This article describes a model of care for abandoned and neglected infants in need of urgent physical, social, and medical support as implemented by the Child's i Foundation, an international, nongovernmental organization operating in Uganda. The model discounts the need for long-term care of young children within institutions and challenges the basis for intercountry adoption. Underpinned by the essentials of care continuum provided under the Uganda National Alternative Care Framework (Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development, 2012), the model emphasizes the need to effect the reintegration of the separated child within the family of his or her birth, or locally organize foster care or adoption. Highlighting policy and programming lessons, the model showcases a holistic approach to the problem and puts emphasis on interventions that are protective, promotional, and transformational and the use of a community-oriented approach. The model offers guidance to both government and nongovernment actors in addressing the problems of child neglect and abandonment through the implementation of the alternative care framework.

Background The negative impact of COVID-19 on population health outcomes raises critical questions on health system preparedness and resilience, especially in resource-limited settings. This study examined healthworker preparedness for COVID-19 management and implementation experiences in Uganda’s refugee-hosting districts. Methods A cross sectional, mixed-method descriptive study in 17 health facilities in 7 districts from 4 major regions. Total sample size was 485 including > 370 health care workers (HCWs). HCW knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) was assessed by using a pre-validated questionnaire. The quantitative data was processed and analysed using SPSS 26, and statistical significance assumed at p < 0.05 for all statistical tests. Bloom's cutoff of 80% was used to determine threshold for sufficient knowledge level and practices with scores classified as high (80.0–100.0%), average (60.0–79.0%) and low (≤ 59.0%). HCW implementation experiences and key stakeholder opinions were further explored qualitatively using interviews which were audio-recorded, coded and thematically analysed. Results On average 71% of HCWs were knowledgeable on the various aspects of COVID-19, although there is a wide variation in knowledge. Awareness of symptoms ranked highest among 95% (p value < 0.0001) of HCWs while awareness of the criteria for intubation for COVID-19 patients ranked lowest with only 35% (p value < 0.0001). Variations were noted on falsehoods about COVID-19 causes, prevention and treatment across Central (p value < 0.0356) and West Nile (p value < 0.0161) regions. Protective practices include adequate ventilation, virtual meetings and HCW training. Deficient practices were around psychosocial and lifestyle support, remote working and contingency plans for HCW safety. The work environment has immensely changed with increased demands on the amount of work, skills and variation in nature of work. HCWs reported moderate control over their work environment but with a high level of support from supervisors (88%) and colleagues (93%). Conclusions HCWs preparedness is inadequate in some aspects. Implementation of healthcare interventions is constrained by the complexity of Uganda’s health system design, top-down approach of the national response to COVID-19 and longstanding health system bottlenecks. We recommend continuous information sharing on COVID-19, a design review with capacity strengthening at all health facility levels and investing in community-facing strategies.

No abstract

No abstract

Increasingly researchers are recognising the importance of including the perspectives of children and young people in research and in the development of interventions and innovations, in order to understand their lives on their own terms. However, due to potential risks posed to children and young people in research, gatekeepers have an increasingly important role in play in granting access and in direct field activities, especially where the research could be deemed as ‘sensitive’. This article reflects on the access and field experiences of a team of international researchers in four countries – Uganda, United Kingdom, Jamaica and India – researching Gender-Based Violence (GBV). Thematic analysis and QSR Nvivo were used to analyse data from this qualitative study which combined descriptive research with autoethnography. The reflective findings suggest that researching sensitive topics with children and young people is necessarily problematic in order to safeguard them, but that gatekeepers and gatekeeping can potentially undermine important research.