UNICEF and Data Collection in Child Protection

Moving Forward in creating the required critical mass

Why it is part of UNICEF’s core mandate

UNICEF has a global mandate for assessing the situation of children worldwide. This is a watchdog function and it should not be limited.

UNICEF has also a function as an agent of change at country and regional level: supporting governments to reform child protection systems.

In both cases, it is about knowledge building, focusing on trends and disparities.

It is about ensuring that government decisions are informed for improved policy formulation and programme planning (UNICEF as an evidence-based organization).

Title goes here

• Household Surveys (MICS – Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey/UNICEF)

• TransMonee. Data Information system for social inclusion of children and women.

• MERG : An inter-agency reference group on M&E in child protection

• Systems indicators (UNICEF/UNODC Juvenile Justice System Indicators) / Manual for the Measurement of Indicators for Children in Formal Care (Better Care Network, UNICEF)

3

It takes several streams to make a river

UNICEF support for data collection: MICS

Household surveys designed to collect data on children and women and to provide evidence

More than 100 indicators (nutrition, child health, mortality, child protection, education, HIV, etc.) . Key data source for monitoring the MDGs, the World Fit for Children goals, and other major international commitments

Largest source of internationally comparable data on child protection indicators (both in terms of numbers of countries collecting data and in terms of ranges of CP issues covered)

Data available by background characteristics (sex, ethnicity, wealth, education, etc.) and at the sub-national level.

Lowest level / less filtered / Allow disaggregation / but periodic

Note: Countries with at least one MICS survey.

Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys 200 surveys in 100 countries since 1995

15 years, 100 countries and 200 surveys

Child Protection in MICSStandard modules:

• Child Marriage • Birth Registration • Child Labour • FGM/C • Child Disability • Child Discipline • Attitudes towards Domestic Violence

- Children included in the surveys: all children living in a household, including orphans and children from minorities

- Groups of children that are not captured: children living in institutions, children living in the street, children in non-permanent residences

TRANSMONEE: Information system for social inclusion of children and women Brings together in a single information system

national statistical information relevant to the welfare of children, young people and women• Population, birth rates• Child and maternal mortality• Life expectancy and adult mortality• Family formation• Health, Education• Child protection issues widely covered (parental and residential care, foster homes, children with disabilities, violence against children, juvenile crimes and sentencing, etc.)

  Gender sensitive data wherever possible

7

Geographical coverage

Provides trends against common and comparable benchmarks across the following 28 countries since 1989

8

EU Member States:Bulgaria Czech Rep.EstoniaHungaryLatviaLithuania PolandRomania Slovakia Slovenia

Candidate countries: CroatiaThe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Potential candidate countries: AlbaniaBosnia and HerzegovinaMontenegroSerbia

Other European Countries and Eastern neighbours: Armenia Azerbaijan BelarusGeorgia Rep. of Moldova Russian Fed.Ukraine

Central Asia: KazakhstanKyrgyzstanTajikistanTurkmenistanUzbekistan

Obstacles to evidence-based policies

Lack of data

Variations in definitions of indicators and terminology used by different countries

Was designed before CP indicators were clearly defined.

9

Monitoring and Evaluation Reference Group on Child Protection

Established in July 2009. Chaired by UNICEF and Save the Children (2010-2011) http://www.cpmerg.com/

• Develop new policies, standards, indicators, methods and tools in the area of M&E for child protection

• Support population based data collection on the incidence of CP issues nationally, regionally and globally

• Identify an evaluation and research agenda; + lessons learned, good practices and facilitate knowledge management in CP sector

• Forge partnerships and share M&E information and learning with existing inter-organizational M&E working groups and networks

CP MERG priorities for the first biennium

– Inventory and assessment of existing tools and methods to measure violence against children

– Review of existing population based data sets across the sector and identification of gaps

– Collation and assessment of methods to monitor the incidence of children out of home care

– Identification of promising M&E tools

UNICEF

MICS data with regional variations

Proportion of children aged 2-14 years that experience severephysical punishment, by worst-off and best-off regions

0

10

20

30

Montenegro Serbia Macedonia Tajikistan Georgia

Best-off region Worst-off region%

Note: For Kyrgyzstan age group is 3-14 years

UNICEF

Proportion of children aged 2-14 years that experience minor tomoderate physical punishment, by age groups

0

20

40

60

80

BiH

Uk

rain

e

Alb

an

ia

Mo

nte

ne

gro

Ge

org

ia

Ma

ce

do

nia

Se

rbia

Be

laru

s

Ka

zak

hs

tan

Ky

rgy

zsta

n

Ta

jikis

tan

Eastern Europe Central Asia

2-4 years 5-9 years 10-14 years

%

MICS age disaggregation

Note: For Kyrgyzstan age group is 3-14 years

UNICEF Regional office CEE/CIS

16

Juveniles sentenced to detention (placed in correctional/punitive institutions/prisons,

end of year, per 100 000 population 14-17 years) 2000-05

Source: TransMonee

0

50

100

150

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Juve

nile

imp

riso

nm

en

t ra

te

Bulgaria

Ukraine

FYR Macedonia

Croatia

Georgia

Romania

Moldova

EnglandArmeniaGermany