PHYSIKALISCH-TECHNISCHE BUNDESANSTALT

Braunschweig und Berlin

REPORT

Review of the organizational structures and processes of the UNBS

Quality Assurance and Import Inspection Departments
(November 2010)

ESTABLISHMENT OF A REGIONAL QUALITY INFRASTRUCTRE

IN THE EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY (EAC)

PN 2007.2032.6 / FV-95015

PTB Project Manager: Tobias Diergardt

Martin Kellermann
mmk Solutions CC
November 2010

1
Contents
1 Background...................................................................................................................................... 4
2 Mission objectives and programme ................................................................................................ 4
3 UNBS organizational structure ........................................................................................................ 4
4 Quality Assurance Department ....................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Certification Division ............................................................................................................... 5
4.2 Surveillance Division................................................................................................................ 9
5 Import Inspection Department ..................................................................................................... 15
5.1 Legislation.............................................................................................................................. 15
5.2 Procedures............................................................................................................................. 15
5.3 Organizational structure........................................................................................................ 16
6 Final comments on the Quality Assurance and Import Inspection structures.............................. 17
7 Training and Consultancy Department ......................................................................................... 18
7.1 Training of quality system auditors ....................................................................................... 18
7.2 Training of inspectors ............................................................................................................ 19
8 Draft Quality Policy for Uganda ..................................................................................................... 20
9 Quality assurance training at Makerere University....................................................................... 22
10 Recommendations for future PTB support ............................................................................... 23
Annex A: Programme of the mission..................................................................................................... 25

2
Abbreviations and acronyms
EAC - East African Community
HACCP - Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point
IEC - International Electrotechnical Commission
ISO - International organization for Standardization
ITC - International Trade Centre (Geneva)
KEBS - Kenya Bureau of Standards
PTB - Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt
SDO - Standards Development Organization
SME - Small and Medium Enterprise
SPS - Sanitary and Phyto-sanitary
SQMT - Standards, Quality Assurance, Metrology and Testing
TBT - Technical Barriers to Trade
UNBS - Uganda National Bureau of Standards
URA - Uganda Revenue Service
WTO - World Trade organization

Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the support received regarding the logistics of the mission
from Giavlira Musoke, Manager Quality Assurance and especially Richard Ebong, Head Surveillance
Inspection. As has been the case on previous missions, staff of UNBS was very open about their
processes and the problems they faced, adding materially to the value of this report. The fundamen-
tal support from the Executive Director, Dr Terry Kahuma is gratefully acknowledged as well.

3
1 Background
The Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS) has benefitted over the years from a variety of
technical support under the auspices of the PTB Project: Establishment of a Regional SQMT-
Architecture in the East African Community (EAC) - FV-95015. The EAC Common Market that came
into effect in July 2010, and other developments at national and regional level have necessitated the
expansion of UNBS activities resulting in a re-organization of a number of UNBS departments and
divisions during 2010. Hence, UNBS approached PTB for technical support in evaluating the new
structures, especially with regard to the certification, surveillance and import inspection activities.
These were to be assessed against the EAC developments and international best practices. Martin
Kellermann, international expert, was contracted by PTB to undertake such a mission to UNBS from 8
to 12 November 2010.

2 Mission objectives and programme

The consultant and the relevant managers agreed to the following list of outcomes for the mission
during the opening meeting:

• Assessment of the current structures, procedures and processes in the quality assurance struc-
tures in relation to regional and international trends and best practices, determining the gaps
and providing recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness and the efficiency of the sys-
tems;
• Review of the internal UNBS conflicts of interest and developing recommendations on how they
can be alleviated;
• Identification of the immediate training needs for the quality assurance structures, including
mechanisms to determine training needs on a continuous basis also in the future; and
• Review of the newly established S-Mark scheme as a regulatory mark for products falling within
the scope of compulsory standards in relation to EAC Common Market developments and inter-
national practices.

An additional objective of the mission was to have a discussion with the Makerere University Busi-
ness School on the need, viability and modalities of tertiary education and training regarding stan-
dardization and quality assurance in Uganda. The programme of the mission is attached as Annex A.

3 UNBS organizational structure

The UNBS consists of two operating entities each headed by a Deputy Executive Director. These two
are Technical Operations and Management Services. Technical Operations consist of a number of
Departments, mostly organized in accordance with traditional models, namely Standards, Testing,
Quality Assurance, Import Inspection, Legal Metrology, the National Metrology Laboratory, and
Training and Consultancy. During this mission only the structures and practices of the Quality Assur-
ance and Import Inspection Departments were reviewed in detail, hence no factual conclusions or
recommendations regarding the overall structure could be made. It does seem however, that the
management levels and manager numbers may be more than what would normally be encountered
in an effective and efficient organization with a flat structure.

4
Recommendation 1
An in-depth review of the overall structures of UNBS may be indicated to arrive at an effective and
efficient overall structure, especially once a proper strategy and business plan has been developed
for UNBS’s future business and growth.

4 Quality Assurance Department

The Quality Assurance Department consists of two Divisions, the Certification Division and the Sur-
veillance Division. Import Inspection, that used to be part of this Department has been moved out
and changed into a full Department. Legal Metrology is a separate Department as is the National
Metrology Laboratory.

4.1 Certification Division

4.1.1 The UNBS Q-Mark
The Certification Division is responsible for managing the UNBS Q-Mark service, a product certifica-
tion scheme introduced in 1995. The certification process is governed by Regulations that were
promulgated in the same year. As such it has the longest history amongst UNBS certification ser-
vices. There are 6 auditors working full-time in the product certification unit, but none of them have
been formally trained or been attached to accredited product certification service providers for
hands-on experience. The procedures have been properly collated in a manual.

At the time of writing, the UNBS had issued Q-Mark permits to 81 companies for 285 products. Al-
though the Q-Mark is operated as a voluntary mark, it has been used extensively as “deem-to-
satisfy” evidence over the years for products that fall within the scope of compulsory standards, i.e.
having the Q-Mark confers a presumption of conformity with the relevant compulsory standard to
the product. The result is that most of the permits, estimated at over 85%, are for products that fall
within the scope of compulsory standards. Obviously most of the permits have been issued to local
manufacturers, but a small number of companies abroad, even as far as China (5), Pakistan (2) and
Indonesia (2) have been issued with permits. No subcontract agreements are in place with foreign
certification companies, and UNBS staff conduct the surveillance of the certified companies abroad.

