MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
KAJAMBELE K. MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
KAKURAMA J. MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
BANJWARE B. KYABUSINGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
KASOLE T. KYABUSINGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
SEZIRAHIGA INNOCENT KYABUSINGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
NAMARA HONESIFORUS KYABUSINGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
MUGISHA DAVID NYAMIRAMU BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
LOBO J KYAKANJUNANI BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
MBABALI MUHEREZA BUHONDA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
BUSINGYE KAUKA BUHONDA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
73
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
BINDEBA LABAN BUHONDA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
MUTESASIRA HARUNA BUHONDA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
SEEZI INNOCENT RWAMADONGO MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
HENRY TURYAHIKAYO KYABUSINGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
BALAHUKWA FRANCIS NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
TUKAMBONE M. NABISAVA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
BANGIRANA J. NABISAVA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
JAMES MUBAZI NABISAVA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
 TUMUSIIME VALENTINO NABISAVA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
BENON BULINGWA KYAKUTEREKERA MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
GANYONZA MICHEAL RWAMADONGO MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
KABAGAMBE S. MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
KABAFUNZAKI B. MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
SANDE SAMUEL MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
MBABAZI S. MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
MUBANGIZI POULINARI MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
OWOMUGISHA FELIX MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
BYARUHANGA J. MASULWA MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
KASAZA JOHN MWITANZIGYE MWITANZIGYE KISIITA KIBAALE
KOBUSINGYE PEACE NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
BERNARD 
BANDIBWIRUKA NYAMIRAMA BUHONDA KISIITA KIBAALE
ZIRYAHARUGO J. PHASE I A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
MUTABAAZI G. PHASE I A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
KAMANYIRE S. PHASE I A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
BESIGYE P. MUKOGERE RUKOOKI RUKOOKI KASESE
BIRYABAHA K. MUBUKU LC 1 RUKOOKI RUKOOKI KASESE
RUHWEZA DEO PHASE 1A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
KAHWA A. PHASE I A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
MUGISA P. PHASE 11 MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
RUTAZIGWA R. PHASE 1A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
LWAHERU S. PHSE I A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
TINKASIMIRE LAWRENCE PHASE 1 SCHEME MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
BYABAGAMBI C. PHASE 2 MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
MBABAZI PHASE 1 MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
MWANZI PETER PHASE I SCHEME MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
TINTA J. PHASE 5 MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
BWAMBALE E.
RUKURUKI PHASE 
11
MUBUKU I SC
RUKOOKI KASESE
KIBWANA P. PHASE 1A MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
NTIHABOSE ERIYA RUKOOKI MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
HENRY NYENDWOHA PHASE 3-8 SCHEME MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
KAMIHANDA FELIX PHASE 1 SCHEME MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
TIBENDA LOVIS PHASE II SEBWE MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
SEMPALA LIVING STONE PHASE II MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
KAHWA MODEST PHASE I SCHEME MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
NDAWI MARY PHASE I SCHEME MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
BYAMUKAMA PATRICK MWALO MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
MUJUNGU JOHN RUKOKI MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
74
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
MUHAWE FRANCIS PHASE II MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
MASABA HENRY PHASE I MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
MUTENDE YOSITASI PHASE I MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
ISINGOMA ISAIAH PHASE 1 SCHEME MUBUKU I SC RUKOOKI KASESE
TUMWESIGE JOWERIA SEETA KIBAALE KIBIGA KIBOGA
GAYIRA S. SEETA SEETA KIBIGA KIBOGA
MUSIIME MARGRET SEETA SEETA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KIWANUKA A. KAJJERE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
ABDU SENYONGA KAJJERE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
KINAGOMBA TWAHA KIBOBA KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
MUSOKE ALDRINE KALAGALA KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
MAGALA MOSES KATEERA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
JJOMBWE S. KATEERA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KATO S.B. NABISOGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KATENDE K. NABISOGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
ZIWA STEPHEN KITETE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
NANYONDO TEO KITETE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
NAMAGEMBE M. KATOMA KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
WANKYA G. KATOMA KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
BATWALE M.I KITEREDDE SEETA KIBIGA KIBOGA
BAHWEYIREMU FRANCIS KITEREDE SEETA KIBIGA KIBOGA
LASTO AGIRASHEBUZA NYANJATEGERA SEETA KIBIGA KIBOGA
SSENTONGO M. KAJJERE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
NSAMBA H. KAJJERE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
WASWA U. KAJJERE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
DOMINICO KULERA KATERA DEGEYA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KISULE WILLY KATERA DEGEYA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
BUWULE A. KYENKUMBYA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KYATULE DAVID KITETE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
GULANYAGO SABIITI KIZINGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
MUHAMOOD 
SSERUNJOGI KIZINGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
ABBAS MAKANDA KIZINGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
SEBIRANDA M. KATERA DEGEYA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KABASAMBO BEATRICE SEETA KIBAALE KIBIGA KIBOGA
LUTALO S. SEETA KIBAALE KIBIGA KIBOGA
