Research
Mak-RIF Round 5, Track 2: PhD Research Grants 2023/2024 Request For Applications
Published
3 years agoon
By
Mak Editor
Background
Funding opportunity description: Makerere University received special funding from the Government of the Republic of Uganda, to support high impact Research and Innovations that will accelerate national development. The Financial Year 2022/24 is the fifth year of this fund’s availability. The fund illustrates the increasing importance that the Government attaches to Research and Innovation as a driver of socio-economic transformation. The objective of the fund is to increase the local generation of translatable research and scalable innovations that address key gaps required to drive Uganda’s development agenda. Over the last four Financial Years (2019/2020 – 2022/2023), government appropriated 105 Billion Uganda Shillings to support this Fund. Between the four years, MakRIF has funded a total of 1.062 projects across all sectors critical for development. In the current Financial Year (2023/24), Makerere University expects to receive about 30 Billion Uganda shillings (about US$ 8.1 million) under the Government Research and Innovation Fund (RIF). Of this, at least 1.5 Billion Shillings will fund PhD research ideas that generate knowledge that addresses national development priorities. The Makerere University Research and Innovation Grants Management Committee (GMC) therefore announces the second round of PhD research grants as part of the 5th round of RIF funding titled: RIF Round 5, Track 2 (PhD Research Grants). Available funds are obligated for the Financial Year 2023/2024, with an expectation of actionable results that speak to the National Research and Innovation Agenda. The GMC therefore invites applications from PhD students with original research ideas that demonstrate a clear link to key thematic areas of the National Research and Innovation Agenda. This is a closed call that is open to only PhD students. This funding call is specifically targeted to PhD students that are full time at Makerere University.
Grant amounts and estimated number of awards: The GMC estimates to award the following number and amount of PhD Research Grants:
| Category | Amount per award | Approx. No.* | Total amount |
| A. Awards to new projects | |||
| Sub-Category 1: Arts and Humanities | Up to 25,000,000/= | 25 | 625,000,000/= |
| Sub-Category 2: Sciences | Up to 35,000,000/= | 25 | 875,000,000/= |
| Sub-total | 50 | 1,500,000.000/= | |
| B. Extension awards to projects funded before | |||
| Sub-Category 1: Arts and Humanities | Up to 25,000,000/= | 25 | 625,000,000/= |
| Sub-Category 2: Sciences | Up to 35,000,000/= | 25 | 875,000,000/= |
| Sub-total | 50 | 1,500,000.000/= | |
| Total | 100 | 3,000,000,000/= |
*Note: The numbers shown are only indicative. The MakRIF GMC reserves the right to adjust the numbers based on the quality of the proposals submitted.
Applicants should take into consideration the following:
- Given that the MakRIF funds are received on an annual basis and are tied to a specific financial year, the current grant only commits to funding the awardee for a period of one year (12 months) of implementation.
- However, the MakRIF GMC is cognizant of the fact that PhD research often spreads over more than one year in which case some projects require multi-year funding. Because of this reality, half of the awards under this round will fund extensions for eligible projects that were previously funded. Extension funding will not be automatic but will be competitive and conditional to the following: 1) Availability of funds, 2) Showing cause as to which additional areas of research will be covered in the extension funding, 3) Successful execution and completion of all the objectives for the previous funding period, evidenced by full submission of the required deliverables; 4) Full technical and financial accountability for all the funds given to the researcher during the previous year of funding. Prior grantees in need of extension funding must apply for the follow-on funding through the new PhD Research Grant call.
- The GMC recognizes that the amounts indicated for this award may not be sufficient to cover all the necessary costs for a student’s project. In such cases, the award should be considered as a contribution and the students should mobilize additional funding to bridge the resource gaps.
- The number of awards indicated are only estimated and the GMC retains the discretion to determine the amount and number of awards based on the actual funding that MakRIF funders will make available and the number of quality proposals submitted.