The procedures for awarding the Q-Mark follow ISO/IEC Guide 65 to some extent, but a peer review
by other NSBs of the region a few months ago, highlighted a number of non-conformities that are
slowly being addressed by the Division. Progress is slow however, and there is no definitive plan to
obtain accreditation or even just full compliance to ISO/IEC Guide 65 in the foreseeable future. Some
of the thinking suggests that harmonization on the EAC level should be achieved first, before accredi-
tation is sought. Such thinking is a fallacy, and every effort should be made to obtain accreditation as
quickly as possible. Whoever is accredited first in the EAC will walk away with the major part of the
business (e.g. it is rumoured that KEBS is seeking to establish an office in Uganda to expand their
business in this country).

The final approval of applications is handled by the UNBS internal Evaluation Committee independ-
ent from the auditors and division management – this is best practice and actually required by
ISO/IEC Guide 65. Surveillance audit planning is the stated responsibility of the Head of the Division,

5
and UNBS follows a strategy to rotate the auditors amongst the permit holders in order to minimize
familiarity issues. Applicants need to demonstrate the compliance of their products with the rele-
vant national standard and the manufacturing control and testing has to comply with a list of re-
quirements established by UNBS. Transport costs are generally included in the certification fees.

Some observations:
• Two surveillance visits are supposed to take place annually. The Division is falling far short of this
target, and are battling to even visit the certified companies once a year. This is not the result of
a lack of manpower. Lack of planning, not allocating the responsibility of companies to specific
auditors and lack of transport are just a few of the reasons for this state of affairs.
• The certificates are valid only for a year, hence have to be re-issued annually. This places a high
administrative burden on the Division, and does not add any value to system, nor does it prevent
non-compliance with permit conditions. It is also a moot point whether they would not be re-
issued in the event of no surveillance audits having been conducted.

Recommendation 2
• UNBS should implement a proper planning system for surveillance visits. It should be noted that
these will constitute the bulk of the activities once a fair number of organizations have been li-
censed, new application being the smaller part of the business. Establishing a planning section in
the Department may be a useful development in this respect.
• To ease the administrative burden UNBS should reconsider the validity of certificates. One way
would be to issue the certificates for a longer period of time, i.e. three years, or even an open-
ended certificate. In the latter case the certificate is withdrawn if the certified organization fails
to meet agreed requirements including payment of the licence fees or if given up voluntarily.
• UNBS should seriously consider accreditation to ISO/IEC Guide 65 for its Q-Mark in order to help
safeguard and grow its future business. UNBS therefore should develop a proper business plan
to achieve this. It should also include timelines and costs. The business plan could then be util-
ised by UNBS to obtain appropriate funding for the process.

4.1.2 System certification

The UNBS is only offering ISO 22000 certification at the moment, and have certified 10 companies.
The close to 300 companies certified to ISO 9000 in Uganda are serviced by multinational certifica-
tion companies such as NIMCO, SGS and Bureau Veritas. UNBS has three auditors that have been
trained in ISO 22000, but these have not been appropriately registered. The UNBS Certification Divi-
sion has not been accredited, nor have formal plans been developed to obtain such accreditation.
Approval for certification is done through the independent Evaluation Committee of the UNBS – this
is international best practice.

Although the process follows ISO/IEC 17021 to some extent, there are some significant differences
and lack of best practices such as:

6
• The international best practice of a three year cycle of certification, annual surveillance in the
first and second year followed by a full audit the third year before the certificate is re-issued, is
not followed. Certificates are valid for one year only. This will be an impediment to accredita-
tion, hence must be aligned with international requirements as soon as possible.
• The surveillance audits that are supposed to be conducted every six months in accordance with
their own procedures are not always taking place.
• No system is in place to record and maintain the details of the auditors on staff, i.e. qualifica-
tions, industrial experience, training, registration and ongoing auditing experience, as will be re-
quired for accreditation. This would apply to subcontracted auditors as well.

Recommendation 3
• UNBS should seriously consider accreditation to ISO/IEC 17021 for its system certification ser-
vices in order to help safeguard and grow its future business. UNBS should therefore develop a
proper business plan to achieve accreditation that would include timelines and costs. The busi-
ness plan could then be utilised by UNBS to obtain appropriate funding for the process.
• UNBS should develop and implement a system for maintaining auditor industrial experience and
qualification records, training records, audit hours, and registration records for own staff as well
as subcontracted auditors. UNBS should designate a specific office to keep these records and
that would ensure that auditors maintain their registration. These records could be kept for ex-
ample by the Human resources Department or the Office of the UNBS Quality Manager.
• UNBS should identify a pool of auditors in private industry that could be subcontracted. UNBS
then needs to support these auditors in obtaining the necessary training and registration.

4.1.3 Organizational structure

A best practice organizational structure of a certification body within an NSB is shown in Figure 1.
Important to note is the Approvals Committee that has to be independent of the auditing teams. In
this respect UNBS is following the correct process in that it’s Approvals Committee, named the
Evaluation Committee, is totally independent.

Another very important part of the governance structure of a certification body is the Impartiality
Committee in the case of system certification. The Impartiality Committee should ensure that UNBS
certification services are provided without prejudice to any entity that applies. Details on the com-
position and responsibilities of the Impartiality Committee can be obtained from ISO/IEC 17021 and
the IAF Guidelines. Even though UNBS is not yet accredited, it may be very useful to start with the
establishment of such a committee as soon as possible, and not to leave it to the last weeks before
an accreditation or peer assessment.

The three operating divisions would be the Auditing Division, a Planning Division and a Finance and
Administration Division. In this respect, the UNBS structure is problematic in that it does not have a
dedicated Planning Division. The problems it experiences in conducting the surveillance audits on
time and at the appropriate frequency is ample evidence that planning is sorely lacking. A quick cal-
culation of the available manpower indicates that this is not the problem – enough man-days are

7
 Accreditation body Board of Directors

Executive Director

Deputy Executive
Impartiality Committee
Director (Technical)

Certification Department

Manager
Certification Department
Approvals
Committee

Audit Division Planning Division Financial and

Administration
Division

Subcontracted auditors

Figure 1: Typical structure of certification body

available to conduct the required surveillance audits and service the new applications. Hence, UNBS
should seriously consider such a structural adjustment.

