Policy Brief: Delivering Climate Finance

May 2018

to Implement Uganda’s National

Determined Contributions (NDCs)

Key Policy messages

1. Increase awareness about the Nationally Determined Contributions, the Green Growth Development Strategy and
available climate financing for implementing proposed actions. The relevant ministries, Departments and Agencies, including
the Ministry of Water and Environment, Climate Change Department, National Planning Authority and the National Designated
Authority for climate funds should make it a priority to inform not only duty bearers, but the general public about the above
actions to stimulate involvement by different stakeholders, and to closely learn about resilience building from ongoing and
completed projects.

2. Parliament, District and Lower Level Councils need to be availed with accurate and timely information to support decision
making in their legislative and monitoring roles. Quite urgently, Parliament should be supported to pass a climate change law
that clearly states both obligations and penalties.

3. Establish and capitalise a climate change fund. Once established, the fund should ensure stakeholder involvement to identify
innovative solutions to climate change as well as monitor the implementation of funded projects to enable resilience building,
as well as building in feedback loops to increase efficiency and effectiveness in use of climate finance.

4. The Government of Uganda should closely follow up the applications for the National Implementing Entities, by expeditiously
addressing any questions pending raised. In equal measure, investments towards building internal capacity to develop
bankable proposals are urgent. Resources including human, time and financial need to be allocated towards this.

1.0 Introduction
Climate change is one of the greatest challenges facing humanity this century, and as a global challenge it requires global
solutions. The threat of climate change is multidimensional and its impacts transcend national borders (MWE 2015). This is
being enabled through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in which close to 195 countries
agreed to pursue efforts to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels (UNFCCC, 2015). Therefore
countries are obliged to develop and implement ambitious climate actions so as to meet these targets, also known as Nationally
Determined Contributions (NDCs) of the Paris Agreement .

It should be noted that for countries to meet such commitments, they require necessary means of implementation. Article 4.3
of the UNFCCC stipulates that the developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II shall also provide
such financial resources, including for the transfer of technology, needed by the developing country Parties to meet the agreed
full incremental costs of implementing such commitments.

Furthermore, the Paris Agreement provides for developed countries to continue to support climate action to reduce emissions
and build resilience to climate change impacts in developing countries through continuation of their existing collective goal to
mobilize USD 100 billion per year by 2020 and extend this until 2025.

