Amolatar District

by January 21, 2025

The access rates in Amolatar vary from 30 % in Acii Sub-County to 95 % in Muntu Sub-County. Amolatar has 561 domestic water points which serve a total of 156,993 people – 136,869 in rural areas. 121 water points have been non-functional for over 5 years and are considered abandoned. Amolatar has 1 piped schemes.

Access

66^%

Rural Functionality

80^%

Equity

136

Management

96^%

Gender

100^%

Population Density (people/km²) and Population

50		250		1,000		2,000

	100		500		1,500

NMS Namasale 113

Nalubwoyo Unknown

NTC Namasale TC 430

AGK Agikdak 250

AGW Agwingiri 189

ATC Amolatar TC 308

APT Aputi 209

AKW Akwon 283

ARW Arwotcek 239

AWL Awelo 259

ETM Etam 223

Abeja Unknown

MNT Muntu 181

Opali Unknown

Acii Unknown

Population figures are projections to the above mentioned date based on UBOS census 2014 and district growth rates. Population density is calculated on land area only. Boundaries reflect the preliminary status only.

Access to Safe Water

20 %		60 %

	40 %		80 %

Total Access 66 %

Rural Access 65 %

Urban Access 69 %

Nalubwoyo 51 %

Opali 64 %

Abeja 54 %

AGK Agikdak 82 %

AGW Agwingiri 37 %

AKW Akwon 83 %

APT Aputi 64 %

ARW Arwotcek 51 %

ATC Amolatar TC 89 %

AWL Awelo 80 %

ETM Etam 76 %

MNT Muntu 95 %

NMS Namasale 71 %

NTC Namasale TC 48 %

Acii 30 %

Access to safe water is the ratio of people served by a safe water point and piped water supply to the total population.
The calculation is based on an estimated number of people per water point type. Maximum access rate can be 95%.

Access to Safe Water

20 %		60 %

	40 %		80 %

Total Access 66 %

Rural Access 65 %

Urban Access 69 %

Nalubwoyo 51 %

Opali 64 %

Abeja 54 %

AGK Agikdak 82 %

AGW Agwingiri 37 %

AKW Akwon 83 %

APT Aputi 64 %

ARW Arwotcek 51 %

ATC Amolatar TC 89 %

AWL Awelo 80 %

ETM Etam 76 %

MNT Muntu 95 %

NMS Namasale 71 %

NTC Namasale TC 48 %

Acii 30 %

Functionality of Point Water Sources

60 %		80 %

	70 %		90 %

Rural Functionality 80 %

Urban Functionality 70 %

Nalubwoyo 67 %

Opali 64 %

Abeja 47 %

AGK Agikdak 86 %

AGW Agwingiri 81 %

AKW Akwon 90 %

APT Aputi 85 %

ARW Arwotcek 74 %

ATC Amolatar TC 68 %

AWL Awelo 95 %

ETM Etam 73 %

MNT Muntu 83 %

NMS Namasale 79 %

NTC Namasale TC 75 %

Acii 100 %

Functionality is the ratio of functional water sources to all water sources. Sources not operating for five or more years are assumed to be abandoned, and hence are not included in the calculation.

People served per technology

Reasons for non-functionality

Type of Management

Source of Funding

District Water Supply Summary

Sub-County	Urban/ Rural	Population	Population Served	Access	Functionality			Point Water Sources																					Piped Water Systems
					Functionality			Protected springs			Shallow wells			Deep boreholes			Rainwater harvesting tanks			Dams			Valley tanks			PSP/Kiosk, Tap stands			YT	HH	IC	NWSC
					R	U	WfP	F	NF	Tot	F	NF	Tot	F	NF	Tot	F	NF	Tot	F	NF	Tot	F	NF	Tot	F	NF	Tot	YT	HH	IC	NWSC
KIOGA
1 Namasale TC	Urban	13,876	6,612	48%	-	75%	-	-	-	-	1	1	2	15	5	20	2	-	2	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
2 Muntu	Rural	17,805	16,915	95%	83%	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	2	47	8	55	1	2	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	30	4	1	No
3 Agwingiri	Rural	21,366	7,806	37%	81%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	22	4	26	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
4 Namasale	Rural	27,261	19,448	71%	79%	-	-	1	-	1	-	1	1	57	6	63	-	8	8	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
5 Aputi	Rural	20,261	12,915	64%	85%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	39	4	43	-	3	3	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
6 Arwotcek	Rural	22,472	11,424	51%	74%	-	-	-	-	-	-	4	4	30	4	34	1	3	4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
7 Agikdak	Rural	14,613	12,012	82%	86%	-	100%	-	-	-	-	-	-	36	4	40	-	2	2	1	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
8 Akwon	Rural	10,438	8,706	83%	90%	-	100%	-	-	-	-	-	-	26	3	29	1	-	1	1	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
9 Nalubwoyo	Rural	11,666	6,006	51%	67%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	6	20	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
10 Acii	Rural	8,099	2,400	30%	100%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	8	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
11 Amolatar TC	Urban	15,104	13,512	89%	-	68%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	34	8	42	-	2	2	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	6	6	-	-	-	No
12 Awelo	Rural	15,472	12,400	80%	95%	-	-	1	1	2	-	-	-	39	1	40	-	-	-	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
13 Etam	Rural	19,770	15,124	76%	73%	-	-	1	1	2	-	-	-	39	10	49	-	4	4	-	3	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
14 Abeja	Rural	9,455	5,112	54%	47%	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	1	9	7	16	-	2	2	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
15 Opali	Rural	10,315	6,600	64%	64%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	8	22	-	-	-	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
Total		237,973	156,993	66	80	70	20	3	2	5	3	7	10	429	78	507	5	28	33	2	8	10	0	0	0	0	6	6	30	4	1	No
District		237,973	156,993	66	80	70	20	3	2	5	3	7	10	429	78	507	5	28	33	2	8	10	0	0	0	0	6	6	30	4	1	No

F = Functional; NF = Non-Functional; Tot = Total; YT = Yard Tap; HH = Household Connections; IC = Institutional Connections

Piped Water Supply Systems

Type of Scheme/GFS	Number of Schemes	Functionality of System			Type of Management					WB in place
Type of Scheme/GFS	Number of Schemes	Functional	Non-Functional	Partially Functional	Private Operator	WSC	Private/Individual	NWSC	Other	Yes	No
Groundwater based/Not GFS	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0
Surface Water Based/Not GFS	1	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0
Total	2	1	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0

GFS = Gravity Flow Scheme; WB = Water Board; WSC = Water Source Committee

66%

80%

136

96%

100%

Population Density (people/km2) and Population

Access to Safe Water

Access to Safe Water

Functionality of Point Water Sources

People served per technology

Reasons for non-functionality

Type of Management

Source of Funding

District Water Supply Summary

Piped Water Supply Systems

66^%

80^%

96^%

100^%

Population Density (people/km²) and Population