Financing the Child Protection System in Kenya
USER MANUAL
FOR
CHILD PROTECTION COSTING TOOL
July 2018
This project was commissioned by UNICEF Office in Kenya and was implemented by
Maestral International.
2
The design of the costing model footprint was initiated in December 2017 and in June 2018
it was validated, tested and completed. Following the finalisation of the model this user
manual was developed to accompany the child protection costing tool to ensure that the
costing model is more user friendly and ease to navigate.
The user manual for child protection costing model was prepared by Shar Kurtishi under the
supervision of Isabel de Bruin Cardoso and Philip Goldman.
This manual also benefited from work and expertise of UNICEF Kenya key staff members
Catherine Kimotho and Godfrey Ndeng’e.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4
The Purpose of this Manual ................................................................................................................................................. 5
Background: A Systems Approach to Child Protection ........................................................................................................ 5
What is the Costing Tool? .................................................................................................................................................... 6
How it Works ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6
How the Costing Tool was Developed ................................................................................................................................. 7
How to Use the Costing Tool ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 9
Tab: Table of Content ........................................................................................................................................................... 11
Tab: Assumptions .................................................................................................................................................................. 12
Tab: Payroll Grades & Scales ................................................................................................................................................ 13
Tab: Existing Finances .......................................................................................................................................................... 14
Tab: Staff Allocations ............................................................................................................................................................ 15
Tabs: Basic Scenario, Enhanced Scenario, Ideal Scenario ................................................................................................... 17
Tab: SCENARIO’S (BASIC, ENHANCED and IDEAL ScENARIO) ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Tabs: Summary and Ideal Scenario Chart ............................................................................................................................ 19
Tab: H&V Equal Distribution .............................................................................................................................................. 20
Tab: Full Establishment ........................................................................................................................................................ 21
Tab: Mandate Definition .......................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4
ACRONYMS
CP - Child Protection
CPS - Child Protection System
DCS - Department of Children Services
FY - Fiscal Year
PBB - Program Based Budgeting
MTEF - Medium Term Expenditure Framework
UNICEF - The United Nations Children's Fund
MI - Maestral International
TWG - Technical Working Group
5
THE PURPOSE OF THIS MANUAL
The Department of Children Services (DCS) and UNICEF Kenya commissioned Maestral International in 2017/2018
to develop a costing tool to review and analyse the budgeting process and existing budget allocations of the child
protection system in Kenya. The tool uses existing national and county level data to generate budgetary costs, actual
budget execution, financing gaps, and projected costs for the next five years (2018-2022). The tool also uses the financial
data to provide three cost scenarios based on enacting different levels and types of child protection measures.
This costing tool will help planners at the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, most specifically those in the
Department of Children Services, to come up with an evidence-based per child capitation budget for coverage of service
delivery at the County and Subcounty children’s offices. In addition to designing the costing tool a capacity building
workshop was conducted with a group of relevant government staff in DCS, Treasury, Ministry of Planning were trained
on the costing model and provided with skills to effectively use the tool and apply the generated information to advocate
for increased resources for the child protection system. This manual has been developed for use during the said
workshop and also to help guide future trainings on the use of the costing tool.
BACKGROUND: A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO CHILD PROTECTION
This costing tool applies a systems lens. Using a systems lens facilitates a move away from looking at child protection
as focused on individual and discrete issues and instead facilitates ‘connecting the dots’ between the various risks, types
and degrees of vulnerability and potential exposures to harm that can impact a child. A child protection system should
aim
to promote the right to child protection, through raising of knowledge and awareness and increasing access to
protection measures, to contribute to the prevention of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation, through early
identification and intervention when problems arise and by building the resilience (including economic) of
children, families and communities; and to respond when violations or issues occur, through the provision of
appropriate services and through community mechanisms such as mediation.1
With the development of a systems approach in child protection, there has become a general consensus of the elements,
components, or parts that are necessary to comprise a child protection system. These elements include all sectors and
institutions that work with and for children such as Justice, Health, Education, Nutrition and Planning as well as NGO’s,
CSO’s and FBO’s contributing to the same topic. Recognizing and strengthening the links between these
elements/institutions can result in interventions being more effective, can allow for leveraging of scarce resources, and
can result in promotion, prevention and response interventions being more sustainable in the long-run.2 In essence, a
systems approach to child protection guides understanding as to how the different elements are connected to more
effectively and efficiently provide care and support to children; it is reflective of, and responsive to, the underlying
causes of child protection risks and vulnerabilities. Child protection systems are therefore not static or wholly replicable,
1 Strengthening Child Protection Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Call to Africa. Joint Inter-Agency Statement. April 2013. Op cit. pp. 2-3.