It is patently obvious that UNBS cannot keep on utilising only own staff for initial assessments and
surveillance audits. There will come a time, and probably very soon, that subcontracted auditors will
have to be utilized. This means that UNBS will have to put a mechanism in place to ensure that such
subcontracted auditors are appropriately trained, registered and experienced – just as such a system
needs to be in place for auditors on staff. This does not exist at the moment.

The Financial and Administration Division does not need to be a part of the Certification Department,
but can be part of the bigger UNBS structures. They will however be audited during any accredita-
tion exercise, and UNBS must therefore ensure that they meet the relevant ISO/IEC Guide 65, ISO/IEC
17021 and IAF requirements. Details can be found in the relevant standard, IAF Guidelines and the
procedures of the chosen accreditation body.

8
Recommendation 4
• UNBS should consider establishing an Impartiality Committee as a precursor to accreditation in
order to gain experience with the management of such a committee.
• UNBS should seriously consider establishing a Planning Division within its Certification Depart-
ment in order to address the obvious lack of planning and so help address the failure to maintain
a proper audit schedule of certified companies.
• UNBS should review its financial system against accreditation requirements and implement
changes if found to be required as soon as possible.

4.2 Surveillance Division

The stated responsibilities of Surveillance Division include the following:
• Inspection of goods in the market place that fall within the scope of Compulsory Standards;
• Factory inspections where such goods are manufactured locally (imported goods are the respon-
sibility of the Import Inspection Department – see section 5); and
• Education and support of especially the SME sector helping them to comply with Compulsory
Standards.

Dealing with “shoddy” product has been allocated in principle to the Division, but has not been prop-
erly put into operation yet.

The Division currently consists of a Head, 2 staff members dealing with market surveillance, 3 staff
members responsible for industry surveillance, 3 staff members plus a contract worker responsible
for the S-Mark, and 2 staff members seconded from the Ministry to help with the education of the
SME sector. An additional 4 personnel were seconded from the Minister’s Office to help with intelli-
gence regarding non-compliant products or “shoddy” product. A divisional structure for future ex-
pansion has been developed.

4.2.1 Surveillance
The Division conducts market surveillance on products falling within the scope of the approximately
520 Compulsory Standards. Additional standards have been proposed for approval, and the number
is therefore set to grow in the foreseeable future. Some of the inspectors have participated in ISO
17020 training sessions. The inspectors carry an Authority Identify Card issued by the Legal Depart-
ment after their names have been gazetted – a good system. Some observations:

• The inspectors do not receive any training regarding their legal powers and responsibilities be-
fore the Authority Identity Cards are issued. As they are given far-reaching powers of entry and
seizure, this is considered a necessity.
• No formal annual market surveillance plan was available – although efforts are made to deal with
specific sectors at given times. It is quite common to develop an annual market surveillance plan
for 60% of the available man-days of the inspection staff after considering leave and sick leave
patterns. The remaining 40% is used to cover ad hoc surveillance inspections, usually triggered
by a formal complaint from the UNBS management, the Ministry, the Minister, the public and/or
NGOs.

9
Recommendation 5
• It is strongly recommended that UNBS develop an annual market surveillance plan on the basis
of risk assessment, and make time available for ad hoc surveillance activities at the same time.
• It is recommended that the inspectors be given appropriate training in inspection techniques and
the legal framework for inspections and market surveillance, including a final examination before
their Authority Identity card is issued.

4.2.2 S-Mark
The S-Mark is being established as a regulatory product certification mark, denoting compliance of
products with Compulsory Standards. The UNBS Q-Mark is utilised as a “deem-to-satisfy” Mark, but
is not a legal requirement (see 4.1.1 above). The enabling legislation has not yet been promulgated,
but the UNBS management has made the decision to start with the S-Mark as a voluntary service in
anticipation of the appropriate legislation. At the time of the report, 30 companies had been li-
censed, and another 50 or so were being considered. It is envisaged that the S-Mark will became
mandatory on 1 November 2011. Some observations:

• The S-Mark is intended to apply to locally manufactured goods only and not to imported prod-
ucts. It is furthermore envisaged that the S-Mark will become mandatory for all locally manufac-
tured goods falling within the scope of compulsory standards. This will certainly be seen as a
negative by the local industry, who would argue that they are being prejudiced with regard to
their foreign competition. On the other hand, insisting on an S-Mark for imported products will
be a very brave undertaking indeed as the Uganda Market is very small and it is highly unlikely
that manufacturers in far-away places will be inclined to go through the whole certification proc-
ess, nor will UNBS be able to establish the appropriate surveillance of the same considering the
financial constraints. Because, if the S-Mark is mandatory, it can be argued that paying for licens-
ing is actually a form of tax, and the government will probably retain a heavy hand in setting the
fees, thereby keeping the fees below market realities.
• Although everybody argues quite vehemently that the Q-Mark requirements are higher and that
it should be considered a premium product certification mark, the real outcome is that both sig-
nify that the product complies with the requirements contained in the relevant standard, no less,
no more. From a producer and consumer perspective therefore, there is little difference, except
that for the producer the Q-Mark is more expensive and some of the quality documentation re-
quirements may be a bit more onerous. This situation is considered a real risk for the future of
the Q-Mark.
• No impact assessment has been conducted for the implementation of the S-Mark, hence there is
no information available regarding the number of products or companies that would be affected.
This means that UNBS does not know how many people, vehicles and other resources would be
needed to administrate the system properly, it is not known whether the laboratory capacity in
the country can cope with all the additional testing, whether the envisaged fees will cover opera-
tional costs, and ultimately what the cost/benefit analysis is, i.e. is the whole exercise worth the
effort.

