DISTRICT CONTINGENCY PLAN
FOR HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE
GULU DISTRICT
Version no: Two (2)
51
1.0 CONTEXT ANALYSIS AND RISK ASSESSMENT
1.1 Background
Gulu district is located in Northern Uganda and lies between longitude 30-32 degrees East; latitude 02-4 degrees North. It is bordered by Amuru district in the West, Lamwo district in the North East, Pader district in the East, Lira district in the South East, Oyam in the district in the South and Nwoya district in the South West. The District Headquarter is 332 kilometres by road from Kampala, the National Headquarters.
Gulu District covers a total land area of 3,449.08 square kilometres, making 1.44% of the National land area and it is astride the Great-North-Road giving access to South Sudan and Democratic Republic of Congo through Nwoya district.
1.2 Demographic profile
The district projected population as of June 2010 is 374,900 compared to 298,527 people during the 2002 population and housing census. The projected figure gives a population density of 109 persons per square kilometre. The average household size is 5.1 persons, with a sex ratio of 97 males per 100 females. This ratio appears normal in spite of the fact that many males were killed during the protracted civil conflict of 1986-2006.
1.3 Administrative units
Gulu district has 02 Counties, 01 Municipality, 12 Subcounties and 04 Municipal Divisions. The District Council, which is the highest political authority within its area of jurisdiction, is run in accordance with the decentralization principles provided for in the Constitution and the Local Governments Act Cap 243.
1.4 Context analysis
Gulu district has witnessed various naturally and human induced disasters. The district experienced a insurgency from 1986 to 2006 which displaced over 90% of the population into Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps for ten years i.e. from 1996 to 2006. During the displacement, complex emergencies arose due to ebola disease out-break in the year 2000, which killed over 200 people. There were also outbreaks of other diseases including cholera, hepatitis E, meningitis and measles. Moreover, the camps were also characterized by frequent fire outbreaks with serious losses of property and a few lives.
Apart from the human diseases, the district has also experienced animal disease outbreaks and crop failures. The animal diseases include Bovine Contagious Pleuropneumonia, swine fever, foot and mouth disease; and Newcastle disease in chicken. Major crop failures have been due to prolonged dry spell, water logging and hailstorms leading to hunger.
Most of the diseases above are transported to Gulu from the neighboring districts especially Kitgum, Pader, Amuru; and South Sudan. This means Gulu District must ever be on alert and prepared to prevent, mitigate and or respond should there be any suspected or reported cases.
1.5 Main hazards
The main hazards in Gulu include human epidemics, animal disease outbreaks, hailstorms, prolonged dry spell, fire outbreaks and water logging.
1.6 Risk Assessment
1.6.1 Hazards that the district is prone to, and the assessment of the potential risk
S/N / Disaster / Types of disaster(Natural or Technological) / Potential Risks Involved / Remarks /
1 / Human Disease Outbreaks (Yellow Fever, Meningitis, Cholera, Hepatitis E, Measles Malaria, Polio and Ebola) / Natural in nature / Death / Gulu district is prone to have an outbreak of diseases as experienced in the recent past, and we should prepare to respond to it promptly. There is high fear of yellow fever spilling over to Gulu District from the neighbouring Districts.
Sickness
Loss of income
Loss of health workers
2 / Animal Disease Outbreak (Swine Fever, Foot and Mouth Disease) / Natural in nature / Loss of animal lives / Gulu District suffered greatly in 2010 as a result of swine fever affecting severely Odek Sub-County and part of Paicho Sub-County leading deaths of lots of pigs.
Loss of economic income
Loss of human lives
3 / Prolonged dry spell / Natural in nature / Crop destruction / Occasionally, the district has experienced dry spells covering the whole district, leading to destruction of crops and hunger in the population.
Hunger
Loss of Human Lives
4 / Floods / Water logging / Natural in nature / Crop destruction / These are likely to occur again as it happened in August-October 2010 affecting sub-counties of Odek and Palaro rather severely.
Disease outbreak
Impeded movements
Hunger
5 / Fire outbreak / Technological due to man’s influence / Death / Gutting of houses/huts during the dry season is a recurrence phenomenon where villages have been devastated covering the whole district.