2 Training Resources Group and Play Therapy Africa for the Inter-Agency Group on Child Protection Systems in Sub-Saharan
Africa (2012). Strengthening child protection systems in Sub-Saharan African: A working paper
6
as they aim to prevent and respond to violence in a manner that reflects availability of resources, structures, mechanisms,
and processes, and upholds positive local culture and values system.
WHAT IS THE COSTING TOOL?
This Costing Tool of the child protection system in Kenya is the first such model developed in Africa and it is intended
to highlight the level to which child protection services and interventions are resourced in Kenya and the extent to
which those resources are adequate for providing the needed capacity for child protection. The flexibility and
accessibility of the tool means that it can be used to create scenarios of different levels of preffered child protection
services and provide a uniform costing (at a per child rate) to aid cross scenario comparisons, and budgetary decision
making.
The costing tool is an excel sheet that can be used to generate the amount of resource needed to establish and/or
strengthen the various elements of child protection in order to ensure children are prevented from and are provided
timely response services when abuse, violence, neglect and exploitation happens.
This costing tool is flexible and accessible tool that allows to create scenerios of different levels of preferred child
protection services and provide a uniform cost per child to aid cross scenario comparison and budgetary decisions.
Further the scenario development will help Kenyan decision makers in deploying resources for generating an effective
child protection system in Kenya at national and county levels. In addition, the child protection system (CPS) costing
tool will also support the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection in being fair in terms of resource allocation (both
Human, Structural and Financial) and will help ensure a greater reach in terms of service provision through its support
of evidenced-based decision making.
The CPS costing tool will help:
• Address children issues for all children of Kenya by enhancing prevention mechanisms
• To generate scenarios that will formulate adequate amount of resources for the child protection system that will enhance coordination and cooperation.
• Strengthen and apply a common understanding between local stakeholders.
• Strengthen fiscal management and improve resourcing.
• Address the needs of the social service workforce and aid in appropriate allocations.
• Strengthen the information base for informed decision-making.
HOW IT WORKS
Using an interactive Excel spreadsheet, the Costing Tool allows technical professionals (such as program officer,
planners, accountants and finance officers) as well as policy makers at political level to estimate the costs of
implementing different human and financial resource allocation options given certain preferences, while meeting budget
and financial envelop ceilings and constraints. Microsoft Excel is a precondition for the tool to work in a computer and
it is suggested that the tool is accompanied with this Manual.
The tool employs several data sources such as Kenya Bureau of Statistics both national and county level demographic
statistics, treasury expenditure data, budget allocations as well as the actual budget execution, payroll data to identify
positions and job-titles and pay grades, and costing of goods and services required to do service provision to generate
a per child capitation budget. Using the tool can aid in identifying financing gaps and can project costs for the next five
7
years under three cost scenarios. These costing scenarios are based around meeting three different levels (basic,
enhanced, and ideal) of integrated child protection services.
