Uganda Child Protection Sub Cluster
Transition: Experiences & Reflections
Presented by: Agnes M.Wasike
National Coordinator – CPWG
Historical facts

Child protection was an Inter Agency Sub Cluster under
the protection cluster of Humanitarian response to the
armed conflict in northern Uganda effective 2005.

Unicef led the child protection sub cluster alongside
district local government staff (probation officers)

Sub cluster meetings fed into the Protection cluster
under leadership of UNHCR, Human Rights Commission
and the government (Office of the Prime Minister).
CP Sub cluster Transition

Cluster approach in Uganda was undertaken in 2009
with findings providing basis for transition

Transition involved identification of government office to
handover

Process initially proved difficult since the protection
cluster functioned more through sub clusters

CP sub cluster eventually was 1st to transition within the
Protection cluster. Unicef handed over sub cluster to
Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development
(Ministry with primary mandate for child protection).
Transition Process Cont’d

Key question during transition – How would agencies that had
been part of the sub cluster continue working together under
government leadership in absence of a joint work plan?

The answer was to form a National Child Protection Working
Group followed by designing a Child Protection Recovery
strategy for Northern Uganda (2009- 2011).

The strategy defined initial TORs for the National CPWG and
provided basis for a joint work-plan.

Initial CPWG plan was to ensure that the CP Recovery
strategy was incorporated within the PRDP (government
Program for Reconstruction and Development of Northern
Uganda) under Prime Ministers office. However, Phase I of
PRDP focused on infrastructure development.
Transition Process Cont’d

CPWG had to find means of implementing the CP
Recovery Strategy for Northern Uganda within its own
means; and also advocated for inclusion of strategy
components in the Government Social Development
Sector Investment Plan.

In the latter months of CPWG meeting in 2009, actors
noted that issues tabled for discussion were not peculiar
to northern Uganda; hence the collective decision to shift
CPWG focus from only focusing on the conflict affected
region to addressing National level child protection
concerns.
Reflections on Transition
Lessons learned from the transition!

Considerations for capacity (staff and other resources) are important

Assumption that the government would allocate resources for CP from the
broader Northern Uganda Recovery strategy was wrong. A Plan B needed to be
created

Strengthened government (Primary Ministry) position in coordinating efforts of
national level child protection actors through CPWG structure

A broad range of child protection stakeholders joined the CPWG (UN agencies,
Funding agencies, international NGOs, Government sectors and institutions with a
child protection mandate). On Average CPWG meetings attendance is 30 agencies.

CPWG agenda broadened beyond CPiE

National CPWG as a multi-sectoral coordination mechanism for CP actors (state
and non-state) has aligned well with the global and national shift of focus from
segmented child protection interventions to a systems approach to child protection.
CPWG current structure and activities

Ministry of Gender Chairs the working Group and hosts its
coordination office.

Coordination office facilitated under a public-private
partnership between the government Ministry and CSO
members in the working Group

Activities : Jointly work-plan developed by members through a
consultative process covering a broad range of child
protection areas i.e. capacity building of social welfare
workforce; research and learning; review of child protection
laws, policies and strategies; Resourcing for child protection
and Instituting Accountability mechanisms.

CPWG Annual budget supported by both grants and
resources mobilized locally from within member organizations
Looking Ahead…

Uganda concluded country mapping of child protection
systems in 2013.

In reference to the Child protection systems mapping
report and other evidence around children without
appropriate care, CPWG developed its medium term (
2014-2016) strategy framework.

Consultation process for developing the national child
protection strategy has commenced and CPWG is
earmarked to participate in this process.

National CPWG mandate will be further reviewed based
on the provisions in the National child protection
strategy to be drafted by end of 2014.
THANK YOU!