The first need for this study arises because thisCentury has marked a significant evolution of program development and project management. Hence, project and program management have gradually transformed overtime from just management techniques to an overall complex system involving systematic methods, attitudes, values and opinions. It has been observed that Governance and Organizational thinking through program and project management have had a significant impact on project performances.The second need for this study is the ever increasing complex nature of multi-stakeholder governance of large scale livelihood projects in developing countries. Therefore, given the fact that these projects involve multi-stakeholder governance, their management is highly based on interdisciplinary knowledge and context where the program is being implementedTakingpost-conflict Northern Uganda as a case, this study focuses on twolarge-scale livelihood projects that have been implemented in the post-conflict situation of Northern Uganda: the Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF)and the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS).However during the implementation of NAADS and NUSAF numerous governance challenges emerged that made the impacts of the projects on the livelihoods of the communities rather moderate. Therefore it was the aim of this study to uncover these governance challenges and also suggest strategies to overcome them.Based on an extensive review ofliterature on governance challenges of livelihoods programsin developing countries,aconceptualframework was developed that distinguishes betweenthe supply-side approaches and demand side approaches that affect programperformance.In this post-war conflict context, the author displays and explores a broad framework that discusses how it can be applied to disentangle the governance challenges encountered in the implementation of large scale integrated agricultural livelihoods programs.This framework draws attention from a wide range of actors both from the demand and supply-side of service delivery.These actors include organizations from the private, public and civil society. This demand and supply framework also emphasizes the role of the policy, context and institutional environment that affect the performance of agricultural livelihoods programs. The empirical research methods applied for this study involved qualitativedata collection approaches with focus group discussions forming a main part of data collection.The study covered four districts of Northern Uganda; Gulu, Pader, Kitgum and Lamwo.The results showed that the main supply-side governance challenges were the following; lack of adequate skilled human resource capacity; poor targeting; lack of adequate monitoring to control kickback payments by staff; embezzlement of funds; poor financial accountability systems and political interference in contracting for goods and services. The maindemand-side governance challenges included the following: poor relationships between beneficiaries and central/local government;lack of trust of beneficiaries vis-à-vis both the political wing and technical wing of local governments; lack of trust between the beneficiaries and the private sector (for example contractors, input suppliers and contracted agricultural extension service providers);low literacy rates among the farmer beneficiaries; political and elite capture of the project assets and services and loss of social capital resulting in conflicts among the communities.The analysis showed that the two projects had different provisions in their implementation mechanisms to deal with these governancechallenges. However, these mechanisms were not sufficiently refined to avoid the problems identified in the study.Overall, the study concludes that there is no ‘‘panacea‘‘in improving governance of livelihoods programs in post-conflict areas. However when both demand and supply-side strategies are implemented in a well-coordinated manner, the governance challenges inherent in post-conflict recovery programs can beeffectively confronted.

Keywords: Program Performance,Post-conflict Northern Uganda,Agricultural Livelihoods Demand and Supply-side Framework