1
The Paris Agreement was agreed in December 2015 after several years of negotiation under the UNFCCC, to strengthen global climate change response.
It came into force in November 2016, thus setting a basis for Countries Party to the Agreement to communicate their Nationally Determined Contributions every 5 years.
 POLICY BRIEF Delivering Climate Finance to Implement Uganda’s National Determined Contributions (NDCs)
2.0 Climate finance
At the international level, financing for climate action also
referred to as climate finance has dominated much of the
UNFCCC negotiations, reflecting a divergence in position
between developed and developing countries. At the national
level, particularly for the least developed countries and
African countries such as Uganda, it represents one of the key
limiting factors holding back delivery of national obligations.
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are essentially
the backbone of the Paris Agreement. While securing a deal
in Paris was a huge success, the real challenge will be actual
progress in tackling climate change, i.e. countries following
through on the commitments they made at Conference of
Parties (COP) 21. This is where NDCs are so important, as they
provide an action plan going forward.
Uganda’s mitigation and adaptation actions in the NDC
are based on the country’s National Climate Change Policy
(2015). Uganda’s NDCs commit to a 22% emission cuts on
a business as usual basis by 2030 due to a series of policies
and measures in the energy, forestry, wetland sectors and
complimented by additional measures in climate smart
agriculture and transport.
According to the Overseas Development Institute (2016),
Uganda’s total expenditure on climate change-relevant
actions has remained well below 1% of Gross Domestic
Product (GDP), which is much less than 1.6% that the
implementation strategy of the 2015 National Climate Change
Policy recommends.
This suggests that significant additional financing will be
required above what is currently spent on climate change-
relevant actions if the climate change policy goals are to be
met (Overseas Development Institute, 2016). In order to fully
implement the aforementioned adaptation and mitigation
priority actions, some cross-cutting initiatives must be
undertaken.
However, the full implementation of the NDC is conditional
on the support of international stakeholders. As set out in the
National Climate Change Policy and Costed Implementation
Strategy, national sources are assumed to cover approximately
30% of incremental costs of the NDC activities in the next 15
years, with 70% expected to originate from international
sources (MWE, 2015). Estimates from the same source show
that Uganda will require United States dollars 2.9 billion over
the next 15 years to address the impacts of climate change
2
Ministry of Water and Environment (2015), Economic Assessment of the Impacts of Climate Change in Uganda. Kampala, Uganda.
in addition to the existing interventions. This represents
approximately 1.2% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) per annum over the next 15 years (GDP at market
prices as of 2011). With less than 1% currently invested in
climate smart interventions, Uganda needs to do a lot more
to mobilise adequate resources, short of which, research
warns, annual costs could be in the range of $3.2-5.9 billion
within a decade.
A number of Parties and multilateral development banks have
made announcements on their climate finance contributions
in the context of the goal of jointly mobilizing USD 100 billion
per year by 2020 as agreed by the Parties at the UNFCCC
conferences in Copenhagen in 2009 and Cancun in 2010.
However, the flow of these funds to vulnerable countries /
Low developing Countries remains low. For example, while
the EU and its Member States constitute the largest donor
for development, humanitarian and climate finance to
developing countries, a recent ActAlliance report (April 2018)
to establish an overview of climate finance provided by EU
institutions and EU Member States to developing countries
indicate low level of support where it is globally needed.
The ActAlliance Report notes that the European Commission
(EC), the European Development Fund (EDF), the European
Investment Bank (EIB) and individual EU Member States
provided only 19% of climate finance to vulnerable least
developed countries (LDC), while 78% of EU funding went to
middle income countries like Turkey, Ukraine and India.
But according to Africa’s Adaptation Gap 2 Technical report
(2015), climate change challenge exceeds the capacity to
respond to projected damages and impacts through domestic
resources, even if the base to raise additional funding is
broadened. Scaled-up international support for African
countries is therefore critical.
Climate finance refers to the financial resources
mobilized to fund actions that mitigate and adapt to
the impacts of climate change, including public climate
finance commitments by developed countries under
the UNFCCC, although a definition of the term “climate
finance” is yet to be agreed internationally.
 POLICY BRIEF Delivering Climate Finance to Implement Uganda’s National Determined Contributions (NDCs)

3.0 Sources of Climate Finance

Climate funds are starting to increase their ambitions on how they engage in countries,
increasingly dealing directly with the lead ministries responsible for strategic investment and In Uganda the
financial management decisions at the national level instead of more peripheral actors. The aim is
to support paradigm shifts rather than limiting ambition to incremental changes.
total cost in
the adaptation
There are several financing mechanisms available globally, towards addressing the climate change priority sectors
mitigation and adaptation goals. Some are defined through the UNFCCC framework, while others,
especially from bilateral sources are also available to governments especially in developing
is estimated at
countries. Various foundations and private entities are equally making financing windows around USD 2.4
available towards governments, private sector and NGOs to address climate change. Given the billion over the
difficulties with tracking such sources, this paper limits itself to the UNFCCC and national sources
such as Green Climate Fund (GCF), adaptation Fund (AF), Global Environment Facility (GEF) Least next 15 years.
Developed Countries Fund (LDCF), and Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) and any other that are
detailed in section 3 below.

In Uganda the total cost in the adaptation priority sectors is estimated at around USD 2.4 billion over the next 15 years.
Although the total costs of the activities in the priority mitigation sectors are uncertain, the upfront capital investment for the
renewable energy installations has been estimated at USD 5.4 billion over the next 10 years. Additionally, the initial Costed Plan
for the National Climate Change Policy indicates costs of around USD 36 million over the 10 years for the implementation of
measures in the forestry sector (MWE, 2015).

Some of the main forms of climate finance are summarised below.