NANKINGA A. KATERA DEGEYA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
MIGANDA JAFFARI SEETA KIBAALE KIBIGA KIBOGA
KYESIMBA GODFREY KITETE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
MWOGERA E. KAJJERE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
KIGOMAKIGUDDE L. KATOMA KAGYERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
NAKIBERU J. KATOMA KAGYERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
ABDUL MUTUMBA KITETE KAJJERE KIBIGA KIBOGA
SENDAWULA F. KIZINGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
SESENGA D. KIZINGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KINENE S. KIZINGA BULIRI KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KATAMBA Z. KIZINGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KATENDE K. KIZINGA KIZINGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
75
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
ZIRIMANYA E. KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
NAKAYITA F. KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
SSEGGUJJA L. KALENGELA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
NAMUTEBI TEO KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
NABUNNYA M. KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
WILSON KAYONGO KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
LUBEGA G. KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
MBAALE D. KALENGERA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
KIIZA BONA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBIGA KIBOGA
NANDOHA J. BUMULA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WASOLO D. BUMULA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
NAMBAFO R. BUMULA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MAKASI B. MUNAMBA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MALIKO SIBEKE BULAKO BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MALEMA JOHN BULAKO BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WANOKHOKA JOHN BULAKO BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MASIFA KAMAKU JOSEPH BUWEESA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
NALYANYA AUGUSTINE BUMATAALA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MUSAMALI M. BUMULA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
SITUMA FABIANO BUWEESA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WEYAWO A. BUWESA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
TEREZA KAKAHI BULAKO BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
NASIWA J. BUTSELITSI BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
LUKENDO AGATHA BUMUYONGA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
MASAABA SAM BUMULIKA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
WALYAWOLA J BUMUYONGA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
SITATI FRED BUKIBETI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
WANYONYI SAMUEL BUMAAFU BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
MAKASI P. BUSHEMBA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WATAAKA M. BUMULA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
M,AKASI A. BUMULA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MICHAEL WAGUSI BUMATALA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MARY NDELEMA BUMULULU BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
DAYANI WANAMI BUMULULU BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
TESHO M. BMAAFU BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
KATENYA E. BUWETSALO BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
NASIMALI CHARLES BUWETSALO BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
LUBISHA GEORGE BUWETSALO BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
KUNDU BOSCO BUWETSALO BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
KHAUKA RICHARD BUMAAFU BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
BWAYO N.J. BUWAMBWASOYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
LAWRENCE MUKAPI BUWAMBWASOYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
NALWANYA P. BUTSELITSI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
FUNGO FRANCIS BUTSEKELEYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
CHRISTINE SIWUNDU BUTSEKELEYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
KANGO PETER BUTSEKELEYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
PATRICK MAKAYI BUTSEKELEYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
SITUMA D. BUMUYONGA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
76
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
MAKONA J. BUMUYONGA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
WANKWABUBI P. BUMUYONGA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
MATASI A. BUMAAFU BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
ALFRED WANJALA BUMAAFU BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
WAMBULWA F. BUMAAFU BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
MASIKA N. J. BUMAAFU BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
WASOLO J.P BUMUYONGA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
WALIMBWA G. BUTSEKELEYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
MABONGA G. BUWAMBWASOYI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
NABENDE P. BUMULA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MOSES MANENO BUMULULU BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WASIKE P.E BUTSEKELEYI BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
LWANDANYI M. BUKUTO BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
SIUNWA M. BUKUUTO BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WATIMA PETER BUTSELETSI BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
MUKAMBA DAVID BUMUYONGA BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
NAMUKOA P. BUMULULU BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WALYAWULA M. BUMULULU BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
PHILIP WANASI BUWEESA BUMULIKA BUBUTU MBALE
WAMBULWA J. BUKIBETI BUMUYONGA BUBUTU MBALE
MUGOBEREZI G. KITTAMBOGO NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
GWAIRA D. KANANSAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KIRUNDA L. KANANSAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
MUWANIKA J. KANANSAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
GWEBATALA S. KANANSAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
MUGAYA J. BEDA NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
NANJUBU AGGREY KANANSYAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
DUUMA EDWARD KANANSYAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
NANJUBU JOWALI KANANSYAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
RACHEAL KAFUKO KANANSYAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
NYINKI MUHAMMED KANANSYAIKE NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
