Last week [12/01/2018], James "Wire" Lunghabo tweeted that "apparently some winners of the UCC organised ACIA awards haven't been paid." He added that "Mbu (a Luganda word meaning apparently) they might need to forfeit a 30% cut to 'you know who'". Of course, "you know who" implied the unofficial brokers in some government MDAs that stand in the way of anything until they are assured of a cut before speeding up the process.
Apparently some winners of the @UCC_Official organised #ACIA awards haven't been paid. Mbu they might need to forfeit a 30% cut to "you know who".#WhistleBlowing
— James Wire Lunghabo (@wirejames) January 12, 2018
Responding to the allegations, through their official Twitter page, UCC said that "All ACIA winners are aware that prizes are awarded to profess innovations only. This requires the innovators to develop project plans with clearly measurable milestones to which their prize releases will be made."
In subsequent tweets, they also added that they have "been engaging with the innovators to help them fine tune [sic] these work plans into MoUs which will guide their progress. Each of the innovators is at different stages of achieving their milestones and payments are made upon verification."
"UCC has zero tolerance for such behavior [sic] and welcomes the said winners who claim they haven’t been paid and are being asked for a bribe to inform the relevant authorities"
However, Ronald Ssebuhinja the founder of School Masters and a member of the ICT Association of Uganda interjected and challenged UCC to publish a full list of all the 2017 ACIA Awards winners with their milestones. Which seemed to imply that perhaps UCC was using the milestones explanation as a paper cover for the issue at hand - bribery.
I doubt the @UCC_Official handler knows exactly what's going on. I challenge you to publish a list of the 2017 winners and their "milestone status". If none of them has done enough to receive their "prizes" in 8 months, then explain why.
— Ronald Sebuhinja K (@sebsronnie) January 13, 2018
Three days later, James - who brought the issue to light, again tweeted that his efforts yielded some results as UCC "scheduled a meeting with the award winners tomorrow [today]."
"The rot has been exposed," he added.
Which sparked a threaded reply from UCC's head of PR, Pamela Ankunda, accusing James of "working so hard at trying to find non existing [sic] info about what you call 'whistleblowing'".
James, I know you are working so hard at trying to find non existing info about what you call 'whistleblowing' #ACIA. @UCC_Official has an open door policy where you can get all the https://t.co/KMmYrnFcsf though are the facts- plz follow the thread #ACIAFacts.
— Pamela Ankunda (@Pamankunda) January 15, 2018
She also went ahead and repeated the same earlier communication by UCC's official Twitter page insisting that all disbursements are milestones based. And dared James to produce any evidence to unearth the "rot" at UCC he was talking about.
Disbursement of the #ACIA prize money is made in phases,based on milestones achieved and progress reports provided by the #Innovators.#UCC routenily assess the progress and verifies these milestones. We monitor and guide innovators. We are interested in seeing them fly higher.
— Pamela Ankunda (@Pamankunda) January 15, 2018
Please bring forward any evidence-you've had three days in a row to do it. We know who has made progress on their #Innovations, who is struggling, who is excelling. Beyond PR, our database is clean. Please visit #UCC at your own time and get more info.
— Pamela Ankunda (@Pamankunda) January 15, 2018
Pamela informed James that they know who gave James the side of the story. Which she followed up with asking James to tell that individual to "to speed up his innovation, guide him, let's engage him and yes, he'll pick his funding."
We both know who has given you his side of the story. Other than generalise, ask him to speed up his innovation, guide him, let's engage him and yes, he'll pick his funding. Unfortunately,it works that way.
— Pamela Ankunda (@Pamankunda) January 15, 2018
Though James maintained that he is working with over five innovators who haven't received their prizes. Before concluding that instead of Pamela focusing her efforts on dispelling his allegations, she should "clean her house" instead.
