financing deinstitutionalisation By Julia Down Hope and Homes for Children BiH

HOPE AND HOMES FOR CHILDREN BIH  Background › HHC in BiH since 1994 › Initially worked to improve conditions in institutions - but limited success › Moved focus to developing family-based services - but this did not automatically reduce number of children in institutions › Now concentrating on directly transforming institutions

Sarajevo SITUATION IN BIH  Population 3.8 mill  Divided into FBiH and RS  3000 children without parental care  Around 1100 children in 17 institutions

NATIONAL STRATEGY  POLICY ON PROTECTION OF CHILDREN WITHOUT PARENTAL CARE AND FAMILIES AT RISK IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA  D eveloped by government with active support of UNICEF, SCUK, HHC and others  Officially adopted in FBiH in January 2008

NATIONAL STRATEGY  Outlines detailed and practical plan for reforming legislation, building capacity of CSWs, developing family-based alternatives to institutional care and transformation of institutions › Every institution to be transformed within 10 years › Model of transformation outlined in detail in the strategy - conforms to the model developed by HHC › Strategy calls for pilot project to test the model in the BiH context

ZENICA PROJECT  BACKGROUND › HHC as lead organisation in implementing pilot project › Negotiations with local authorities led to agreement to transform institution in city of Zenica › DC Most institution with capacity for 60 children aged 0-18+

TRANSFORMATION OF DC MOST  Main partner Zenica city municipality as founder of institution › HHC assessed every child and their families › Recommended a family-based placement for each child based on individual needs › Analysed average number of new children entering the institution every year in order to predict demand for new services

SERVICES TO REPLACE THE INSTITUTION  Prevention  Reintegration  Fostering  Local adoption  Young adult support  Small family home

 HHC providing capital investment, some transitional costs, training, management and monitoring of project  Staff of institution have priority in applying for jobs in new services  18-month project to transform the institution Jan 2007 – June 2008

TRANSFORMATION OF DC MOST Total Number of Children 67 Reintegration with biological families 19 Adoption within BiH 12 Placement in foster families 11 Independent living for young people aged 18 and over 13 Placement in Small Family Home 12

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ZENICA  BiH has very decentralised political system  Institutions for children are managed and financed at local level  This works differently in different locations 4 Federation of BiH Republika Srpska

DC Most – financed on “per head” basis › Children placed by CSW in municipality from where they come › CSW pays institution monthly rate per child › The institution has no other formal source of income KAKANJ VAREŠ ZAVIDOVIĆI ŽEPČE MAGLAJ DOBOJ-JUG USORA TEŠANJ VISOKO BREZA OLOVO

RUNNING COSTS OF DC MOST CAPACITY (aged 0-18) 60 TOTAL BENEFICIARIES PER YEAR 75 FUNDING SYSTEM Monthly Centres for Social Work€ per  Zenica-Doboj Canton265 Outside Zenica-Doboj Canton 292

HOW MUCH DOES DC MOST COST THE STATE? CSW% # of Children Monthly Per Child TOTAL Monthly TOTAL Annual Zenica - Doboj Canton 75%45265 € € € Outside Zenica - Doboj Canton 25%15292 €4 380 € € € €

 The new system comprises the following services 1.Prevention 2.Reintegration 3.Young Adult Support 4.Fostering 5.Small Family Home RUNNING COSTS OF NEW SYSTEM ALL NEW SERVICES ARE SUPPORTED BY MOBILE TEAM 2 Social workers 1 Psychologist

MOBILE TEAM SERVICES CAPACITY (per year) # OF BENEF. (per year) COSTS (travel & direct help) 1.PREVENTION25 families € 2.REINTEGRATION 10 children + their families € 3. YOUNG ADULT SUPPORT € 4.FOSTERING25 allowances € training, campaigns € 5. SMALL FAMILY HOME € MOBILE TEAM SALARIES (taxes, allowances, office costs) (ANNUALLY) € TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS €

SUMMARY COMPARISION OF TWO SYSTEMS TOTAL # OF BENEFICIARIES EACH YEAR TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS COSTS per beneficiary DC MOST €2 609 € NEW SYSTEM €866 €  The new system of services provides better outcomes for children  The new system of services is cheaper and more cost effectice.  The new system serves more than twice as many beneficiaries annually.

ADDITIONAL COSTS  Capital investment provided by HHC › Purchase, renovation, furnishing and equipping of small family home – euros › Purchase of vehicle for mobile team – 5000 euros  Transitional costs provided by Zenica municipality › Covering income lost to DC Most due to decrease in number of children – euros

CHALLENGE  New system cheaper overall and cost effective BUT › Cost bearers changed without formal budget reallocation › Running costs used to be spread between as many as 20 municipal CSWs at any one time – Zenica municipality incurred no direct costs

CHALLENGE  Running costs of new system are covered by: 1. Municipal CSWs › Allowances for foster carers › Cost of food and clothing for children placed in small family home 2. Zenica municipality › Staff salaries and amenities for small family home 3. Zenica municipality/Zenica-Doboj Canton › Salaries and other costs of mobile team › Direct material support to beneficiaries

GORAZDE PROJECT  Gorazde canton has no institutions but places children in institutions elsewhere in BiH  HHC together with local authorities planning to develop family-based services within the canton for current and future children without parental care and children at risk of separation  Services will include prevention, reintegration, fostering, young adult support, small emergency reception centre  Services will be supported by a mobile team of 2 professionals

GORAZDE PROJECT FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Running costs of current system Institution # of Children Monthly Per Child TOTAL Annual Selo Mira12250 KM KM Dom Bjelave1326 KM3 912 KM SOS Village Sarajevo 7476 KM KM SOS Village Gracanica 9476 KM KM Dom Porodica4550 KM KM TOTAL KM €

GORAZDE PROJECT FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Running costs of new services Service # of Beneficiaries-annually TOTAL Annual Prevention KM Reintegration KM Fostering KM Young Adult Support KM Emergency Reception Centre KM TOTAL KM €

GORAZDE PROJECT FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Comparison of running costs of current system and running costs of proposed new system COST PER BENEFICIARY TOTAL Annual CURRENT SYSTEM € € NEW SYSTEM 711 € € HHC INVESTMENT IN SETTING UP SERVICES KM = € …

CONCLUSION  Two very different DI projects within BiH context – demonstrates that there is no blueprint that can be applied in every situation but each location requires its own unique DI process  DI projects in Zenica and Gorazde demonstrate that DI not only provides greatly improved outcomes for children but also that it is financially viable in the BiH context