MUDOOLI J. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KAMWASA R. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
IKANZA R. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
NKOLA H. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
NDIGWOOZA F. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
TIBAGOTYA L. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KABUTANIA M. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KAMWASA S. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
BALABYE D. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KYKULAGA E. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KAKUKU Y. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
WANSUNGUZI N. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
BALIDHA EMMANUEL BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KAPULYAKA GRACE BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
DIOGO SIMON BUBBULI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
CHRISTOPHER KAKDUKQ BUBBULI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KUNYA LIVINGSTONE BUBBULI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
77
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
MUTASA FRANCO BUBBULI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
WAAKO GEOFFREY BUBBULI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
TEZIKY M. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
GUMULA M. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
MUDOOLI M. BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
ERIA KUNNYA BUPENI NSAMULE NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
IRUBA KITTAMBOGO NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
KYEPA M. KITTAMBOGO NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
ISIIKO N. KITTAMBOGO NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
BUMUNONE H. BEDA NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
LWABANJA I. BEDA NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
WALUBO C. BEDA NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
MUGOBEREZI E. BEDA NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
NABUGERE M. BEDA NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
MUDUUSU A. KITTAMBOGO NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
BAIGALA M. KITTAMBOGO NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
TIBANJAGALA C. KITTAMBOGO NAMAWA NAWAIKOKE KAMULI
OPIO B. ADYAGOPIRI AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
TOM OKULLO OKECH OYERE OLAKA LIRA LIRA
OKELLO RICHARD OKECH OYERE BARA APWOO LIRA LIRA
GEORGE OWIO ADYANG OPIRO AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
AKELLO S. KURIWOO ANYNGAPUK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
AMON OBUKU OKII OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
AWILO O. AKUPI WOO ANYANG OPUC ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OLEKE NICHOLAS OKII OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ADILO S. OKI OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
MOSES AWOR ADELOKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
AGNES MUNU ADYANG OPIRO AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
OTIM B. OKECH AMUKA LIRA LIRA
OKELLO S. OKI OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OKELLO FRANCIS OLENGO BIR AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
ANGOE RICHARD ADELOKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ADUPA F. BUNG OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OBONG C.P ADEL OKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OKELLO R. OWITI AMUCHA LIRA LIRA
ABURA J. AWIRA AMUCHA LIRA LIRA
OKWIR J. OKEC OYETRE BARAP WOO LIRA LIRA
OGWENG RICHARD ADYAGA OPIRO AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
EKUT PETER ADYAGA OPIRO AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
OMARA GEOFFREY OKECHEOYELLE OLAKA LIRA LIRA
OTITI J. ADYAGOPIRO AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
OGWALA A. OKEKYE OYERE BARAPWO LIRA LIRA
APITA R OTONGO ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
EGIT T. AGENGA ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ABWO A. OKII- OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OGWANG G. OTONGO ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
KEREN OKWENY AGENGA ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
78
NAME VILLAGE PARISH SUB-COUNTY DISTRICT
OBUA M. OMITO ADELOKOK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
AMONG S. OMITO ADELOKOK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ODONG MARTIN OMITO ADELOKWOK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OWULA SAM OMITO ADELOKWOK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
EDONGA BONEY BUNG ADELOKOK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OMWENG PETER BUNG OMORO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
MARY ANGOL OKII OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OGWANG THOMAS OKII OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OKULLU C.P. OKI OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
WILBERT OTENG KURIWOO ANYANGAPUC ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ATOKE R. KURIWOO ANYNGAPUK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OKELLO F. ADEL OKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OKELLO MOSES ADYAGA OPIRO AMOCHA LIRA LIRA
AMOLO A. KURIWOO ANYNGAPUK ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OYO ALFRED OKII OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
DOI FRED OKECH OYERE ANYOM OREM ADEKWOK LIRA
OWINY TIT OKI OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OGWANG P. OKI OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
LUCCY APUNYU OKI OYERE ANYOM OREM ADEKWOK LIRA
AWANY D. OKI OYERE ANYOMOREM ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OMING VINCENT ADELOKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OTIM S. ADEL OKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OULA T. ADEL OKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ANYI A. ADEL OKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OJEDE OBA NGETA GINNERY ANYANGAPUC ADEKOKWOK LIRA
LYDIA AKELLO OKII OYERE ANYANGAPUC ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OYAR AGUSTINE NGETA GINNERY ANYANGAPUC ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OWENG A. NGETA GINNERRY ANYANG OPUC ADEKOKWOK LIRA
OKWIR J. ADEL OKOK OMITO ADEKOKWOK LIRA
ACDI/VOCA PL -480 TITLE II PROGRAM, MID-TERM REVIEW REPORT 2004 The Ssemwanga Center Ltd.
79
REFERENCES
ACDI/VOCA quarterly monitoring reports
Grantee quarterly reports
Uganda Bureau of Statistics, November 2003, Uganda National Household Survey 2002/03, Report on 
the socio-economic survey.
Ministry of Gender and Community Development, 1998, Women and Men in Uganda, Facts and Figures, 
Directorate of Gender, Kampala.