Don't get me there madam. Who has given me isn't the issue because I'm dealing with at least five innovators, all disgruntled. Just clean your house. Stop the victimisation. @UCC_Official @FrankTumwebazek @UCC_ED @Tybisa @NITAUganda1 @Snottyganda @tomddumba @Dignited
— James Wire Lunghabo (@wirejames) January 15, 2018
Later in the day [yesterday], UCC issued a statement - still on their Twitter page. It was basically explaining the genesis of the ACIAs, their role and how they award prizes. However, it didn't seem to point out specifically if there are any innovators they haven't awarded yet and how they are handling it.
The statement read;
BRIEF ON ACIA WINNERS
This is to inform that UCC has run the ACIA Awards initiative a platform for showcasing, recognizing, and promoting outstanding ICT innovations in Uganda. This initiative, aimed at promoting the development of indigenous ICT solutions has run successfully for 8 years. Winners have received various forms of support, enabling them further develop their innovations.
Each year, a call is issued out, inviting innovators to responded [sic] to a predetermined challenge relating to a social economic issues [sic] faced by the public. The Call is structured under various categories to enable participation from as many groups as possible. Submitted applications are taken through a rigorous selection process before a shortlist of outstanding innovations is generated by a panel of distinguished judges comprising of eminent persons with knowledge and experience in innovation, ICTs, and business.
The shortlisted innovators/finalists are invited to pitch their innovations before the panel of judges, who identify the winning innovations. The winners receive various prizes ranging from seed funding; innovation support; capacity building; exposure visits; equipment, etc. These prizes are intended to support the innovators to progress their innovations.
Access to Prizes
Winners under the ACIA Awards Initiative access prizes following achievement of agreed milestones contained in the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between the winners and UCC. This is to ensure that resources are utiliced [sic] for purposes of developing the ICT innovations. Milestones are tagged to the implementation Plans provided by the innovators. Disbursement of prize money is made in phases, based on milestones achieved and progress reports provided by the innovators. Routine assessment of progress made by the innovator is made to verify the milestones achieved.
UCC also collaborates with leading ICT incubation services providers and incubation hubs like outbox, HiveColab for capacity building and incubation support services to selected winners. A tripartite MoU is signed between the Incubator, Innovator and UCC. The MoU also contains milestones that are tagged to the implementation plans. Achievement of the milestones forms the basis for disbursement of funds. The periodic follow up of winners is aimed to establish progress made and providing support where applicable. This includes making referrals to partners in the innovation ecosystem locally, regionally and globally.
Albert Mucunguzi, the Chairman of the ICT Association of Uganda first responded to the statement by citing the spelling mistakes in it. Before issuing his own.
In his statement, Albert pointed out that "the timing of the [UCC] statement seems deliberately intended to coincide with the ongoing debate about whether or not individuals within UCC solicited bribes from past winners in order to facilitate access to their prizes."
However, he said that UCC's attempt - through the statement - to explain the process of "access to prize looks like an attempt to dismiss James Wire’s [bribery] allegations". Read Albert's Statement here.
Earlier on, Vincent Bagiire, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of ICT and National Guidance had interjected the back and forth between James and Pamela. He assured James that the ministry is "engaging with UCC to establish the cause of delays with a view of addressing the innovators concerns." And promised to communicate the outcome as soon as possible.
@wirejames we are engaging with @UCC_Official to establish cause of delays with a view of addressing the innovators concerns. Thereafter, we shall communicate to all concerned ASAP. @FrankTumwebazek https://t.co/RUR8FnqYjs
— Vincent Bagiire (@Tybisa) January 15, 2018
If it turns out to be a case of bribery, it would have done a dent in the credibility of the awards as some people already had a belief that one can't win and if they won can't get their prize.
It's true.. Seeding funds are never paid... If paid then you can't get full payment... They just keep the puzzle puzzling.... If you win seeding fund... And after wining they again set milestones to get it... It's all crap
— @Powell'Samuel. (@mugabikiwanukas) January 14, 2018
UCC shouldn't take such accusations lightly as they have come to haunt MTN Uganda. Especially in the quality of applicants to its Innovation Awards following accusations from different people that the company 'steals ideas'. (See also: Does MTN Organize Innovation Awards and Competitions to Steal Ideas?)