Community Perception Survey - 2019
Uganda, 2019
Get Microdata
Reference ID
HDX_GTS_UGA_2019_PS_vEXT
Producer(s)
Ground Truth Solutions
Metadata
Created on
May 12, 2021
Last modified
May 12, 2021
Page views
946
Identification
Survey ID Number
HDX_GTS_UGA_2019_PS_vEXT
Title
Community Perception Survey - 2019
Country
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Uganda | UGA |
Abstract
This data includes responses to Ground Truth Solutions' perception survey conducted in October 2019 with 1511 refugees in Uganda. Both South Sudanese and Congolese refugees who have received aid and support from humanitarian organisations in the last 12 months are included.
Surveys were conducted in Adjumani (Nyumanzi, Baratuku, Elema), Bidibidi (Zone 1 and Zone 3), Imvepi (Zone I and Zone II), Kiryandongo (Ranch 1 and Ranch 37), Palorinya (Belemaling, Chinyi, Morobi), Rhino (Zone 2 – Omugo, Zone 3 - Ocea), Kyaka II (Byabakora, Kakoni, Mukondo), Kyangwali (Kirokole, Maratatu A, Maratatu B), Nakivale (Base Camp), and Rwamwanja (Base Camp, Kaihora, Nkoma).
Overall, the refugees surveyed view their relations with Ugandan locals and aid workers positively, saying they feel welcome in Uganda and treated with respect by humanitarian workers.
Building on this positive relationship, communication between aid providers and refugees could be more open and robust. Currently, just over half of the refugees interviewed say they are able to provide feedback to humanitarian staff, and only a minority is aware of what assistance they are eligible to receive. Around half of the respondents feel that aid is unfairly distributed.
Refugees consider the aid received insufficient to meet their most important needs, so it is perhaps not surprising that they are also pessimistic about achieving self-reliance. Less than a quarter feel that their life prospects in Uganda are improving. While a clear majority points to the need for livelihood opportunities to strengthen their sense of self-reliance, three-quarters of respondents say they lack access to such opportunities.
Almost everyone in our sample has been allocated land, and many consider it too small or not fertile enough, which is reflected in the high percentage of people (79%) who say they are dissatisfied with the land they have received. Refugees surveyed would appreciate more support from humanitarian actors when it comes to making decisions about returning to their countries of origin. Similarly, internal movement within Uganda and opportunities to migrate to a new country are areas in which refugees say they lack guidance from humanitarian agencies or other actors.
Surveys were conducted in Adjumani (Nyumanzi, Baratuku, Elema), Bidibidi (Zone 1 and Zone 3), Imvepi (Zone I and Zone II), Kiryandongo (Ranch 1 and Ranch 37), Palorinya (Belemaling, Chinyi, Morobi), Rhino (Zone 2 – Omugo, Zone 3 - Ocea), Kyaka II (Byabakora, Kakoni, Mukondo), Kyangwali (Kirokole, Maratatu A, Maratatu B), Nakivale (Base Camp), and Rwamwanja (Base Camp, Kaihora, Nkoma).
Overall, the refugees surveyed view their relations with Ugandan locals and aid workers positively, saying they feel welcome in Uganda and treated with respect by humanitarian workers.
Building on this positive relationship, communication between aid providers and refugees could be more open and robust. Currently, just over half of the refugees interviewed say they are able to provide feedback to humanitarian staff, and only a minority is aware of what assistance they are eligible to receive. Around half of the respondents feel that aid is unfairly distributed.
Refugees consider the aid received insufficient to meet their most important needs, so it is perhaps not surprising that they are also pessimistic about achieving self-reliance. Less than a quarter feel that their life prospects in Uganda are improving. While a clear majority points to the need for livelihood opportunities to strengthen their sense of self-reliance, three-quarters of respondents say they lack access to such opportunities.
Almost everyone in our sample has been allocated land, and many consider it too small or not fertile enough, which is reflected in the high percentage of people (79%) who say they are dissatisfied with the land they have received. Refugees surveyed would appreciate more support from humanitarian actors when it comes to making decisions about returning to their countries of origin. Similarly, internal movement within Uganda and opportunities to migrate to a new country are areas in which refugees say they lack guidance from humanitarian agencies or other actors.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
Individuals and households
Version
Version Description
v2.1: Edited, anonymous dataset for licensed distribution
Scope
Notes
Admission and rights; emergency response and ongoing needs; resilience and self-reliance; expanded solutions; voluntary repatriation; demographics.
