by November 12, 2024
The access rates in Namutumba vary from 25 % in Bugobi Sub-County to 95 % in Nangode Sub-County. Namutumba has 709 domestic water points which serve a total of 202,250 people – 173,861 in rural areas. 70 water points have been non-functional for over 5 years and are considered abandoned. Namutumba has 1 piped schemes.
Access
Rural Functionality
Equity
Management
Gender
50 | 250 | 1,000 | 2,000 | ||||
100 | 500 | 1,500 |
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.
20 % | 60 % | |||
40 % | 80 % |
Severity: Warning
Message: Division by zero
Filename: public_pages/district-report.php
Line Number: 216
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/wsdb_2018/application/views/public_pages/district-report.php
Line: 216
Function: _error_handler
File: /var/www/wsdb_2018/application/controllers/Reports.php
Line: 77
Function: view
File: /var/www/wsdb_2018/index.php
Line: 315
Function: require_once
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%.
20 % | 60 % | |||
40 % | 80 % |
Severity: Warning
Message: Division by zero
Filename: public_pages/district-report.php
Line Number: 329
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/wsdb_2018/application/views/public_pages/district-report.php
Line: 329
Function: _error_handler
File: /var/www/wsdb_2018/application/controllers/Reports.php
Line: 77
Function: view
File: /var/www/wsdb_2018/index.php
Line: 315
Function: require_once
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%.
60 % | 80 % | |||
70 % | 90 % |
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.
Sub-County | Urban/ Rural | Population | Population Served | Access | Functionality | Point Water Sources | Piped Water Systems | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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 | BUSIKI | ||||||||
1 Bulange | Rural | 39,825 | 22,462 | 56% | 93% | - | - | 8 | - | 8 | 12 | - | 12 | 51 | 6 | 57 | 2 | - | 2 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 | - | - | - | No |
2 Kibaale | Rural | 25,819 | 17,300 | 67% | 97% | - | - | 1 | - | 1 | 8 | - | 8 | 47 | 2 | 49 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
3 Namutumba | Rural | 41,896 | 22,752 | 54% | 93% | - | - | 7 | 1 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 41 | 1 | 42 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 342 | 642 | 29 | No |
4 Bugobi TC | Urban | 11,083 | NWSC | NWSC | - | 71% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 5 | 2 | 7 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | Yes |
5 Nabweyo | Rural | 13,640 | 4,200 | 31% | 93% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 13 | 1 | 14 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
6 Kiwanyi | Rural | 16,076 | 15,012 | 93% | 83% | - | - | 3 | - | 3 | 9 | 7 | 16 | 31 | 1 | 32 | 1 | 1 | 2 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
7 Kizuba | Rural | 18,756 | 11,600 | 62% | 98% | - | - | 7 | - | 7 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 30 | - | 30 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
8 Nangode | Rural | 8,769 | 8,331 | 95% | 85% | - | - | - | 1 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 23 | - | 23 | - | 1 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
9 Magada | Rural | 42,383 | 11,400 | 27% | 95% | - | - | 2 | 1 | 3 | 6 | - | 6 | 29 | 1 | 30 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
10 Nsinze | Rural | 21,313 | 11,103 | 52% | 85% | - | - | 2 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 8 | 25 | 2 | 27 | - | 1 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
11 Bugobi | Rural | 21,557 | 5,400 | 25% | 95% | - | - | 3 | - | 3 | 2 | - | 2 | 13 | 1 | 14 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
12 Mazuba | Rural | 16,807 | 8,706 | 52% | 90% | - | - | 3 | - | 3 | 2 | - | 2 | 23 | 2 | 25 | - | 1 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
13 Nsinze Town Council | Urban | 8,647 | NWSC | NWSC | - | 100% | - | 1 | - | 1 | 1 | - | 1 | 13 | - | 13 | 3 | - | 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | Yes |
14 Kagulu | Rural | 20,826 | 5,500 | 26% | 100% | - | - | 2 | - | 2 | 4 | - | 4 | 13 | - | 13 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
15 Nawaikona | Rural | 11,326 | 10,760 | 95% | 96% | - | - | 5 | 2 | 7 | - | - | - | 42 | - | 42 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
16 Kibaale Town Council | Urban | 13,762 | NWSC | NWSC | - | 86% | - | 2 | - | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 14 | 2 | 16 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | Yes |
17 Ivukula Town Council | Urban | 11,326 | NWSC | NWSC | - | 80% | - | - | - | - | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | - | 6 | 1 | 1 | 2 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | Yes |
18 Nangode Town Council | Urban | 10,839 | NWSC | NWSC | - | 52% | - | - | - | - | 2 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 13 | - | 2 | 2 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 | - | - | - | Yes |
19 Namutumba TC | Urban | 24,845 | 7,806 | 31% | - | 93% | - | 9 | - | 9 | 7 | - | 7 | 11 | 2 | 13 | 1 | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
20 Ivukula | Rural | 21,070 | 19,336 | 92% | 87% | - | - | 2 | - | 2 | 13 | 2 | 15 | 46 | 2 | 48 | 1 | 5 | 6 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
21 nul | Urban | 0 | 0 | 0% | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | No |
Total | 400,565 | 202,250 | 50 | 92 | 82 | 0 | 57 | 6 | 63 | 87 | 22 | 109 | 484 | 30 | 514 | 9 | 12 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 342 | 642 | 29 | No | |
District | 400,565 | 202,250 | 50 | 92 | 82 | 0 | 57 | 6 | 63 | 87 | 22 | 109 | 484 | 30 | 514 | 9 | 12 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 342 | 642 | 29 | No |
F = Functional; NF = Non-Functional; Tot = Total; YT = Yard Tap; HH = Household Connections; IC = Institutional Connections
Type of Scheme/GFS | Number of Schemes | Functionality of System | Type of Management | WB in place | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Functional | Non-Functional | Partially Functional | Private Operator | WSC | Private/Individual | NWSC | Other | Yes | No | ||
Unknown/Not GFS | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
GFS = Gravity Flow Scheme; WB = Water Board; WSC = Water Source Committee