3.1 Understanding Green Climate Fund (GCF)
The Green Climate Fund (GCF) of the UNFCCC was agreed at
the Durban COP and became fully operational with its first
projects approved at the end of 2015. GCF is the newest actor
in the multilateral climate finance architecture and became
fully operational in 2015. Since then, it has approved USD
2,634 million for 54 projects. The GCF is an operating entity
of the Financial Mechanism of the UNFCCC.
It is a legally independent institution hosted by South Korea,
has its own secretariat and the World Bank as its interim
trustee. It functions under the guidance of, and is accountable
to, the UNFCCC COP.
The 24 GCF Board members, with equal representation of
developed and developing countries with support from the
secretariat, have been working to operationalize the Fund
since their first meeting in August 2012.
initial resource mobilization effort that began in June 2014
raised USD 10.3 billion from 43 contributing countries
(including eight developing countries) as well as a handful
of regions and cities. By September 2017, USD 10.1 billion
of pledged finance was formalized through contribution
agreements. Heading into COP 23 in Bonn under a Fiji
Presidency, this climate finance fundamental provides a
snapshot of the operationalization and functions of the Fund.
While the Fund’s role in a post-2020 climate regime as the
major finance channel under the UNFCCC was confirmed, the
scale of its resourcing remains to be clarified post-Paris.
Uganda is implementing a number of the projects among
them they include: Government of Uganda and UNDP
launched implementation of a $44.26 million “building
community resilience, wetlands ecosystems and associated
catchments in Uganda” through GCF funding (UNDP 2017).
3.2 Global Environmental Facility (GEF)

This year, the GCF focused on addressing policy gaps in
essential policies and frameworks to receive and manage
finance as well as policy reforms to speed up proposal
approval and disbursement of approved funding. By October,
it also accredited a total of 59 implementing entities. The
The GEF is an operating entity of the Financial Mechanism
of the UNFCCC, serving in the same function for the Paris
Agreement, with a long track record in environmental
funding. It also serves as financial mechanism for several other
conventions, including on biodiversity and desertification.

Government of Uganda and UNDP launched implementation of a $44.26 million “building community
resilience, wetlands ecosystems and associated catchments in Uganda” through GCF funding (UNDP 2017).
 POLICY BRIEF Delivering Climate Finance to Implement Uganda’s National Determined Contributions (NDCs)
Resources are allocated targeting multiple focal areas,
including climate change, according to the impact of
dollars spent on environmental outcomes, but ensuring all
developing countries have a share of the funding. 30 donor
countries pledged USD 4.43 billion over all focal areas to the
sixth replenishment of the GEF (2014-2018).
Though the climate change focal areas will be supported
with USD 1.26 billion, but GEF 6 is increasingly focused on
programming that targets multiple focal areas including
climate change, in thematic areas such as sustainable cities
and land use and forests. As of March 2017, projects in the
focal area of climate change represented approximately
29% of the GEF’s cumulative funding approved to date. This
amounts to USD 4.7 billion, making the GEF the largest single
source of cumulative multilateral funding for climate change
actions.
The GEF also administers the Least Developed Countries Fund
(LDCF) and the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) under
the guidance of the UNFCCC Conference of Parties (COP).
These funds support national adaptation plan development
and implementation, although largely through smaller scale
projects (with a country ceiling for funding of USD 20 million).
As of October 2017, the LDCF has made cash transfers to
projects of USD 493 million and the SCCF has made similar
transfers of USD 201 million, both since their inception in
2001 across over 100 countries.
3.3 The Climate Investment Funds (CIFs)
The CIFs was established in 2008 are administered by
the World Bank, but operate in partnership with regional
development banks including the African Development Bank
(AfDB), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the European
Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).
The CIFs finance programmatic interventions in selected
developing countries, with the objective of improving
understanding of how public finance is best deployed at scale
to assist transformation of development trajectories. The
CIFs have a total pledge of USD 8.24 billion. They include a
Clean Technology Fund with USD 5.48 billion in contributions
and USD 2.75 billion in cash transfers to projects to-date,
and a Strategic Climate Fund (SCF), with USD 2.76 billion
in contributions and USD 856 million in cash transfers to
projects as of October 2017.
The CIFs was established in
2008 are administered by
the World Bank, but operate
in partnership with regional
development banks
The SCF is composed of the Pilot Program for Climate
Resilience (PPCR), the Forest Investment Program (FIP), and
the Scaling-Up Renewable Energy Program for Low Income
Countries (SREP).
While the CIFs had a sunset clause that would come into
effect when a global architecture was in place, commonly
understood to be the operationalization of the Green Climate
Fund (GCF), it was decided in 2016 that its operations would
be extended through 2019 at which point options to sunset
would be revisited (Bird et al., 2017).
Uganda is partnering with the CIF, the African Development
Bank, the World Bank, and the International Finance
Corporation to amplify its current reforestation policies and
diversify its renewable energy mix. FIP resources will be used
to conserve and enhance forest landscapes to maintain the
biodiversity, livelihoods, and economic opportunities which
they support. FIP will also be leveraged to scale-up REDD+
initiatives to elevate Uganda’s participation in global action
on climate change .
3.4 The Adaptation Fund (AF)
This is financed through a 2% levy on the sale of emission
credits from the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto
Protocol and, in times of low carbon prices, increasingly
reliant on developed country grant contributions. Operational
since 2009, total financial inputs amount to USD 619 million,
with total cash transfers to projects of USD 237 million. The
AF pioneered direct access to climate finance for developing
countries through accredited National Implementing
Entities that are able to meet agreed fiduciary as well as
environmental, social and gender standards, as opposed
to working solely through UN agencies or Multilateral
Development Banks (MDBs) as multilateral implementing
agencies (Bird et al 2017). Currently Uganda is implementing
the project “Uganda Enhancing resilience of communities
to climate change through catchment based integrated
management of water and related resources in Uganda”
(EURECCCA).
 POLICY BRIEF Delivering Climate Finance to Implement Uganda’s National Determined Contributions (NDCs)

