United Model of Child Protection

12th IVAT International Training SummitHonolulu, HI

2015

Why United Model?CAC/ Barnahus/ other variations of Criminal

Justice+MDT

Gundersen NCPTC, other Criminal Justice Training Programs

CHI

Treatment - various

ICMEC/NCMEC

NFJCA

Why United Model?

• Comprehensive and logical chain of all-three-level prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect

Why United Model?

• United Child Protection Model could serve various target groups – Child Sexual Abuse and CSE, Neglect, Physical Abuse, Emotional/Psychological Abuse in different manifestations, as well as it satisfies special needs of target groups – disability, learning difficulties, missing, refugee/migrants, HIV/AIDS, etc.

Why United Model?

• It is highly cost efficient solution for the most countries of the world in the times of Global Economy Crisis, and it especially fits for low and middle-income countries

United Model Idea in-Brief

• To unite fragmentary elements of Child Protection system into one comprehensive technological chain – all under one roof including management, fundraising/development/PR functions delegated at managerial level in frames of the same agency of national or lower level – depends on the centralization/decentralization processes in the target country

Original Models Learnt

• Child-friendly Criminal Justice combined with Assessment of a Child (Children’s Advocacy Center/NCAC, USA; Barnahus, Iceland, Sweden)

• Child Helpline (CHI – various member-lines)• Clinical Model – combination of Assessment of a Child

and Treatment (Oklahoma University Children’s Hospital, USA; Barnahus, BUP Elefanten, both - Sweden)

• Prosecution of Child Abuse (NCPCA of US NDAA, USA)• Comprehensive approach towards the problem of

Missing and Exploited Children (ICMEC/GMCN, USA)• Training in various aspects of Child Protection

(Gundersen NCPTC, USA; NCAC, USA; IAI, USA)

Variations of Models Learnt

• Smile of the Child (Greece): Child Helpline, South-Eastern European CMEC, Children’s Homes, Emergency Child Protection Service, EU Anti-bullying Coalition, Safer Internet Programme

• Nobody’s Children Foundation (Poland): Child Helpline, pro-CAC, Safer Internet Programme, Prevention – Good Parent-Good Start Programme

United Child Protection Model in Belarus, built in 2009-14

• National toll-free 7/24 Child Helpline 8-801-100-1611, with perspective to be integrated into the national emergency/rescue service 112

• Pro-CAC/Barnahus - child-friendly facilities to conduct Forensic Interview and Rehabilitation of children - 17 across the country, MDT – 17 across the country

• Child Protection Unit in Children’s Hospital – child-friendly facilities to conduct Clinical and Forensic Interview, Exam, and Rehabilitation/Treatment – 2 in the process of launch and development

• National Center for Missing and Exploited Children – 1• Child Protection Unit to support Family Justice – 1 under

development• Programme Coordination, Development, Training, and M&E Unit

including Prevention/PA group and the organizing group of the International Conference “Safe Belarus/Safe Commonwealth for Children” (started on annual base in 2010)

Legislative Base of the ModelUN ECOSOC Resolution (2005)Belarus Presidential Decree Law #18 (2006)Decision of the Belarus Govt. Instruction #47

(2006)CoE Lanzarote Convention (2007)CoE CM Rec(2009)10Decision of the Commission on Juvenile Affairs

#33-13 (2011) to launch National 7/24 toll-free Child Helpline

The Strategy of Prevention of Child Abuse and Support to Abused Children in Belarus following to CoE CM Rec(2009)10 - (2009, in redaction of 2012)

Legislative Base of the Model

Decision of Belarus Govt. #216 (2012) adjusting National Plan of Action towards Child Protection for 2012-16

Plans of Cooperation of Ponimanie and Investigation Committee, Ministry of Healthcare, Ministry of Interior, and State Forensic Expertize Committee to implement National Plan of Action towards CP

Decision of Belarus Govt. #651 (2013) on Commission on Juvenile Affairs under the Council of Ministers (Government)

Methodical Recommendations of Investigation Committee on investigation of crimes against sexual integrity of children (2013)

Law on changes in Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes (actual since Jan. 1, 2015)

United Child Protection Model

Reporting/

Child Helpline

Belarus

Child-friendlyInvestigation and Trial/CAC/Barnahus

Child-friendly

Treatment/ CAC/

Barnahus A-Type

Family/Parents

Rehabilitation/

CAC/Barnahus

Additional Services: Nat.

Center for Missing &

Exploited Children

Nat. Family Justice Center

M&E, Standards,

Recommendations

General Overview of the United Child Protection Model Functioning

Reporting

Policy Making

M&EInvestigation

Forensic Interview), Prosecution and

Trial

Clinical Child Protection Unit and

Treatment

Parents/Family

Rehabilitation

Specialized Services – NCMEC,

FJSC

Direct Service Delivery

Methodology/ SOP/ Recommendations

Training/ Education

Prevention

Geography of elements of United Child Protection System in

Belarus, July 1, 2014

Including: • Pro-CAC/Barnahus (17)• Multidisciplinary Teams (17)• Toll-free 7/24 National Child

Helpline • National Center for Missing

and Exploited Children• Child Protection Units in 2

Children’s Hospitals• Universities (11), CAST

Universities (3)• Volunteers’ Groups (17)• 3 local NGO• International NGO Ponimanie

SOP, Recommendations• Every element of the System needs Standard

Operational Procedure and recommendations to implement better evidence-based practices