10
• As this would be a technical regulation and has to be notified to the WTO TBT Secretariat, no-
body has thought about this yet. The only redeeming feature is that the S-Mark will only apply to
locally produced products – in fact the reverse of what normally happens when imported prod-
ucts are subject to more onerous requirements than locally produced ones.
• Considering the real problems that the Certification Division has in meeting their surveillance
obligations regarding the Q-Mark with only about 80 companies on their books, it is highly
unlikely that the Surveillance Division will be able to cope with their obligations in a scheme that
will soon overtake the Q-Mark in terms of company numbers. The reason for establishing the S-
Mark is therefore seriously compromised right from the start.
• The burgeoning S-Mark Division being grouped with Surveillance Division activities may not be
the optimum place for it. In essence it is a product certification activity and hence more organ-
izational and operational synergies could be gained by combining it with the Q-Mark and system
certification activities. It is not a normal surveillance activity, even though UNBS may be con-
templating having the S-Mark declared mandatory for local manufacturers. In addition, surveil-
lance is normally financed from government funding, whereas the S-Mark will be paid for by the
licensees. Financial governance may therefore be another reason for a rethink on the S-Mark
structure.

Recommendation 6
It is strongly recommended that UNBS review the total strategy and modalities of the implementa-
tion of the S-Mark scheme with specific attention to:
• Locally manufactured goods viz a viz imported goods;
• The internal competition between the Q-Mark and the S-Mark;
• Establishing the full scope of work to implement the S-Mark in order to properly plan and pro-
vide resources;
• Promulgating the required legislation;
• Finding its optimum place in the UNBS structure; and
• Notifying the WTO TBT Agreement Secretariat.

A proper business plan should be developed considering all the above information, and thereafter, if
it is still considered to be a viable business proposition, proper planning for implementation should
be developed, including the commitment of the necessary resources.

4.2.3 Shoddy goods

Low cost and low quality goods are a real problem in developing countries where the average con-
sumer does not have much purchasing power. Shoddy goods are therefore plentiful in the market
place and a real challenge for the political level and ultimately the NSBs that bear the brunt of the
consumer frustration. Uganda is no different. The Surveillance Division has been given the responsi-
bility to also deal with shoddy goods, but lacks any enabling legislation to do so. The more clever
traders can therefore totally ignore any current efforts of the UNBS. Unfortunately, the draft regula-
tion developed with PTB support in August 2008 does not seem to have progressed any further.

11
Product liability legislation, which is a more sophisticated name for the same issue, is being consid-
ered at the EAC level, and that has to be factored into the future developments in Uganda as well.

4.2.4 Organizational structure

A draft organizational structure developed by the Division is shown in Figure 1. This is overly com-
plex, a mixture of structure and activities, many one-on-one reporting lines, long communication
lines, and hence considered to be neither effective nor efficient in meeting the challenges of a mar-
ket surveillance division. It is always good practice for the structure to roughly follow function, keep
reporting lines as short as possible, and have about 8 to 15 staff reporting to a manager or head.

The Surveillance Division has not yet developed a proper business plan and its activities are not for-
malized or finalized. In essence however, the division has may need to consider the following activi-
ties which would define the structure:

• Surveillance inspection in the market place;

• Surveillance inspections of warehousing;
• Inspections of manufacturing premises, mainly where indicated by negative results from the pre-
vious two activities;
• Data analysis and risk assessment to determine the primary surveillance focus; and
• Planning of the surveillance activities, annual as well as the ad hoc activities.

Considering the above, and taking into account that the market surveillance activities have to be
rolled out also in regional areas, a draft structure that could be considered is shown in Figure 2. This
still contains the functions, but may be a much more realistic structure. The actual names of the
various sections can still be aligned with custom and practice in UNBS. Long descriptive names seem
to be en vogue, but they can also be shortened quite a lot. People will eventually know who does
what without departments and sections sporting such long and unwieldy names.

The final structure however, can only really be considered when a proper business plan has been de-
veloped. Issues that still need to be finalised include whether factory inspections should really be
considered a main focus in the quest to ensure products complying with compulsory standards. In-
ternational best practice would indicate that majoring on post market activities, e.g. market and
warehousing surveillance combined with a rigorous sanctions regime when required, is a much more
effective and cost-efficient approach.

Recommendation 7
• UNBS should develop a proper business plan for surveillance activities considering international
experiences in this regard, the common market developments in the EAC, available resources
and other relevant factors.
• Once a proper business plan has been developed, the optimum structure can be formulated
based on the business plan.
• A proper sanctions regime needs to be developed and agreed to between the Surveillance Divi-
sion and the Legal Department of UNBS that needs to be rigorously applied once non-
conformities are picked up and suppliers knowingly and consistently fail to heed requests for rec-
tification of the issue.

12
Figure1: Draft organizational structure: Surveillance Division
Surveillance Division

Intelligence

Coordination/
Industrial Surveillance Market Surveillance
Consumer Complaint

Research /Technical
Advisory
Factory inspection
Factory Inspection
Hardware/ Factory
Supper Market Warehousing / Stores Emergency Unit / Regional Offices IT and Data Analyst
Outlets

Engineering & Electrical and Engineering- Northern

Engineering Chemicals
Metrology Electronics Construction Region

Chemicals /Consumer Food Grade Central

Food and Agriculture Food Products Engineering - General
Goods Chemicals Region

Food and Agriculture Cosmetics/ South Western

Beverages and Spirit Cosmetics
Prohibited Substance Region

Cosmetics and Human Food Products

Consumer Goods Eastern Region
Chemicals

Animal Feeds

Regulatory Impact
Assessment

13
Figure 2: Proposed organizational structure: Surveillance Division

Surveillance
Division

STRUCTURE

Industrial Market Planning and

Regions
Surveillance Surveillance Risk Assessment

− Manufacturing − Retail − Northern Region − Data analysis

− Food and agricul- − Warehousing − Central Region − Risk assessment ACTIVITIES
ture − South Western Region − Planning
− Building and Con- − Eastern Region
struction
− Transport

14
5 Import Inspection Department
The Import Inspection Department has only recently been elevated to the level of a Department due to
the increase of business and personnel - previously it was a Division in the Quality Assurance Depart-
ment. It is a fairly large Department with nearly 50 staff members at Head Office and in the field. UNBS
is endeavouring to have field officers stationed at all the major border posts with its surrounding coun-
tries, but not all have yet been realized. In addition, field officers are stationed at Entebbe Airport, and
in Kampala to deal with the various bonded warehouses, container depots and the like that fall under
the control of customs, i.e. the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA). UNBS is supposed to inspect all im-
ported products that fall within the scope of Compulsory Standards (approximately 520 have been
promulgated so far). UNBS inspect approximately 2 500 consignments out of the 96 000 that customs
clear per month, take samples from about 30 for testing, and report 2 to 3 failures per month. In effect
therefore an audit type approach.