Topics
| Topic |
|---|
| Protection |
| Community Services |
| Livelihood & Social cohesion |
| Basic Needs |
| Solutions |
| Legal Assistance |
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name |
|---|
| Ground Truth Solutions |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
This survey is the third round of questions Ground Truth Solutions has asked in Uganda; the first round took place in 2017 and the second in 2018. As in previous rounds, respondents to the current round of questions have been selected randomly, but the respondents themselves are different from those in previous rounds. When designing the sampling strategy for this survey, we used the most recent figures for populations of refugees from the UNHCR refugee portal. Based on this data, we decided to focus on South Sudanese and Congolese refugees, as they made up 92% of all the refugees in Uganda at the time. Refugees from Burundi, Somalia, Rwanda, Eritrea, Sudan, and Ethiopia each made up 0-3% of the overall refugee population and were excluded from this study. This is not to say that the perspectives of more marginal groups are not important, but rather that gathering these perspectives was simply beyond the scope of our research in view of the geographical and time constraints involved. In terms of the locations selected, we decided to include Adjumani, Bidibidi, Imvepi, Kiryandongo, Kyaka II, Kyangwali, Nakivale, Palorinya, Rhino, and Rwamwanja (and to exclude Kampala, Lobule, Oruchinga, and Palabek), as over 90% of South Sudanese and Congolese refugees reside in these refugee settlements, according to UNHCR's most recent figures.
The actual sample size achieved was 1,511 participants from 10 refugee settlements across Uganda, and the sample size in each settlement was proportional to the population size of the targeted communities within any given settlement. Using a confidence level of 95%, this sample size affords an expected margin of error of 3%.
Ground Truth Solutions co-led enumerator training and supervised data collection on the ground. Within each of the 10 selected settlements, we chose particular zones from which to collect data, and within these zones, we selected smaller village/cluster units. In selecting the zones, we grouped them into two or three tiers, depending on the population size within the given zones of the camp, and asked the data collection partner to select one zone from each tier in order to capture responses from differently sized areas. Within the zones, a GTS supervisor, in consultation with local leaders and actors on the ground, selected the villages/clusters based on several factors, such as when they were established, their distance from central points, and their population size.
The actual sample size achieved was 1,511 participants from 10 refugee settlements across Uganda, and the sample size in each settlement was proportional to the population size of the targeted communities within any given settlement. Using a confidence level of 95%, this sample size affords an expected margin of error of 3%.
Ground Truth Solutions co-led enumerator training and supervised data collection on the ground. Within each of the 10 selected settlements, we chose particular zones from which to collect data, and within these zones, we selected smaller village/cluster units. In selecting the zones, we grouped them into two or three tiers, depending on the population size within the given zones of the camp, and asked the data collection partner to select one zone from each tier in order to capture responses from differently sized areas. Within the zones, a GTS supervisor, in consultation with local leaders and actors on the ground, selected the villages/clusters based on several factors, such as when they were established, their distance from central points, and their population size.
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2019-10-08 | 2019-10-30 |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face [f2f]
Supervision
Data was collected from 8–30 October 2019, in partnership with the Centre for Integrated Research and Community Development Uganda (CIRCODU), a Kampalabased data collection firm. The enumerators were previously trained on electronic data collection devices, including KoBo, on which this questionnaire was programmed. Prior to the commencement of data collection, Ground Truth Solutions staff trained enumerators on the survey tool, concepts of perception data, and the GTS Code of Conduct. GTS also helped to supervise enumerators and provided daily feedback on the length of interviews, GPS locations, and the quality of the open-ended questions asked.
Data Collectors
| Name |
|---|
| Ground Truth Solutions |
Questionnaires
Questionnaires
Survey questions were developed to help understand refugees’ perceptions of the aid they receive, their relationship with humanitarian workers and the host community, and their future prospects. For the purpose of comparing this data with previous rounds, the questions in this round are phrased similarly to those in rounds one and two wherever possible. We consulted local actors and organisations in Uganda for feedback and input during the survey question design phase. Draft questions were also presented to UNHCR, the Assessment Technical Working Group (ATWG), the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), and the Office of the Prime Minister. Additional questions around voluntary repatriation, migration to a different country, and moving within Uganda were introduced this year in order to cover voluntary repatriation as the fifth pillar of the Office of the Prime Minister’s Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework. The team tested all the questions and translations with refugees before rolling out the survey.
Data Processing
Other Processing
Summary statistics are reported as the percentage of responses in each of the Likert categories or to binary yes/no questions. Average values are obtained for each question. Sub-group comparisons are made according to demographic markers of interest (e.g. refugee status, age, gender, disability status, etc.), but are only mentioned if the difference in the answers between sub-groups is larger than 10%. Change over time is assessed by comparing current scores to past survey round mean scores (out of five). Graphic representations of Likert scale and binary questions are visualised using green for favourable opinions and red for unfavourable opinions. Neutral responses are shown in grey.
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
HDX_GTS_UGA_2019_CPS_DDI_v1.1
Producers
| Name |
|---|
| HDX |