The four-year project is funded by the Adaptation Fund (USD
7,751,000) and will be executed by the Ugandan Ministry of
Water and Environment in partnership with Global Water
Partnership, Eastern Africa while the OSS will serve as an
Implementing Entity .
3.5 Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
These play a prominent role in delivering multilateral climate
finance, with climate finance commitments of USD 27.4
billion made in 2016 alone (EBRD et al., no date). Many have
incorporated climate change considerations into their core
lending and operations, and most MDBs now also administer
climate finance initiatives with a regional or thematic scope.
The World Bank’s carbon finance unit has established the
Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) to explore how
carbon market revenues could be harnessed to reduce
emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, forest
conservation, sustainable forest management and the
enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+) Others sources
of funds include but not limited to the Climate Investment
Fund of the World Bank and the Global Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy Fund (GEEREF) which leverages public
sector funds to catalyse private sector investment into clean
energy projects (ACTADE 2017).
The African Development Bank is also the Trustee for the
Africa Renewable Energy Initiative (AREI) and will house the
AREI Trust Fund with expected USD 10 billion in resources.
Climate finance appear to have directed mitigation and
adaptation finance where by in Uganda a country with high
vulnerability to climate change is expected to benefit from
Adaptation finance that targets poor and vulnerable and the
largest volumes of REDD+ finance targets demonstration to
political commitment to tropical-forest protection.

4.0 Challenges in accessing climate finance

→→ Lack of clear definition of climate finance and climate funding, although a definition of the term
“climate finance” is yet to be agreed internationally this poses the challenge on what qualifies as
climate finance and climate funding since the two terms are used interchangeably.

→→ Coordination of finances that are existing and the impact of the funding that is provided is
not clear. There is limited public knowledge about existing finances and to what interventions.
Scanty information can be found on some websites and in newspapers. However, there is no
single one-stop center to monitor how much financing has been mobilized (domestic and
foreign). This limits learning and accountability not only towards value for money, but most Access to
critically towards adaptation and mitigation objectives. financing is a
→→ Access to financing is a major barrier not only to Government, but also to non-state actors. Taking
major barrier
the global financing mechanisms for example, each window has elaborate but cumbersome not only to
criteria for accreditation. Very few countries in Africa for instance have succeeded in being Government,
accredited directly, thus remaining dependent on multilateral agencies such as the UNDP to
access financing on their behalf. While this is fine in the short term, National Implementing but also to
Entities (NIEs) are desired for the midterm and long run, to ensure adequate capacity non-state
development and accountability to the people.
actors.
→→ Related to the above are the low capacity levels to develop bankable projects. Compared
to multi-lateral implementing entities that have fully fledged departments for resource
mobilization, Uganda Government and non-state actors do not have adequate expertise, and
resources including time, to develop bankable proposals.