5.1 Legislation
The regulations for import inspections were promulgated in 2002. Unfortunately these are incomplete
and need urgent revision in a few key areas, including the penalties for transgressions that are abso-
lutely laughable. A revision was undertaken in 2008, but progress to get them promulgated has been
extremely slow, both in UNBS and in the Ministry. This apparent lack of urgency must be addressed to
ensure that the inspection work is underpinned by appropriate legislation. Currently the inspection staff
of UNBS can be considered to be operating with their one hand tied behind their backs. This saps en-
ergy, and motivation tends to diminish.

5.2 Procedures
Staff is supposed to work in accordance with Guidelines for Inspection that were developed in 2003.
These however, are only very general or indicative in nature. A set of proper procedures have been
drafted based on the best practices and experience that have evolved over the years. These have been
circulated to staff members for comment with little or no reaction. Nor has the management of the
former Division or current Department yet pushed for their completion and approval. The result is that
inspectors to some extent follow their own inclinations, and differences amongst inspectors are very
evident. Even suppliers and importers are said to be calling for proper procedures in order to foster
transparency, consistency and integrity.

This is not a healthy situation at all. It is therefore extremely important that these draft procedures1 be
finalised, aligned with ISO/IEC 17020 as far as possible, approved and implemented. As part of their im-
plementation a formal training programme for all inspectors should be arranged, with an examination at
the end, to ensure that the inspection activities continue on a proper footing. Failure to address this
situation, will lead to more and more problems with the inspection activities as inspectors will take short
cuts, diverge even more amongst each other in what they do, thereby compromising the effectiveness
and efficiency of the whole process.

1
The set of draft import inspection procedures will be reviewed separately from this report.

15
5.3 Organizational structure
With import inspection activities expanding at a breath taking pace, it is important that an appropriate
organizational structure is put in place to deal effectively and efficiently with the responsibilities and
work load. The approved structure of the Import Inspection Department is shown in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Organizational structure of Import Inspection Department

Import Inspection Department

Border Entry Point Inland Customs Stations & Coordination

Division Mobile Team Division Division

Central, Eastern and ICD / Bonds Mobile Data Mgt Risk Mgt & Compliance
South Northern Inspection, Team Section System Review
Western & Region Registration Section Support Section
Western Section n Section Section
Section

In general the organizational structure follows the functions and responsibilities of the Department.
That is good. The majority of staff obviously is part of the two Divisions operating in the field. For the
Coordination Division to be divided into three sections therefore does not make sense considering the
small number of staff in the sections. This will need to be rethought. It is not useful to have a few sec-
tions consisting of only one person. The functions may be necessary, but it may be more meaningful to
have the five members of staff report to the Coordination Division Head, each with their own responsi-
bilities without any further subdivision into sections. This would also be more useful to deal with leave,
illness and other redundancies, i.e. available staff members be assigned work of people absent.

Recommendation 8
It is recommended that UNBS revisit the organizational structure of the Import Inspection Division,
strengthen the risk assessment and data management section, and ensure that one-on-one structures
are minimized.

16
6 Final comments on the Quality Assurance and Import Inspection
structures
There is a tendency internationally to separate regulatory administration from standards development
and conformity assessment services. Having all these functions in the same organization such as in the
UNBS is problematic: (i) It eventually leads to a conflict of interest; (ii) UNBS is no longer seen as the
friend of industry but becomes the unwelcome “policeman” thereby compromising its developmental
role; and (iii) Standards development is geared towards satisfying only the regulatory needs of the coun-
try or worse, the NSB strives to have as many standards as possible declared compulsory in order to se-
cure income, leading to over-regulation. This situation is exacerbated by governments when they give
regulatory powers to the NSB and at the same time withdraw funding, arguing that the NSB now has the
wherewithal to earn its keep.

Quite a few developing countries are therefore in the process, or have done so already, to separate the
regulatory activities from the NSB. If this is seen as a future scenario in Uganda, and it is certainly not
that far-fetched given the need to negotiate trade agreements with major trading blocs such as the EU,
then it would be useful if UNBS fine-tunes its organizational structure in such a way that all the regula-
tory functions are combined in a single management entity. If a “divorce” comes about in the future, it
is fairly easy to separate the regulatory functions and establishing them as an independent entity with-
out disrupting the rest of the organization too much.

This means that the market surveillance functions should not be in the same department as the certifi-
cation services. It would make a lot more sense to combine the market surveillance and import inspec-
tions, as both are regulatory functions. It is acknowledged that UNBS needs to balance the amount of
work and staff across Departments and Divisions, and hence this may not be possible in the short term,
but it is a re-organization that should not be left aside for too long.

Another complicating long-term development could be the eventual scaling down of import inspections.
Import inspections are extremely costly, the logistics are challenging to the point of becoming impossi-
ble, and the time taken for testing many of the products runs into weeks and months. Over and above
these challenges, it is also very clear from the underlying statistics and market surveillance data that it is
highly unlikely that all shipments of non-compliant products are identified. Hence, many countries have
stopped all-inclusive import inspection with the exception of a few high-risk products, and conduct im-
port inspections very much on a sampling or audit basis based on risk assessment.

These countries rely heavily on a proper market surveillance regime, tight product liability legislation
and effective sanctions when the need arises. As Uganda’s intra-regional and foreign trade expands,
this will very quickly become an issue also for this country. UNBS should therefore be prepared to
change its approach regarding import inspection in the not too distant future, and ensure that their in-
formation evaluation, risk assessment capability and a seamless integration with the customs and excise
data base is in place to shift to a more audit type approach rather than to try and inspect everything.

Recommendation 9
UNBS should develop a proper strategy for its future, i.e. what it wishes to be in the future, and how to
get there. Current customs and practices should really be challenged during this process.

17
7 Training and Consultancy Department
The Training and Consultancy Department provides training to both industry and UNBS staff, whereas
consultancy is geared towards the SME sector. The Department trains a total of about 300 people from
industry annually. In addition, many more are trained in company specific training programmes. A no-
table achievement. Whereas the training activities were discussed in fair depth in terms of the objec-
tives of this mission, the activities of the consultancy arm of the Department were not, and hence no
comments are provided in this regard.