After the user inputs applicable local data, the tool tallies current and projected scenarios into a per child cost and can
be used to guide overall budgetary allocations. But for such allocations for child protection services, programmes and
interventions to work it is assumed that: resource allocation is fairly distributed within the counties and sub-counties;
that citizens are able to receive services; and that service providers are able to reach their clients. Using the tool will aid
in creating transparency in the overall allocation process for child protection services in Kenya. Costing Model also
allows transparency and fairness in terms of allocation based on set of criteria that can be achieved using the costing
model, which is provided with a formula in funds allocation for counties and sub-counties based on child population
and geographical coverage. It is hoped that the future planning on CPS employs the use of the model so that it can
plan for resources needed to render CP services that are guided by the costing model and these criteria. Furthermore, it
is recommended that criteria’s used in the model should be revisited every 2 to 3 years given that the risk factors and
Child Protection System landscape changes as time goes by.
HOW THE COSTING TOOL WAS DEVELOPED
The tool tallies current costs and projected costs as a per child capitation. Per child capitation is a key criterion in
determining the sufficiency of resource allocation for child protection in international documentation. However, per
capita funding for the child protection system is not available in national and the majority of county level budgets. To
determine necessary future per capita funding for Kenya, five counties where identified to aggregate current per capita
costs related to the child protection system and determine what appropriate allocation of funds for the child protection
system should look like.
The methodology used to develop the costing model started in October 2017. The following outlines the major steps
in the production of the costing tool.
Literature review including sources from the Government of Kenya (including reports on national surveys, reports on
child protection), donors and non-governmental organizations (UNICEF, World Bank, DfID, Save the Children, CISP?
); national and county governments policy planning and strategy documents (the County Integrated and Annual
Development Plans, Medium Term Plans and Expenditure Framework reports, programme based budgets of the
national government, budget outlook papers, budget policy statement etc.); annual operational plans of relevant sectors,
agencies and private companies; relevant legislation (such as Public Financial Management Act 2012, Children’s Act
2001 , National pal of Action for Children in Kenya , Constitution of Kenya 2010, National Policy on Social Protection,
amongst others); and other relevant reports based on the literature search.
Establishment of a Technical Working Group (TWG) to support the development of the costing tool. Its mandate
was to make decisions on the path towards the costing tool development and to validate and accept the deliverables.
Partners in the technical working group were from the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection, Specifically
representatives from Finance, Planning and Children’s Departments, the Anti-FGM Board, the Streets Families
Rehabilitation Funds UNICEF and Maestral International. The DCS was the convener and the TWG was chaired by
the Finance Officer in the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection
Establishment of the data collection framework. October 24th, 2017 and November 21st, 2017, the broad scope
of the tool, and which services and interventions should be included in the costing tool were developed and agreed
upon by the TWG
8
Refinement and approval of the data collection framework. December 8th, 2017. Further decisions about the
design of the costing tool and the plan for relevant and appropriate data collection was agreed upon. recommendation
was provided to include at least 5 counties in the study and a Criteria for county selection was developed.
Identification of counties. While the costing tool is national in scope, a strategic number of counties were identified
to contribute to informing the costing tool. A set of criteria was developed that could identify a sample of counties that
reflect a diversity of contexts to ensure the costing model can be aggregated and applicable for generating national level
per capita costs for the child protection system. On applying the criteria, the following counties were identified: Nairobi,
Kakamega, Garissa, Turkana, and Kilifi counties. These represent a diversity of Kenyan regional factors on issues of:
marginalized and non-marginalized3 counties; urban and rural counties; large, medium and small counties in terms of
geographical size and population density; and whether they have government or private run one stop centres (child
protection center), or not.
Field Data Collection A research team visited all 5 counties in order to see the differences on resource allocation and
had in-depth interviews and discussions with the Children County coordinators and their teams from children offices
at County and Subcounty level. In addition, the team visited the County Government planners and treasury officials to
discuss the needs and affordability of the cost of Child Protection resulting from the model.
Costing tool trail and improvement Workshop, Naivasha, February 26-28th 2018. The workshop brought together
xxxx participants from national level and the 5 selected counties. The team Reviewed data from the county level
research, the aggregation for costing tool construction and the child protection elements captured in the model.
Consensus was reached on various issues including on the three different scenarios i.e. basic, advance and ideal
scenarios.