Scope and Technical Description of the Research and Innovation Grant
The GMC conducted a comprehensive stakeholder consultation to identify priority thematic areas of interest for national development. The GMC triangulated this information with that from the National Development Plan III, the Makerere University Strategic Plan and Research Agenda to develop an instructive MakRIF research agenda that responds to national development priorities. The RIF Round 5, Track 2 (PhD Research Grants) will therefore specifically target research and innovation projects that align with priority thematic issues in the MakRIF instructive Research Agenda under 14 thematic areas as follows:
Theme 1: Transforming the Agricultural sector to drive development
Theme 2: Achieving Sustainable health as a means to sustainable development
Theme 3: Re-imagining Education to unlock capacity for economic development
Theme 4: Water, sanitation and the environment: A pre-requisite to sustainable development
Theme 5: Harnessing the social sector, culture and arts to drive development
Theme 6. Harnessing Tourism, wildlife and heritage for development
Theme 7: Sustainable Planning, finance and monitoring as catalysts for growth
Theme 8: Leveraging public service and local administration for efficient service delivery
Theme 9: Defence and security: Achieving sustainable peace and stability
Theme 10: Strengthening law, governance, human rights and international cooperation as prerequisites for development
Theme 11: Harnessing Information and Communication Technology to drive development
Theme 12: Works, manufacturing, science and technology as tools to accelerate development
Theme 13: Solutions to catalyse business and enterprise
Theme 14: Energy and Minerals as drivers of rapid economic development
The MakRIF PhD Research Grants will cover all technical disciplines in Makerere University as long as the research questions align with the instructive research agenda themes above. Particular attention will be paid to ideas that have clear potential for scalability to drive development.
Note: This grant covers the costs of research. It does not cover payment of tuition or living stipends for PhD students.
Eligibility
The new PhD research grants will only be open to PhD students who have been approved for full registration at Makerere University. Students who have already received full scholarships under other award programs are not eligible to apply for these grants as this will constitute double funding. Members of Academic staff who are not on the Makerere University Staff Development Program, as well as those who are on the Staff Development Program but received only a tuition waiver without research funding are eligible to apply, provided they do not have full funding for their research from elsewhere. This funding is only open to Makerere University students. PhD students registered in other universities are not eligible for this funding. Further specifications on the awards are as follows:
- Applicants for new awards must be at a stage where they have been approved for full registration as PhD students at Makerere University. Being at the stage of full registration means that they have developed a full research proposal that has been approved by the respective Higher Degrees Research Committee in their academic unit, and that they have been recommended for full registration OR are fully registered by Makerere University. New grant applicants will be required to provide evidence of one of the following: Minutes of the Higher Degrees Research Committee in their Academic college, showing approval of their research proposal, OR a full registration certificate.
- Because the research funds are provided for one year funding cycles, PhD students with provisional registration will not be eligible for funding under this award since the time required for them to complete full proposal development and to start data collection is unlikely to fit within the financial year.
- New grants are limited to PhD students who do not have prior funding for their studies or whose funding is inadequate to cover their research. Applicants in the latter category must make full disclosure of their other funding sources and what they cover.
- Applicants for extension awards should have been funded in the earlier PhD research awards. Only those who have completed and closed out their previous projects will be considered.
- All applicants (new and extension) should provide a letter of support from any one of the following: 1) The Head of their Department, or 2) The Dean of their School, or 3) the Principal of their College (Only one of these is sufficient).
- All applicants (new and extension) should provide a letter of support from one of their Supervisors within Makerere University. The letter should clearly indicate that they do not have other funding that fully covers their research/training activities, or where such funding is available, they should indicate what aspects of the student’s study program it covers and the funding gap. The supporting Supervisor will be designated as a co-Investigator on the research project.
GRANT GUIDELINES
MakRIF PhD Research Grant applicants will submit a competitive project proposal for the available funding. The proposal ought to specify the objectives for the full research project. It should also indicate which of the full research objectives will be specifically met by the available funding for this financial year.