Loss of Houses/Huts
Loss of income
Loss of animal lives
1.6.2 Probability of occurrence of the top 4 hazards in the next five years in Gulu
No. / Hazards / Probability score1 / Human Disease Outbreaks (Yellow Fever, Meningitis, Cholera, Hepatitis E, Measles Malaria, Polio and Ebola) / 3
2 / Animal Disease Outbreak (Swine Fever, Foot and Mouth Disease) / 2
3 / Prolonged dry spell / 1
4 / Floods/Water Logging / 2
1.6.3 Relative degrees of potential impact among all of RMI public health disaster hazards
Hazards / Size of incident area / Size of population / Potential lethality / Potential destruction of critical infrastructure / Mean impact scoreHuman Disease Outbreak / 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 1.5
Animal Disease Outbreak / 2 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 1.25
Prolonged dry spell / 0 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 0.75
Floods/Water logging / 1 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 1.25
Fire outbreak / 1 / 1 / 0 / 2 / 1.0
1.6.4 Hazard Priority Scores for Gulu
/ Hazards / Mean impact score / Probability score / Hazard priority score /1 / Human Disease Outbreak / 1.5 / 3 / 4.5
Animal Disease Outbreak / 1.25 / 2 / 2.5
2 / Prolonged dry spell / 0.75 / 1 / 0.75
3 / Floods/Water Logging / 1.25 / 2 / 2.5
4 / Fire Outbreaks / 1.0 / 1 / 1.0
1.6.5 Top Three Hazards in Gulu
No. / Hazard / Scores1 / Human Disease Outbreak / 4.50
2 / Animal Disease Outbreak / 2.50
3 / Floods/Water Logging / 2.50
4 / Fire Outbreaks / 1.0
5 / Prolonged Dry Spell / 0.75
1.7 Vulnerability Analysis
1.7.1 Vulnerability analysis for infrastructure in Gulu for the top three priority hazards
Asset / Priority Hazards /1. Human Disease Outbreak / 2. Animal Disease Outbreak / 3. Floods/Water Logging /
Building structures / 0 / 0 / 0
Electrical power / 0 / 0 / 0
Water supply / 3 / 2 / 2
Sanitation system / 3 / 3 / 3
Medical equipment / 0 / 0 / 0
Medical supplies / 3 / 3 / 1
Human resources / 3 / 2 / 3
Communications / 0 / 0 / 1
Environmental control / 1 / 2 / 1
Sub Total / 13 / 12 / 11
AVERAGE / 13 /9 = 1.44 / 12 /9 = 1.33 / 11 /9 = 1.22
Infrastructure is most vulnerable to priority hazard 1 (Human Disease Outbreak).
1.7.2 Vulnerability Analysis of the Population in Gulu for the top three Priority Hazards
No. / Population Vulnerability / Priority hazardHuman Disease Outbreak / Floods/Water Logging / Animal Disease Outbreak
1 / Children / 3 / 2 / 1
2 / Women / 3 / 2 / 3
3 / People with disabilities / 3 / 3 / 3
4 / Older persons / 3 / 3 / 3
5 / Health Workers / 2 / 1 / 1
6 / Poor people / 2 / 2 / 2
7 / People Living with HIV (PHIV) / 3 / 1 / 1
8 / Livestock / 1 / 2 / 3
9 / Crops / 1 / 3 / 1
10 / Farmers / 2 / 3 / 3
11 / General population / 1 / 1 / 1
12 / Roads and Bridges / 1 / 3 / 1
13 / Malnourished people / 3 / 1 / 2
14 / Lack of information / 2 / 1 / 2
15 / Lack of experience / 3 / 2 / 3
16 / Inadequate healthcare / 3 / 1 / 3
17 / Geographically isolated areas / 3 / 2 / 2
18 / Inadequate social organization / 3 / 3 / 3
19 / High burden of illness / 3 / 3 / 2
20 / Poor water and food quality / 2 / 1 / 1
Subtotal of vulnerability scores / 47 / 40 / 41
Divide subtotal by 20 (Mean Population Vulnerability Score) / 2.35 / 2 / 2.05
Human Disease Outbreak is the most vulnerable hazard identified in Gulu.
1.7.3 Summary of the Vulnerability Ranking
Vulnerability ranking according to hazard / Priority hazards1. Human Disease Outbreak / 2. Animal Disease Outbreak / 3. Floods/Water Logging
Infrastructure / 1.44 / 1.33 / 1.22
Communities (Population) / 2.35 / 2.05 / 2.00
Average / 1.90 / 1.69 / 1.61
1.7.4 Re-organization of the priority hazards to include vulnerability
No. / Hazard / Hazard Priority Score / Average Vulnerability Score / Combined Hazard Priority Score1 / Human Disease Outbreak / 4.5 / 2.35 / 10.58
2 / Animal Disease Outbreak / 2.5 / 2.05 / 5.13
3 / Floods and Water Logging / 2.5 / 2.00 / 5.00
Therefore Human Disease Outbreak is the highest ranking of the three priority hazards.