Validation of the costing model by TWG on , July 6th, 2018 in Nairobi Technical working group meeting was held to
validate the costing model at the DCS This was before the training of Trainers
Stakeholders validation and TOT Workshop between 16th and 18th July 2018 at Naivasha. A total of xxxx
participants from national and county level government and non-government personnel were trained on the use of the
costing model and how to use the products of the model to do advocacy at various levels. Participants included staff
from National Treasury, Ministry of Planning, Ministry of Labour and Social protection, county governments, NGOs
and UNICEF.
Presentation of Costing Tool to DCS policy level personnel on 19th July 2018 was done after the workshop to share
the outcome of the workshop and recommendations e.g. the development of a Cabinet Memo on increasing budget
allocation for child protection and ring-fencing the same.
3 The Commission on Revenue Allocation has established criteria for identifying marginalized counties and has identified 14
counties in Kenya as marginalized.
9
HOW TO USE THE COSTING TOOL
INTRODUCTION
The costing tool is Excel based. The costing tool elements are found as separate worksheet pages accessible
through both hotlinks on the table of contents page and through the worksheet tabs at the bottom of each
spreadsheet. The elements of the tool are listed below. In this chapter each table (tab) of the tool will be
discussed and examples shown to help guide a user in filling in and understanding the tool.
IMPORTANT: The sheets Assumptions, Existing Financing, Staff Allocations, All Counties and Full
Establishment are the sheets where the user needs to add inputs from their data sources. Cells where inputs
from the user is required are highlighted in in Gold, Ascent 4 Lighter 80% (see the colour below.)
Furthermore the tabs that are marked in below in the same colour require input from? user.
Tab Name Content
Main Front page
Table of Contents Links to navigate the model
Assumptions Country and county data and model assumptions
Payroll Grades & Scales Staffing, ratios and parameters
Existing Financing Existing child protection financing from Government of Kenya
Staff allocations New staff allocations across CP institutions
Basic Scenario Basic Scenario: Resource allocation for meeting the minimum needs to service CP systems
Enhance Scenario Enhanced Scenario: Resource allocation for meeting the minimum needs to service CP systems + additional resources to strengthen the formal and informal education for CP workforce
Ideal Scenario Ideal Scenario: Resource allocation for meeting the minimum needs to service CP systems + additional resources to strengthen the formal and informal education for CP workforce + Capital Investments
Summary Table Summary of total costs for CP under the three scenarios
10
Ideal Scenario Chart Chart to visualize funding needs for next 5 years under the ideal scenario
Horizontal and Vertical Equalization Distribution
Distribution of funds across the Counties
Full establishment Existing payroll job titles with pay, scales and grades
Mandate Definition Table to visualize the different staff and resource needs under the three scenarios
All Counties Vital Statistics of all counties. National and county population, geographical, child population and other statistics
11
TAB: TABLE OF CONTENT
This tab is the main menu for navigating among seven major pages of the costing tool. You can click in the
hyperlink as selected below in red or use the tab bar at the bottom of each worksheet to navigate the costing
model.
Tool can be navigated through the hyperlinks or the tabs at the bottom of the page
12
TAB: ASSUMPTIONS
This tab populates the model with main assumptions that Child Protection System costing model need to
operate to perform the calculations. Assumption tab is a mandatory sheet before even going further with the
tab to follow.
Under this tab the planner is expected to input the following data: Macroeconomic, Financial, National
Budget and Expenditures, Population data, County Budgets and expenditures, Formal Education data,
Staffing, Designations, Job Groups and Salary ranges, Kits, Recurrent and Capital investment costs for a
County or sub county children’s office.
NOTE: Some of the assumption data are already in use and are already added within the assumption sheet.
Please double check if data are correct and if not please update them. It is very important to review
assumptions critically as that is the basis for the formation of the scenarios.
When the tab is first opened
it might look like this.
Clicking one of the plus icons on left hand side of the
sheet will open a subsection of grouped rows.
