Amolatar District

by May 15, 2025

The access rates in Amolatar vary from 29 % in Acii Sub-County to 95 % in Muntu Sub-County. Amolatar has 561 domestic water points which serve a total of 157,142 people – 137,018 in rural areas. 121 water points have been non-functional for over 5 years and are considered abandoned. Amolatar has 1 piped schemes.

Access

65^%

Rural Functionality

80^%

Equity

138

Management

96^%

Gender

100^%

Population Density (people/km²) and Population

50		250		1,000		2,000

	100		500		1,500

NMS Namasale 114

Nalubwoyo Unknown

NTC Namasale TC 433

AGK Agikdak 252

AGW Agwingiri 191

ATC Amolatar TC 311

APT Aputi 210

AKW Akwon 285

ARW Arwotcek 241

AWL Awelo 262

ETM Etam 225

Abeja Unknown

MNT Muntu 183

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 65 %

Rural Access 65 %

Urban Access 69 %

Nalubwoyo 51 %

Opali 63 %

Abeja 54 %

AGK Agikdak 81 %

AGW Agwingiri 36 %

AKW Akwon 83 %

APT Aputi 63 %

ARW Arwotcek 50 %

ATC Amolatar TC 89 %

AWL Awelo 79 %

ETM Etam 76 %

MNT Muntu 95 %

NMS Namasale 71 %

NTC Namasale TC 47 %

Acii 29 %

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 65 %

Rural Access 65 %

Urban Access 69 %

Nalubwoyo 51 %

Opali 63 %

Abeja 54 %

AGK Agikdak 81 %

AGW Agwingiri 36 %

AKW Akwon 83 %

APT Aputi 63 %

ARW Arwotcek 50 %

ATC Amolatar TC 89 %

AWL Awelo 79 %

ETM Etam 76 %

MNT Muntu 95 %

NMS Namasale 71 %

NTC Namasale TC 47 %

Acii 29 %

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	13,998	6,612	47%	-	75%	-	-	-	-	1	1	2	15	5	20	2	-	2	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
2 Muntu	Rural	17,962	17,064	95%	83%	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	2	47	8	55	1	2	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	30	4	1	No
3 Agwingiri	Rural	21,555	7,806	36%	81%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	22	4	26	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
4 Namasale	Rural	27,501	19,448	71%	79%	-	-	1	-	1	-	1	1	57	6	63	-	8	8	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
5 Aputi	Rural	20,440	12,915	63%	85%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	39	4	43	-	3	3	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
6 Arwotcek	Rural	22,670	11,424	50%	74%	-	-	-	-	-	-	4	4	30	4	34	1	3	4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
7 Agikdak	Rural	14,742	12,012	81%	86%	-	100%	-	-	-	-	-	-	36	4	40	-	2	2	1	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
8 Akwon	Rural	10,530	8,706	83%	90%	-	100%	-	-	-	-	-	-	26	3	29	1	-	1	1	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
9 Nalubwoyo	Rural	11,768	6,006	51%	67%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	6	20	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
10 Acii	Rural	8,183	2,400	29%	100%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	8	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
11 Amolatar TC	Urban	15,237	13,512	89%	-	68%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	34	8	42	-	2	2	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	6	6	-	-	-	No
12 Awelo	Rural	15,609	12,400	79%	95%	-	-	1	1	2	-	-	-	39	1	40	-	-	-	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
13 Etam	Rural	19,944	15,124	76%	73%	-	-	1	1	2	-	-	-	39	10	49	-	4	4	-	3	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
14 Abeja	Rural	9,539	5,112	54%	47%	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	1	9	7	16	-	2	2	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
15 Opali	Rural	10,406	6,600	63%	64%	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	8	22	-	-	-	-	1	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	No
Total		240,084	157,142	65	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		240,084	157,142	65	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

65%

80%

138

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

65^%

80^%

96^%

100^%

Population Density (people/km²) and Population