Examining dimensions of vulnerability among children in Uganda

Abstract

Insufficient data on the nature and extent of children's vulnerability in Uganda has challenged government and donors in priority setting, resource allocation and developing effective approaches to improve well-being. We conducted a population-based survey among a nationally representative sample of 2551 households, covering a total of 7946 children. We engaged national stakeholders in a priority-setting exercise to develop a scoring system to assess dimensions of children's vulnerability. The exercise identified individual and household characteristics to assess vulnerability--many of which had not been measured previously--to which numerical weights representing vulnerability level were assigned. Highly weighted characteristics included maternal death, disability, child labour and pregnancy before age 17. Psychosocial elements included living apart from siblings, having nobody to talk to and never visiting a living parent. According to this approach, an estimated 51.1% of children in Uganda (weighted for national population distribution) are considered critically or moderately vulnerable. It is to these children, equivalent to a national total of 8.7 million, that support services should be prioritised. However, survey data suggest that the most critically vulnerable children are under-represented in several types of support services. This pioneering, participatory methodology provides a rudimentary, but valuable, first step towards quantifying the vulnerability of children in Uganda and assessing their resource needs. It has been used by the Government of Uganda to determine subcategories of vulnerability for resource allocation. A major advantage is that it uses local contextual knowledge of child vulnerability rather than generic criteria applied in international surveys. Further analytical work is required to validate the methodology, link it to child well-being outcomes and devise a practical tool for service providers to refine programme targeting. The approach may be useful to national, regional or local service providers seeking an overview of their client base to monitor and improve programme-targeting efforts.

Access to Education for Orphans and Vulnerable Children in Uganda: A Multi-District, Cross-Sectional Study Using Lot Quality Assurance Sampling from 2011 to 2013

“…Kampala); Table 1 shows how the data were distributed between four Uganda regions. Similar regional classifications have been used in previous studies [ 23 , 26 , 37 ]. The donor selected the districts surveyed each year; hence there is some variation in the geographical regions from one year to another ( S1 Table ).…”

Vulnerability in maternal, new-born, and child health in low- and middle-income countries: Findings from a scoping review

“…Most of the studies focused on a single country, while six focused on multiple countries. When reported, the studies were found to be from 40 countries with nine studies from Brazil [ 48 , 51 – 58 ], three each from Kenya [ 58 – 60 ], Nigeria [ 61 – 63 ], Democratic Republic of Congo [ 61 , 64 , 65 ], and Uganda [ 39 , 64 , 66 ] and two each from Malawi [ 61 , 67 ] and Bangladesh [ 68 , 69 ]. Fig 3 provides a summary statistic of the studies on vulnerabilities in new-born and child health, while additional information on the characteristics of the studies can be found in online S1 Table .…”

The adolescent girls vulnerability index: Guiding strategic investment in Uganda

“…The indicators included in the index are based on research and expertise on adolescent girls. Risks such as child marriage, limited economic opportunities, and parenthood have different Forsyth et al 1996;Kalibala et al 2012;MEASURE Evaluation 2009;Land et al 2001;Gordon et al 2003;Pullum et al 2011. implications for adolescent girls compared to boys. An index of adolescent boy vulnerability should be created but should be similarly tailored to the population rather than simply an extension of adolescent girl vulnerability.…”

“…and the Vulnerability Score(Kalibala et al 2012) have been used to identify children as vulnerable on the basis of a set of indicators. The vulnerability scale uses 12 components, each with a score of 0-3 points.…”