→→ There are limited joint project fundraising between CSOs and Government due to lack of
operational frameworks

3
https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/country/uganda
4
https://www.gwp.org/en/GWP-Eastern-Africa/WE-ACT/News/oss-and-the-government-of-uganda-sign-an- agreement-for-the-implementation-of-eureccca-project-in-uganda/
 POLICY BRIEF Delivering Climate Finance to Implement Uganda’s National Determined Contributions (NDCs)
5.0 Recommendations on how to address the challenges
→→ There is need to clearly define what constitutes climate
finance in Uganda, so that the contributions made by
different development partners and initiatives are clearly
earmarked for climate change related activities.
→→ Ownership of a cross-cutting issue like climate change,
that requires action by a diversity of public, private and
local actors, poses a significant challenge to coordination.
Hence, there is need for more efforts on sectoral
coordination of climate finance initiatives in Uganda
given that the effects and impacts of climate change
are in multiple sectors. Greater coordination is needed
across providers of climate finance to maximize synergies
and take advantage of complementary competences and
instruments. Incentives to this end could be reinforced at
Fund level, and national and subnational level.
→→ A more concerted effort is required to engage key
stakeholders during programme design to understand
their varying interests and their objectives for
involvement. In this context it is critical to consider the
underlying policy and regulatory framework and national
context for investment in low-carbon and climate-
resilient approaches, even if a programme may not be
able to address these issues directly. This will then help
those involved to understand if the funds are for climate
finance.
→→ Implementation of climate finance needs to be accelerated
without compromising on programme quality: simpler
application processes, and support to help stakeholders
understand and navigate processes may help to increase
the number of those that apply for funding for low
carbon development and climate resilient initiatives at
national and subnational level.There is need to clearly
define what constitutes climate finance in Uganda so
that the contributions made by different development
partners and initiatives are clearly earmarked for climate
change related activities use the right types of finance for
the appropriate purpose. Climate funds are increasingly
focused on finding the most appropriate instruments to
encourage low-carbon and climate resilient investment
at the lowest possible cost. But in many cases, climate
funds need to consider the full suite of financial options,
including grant and concessional funding, as well as low
scale investment for community initiatives so that they
can be demonstrated and replicated at community level.
→→ There is need for climate finance to support institutional
capacity building among the various actors including non-
state actors, as well as create incentives that encourage
investors to engage on new areas that they perceive to
be higher risk. Even relatively small amounts of grant
finance can complement the use of less concessional
and non-concessional financial instruments, and greatly
increase impact at community level.
→→ Raising political awareness is important as policy makers
and politicians are key actors in the policy process of
climate finance. Public awareness to increase enthusiasm
and support, stimulate self-mobilization and action,
and mobilize local knowledge and resources among
the various actors to address climate related issues.
This will be achieved through strategies of effective
communication to reach the desired outcome of climate
financing in Uganda.
→→ There is need for GCF to continue expanding the range
of partners involved in the delivery of climate finance,
by allowing countries to access resources through
multiple implementing partners from the sub-national to
international level and make the requirements that suit
the capacity of those that apply.
→→ Active civil society and private sector engagement with
these institutions can help to bring new issues and
perspectives to bear on the decisions that are being
made. But sustaining substantive engagement from non-
governmental stakeholders takes continued commitment
on their part, and may benefit from support.
→→ Funds have started to learn from past experience,
developing partnerships with financial intermediaries
which often have greater capacity to ensure that a range
of funding options are available and are better networked
within a country. This has helped larger climate funds
effectively scale their operations, particularly on energy
efficiency.
→→ All funds have supported sub-national action to some
extent, but have interfaced primarily with national
governments. Hence, there is need to allow non-
state actors to have the opportunity to participate in
implementing low carbon development and climate
resilient initiatives through pilots and replication at
community level.
Raising political awareness is
important as policy makers and
politicians are key actors in the
policy process of climate finance.
 POLICY BRIEF Delivering Climate Finance to Implement Uganda’s National Determined Contributions (NDCs)

6.0 Conclusion
There are now more than ten international multilateral funds created by the global community, to channel climate finance to
developing countries, including the GCF. Ensuring that the climate funds created under the UNFCCC have adequate finance is
critical to securing the ambitious global agreement on climate change.