Table after clicking plus icon.
Check all assumptions. Fill in
needed data.
13
CAUTION: Please make changes only in cells that are marked in yellow. You are not allowed to add rows
unless there is an administrator to connect those new rows to the formulas in other output sheets
TAB: PAYROLL GRADES & SCALES
This tab employs the Kenyan staff establishment job groups, job titles, and salaries relevant to child services
that are listed as below.
NOTE: General use of the costing tool does not require modification of this tab. Only if salaries for
paygrades are changed will this table need modification
CAUTION: If salaries need to be modified, the modification must be done on this page, not on any other
sheet. Modification on this table will update other pages of the costing tool
Table lists jobs and salaries and is
used to populate costing scenarios
with accurate costs
14
TAB: EXISTING FINANCES
These tabs present the existing financing of Department of Children Services for the current fiscal year that
creates the baseline for initial calculations. The baseline will be the basis for future benchmarking against
proposed scenarios.
Under this table the planner is expected to input the data from the annual budget from last year where you
would find planned budget and expenditures for a full year.
In more details you would need the vote of the Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services for both
recurrent and development costs at programme level with the following details:
• Printed estimates
• Approved estimates
• Cumulative Expenditures
• Outstanding Commitments
• Total Payment Commitments
NOTE: When overall investment is divided by child population that serves to identify the existing
investment per child (See bottom row). This variable is very important as this will serve as the baseline for
what is the current level of investment.
Mandatory inputs are only the
Approved estimates and Total
payments Commitments
15
TAB: STAFF ALLOCATIONS
This tab serves to create the baseline staffing using ratios for different types of staff at all institutions dealing
with children and their families.
On this table the planner is expected to input the ratios for staff for institutions at the county level. These
institutions are comprised of: Children’s Office at the County level, Children’s Office at Sub County level,
Remand homes, rescue centres and Rehabilitation schools. Mandatory inputs are only the ones already
added in the ‘Staff allocation’ sheet. However, if you think that there is a certain job designation of staff
missing you can add rows. For each job you wish to add refer to section STAFFING, DESIGNATIONS,
JOB GROUPS AND SALARY RANGE on the Assumptions tab (see row 80 and below) to identify the
missing Designation, Job Group, Monthly and Annual salary.
Enter staffing ratios
Add rows and staff types as necessary
16
An important factor to be mentioned is that staff allocation can be done using several ratios based on
certain criteria and those are:
• Against a county (example: 1 Children Coordinator Officer for a county)
• Against a sub-county (example: 1 or more Children officer for a sub-county)
• Against a child population (example: for counties with more than 1,000,000 million children you can allocate additional children officers to address the caseload)
• Against an office, (example: each children office should have two security guards)
• Against a county size in square kilometers (example: for every county that has above 20,000 sqm an additional driver is allocated)
Each of the above ratios can be used in one or more occasions. Example you may allocate at the county level a lawyer, however you can allocate additional lawyers to counties with more than 1 million children.
NOTE: Criteria should be reviewed if not every year at least every two years and as this will have impact on
the ultimate outcome which is Investment per child in Kenya.
CAUTION: The Staff allocation sheet is used to create a baseline. However, when moving to each of the
scenario tabs, the staff allocation will need to be done separately for each of the children institutions on the
scenario pages as well. This allows for the different scenarios to represent different staff levels with job
groups and salary ranges.
17
TABS: BASIC SCENARIO, ENHANCED SCENARIO, IDEAL SCENARIO
These tab serve to create scenarios that will be used to allow staffing using ratios for different types of staff
at all institutions dealing with children and their families.
These tabs calculate Child Protection System costing under three different models/scenerios. See Tab
Mandate Definition for the description of the elements that comprise the three different levels.
The three tabs are similar in their layout. For each scenario users must fill in the necessary components such
as staff types, staffing ratios, supply levels, etc.