Applicants intending to apply for multi-year funding in the subsequent years will be required to indicate so. In such cases, the students should indicate which study objectives would be covered by the extension funding.
The research problem: The proposal should clearly articulate the knowledge gap that the researcher targets to address, and why it is important to address this knowledge gap. The research problem should be aligned to at least one theme in the MakRIF research agenda.
Previously funded proposals applying for extension funding should indicate how the proposed research problem builds on the research problem of the previous phase.
The proposed solution: PhD Researchers should present the proposed solution in form of the research focus for the current phase of the funding. They should clearly articulate the objectives of the planned research. Researchers should also describe the critical content of the solution (i.e., the ‘research methodology’). Researchers should defend the relevance of the proposed solution to addressing key development outcomes in the respective sector and its alignment to one or more thematic areas specified in this call. Researchers should also demonstrate that at least one objective of their research project is implementable within one (1) year and will result in tangible results within one year of execution.
Research projects that require multi-year implementation will only be considered if they can show actionable intermediate results or objectives attainable within 1 implementation year, since funding will be on a yearly basis. Apart from a summary of the proposed approach, researchers will provide a more detailed description of their technical approach (research methodology) to enable a robust assessment of the rigor of the proposed methodology.
Previously funded proposals applying for extension funding should indicate how the proposed solution builds on the solution from the previous phase.
Outputs, outcomes, and impact: Researchers should articulate the overall scientific outputs, outcomes and anticipated impact of the PhD research project. They should state the primary (Direct) and secondary (Indirect) beneficiaries of the planned research project. They should state the anticipated outputs (the outputs of the activities of the entire project as well as the specific milestones to be attained with the one-year funding) and the outcomes (both the outcomes of the entire project and those for the current funding phase). Researchers should also state the anticipated impact of the the project (Note: Impact might not be achievable in one or even a few years in which case the current phase only contributes to it). Since this funding is specific to the current financial year, projects must demonstrate clearly the deliverables they expect within one year, matching the level of investment made and attainable in the 1-year timeframe. Multi-year projects should show clearly what will be achieved in the current year of funding as well as what would be achieved overall when the full PhD research is completed in the subsequent years.
Previously funded proposals applying for extension funding should indicate how the proposed outputs, outcomes and impacts build on those realized in the previous phase of funding.
Translation and dissemination for impact: Since this fund is aimed at supporting government and its partners to improve service delivery and to accelerate development, researchers should show a clear plan for disseminating their findings to audiences critical for policy and program change so as to achieve impact at scale. This will include a clear description of the knowledge translation and dissemination plan to stakeholders in the relevant sectors including the knowledge products anticipated to arise from the study (e.g., publications, policy briefs, knowledge briefs, etc.). Innovation-based projects should articulate a scaling strategy, including linkage to scaling partners within the industry (for commercially viable enterprises), or within the relevant public sectors (for innovations targeted to the public) or within relevant implementing agencies (for social enterprises). Innovations targeting commercial interest should demonstrate the anticipated commercial potential, anticipated demand, anticipated patents/copy-rights/industrial design claims/trademarks if applicable and the path to commercialization. Innovations targeting social impact (social innovations) should elucidate the path to wide scale community uptake.
Previously funded proposals applying for extension funding should indicate how the planned knowledge translation/scaling activities builds on those in the previous phase of funding.
Ethical implications: The implications of the research to human subjects, animal subjects and the environment should be articulated where necessary including how key ethical or environmental concerns arising from the study will be addressed. It is anticipated that at the time of full registration, projects requiring ethical approval will have already obtained that approval from their respective ethics committees.