2.1 RISK SCENARIOS (2 pages)
2.1.1 Details of scenario 1: Numbers (disaggregated into sex and age), magnitude of impact, location etc
Scenario 1Best case scenario / Known human disease out-breaks with 5 infant and child deaths registered in Odek, Paicho, Palaro and Gulu Municipality
Most probable scenario / Known and manageable human disease out-breaks with 10 infant and child deaths registered in Odek, Paicho, Palaro and Gulu Municipality
Worst case scenario / Outbreak of a highly contagious and diagnostically challenging human disease causing 200 deaths among general district population
In case of an outbreak of human disease featuring worst case scenario, the following categories of the population will be most affected:
i. Children and Women will be most affected with over 50% of the infections of the categories of population affected
ii. People Living with HIV (PHIV) have weakened immune system, thus, the probability of surviving is very narrow if they circum to infection
iii. Older persons and persons with disabilities due to the nature of their mobility
iv. Health Workers (front liners charged with the responsibility to treat patients)
v. General population.
Scenario / EW indicators...by who? / Planning assumptions / Indication of resources/supply requirements / Main actors available / Constraining factors
Scenario 1
High infection rate, high fatality rate, fears among health workers, diagnostic difficulty and case management challenges, delayed effective response. / Presence of massive similar infections, unusual OPD attendance, and suspected cases reported by DHO. / -Over 500 persons affected in Gulu Municipality and most of the rural Sub Counties.
-200 people may be killed including health workers some of whom may desert the health units because of fear.
-A lot of skills, experience, medical and sundry supplies will be required.
-Resources are available
-Partners cooperate
-Climate change
-Technical expertise available
-Political will at all levels / Medicine, medical sundries, human resource, vehicles, fuel, isolation construction materials, effective communication gadgets. / District Chairperson, CAO, DHO, Medical Superintendents of Lacor Hospital, Gulu Regional Referral Hospital, UPDF 4th Division Hospital & Gulu Independent Hospital, In-charges Health Units, MOH, WHO, Unicef, WFP, WVI, URCS, ACF, District Water Officer, MAP, NUMAT. / Inadequate funding, poor road infrastructure for referrals, inadequate diagnostic equipment, inadequate qualified & experienced health workers, limited number of vehicles, limited In-patient space in Hospitals, poor sanitation among communities including in Gulu Municipality.
2.1.2 Details of scenario 2: Numbers (disaggregated into sex and age), magnitude of impact, location etc
Scenario 2Best case scenario / Disease out-breaks causing death of 45 livestock (cattle & pigs) and 100 birds in Bungatira, Patiko, Odek, and Palaro Subcounties.
Most probable scenario / Disease outbreaks causing death of over 80 livestock (cattle & pigs) in Odek, Paicho, Palaro Subcounties and Gulu Municipality
Worst case scenario / Disease outbreaks causing district-wide death of over 400 livestock including cattle, pigs goats, sheep and over 500 birds.
In case of an outbreak of animal disease featuring worst case scenario, the following categories of the animals and human population will be most affected:
i. Livestock (Cattle, Goats, Pigs, Sheep, Birds, etc), devastating animal population
ii. Farmers’ communities will be most hit which will culminate into the general population of the district in terms of loss of income
iii. Veterinary staff to extend will at risk of contracting the animal disease leading to real tragedy on human population, and coping up with it can be a tag of war
Scenario / EW indicators...by who? / Planning assumptions / Indication of resources/supply requirements / Main actors available / Constraining factors
Scenario 2
District-wide rapid death of cattle, pigs goats, sheep and domestic fowls. High infection rate requiring quarantine and urgent preventive and mitigation responses. / Massive animal and bird infections & deaths, suspected cases in/from neighbouring/other districts reported by DVO. / -over 800 animals and over 1000 birds affected throughout the district.
-400 animals and 500 birds may die while some Extension Workers and community members may also be infected from the animals due to poor carcass management. / Medicine, vaccines, veterinary sundries, technical human resource, enforcement personnel, vehicles, fuel, treatment centres construction materials. / District Chairperson, CAO, District Production Officer, DVO, DNC, District Entomologist, MAAIF, WVI, CARE, FAO, UNDP, ACORD, CRS, ALREP, NUDEIL. / Inadequate funding, poor road infrastructure for communication, inadequate diagnostic equipment, inadequate stock of medicine and vaccines, limited number of vehicles, limited functional treatment centres, risky community behaviour of eating carcasses of infected animals & birds.
2.1.3 Details of scenario 3: Numbers (disaggregated into sex and age), magnitude of impact, location etc