There are now a large number of multilateral climate funds, both under and beyond the UNFCCC convention that support
adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. Each of these funds had a particular purpose and function at the time of
their establishment, but there is now substantial overlap, and too little money available through these disparate channels.

Hence, there is need to simplify how they can be accessed by various actors interested in low carbon development pathways
and climate resilient related activities. It is time to simplify and consolidate the global climate-finance, and scale up finance.
Multilateral climate funds have brought developed and developing countries together to agree on how best to finance
interventions to address global climate change, and are increasingly inclusive of civil society, private sector and other inputs

References
• ActAlliance (2018). An analysis of the Climate Finance Reporting of the European Union http://actalliance.eu/wp-content/
uploads/2018/04/Analysis-of-the-climate-finance-reporting-of-the-EU.pdf accessed April 24, 2018
• ACTADE (2017). An outlook of Uganda’s Climate Finance Landscape
• Bird, N., Watson, C., & and Schalatek., L. (2017). The Global Climate Finance Architecture Overseas Development Institute
and Heinrich Böll Stiftung North America
• Green Climate Fund Website: www.greenclimate.fund (accessed on February 9, 2018)
• Ministry of Water and Environment (2015). Economic Assessment of the Impacts of Climate Change in Uganda. Kampala,
Uganda.
• Ministry of Water and Environment (2015). Uganda’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution :http://www4.unfccc.
int/submissions/INDC/Published%20Documents/Uganda/1/INDC%20Uganda%20final%20%2014%20October%20%20
2015,%20minor%20correction,28.10.15.pdf accessed February 9, 2018
• MWE. 2015. National Climate Change Policy. Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE), Kampala
• ODI (2014). Climate finance: is it making a difference? A review of the effectiveness of Multilateral Climate Funds
• ODI (2016). Public spending on climate change in Africa Experiences from Ethiopia, Ghana, Tanzania and Uganda
• OSS (2017). Kick-off Meeting EURECCCA – Project, funded by Adaptation Fund http://www.oss-online.org/en/kick-meeting-
eureccca-%E2%80%93-project-funded-adaptation-fund
• UCSD (2017). Uganda National baseline study for “Promoting Implementation of the Paris Agreement (PIPA) in East Africa
• UNDP Uganda (2017) http://www.ug.undp.org/content/uganda/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2017/11/29/press-
release-government-of-uganda-and-undp-launch-implementation-of-a-44-26-million-project-to-restore-wetlands-and-
build-community-resilience.html accessed on 12 March, 2018
• UNEP (2015). Africa’s Adaptation Gap 2 Technical report: http://climateanalytics.org/files/africa_adaptation_gap_2014_1.
pdf accessed April 24, 2018
• UNFCCC (2015). Paris Agreement http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php accessed March 12, 2018
 Photo Source: UCSD

This Policy Brief has been prepared by the Uganda PIPA project Campaign Group members (Climate Action
Network - Uganda, African Center for Trade and Development, Advocacy Coalition on Sustainable Agriculture,
and Environmental Management for Livelihood Improvement – Bwaise Facility) led by UCSD as part of the
Project: Promoting Implementation of the Paris Agreement (PIPA) in East Africa - with a pro-poor focus involving
INFORSE Network, Sustainable Energy, TaTEDO and SusWatch Kenya supported by CISU (Denmark).

Through the PIPA, the above Partners are contributing to strengthening the pro-poor focus and climate change
ambitions in the implementation of the Paris Agreement in East Africa. This is being done through assessing
implementation (readiness) of the NDCs. This is the principal cornerstone of the Paris Agreement. More about
the Project: http://www.inforse.org/africa/East_Africa_PIPA.htm

Views expressed do not necessarily represent those of the project funder.

Uganda Coalition for Sustainable Development (UCSD), P.O. Box 27551 Kampala. Tel:+256414269461,
E-mail: ugandacoalition@infocom.co.ug, Web: www.easuswatch.org, Twitter: @ugandacoalition