Budget: Researchers will prepare a summary budget for the one-year phase of their project as well as a detailed budget. Budgets should be submitted in the official currency (Uganda Shillings). Because these are university funds, academic units (Departments, Schools and Colleges) will not charge institutional overheads to any of the research funds. Budgets should not spread beyond one Financial Year. Even if the projects to be funded under this mechanism are multi-year, researchers should provide a budget for only one Financial Year. The budgets will include the following sections:
- Personnel costs
- Travel
- Supplies and services
- Equipment
- Program activity costs
- Dissemination
Under Personnel costs, applicants should not budget for ‘Salaries’ for staff who are paid a salary by Makerere University or another Government of Uganda institution (whether on permanent or contract terms) as this would constitute double payment from government funds. However, such researchers can budget for ‘activity-based’ time input or ‘level-of-effort-based’ costs for their additional time input into the project in form of allowances. The latter should be justified by specifying the extra-time demands from the project for each individual involved.
Researchers can budget for salaries for critical project staff that are not paid by Makerere or the Government of Uganda e.g., Project Coordinators, Administrative Assistants, Research Officers etc. Regular Personnel costs excluding field research assistants should not exceed 33% of the budget. Field research assistants (or Data collectors) if needed should not be included under ‘Personnel costs’ but should instead be included under ‘Program Activity Costs’. All salaries and all repetitive allowances will be subject to mandatory statutory deductions at source, to pay the relevant taxes. Because these funds are earmarked to support actual research, PhD students cannot budget for a monthly stipend under this award.
In addition to the summary budget, research teams will be required to attach a detailed budget (As an MS Excel attachment) that breaks down all expenditure line items, inclusive of a budget justification that explains the rationale behind the different budget items. The total budget in the budget summary should exactly match that in the detailed breakdown. You should budget within the category that your project was funded in RIF-1. Budgeting in another category will lead to disqualification. The total budget should not exceed the highest amount indicated for the respective funding category in which your project lies. Exceeding the indicated category maximum can result in disqualification.
PhD Researchers cannot budget for Tuition.
Workplan: Researchers will provide a list of key milestones for the project clearly demonstrating the deliverables expected at each point during the extension phase of the project. These milestones will be used as the basis for tracking implementation of activities towards project goals and outputs. Given the one-year time-frame for the awards, it will be important that researchers commit to a clear time-bound set of deliverables all achievable within one year for the main deliverable targeted during the current period of funding. Failure to articulate a one (1) year plan will imply inability to utilize the grant funds within one (1) year.
Previously funded proposals applying for extension funding should indicate how the current workplan/milestones build on those proposed and realized in the previous phase of funding.
GRANT PROCESS
Submission of applications: Submission of the applications will be online at https://rif.mak.ac.ug/portal. All submissions must be online and must be made within the stipulated period. To access the application form, the PhD Research Fund applicant will be required to create a MakRIF account. In your account, select the appropriate funding opportunity and fill out the application form.
Rules governing applications: All applications should be written in English. All applications should be submitted via the online portal mentioned above. Complete applications must be submitted not later than 11.59pm East African Time on the closing date. No submissions after closure of applications will be accepted. Any attempt at solicitation of acceptance beyond this date will not be entertained. The Grants Committee bears no responsibility for submissions that are not completed in time and incomplete submissions will not be considered. If none of the submitted applications meets the requirements to receive a grant, the call may be reopened at the sole discretion of the Grants Management Committee. An individual researcher should not submit more than ONE application.
Participants agree to assume any and all risks, and to waive claims against Makerere University and the Grants Management Committee for any injury, death, damage, or loss of property, revenue, or profits, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, arising from their participation in this grant implementation.
Evaluation and selection of projects: Applications will be reviewed by the GMC. Submission of an application does not mean the project must be funded. The GMC will evaluate five main aspects of the project:
- The alignment of the proposed research to national priorities as stipulated in the MakRIF research agenda
- Clear articulation of the knowledge gap and how the planned research will contribute to building new knowledge
- Quality of the proposal in terms of the relevance and innovativeness of the proposed solution, the planned activities and the articulation of a sound methodology
- Clear stipulation of outputs and outcomes and feasibility of tangible achievements within one year of funding
- Potential impact and transformativeness of the proposed research idea, especially in contributing to national development
- Submission of a realistic budget
Notification of successful applicants: Successful applicants will be informed by email to their designated point of contact.