On this tab the planner is expected to input the ratios for staff for institutions at the county level. These
institutions are comprised of: Children’s Office at the County level, Children’s Office at Sub County level,
Remand homes, rescue centres and Rehabilitation schools. Mandatory inputs are only the ones already
added in the ‘Staff allocation’ sheet.
v
However, if you think that there is a certain job designation of staff missing you can add rows. For each job
you wish to add refer to section STAFFING, DESIGNATIONS, JOB GROUPS AND SALARY RANGE
Plugging/Removing the
numbers/ quantity of staff
it will automatically have
impact on the lower part of
the table where costs are
summarized. (WHAT IF
formulae)
18
on the Assumptions tab (see row 80 and below) to identify the missing Designation, Job Group, Monthly
and Annual salary.
Cells in yellow are bounded with “WHAT IF” mechanism that allows the planner to remove, reduce or
increase the amout of staff per type, good, services or capital projects to make the calculation
NOTE: The only thing that planners are required to do annually when submitting their budget proposals is
to index the inflation rate and the currency fluctuation into allocation per child projections and that will have
an impact on the overall proposed investment/envelope for children in Kenya
Each Scenario spreadsheet
has a summary at the end
which gives an output in
terms of Average per child
Each Scenario spreadsheet has a
summary of the overall resource
produced as a result of above
implications.
TABS: SUMMARY AND IDEAL SCENARIO CHART
This tab summarizes the three scenarios and provides easy cross comparisons. The outcome on this table is
the ultimate outcome and will serve to identify not only the current level of investment in Child Protection
Systems in Kenya but also the estimated needs on different scenarios and the increased budget needs in
Kenyan Schillings.
A key outcome in this table is the calculation of the financing gap.4 The financing gap is calculated as
follows: Financing gap = Cost/amount of current budget allocation for child protection – scenario cost per
service.
The Ideal Scenario Chart provides a visual representation of the financing needs over the next 5 years to
meet the Ideal Scenario.
CAUTION: The planner is not expected to input any details here but rather at the scenario sheets and in the
assumptions sheet.
NOTE: Further charts can be developed using the outcome from Scenario sheets as well as Summary sheet.
Table shows funding difference
for each of the three scenarios.
20
TAB: HORISONTAL AND VERTICAL EQUALISATION DISTRIBUTION
This tab ensures that resources are distributed based on the criteria Child Population, Size of the county,
Density, Child institutions in the county as well as Marginalised criteria used by the Planning and Treasury
to equalize the resource allocation that is decided is distributed in full fairness and in transparent method of
available resources.
Under this table the planner is expected to input the data from the overall envelope. That will be the basis
for horizontal and vertical distribution. Horizontal distribution criteria are population, size of the county,
density and institutions (Rehab, Remand and Rescue centers).
Mandatory inputs are only the ones underscored as indicated in red. Please make sure that the percentages
inputted equal 100% otherwise there will be surplus in allocation. A double check has been done, please
double check the cell AB55 and if the tally is 100% it will indicate “OK”, otherwise it will appear “Please
check the percentages, are they correct, as its seems you are above 100%"
The final column at the right side named TOTAL is the overall envelope and vertical distribution is by county
absolute values in KES that will be the distribution as required resources for CPS to counties.
NOTE: User or administrator of the model should update on annual basis the numbers of children in
institutions as well as the number of institutions.
This is just the upper bar of the Horizontal and Vertical tab. This is the only section of this table that
needs data entry. Enter a value in % in each red labeled box. Percentages at the end added must total
100%, otherwise the planner shoud revise the percentages in each of the criteria.
21
CAUTION: Planners should check the allocation based on the percentages above and should not intervene
directly in values allocated within the process.
TAB: FULL ESTABLISHMENT
This tab is not directly related to any of the tabs, however it serves to feed the assumption part of the
designations, job-groups and salaries.
NOTE: This tab needs to be reviewed only when something changes in the Full establishment such as
descriptions of designations or the job titles, job group and salary increases from year to year and all the
changes should be indicated in the assumption sheet under the section of staffing.
22
Top Related