7.1 Training of quality system auditors

Training is provided to industry regarding the implementation of standards, including ISO 9000, ISO
14000, ISO 22000 and HACCP. Training related to internal audits is also provided, but training of audi-
tors and lead auditors not. Some UNBS staff was trained a few years ago under a UNIDO programme,
but there was no follow up to ensure their registration. Hence, there are no registered auditors and
lead auditors currently in UNBS, and probably even in Uganda. This is a major gap, and will need to be
addressed as soon as possible if UNBS is to stands any chance of obtaining accreditation for its certifica-
tion activities. In this respect it would be very important to develop a holistic approach to develop a
pool of registered auditors and lead auditors that becomes self-perpetuating, instead of continuously
having to rely on foreign training programmes that all too often are fragmented and in the end ineffec-
tive. Elements to be included in such an approach are:

• Provide for formal training for a fairly large number of potential auditors from both UNBS and pri-
vate industry;
• Ensure that these trainee auditors gain the necessary auditing experience required for registration;
• Provide for registered lead auditors from abroad to spend some time in Uganda to evaluate the
trainee auditors during actual audits, in order for them to request registration from a recognized
auditor registration organization2;
• Provide formal training as lead auditors to the registered auditors; and
• Provide for peer review of these as lead auditors in order for them to be registered as lead auditors.
• Utilise these registered lead auditors to evaluate trainee auditors and for peer reviews of lead audi-
tors and so perpetuate the system.

It is very important that such a holistic approach be formalized with time lines and allocated responsi-
bilities in order to ensure that UNBS in particular has access to a pool of competent auditors and lead
auditors without which accreditation of its certification services will not be possible. And without ac-
creditation, the future growth of such a service will be severely compromised. A proper training and
registration plan may also help UNBS obtain technical support from development partners. Lack of a
proper plan will clearly lead to a lack of enthusiasm on their part.

2
Uganda can establish its own registration scheme for auditors and lead auditors, but that would be a long term
goal. In the short to medium term registration with an organization such as IRCA (Website: http://www.irca.org) in
the UK may be the best solution. Instead of national auditor registration scheme, a regional EAC auditor registra-
tion scheme may also be a viable long term alternative.

18
Recommendation 10
It is strongly recommended that UNBS Training and Consultancy Division establish auditor and lead audi-
tor training programmes for staff and private industry that meet international requirements in close co-
operation with the Certification Department and the UNBS Quality Manager.

7.2 Training of inspectors

UNBS has and is appointing a large number of inspectors to conduct market and factory surveillance and
import inspection. Although some of these have received general training regarding ISO/IEC 17020, two
major gaps in their training are evident, namely –

1. None of the inspectors have received formal training in the procedures to be followed. As they are
constantly in the eye of suppliers, manufacturers, importers and the like, it is extremely important
that they always act with integrity and in accordance with defined and transparent procedures.
Hence a formal in-depth training in the procedures is indicated. Currently they learn good and bad
habits from their co-workers, and hence do not always follow proper procedures. This needs to be
rectified, and the Training Division in collaboration with the Surveillance Division and Import Inspec-
tion Department need to develop a proper training modules in inspection techniques and behaviour
for these inspectors. A formal examination is also indicated to ensure that the training has been ef-
fective.
2. The inspectors receive immense legal powers of entry and hence need to know their legal powers
and their responsibilities. Although some have undergone some training in this respect, it was more
of a sensitization course without any examination. This is such an important issue that formal
course with examination should become a precondition for the issue of their Authority Card. In ad-
dition, they should be trained in what to do in sticky situations, such as when they are refused entry
into premises, or when they are run out of warehouses at the wrong end of a gun. Such events may
sound far-fetched, but they have happened in quite a few countries already.
3. UNBS has drafted a Code of Conduct for Inspectors that they wish every inspector to abide by. This
is useful concept, but it cannot replace a well-constructed list of inspector responsibilities in the
UNBS Act or its Regulations, it can only support them. The Code of Conduct therefore has to be very
carefully aligned with relevant legislation, or, if the legislation is not sufficient, it should be strength-
ened. The current draft is overly long, many concepts are duplicated in different sections, and
hence it loses its impact.

Recommendation 11
• It is strongly recommended that UNBS Training and Consultancy Division establish inspector training
programmes for staff based on UNBS procedures and legal requirements in close cooperation with
the Certification and Import Inspection Departments and the UNBS Quality Manager.
• The draft Inspector’s Code of Conduct should be carefully revised to rid it of duplicated sections,
align it with legislation and shorten it to no more than two pages in order to render it effective.

19
8 Draft Quality Policy for Uganda
After a tremendous amount of work by private industry with input from the Ministry of Tourism, Trade
and Industry (MTTI), the Uganda National Chamber of Commerce and Industry (UNCCI) published a draft
policy paper on standardization and quality assurance a year back. This idea has now been grasped by
the MTTI and they have developed an official Draft National Standards and Quality Policy3 that has been
circulated for national consultations. The draft policy deals with most of the issues that an effective
quality policy should deal with as quite a large portion of the very useful UNCCI document has been util-
ised in the new draft. There are however a few major gaps that are quite apparent when viewed against
similar successful policies of other countries and the challenges currently being faced by Uganda in this
domain:

1. In the first place, the draft policy is not always very clear on the difference between standards and
technical regulations. Compliance with standards is always “non-mandatory” according to WTO TBT
Agreement rules, whereas compliance with Technical Regulations is always “mandatory”. This is a
very important difference that has to be very clearly articulated. The fact that Uganda calls techni-
cal regulations Compulsory Standards frequently obfuscates this distinction in the draft policy. Too
often this leads policy makers to conclude that all national standards are of a mandatory kind, which
is a far cry from the requirements of the WTO TBT Agreement. Hence the Section 5.1 Harmonize
and Strengthen the Standards Regulatory Framework, which includes some very useful policy objec-
tives, needs to be carefully edited to ensure consistency with WTO TBT Agreement nomenclature
and requirements and that the difference between standards and technical regulations (i.e. compul-
sory standards) remains clear.