Grant timeline:
| Milestone | Date |
| Issuance of RFA | Friday 9th February 2024 (Closed to PhD students only) |
| Closing date for applications | Friday 8th March 2024 |
| Selection | Monday 11th March 2024 to Friday 12th April 2024 |
| Award notification | Friday 12th April 2024 |
| Induction | Wednesday 17th April 2024 |
You may like
-
ADVERT: Mature Age Entry Scheme Examinations – 2027/2028
-
MURBS Presents FY 2025/26 Performance with 15% Growth
-
What two weeks with Farmers in Mwera, Mityana, taught Makerere’s PhD Students about Agricultural Innovation
-
Makerere Strengthens Doctoral Training Through BURST-Excel Research Network
-
PIM CoE equips Public Officers to Make Better Public Investment Decisions
-
Makerere University and Xiangtan University Advance Strategic Partnership in Chemical Engineering
Agriculture & Environment
What two weeks with Farmers in Mwera, Mityana, taught Makerere’s PhD Students about Agricultural Innovation
Published
5 days agoon
October 26, 2026
From walking through farms and tracing agricultural histories to listening to farmers and engaging communities in dialogue, a two-week field course in Mityana District offered Makerere University doctoral students a profound lesson: meaningful agricultural innovation begins with the people it seeks to serve.
When the classroom moved to Mwera, Mityana
For two weeks, the classroom had no walls. Its lessons were written across coffee and banana gardens, cultivated fields, homesteads and the lived experiences of farming communities in Mityana District. From 4 to 16 October 2026, Mwera Parish and the surrounding villages of Kiwande, Kakindu, Kitiddibuli, Bananze and Kireku became an extended classroom for six doctoral students pursuing a PhD in Agricultural and Rural Innovation under Makerere University‘s Department of Extension and Innovation Studies.
The students were undertaking a field course in Action Research in Agri-food Systems, Innovations and Livelihoods, an academic exercise designed to take learning beyond the university and into the communities whose agricultural realities are often the subject of research, policy and development interventions.

Here, there were no neatly arranged lecture halls or powerpoint presentations to explain every agricultural challenge. Instead, there were landscapes to interpret, farmers with stories to tell, and agricultural practices shaped by generations of experience, adaptation and survival.
Under the guidance of Dr. Richard Miiro, Dr. Sarah Akello and Dr. Moses Okech, the students set out to understand farming systems not simply as combinations of crops and livestock, but as complex relationships between people, natural resources, institutions, markets and livelihoods.
What began as an academic exercise would gradually become something more profound. An encounter with the realities of rural life and a reconsideration of what it truly means to support agricultural innovation.
Reading the landscape, listening to farmers

The first lessons came from the landscape itself. Moving through Mwera, Kakindu, Bananze, Kitiddibuli and neighbouring communities, the students conducted transect walks, observed cropping patterns, examined agroecological conditions and interacted with farming households.
Everywhere they looked, the landscape offered clues about how people made a living.
Coffee and banana gardens stood alongside seasonal crops, livestock enterprises and settlements. The arrangement of farms, the crops under cultivation and the resources available to households reflected decisions shaped by soil conditions, land availability, household resources and market opportunities.
Yet, as the students soon discovered, what was visible on the land told only part of the story. Why did neighbouring households practise agriculture differently, even when they appeared to share similar conditions? How had farming systems changed over time? What influenced farmers’ decisions, and what challenges continued to threaten their livelihoods?
To answer these questions, the students had to do more than observe. They had to listen. Through interviews, historical inquiries and participatory discussions, farmers shared experiences that offered explanations beyond what could be seen in their fields.