• Ponimanie develops SOP for House of Understanding (CAC/Barnahus), National Child Helpline, Clinical/Treatment service, Child Protection Emergency Unit, and NCMEC

• Ponimanie also adapts and develops evidence-based practices and issues recommendations to use evidence-based practices for frontline professionals employed at partner organizations where our services are located

Monitoring & Evaluation

• ICAST based M&E of dissemination of child abuse nationwide (RST, N=4000, 2000)

• SDQ based M&E of intervention on-ground (RST, N=100, 150)

• CSS based M&E of Child Helpline (N=3500)• ICDP based M&E of Prevention nationwide (RST,

N=2000)• NCAC/Ponimanie method of M&E of cost efficiency

(benefit-costs study) in target regions (RST, N=200)• RBMME based Complex M&E of the effectiveness of

program activity/ strategy implementation held by external experts in 2011 and 2015

Cost Efficiency Study 2

• Method: Cost-Benefit Analysis is adapted and upgraded from the evidence-based example of US National CAC Cost-Benefit Study of 2005

• Type of Study: Desktop Study, 2013• Description: Costs of randomly selected 100 cases

passed through CP System in 2008 were compared to costs of another 100 cases passed through United CP Model in 2011-13. Benefits for children and families of the same cases were compared. Non-direct costs of fragmentary elements of CP system were compared with non-direct costs of United Child Protection Model.

Cost Efficiency Study 2Findings:

1) Modern CP system ($490 per case) provides the society with 2,7 times higher cost efficiency in comparison with the traditional system ($1324 per case),

2) It brings higher benefits/safety for children and families up to by 3 times ($1200 to $400) because of less costs of therapy as consequence of less secondary trauma

3) Non-direct costs of United Child Protection Model (USD 52 per each direct beneficiary) including costs of management, fundraising, PR, HR, Management of Volunteers, Logistics, are 2,5 times lower than total non-direct costs of the fragmentary elements of United CP Model such as Child Helpline, network of CAC, Clinical CPU, and NCMEC-BY (USD 131 per direct beneficiary).

Lifetime Loss Analysis

Lifetime Loss in abused children in Belarus, USD

Totally Prevented LTL in 389 cases in 2013 is about USD 30M, and in 351 cases in 2014 it is over 26M, only prevented PIT Loss is over USD 4M a year.

Total Lifetime Loss (LTL)

Personal Income Tax (PIT=13%) Loss

Lethal Case 150,000 31,000

Non-lethal Case 60,000 8,000

Immediate Social Impact Analysis of Catalytic Capital Investment into

United Child Protection Model

• Method: Immediate Analysis of Social Impact of Investment following to debates on the article by Paul Brest and Kelly Born in Stanford Social Innovation Review (SSIR), September 2013. Type of Study: Desktop Analysis, data of 2012.

• Description: Analysis of Social Impact of Initial Investment of Catalytic Capital was made  taking into account factors of GDP and State Budget for Child Protection in low and middle-income countries.

Immediate Social Impact Analysis of Catalytic Capital Investment into United Child Protection Model

• Findings: Traditionally State Budget Assignment allows poor countries to maintain critical and emergency services, without any development and innovation. Final establishment of United Child Protection Model demands new Catalytic Capital investment of USD 17M.

• Social Impact of Child Protection is expected on the level of 0,025% of GDP per year as 50% of harm reduction/ prevention of lifetime loss (USD 15M in absolute figures for Belarus as an average country in the world) leading Global Social Impact of USD 2,5 Billion a year when every developing country will establish only National Centers of the United Child Protection Model.

Conclusion

1. Systematic, comprehensive and integrative approach in protection of children from violence including Policy-making, Education, and Direct Service Delivery was chosen for Belarus to make a sustainable and replicable pilot for low and middle-income countries of the Globe, primarily in the Region of EE-CIS

Conclusion

2. United Child Protection Model established within 2009-14 demonstrates great change in effectiveness/ cost efficiency of response/prevention of CAN, and high level social impact on lives of thousands of people via humanization of public attitude and professional community to the needs of victimized children

Conclusion

3. The heart of the Model - United Child Protection Training and Direct Service Delivery Center for the Region EE-CIS - must be established in Belarus to maintain and further develop an excellent example and the most appropriate way to increase Social Impact on children in low and middle-income countries with limited societal/Governmental resources

National/Regional United Child Protection Center for Belarus and the Region EE-CIS

– Construction Project

• Draft Construction Project is ready

• The land is provided free-of-charge by Minsk City-Hall, Belarus

• We are looking for Major Donation/Grant/Catalytic Capital/Social Impact Investment to launch this project

ADVERTIZING!!! • The next 6th “Safe Belarus and EE-CA Region

– for Children” International Conference is scheduled for April, 2016 in Minsk, Belarus and cordially welcomes participants from Region of Eastern Europe/CIS and experts from worldwide willing to contribute with their knowledge and experience in elements of the United CP Model

• Please go to our website conf.ponimanie.org to be updated. Registration will be opened in June 1, 2015.

Thank you!Andrey M. Makhanko, MA, ICEPRC,

Chairman of the Board, Executive Director,INGO “Ponimanie” – ISPCAN, GMCN, CHI, CR Connect National Partner/Member,

ISPCAN Multidisciplinary Team Awardee Leschinskogo Street 8, Building 5, Office 403-404, 220140 Minsk, Belarus,

andrey.makhanko@ponimanie.org www.ponimanie.org