2. In the same Section 5.1 the perception can be created that Uganda will end up with a number of
standards agencies. This is not international best practice. Normally one would establish an apex
national standards body, i.e. the UNBS. This body is responsible for the publication of all Ugandan
National Standards, not necessarily their development. Other organizations or even government
departments, recognized by the UNBS after ensuring that they comply with Annex 3 of the WTO TBT
Agreement, can develop standards up to the point of a draft national standard, but then this draft is
transferred to the UNBS to effect the final publication. Such organizations are generally known as
Standards Development Organizations (SDOs). Such an arrangement ensures that national stan-
dards are always easily available, and it enables Uganda to meet WTO TBT Agreement requirements
on the development and notification of standards quite easily.

The context could also indicate that what is meant by “standards agencies” are actually “regulatory
agencies” of which there would be quite a few, each Ministry having established their own. This is
quite normal, but they are not standards agencies, they are regulatory agencies. Their mandates
have to be carefully sorted out to ensure that overlaps and gaps are minimized. Generally speaking
these overlaps are the real problem for suppliers and for trade, i.e. products are regulated by more
than one agency, frequently in accordance with differing requirements, all of which can be catego-
rized under unnecessary non-tariff trade barriers or NTBs. This division of labour needs to be clari-
fied, even detailing the broad principles in the draft policy whereby this will be done, as well as an

3
The text of the policy can be obtained from the official website of MTTI at: hhtp://www.mtti.go.ug.

20
 unequivocal commitment of government to see it through. It is usually the division of labour be-
tween the national standards body that has been given regulatory responsibilities and the regula-
tory authorities in other Ministries that is usually the biggest issue. Many countries are therefore
considering separating regulatory type work from the national standards body (see also discussion
in section 6 of this report).

3. Section 5.2 addresses maybe one of the major challenges of the current Ugandan situation, namely
the lack of coordination and a clear division of labour amongst regulatory authorities. Hence it over-
laps to a large extent with Section 5.1. The wording “clear coordination and collaboration platform”
can be interpreted in many ways. Most countries that have gone down this road have found that
such a “platform” needs to be given legal teeth, otherwise it does not work. A forum, a coordinating
committee, an inter-Ministerial committee or similar representative structures do not work. Coun-
tries who have got it right have established a Technical Regulation Department in the Office of the
President or Prime Minster under a Technical Regulation Law. This Department has the responsibil-
ity to ensure full compliance with the WTO TBT Agreement and similar regional protocols or agree-
ments by Ministries, their Agencies and the Quality Infrastructure organizations. They therefore
wield a lot of power, and cannot easily be placed within a Ministry. Uganda should seriously con-
sider such a construct – it will be much more effective than what is currently in the draft policy.

4. Another gap in the draft policy is the responsibilities and involvement of industry. The government
cannot make the policy work unless the private sector buys into the idea and supports it whole-
heartedly. Yet, the current draft deals mainly with government activities. The involvement of indus-
try in the ongoing standardization work, active participation in the governance of Quality Infrastruc-
ture organizations, implementation of standards and technical regulations in industry and the mar-
ket place, even financial support for the running of Quality Infrastructure organizations, etc. are all
elements that could be usefully included.

5. The last major issue that needs to be addressed is the involvement of the development partners.
Uganda, like many developing economies, gains tremendously from ongoing donor community ac-
tivities in the country, also in the standards, conformity and technical regulation and SPS domain.
Too frequently however, there is little coordination between Ministries and the development part-
ners when it comes to the establishment of infrastructure. The result is that overcapacity in testing
and certification services, thereby greatly jeopardizing the self-sufficiency of the same, stressing the
supply of skilled personnel and other negative outcomes. The draft policy could be enhanced quite
a bit by the including the relevant coordination requirements.

Recommendation 12
It is strongly recommended that UNBS utilise the public consultations regarding the draft Standards and
Quality Policy to strengthen the already good document even more by the inclusion of policy for –

• Articulating the clear difference between standards and technical regulations, and ensuring that the
requirements of the WTO TBT Agreement are complied with;

21
• An unambiguous commitment that government will delineate the responsibilities amongst regula-
tory authorities and the quality infrastructure organizations, even to the extent of revising relevant
legislation;
• A clear statement that UNBS should be the apex standards body, responsible for the publication of
all national standards, even though others may develop them;
• The establishment of a Technical Regulation Department in the Office of at least the Prime Minister
with regulatory powers to oversee and coordinate standards and regulatory activities amongst Min-
istries and their Agencies in order to fully meet WTO TBT Agreement and EAC Common Market Pro-
tocols;
• Responsibilities of the private sector; and
• Coordination mechanisms between development partners and government.

9 Quality assurance training at Makerere University

The Makerere University Business School has approximately 15 000 pre and post-graduate students,
Due to its large number of students, it will be re-established as an independent university in 2011. The
Makerere Business School and UNBS signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 2009 whereby
they will work together to provide higher education regarding standardization and quality management
in Uganda. The Business School is primarily responsible for the academic side whereas UNBS would
provide lecturers and offer internships to students where relevant. The Business School is very keen to
enhance their offerings regarding standardization and quality assurance on two fronts, namely

• Short term courses for SMEs and individuals that wish to gain insight into the subject matter, espe-
cially with the view to export to the region as well as further afield; and
• Lon term diploma or graduate courses for individuals that may wish to make this domain their ca-
reer.

The former would typically be of a week duration, whereas the latter would be for one year or longer.
The PTB sponsored three day workshop for Export Quality Management was of specific interest, and the
possibility of running this again in 2011 as a Train-the-Trainer course would be welcomed. The Business
School would be more than happy to organize and host such a course. It was pointed out that the ITC
Publication on which the PTB course was based is being revised and that the revised version should be
published early next year. It was agreed that it would not make sense to base the course on the previ-
ous version of the book, but that the revised and updated version should be utilised.

A workshop with PTB support was planned for the first quarter of 2010, but did not take place due to
factors beyond the control of PTB and the designated trainer. Makerere and UNBS held the training
workshop anyway, and utilised the relevant ITC publication as best they could. It was well attended and
was considered a success, but it is understood that lecturers would need considerable strengthening
from an expert to become really effective.

The long term pre- and post-graduate courses fall outside the ambit of PTB support, but it may be useful
to facilitate linkages of the Makerere Business School with UNISA or Pretoria University Business Schools

22
that have such courses, or even the University of Hamburg that has been a recipient of the ISO award
for the best University programme on standardization. If the Makerere Business School can establish
such pre- and post-graduate courses, they would fill a much needed gap not only in Uganda, but also in
the whole of the EAC.