Their accounts revealed that agricultural decisions are not always driven by the desire to maximise yields or profits. Sometimes, a farmer’s choice reflects the immediate needs of a household, limited financial resources, available labour, uncertainty about markets, the need to manage risks or lessons accumulated over years of experience. A farming practice that might appear inefficient to an outsider could, when understood through the farmer’s circumstances, represent a deliberate and practical response to uncertainty.

For the doctoral students, these encounters challenged a conventional assumption about agricultural extension, that experts possess knowledge which must simply be transferred to farmers.
The farmers of Mwera were far from passive recipients of information. They were knowledgeable actors, continuously observing, experimenting, adjusting and making decisions within the opportunities and limitations of their circumstances. It became increasingly clear that effective agricultural extension cannot begin with prescribing solutions. It must begin with understanding the people expected to use them.
Understanding the farming system
As the days progressed, the students began connecting what they had observed in the fields with what they were learning from the farmers. They examined the area’s agrarian history, farming practices, resource use and livelihood strategies, seeking to understand not only how agriculture was being practised, but also why farming systems had evolved in particular ways.
Historical accounts helped explain changes in land use, agricultural production and livelihoods. Observations of the landscape revealed differences in farming opportunities, while conversations with households illuminated the social and economic circumstances influencing agricultural decisions.

Therefore, addressing one problem without understanding its relationship to others can result in interventions that appear technically sound but are difficult for farmers to adopt or sustain. The field experience also challenged the tendency to associate agricultural innovation exclusively with new technologies, improved seeds, machinery or modern production techniques.
Innovation, the students learned, can also emerge from changes in how farmers organise themselves, share knowledge, access information, manage resources, respond to risks or collaborate with institutions. Sometimes, the most consequential innovation is not a new technology introduced onto a farm, but a new relationship, an improved way of working together or a better understanding of an existing challenge.
For students, these insights were particularly significant. They reinforced the importance of understanding the wider social, economic and institutional environment within which agricultural decisions are made. They also demonstrated why successful interventions must be relevant to farmers’ circumstances, inclusive of different farming households and sustainable beyond the period of external support.
When researchers returned to the community
After nearly two weeks of walking through farms, observing agricultural practices, conducting interviews and analysing findings, the students returned to the people who had made their learning possible. This time, however, they were not coming to ask questions. They were coming to share what they had learned and, importantly, to find out whether the community agreed with their interpretations.
At Mwera Community Hall, more than 60 community members gathered for a feedback session, among them were farmers who had participated in the fieldwork and shared their experiences with the students. It was a defining moment in the field course.

The students presented their findings on the landscape, agricultural history, farming practices, livelihood strategies and the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats identified within the farming systems. But the meeting was not intended to be a one-way presentation of academic findings. Community members were invited to validate the observations, question the interpretations, identify gaps and contribute their own perspectives on the challenges facing agriculture in the area.
The discussions brought familiar concerns to the forefront; declining soil fertility, the rising cost of agricultural inputs, crop suitability, pests and diseases, and access to agricultural services.
Through a participatory prioritisation exercise, pests and diseases emerged as the farmers’ leading concern, followed by limited access to farmer advisory services.
The significance of this outcome went beyond identifying two agricultural challenges. It demonstrated why communities must be involved not only in providing information for research, but also in interpreting findings and determining which problems deserve priority attention. For researchers, a challenge may appear important because of its technical or economic implications. For farmers, its urgency may be shaped by daily experiences, the risks it presents to household livelihoods and their ability to respond.
The feedback session therefore became more than the conclusion of a field course. It was an opportunity for the students to subject their academic interpretations to the knowledge and judgement of the people whose lives those interpretations sought to explain.
In that exchange lay an important distinction between conducting research on communities and conducting research with them. The farmers were not merely sources of data. They were contributors to knowledge generation, participants in validating findings and partners in identifying the challenges that mattered most to them. Yet, even as the discussions drew to a close, a larger question remained: What happens after researchers leave?
Rethinking agricultural extension and innovation
The experience in Mwera offered lessons extending well beyond the requirements of a doctoral field course. For agricultural extension professionals, it raised fundamental questions about how farmers are understood, how agricultural problems are diagnosed and how interventions are designed.

The first lesson was the importance of diagnosis before prescription.
Agricultural interventions cannot be adequately designed without understanding the landscape, its history, the diversity of farming households and the social, economic and institutional relationships that influence their decisions. What works for one farmer may not necessarily work for another, even within the same community. Differences in land ownership, labour availability, financial resources, farming objectives and exposure to risk can significantly influence the suitability of an intervention.
The second lesson concerned the place of farmers in knowledge creation.
Scientific research remains essential to agricultural development, but farmers also possess valuable knowledge acquired through experience, observation and adaptation. Bringing these forms of knowledge together creates opportunities for solutions that are both scientifically informed and grounded in local realities.
The third lesson was that agricultural innovation is rarely the achievement of a single actor.
Farmers, researchers, extension workers, government institutions, markets and other development actors all influence how knowledge is generated, shared and translated into practice. Innovation therefore requires collaboration, coordination and relationships that enable different actors to learn from one another and respond to shared challenges.
Taken together, these lessons challenge agricultural extension professionals to move beyond their traditional role as transmitters of technical knowledge and become facilitators of learning, collaboration and innovation.
They also challenge universities to reflect on the meaning of research impact.
Should the success of agricultural research be measured only by the volume of data collected, academic reports completed and publications produced? Or should it also be assessed by the extent to which research strengthens communities’ capacity to understand and address their own challenges? For institutions such as Makerere University, whose teaching and research are closely connected to national development priorities, this question is particularly relevant. Field-based learning offers an opportunity to connect academic inquiry with the realities of the communities that research ultimately seeks to serve. It also reminds researchers that meaningful engagement requires more than arriving in a community, collecting information and departing with findings. It calls for listening, mutual learning, respect for local knowledge and a willingness to recognise farmers as partners in the search for solutions.
Research
CARTA Fellow Tamale on Building Systems, Shaping Policy and Transforming Lives beyond the PhD
Published
4 weeks agoon
October 6, 2026
A PhD can spark impact that extends far beyond academia. Meet CARTA graduate Andrew Tamale, whose journey demonstrates the multiplier effect of research capacity strengthening—from helping transform doctoral training and generating evidence that informed safer fish consumption practices, to strengthening One Health approaches for outbreak preparedness in Uganda and beyond.
Source: CARTA News & Updates Issue 105
Research
CARTA Fellow Anywar Appointed UTANA Subject Matter Expert, Talks Medicinal Plants
Published
4 weeks agoon
October 6, 2026
Godwin Anywar, cohort 6, Makerere University, was appointed as a Subject Matter Expert on the Manuscript Technical Evaluators team of the Uganda Textbook Academic and Non-Fiction Authors Association (UTANA) on August 31, 2026. In this role, Godwin will contribute to the qualitative, academic, and pedagogical assessment of manuscripts submitted under the Capacity Building for School Books Project (CB-SP). The four-year project, implemented jointly with the Department of Teacher Education and Training Development (TETD) of Uganda’s Ministry of Education and Sports (MoES), aims to strengthen authorship and support the development of school books in Uganda’s education sector.
He was also featured in Uganda’s New Vision on July 26, 2026, in a special report on Uganda’s medicinal plants.
Source: CARTA News & Updates Issue 105
Trending
-
Business & Management2 weeks agoPIM CoE equips Public Officers to Make Better Public Investment Decisions
-
General2 days agoADVERT: Mature Age Entry Scheme Examinations – 2027/2028
-
Agriculture & Environment5 days agoWhat two weeks with Farmers in Mwera, Mityana, taught Makerere’s PhD Students about Agricultural Innovation
-
General4 days agoMURBS Presents FY 2025/26 Performance with 15% Growth
-
General1 week agoMakerere Strengthens Doctoral Training Through BURST-Excel Research Network