10 Recommendations for future PTB support

Future PTB support would to a large extent be guided by the planning for the third phase of the project.
There are however a number of elements in UNBS that would require future support, and which PTB
could consider. These include the following:

1. It is quite clear that the whole issue of product certification marks, regulatory marks, import inspec-
tion would require the development of a holistic strategy. This can be considered evidence of a
much bigger need of developing a holistic strategy for the future for the UNBS. The continuing
changes in the East African Community, the start of the EAC common market with its inevitable
opening of the intra-regional border posts, the establishment of the “One stop customs” Act will all
have a major impact on the business of UNBS. The old business model will come increasingly under
strain. Hence it might have a positive impact on the future of UNBS if PTB could facilitate the proc-
ess of developing a viable business strategy for UNBS, if its senior management really believes in
such a concept and requests such facilitation.

2. The outcome of the strategy discussed under (1) above will have an effect on the organizational
structure of the UNBS, especially the whole quality assurance domain, i.e. product and system certi-
fication, inspection and market surveillance. Once the strategy has been developed, it may be use-
ful to provide support to UNBS in developing an organizational structure that can carry the imple-
mentation of the strategy.

3. PTB should consider the offer of the Makerere Business School to host an Export Quality Workshop
in 2011 once the ITC book has been republished. This should be in the form of a Train-the-Trainer
workshop, i.e. a four day workshop with an examination at the end. The Makerere Business School
should identify a number of lecturers from amongst its staff, as should UNBS, to participate. The
Makerere Business School should then be supported in developing their own training material, so
that they can provide these workshops in future.

4. One of the major impediments for growth in the certification business of UNBS is the general lack of
trained and registered auditors. A fair number of staff has been trained over the years as auditors,
but few are working in the certification divisions and their registration has not been pursued. PTB
should therefore consider supporting UNBS in developing a proper plan for the training and registra-
tion of quality auditors in the certification divisions and in private industry, starting with training in
audit skills, ensuring that they get the appropriate experience, contracting registered lead auditors
from abroad under which they can perform audits for registration, support their registration with
IRCA or similar and provide guidance on the establishment of a concomitant record system in UNBS.
The same should be done for lead auditors as a follow up to the auditor registration programme.
Only in this way can the whole auditor development programme become self-sustainable.

23
5. The situation regarding training of inspectors is very similar to that of the training and registration of
auditors (see point 4 above). Hence, it may be appropriate for PTB to provide support to UNBS in
developing the training modalities for the training of inspectors in ISO 17020, UNBS inspection pro-
cedures and legal responsibilities. This could be extended to also include a Train-the-Trainer pro-
gramme to establish a self-sustaining inspector training and registration programme in UNBS.

24
Annex A: Programme of the mission

Date Activity Discussion Partners

Sunday Arrival from Johannesburg
th
7 Novem-
ber
Monday Opening meeting with UNBS Technical Manag- Gyavlira Musoke – Manager Quality Assur-
th
8 Novem- ers ance
ber − Finalization of programme Richard Ebong – Head Surveillance Division
− Agreement on outcome of the mission Samuel G L Balagadde – Manager Import
Inspection
Daniel Atugonza – Senior Surveillance Offi-
cer
Joseph M Lugoloobi – Inspector
Winfried Atugonza – S-Mark Manager
Meeting with Quality Assurance Department Gyaviira Musoke – Manager Quality Assur-
- Structure of the Department, ance
- Quality Assurances Matters
- Identification of Training Needs
st
1 meeting with Standards Strategy Coordina- Julius Oboth – Standards Strategy Imple-
tor mentation Coordinator
− Review of the draft Standards and Quality
Policy of Uganda
Tuesday Meeting With the Surveillance Division Richard Ebong – Head Surveillance Division
th
9 Novem- - Studying the Proposed Structure Daniel Atugonza – Senior Surveillance Offi-
ber - Code of Conduct and Applicable Legislations cer
- Compulsory Registration ( S-Mark) Winnie Atugonza – Senior Surveillance Offi-
- How to Conduct Market Surveillance cer
- Market Surveillance procedure Vitalis Shaka – Surveillance Officer
- Identification of training needs for the Divi- Margie Ndagire - Inspector
sion Joseph Lutaaya – Standards officer (MSME)
Richard Ngonzi – Standards officer (MSME)
nd
2 meeting with Standards Strategy Coordina- Julius Oboth – Standards Strategy Imple-
tor mentation Coordinator
- Review of the draft Standards and Quality
Policy of Uganda (Unfortunately the planned attendance of
Deus Kamweya from MTTI did not material-
ize)
Wednesday Meeting with Manager import Inspection Samuel L. Balagadde – Manager Import
th
10 Novem- - Structure of the Department Inspection Department
ber - Applicable legislation Eric Kagoba – Senior Inspector
- How to conduct inspection Zainah Tondo – Inspector
- Import inspection procedure Linda Kobere – Inspector
- Identification of training Needs Matina Kaleebi – Inspector
Innocent Namara – Inspector
MacSamuel Lasagula - Inspector

25
Date Activity Discussion Partners
Thursday Meeting Training and Consultancy Department Eng. Jackson K. Mubangizi – Manager Train-
th
11 Novem- - How to conduct internal training for techni- ing and Consultancy Department
ber cal officers of Quality Assurances and import Daniel Magada – Senior Training Officer
inspection
- Identification of international linkages and
support necessary
Meeting with the Legal Team Helen Wenene – Senior Legal Officer
− Prosecution of Cases related to Quality Is- Caroline Ayenzibwa – Legal officer
sues
− Review of status of UNBS legislation
Friday Makerere University Business School Stephen K Nkundabanyanga – Lecturer and
th
12 Novem- − Standards and quality related studies Business Consultant
ber Dinah Nahabwe – Assistant Director, Fac-
ulty of Commerce
Bazinzi Matamba - Lecturer
Paul Walakira – Standards Department
UNBS
Wrap Up Meeting Dr. Terry Kahuma – Executive Director
− Findings and recommendations of mission UNBS
UNBS Technical Managers
Saturday Departure for Johannesburg
th
13 Novem-
ber

26