Analysis in residential institutions in the kyrgyzstan may2012
Ministry of Social DevelopmentMinistry of Education and Science Moya Semya Public Foundation With the support of UNICEF
To conduct comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis of residential institutions in the Kyrgyz Republic and those in their care
Clarification of the number of state and non-state children’s institutions in the country and determination of their type of ownership. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of the make-up of the residents of children’s residential institutions, disaggregated by type of ownership and type of social service provided Assessment of the condition and quality of care in children’s residential institutions in the following areas: social provision; hygiene and sanitation; and facilities and equipment. Creation of lists of institutions that are ready for short-term, medium-term or long-term transformation, and development of concrete recommendations for each institution. Analysis of the set of documents held on each child, and the procedure for placing children in the institution. Analysis of the services provided in children’s residential institutions. Track the patterns of movement of residents of residential institutions by region and by type of institution. Revealing the barriers to the de-institutionalisation process.
Residential children’s institutions and the services they provide Regular and other staff of children’s residential institutions Children in the care of children’s residential institutions
Desk review: open source materials, and reports by state bodies, international organisations and NGOs. Participant observation Survey of children in institutional care Surveys of staff members of social institutions providing residential care
Questionnaires for staff of residentialinstitutions Ministry of Education, Ministry of Social Development and Ministry of Health: 100 people. District and local budgets – 95 people. Private children’s residential institutions – 62 people.Total: 257 people.
The research was conducted in 86 residential institutions: -71 children’s orphanages -15 orphanages for children with disabilitiesAn additional 25 state institutions funded from local budget and 6 private institutions were not included in the research.
Type of ownership and source offinancing Institutions Number of children Number % Number % National budgetMinistry of Education and Science 24 20.5% 3731 34.2%Ministry of Health 3 2.6% 200 1.8%Ministry of Social Development 3 2.6% 539 5%Ministry of Internal Affairs 2 1.7% 24 0.2% Local government budgetsBoarding schools 32 27.4% 4400 40.3%Temporary shelters 20 17% 536 5% PrivateChildren’s homes, shelters, boardinghouses, religious boarding housesand so on 33 28.2% 1478 13.5%Total: 117 100.0% 10908 100.0%
Oblast Bishkek Chuy Naryn Talas Issyk Batken Osh Jalal- Total Kul abadNumber of 14 27 2 1 10 3 6 8 71institutionsNumber of 1132 1799 159 337 351 475 863 562 5678children ininstitutionalcare
3000 25342500200015001000500 262 0 Without instructions from district Without birth certificate administration / Mayors Office
Yavna Reception Bala Umutu Centre to (Alternative) Family Support Families and Children’s Charitable Children, the Single and the Foundation, Chuy Oblast; Elderly, Kara Suu; Kara Balta Children’s Bazarkorgon Sanatorium- Home, former Yraiym, Chuy Type Children’s Oblast (private institution); Rehabilitation Umut Children’s Fostering- Centre, Jalalabad Province Adaptation Centre, Chuy (healthcare system, funded Oblast; through the local budget); Jalalabad Children’s Meerim-mentor Family- Psychoneurological type Children’s Home, Chuy Boarding School OblastInfrastructure in best Infrastructure in worstcondition condition
Case management services (ensuring a family environment, restoring documents, work with parents and so on) are provided in 17 state institutions and 10 private ones.
Institutions Children Number % Number %For children with learningdifficulties 8 53% 957 39%For children with delayedpsychological development 1 7% 160 6%For children with speechdefects 1 7% 275 11%For children with visualimpairments 2 13% 310 13%For children with hearingimpairments 3 20% 775 31%Total 15 100% 2477 100%
All 15 studied specialised children’s residential institutions support development of the working and creative skills and abilities of their children; The institutions organise clubs for handicrafts, sewing, music, dancing, drawin g, footwear making and sports; In 12 institutions, children study computer literacy
Osh Specialised Orto Suu Boarding Boarding School for School Blind and Visually Impaired ChildrenBest institution for Worst institution forinfrastructure infrastructure
The main reasons for children being admitted to residential care are difficult financial conditions and the death of a parent; Almost all institutions are geared towards upkeep rather than rehabilitation or social adaptation; At the local level institutions have a trend to accumulate up to 400 children. The research showed that in local-level institutions children are admitted usually based on applications, without the participation of FCSDs and CCAs, and by referral from various structures; 3,286 children who go home at weekends and in the holidays could potentially be reintegrated into their family environments; Case management services are only provided in 29 institutions, and even here they are narrow and do not fully meet the children’s needs for a family environment; Growth has been noted in the number of private residential institutions: they admit children under their own criteria, often groundlessly and artificially depriving children of their family environments; they have no links with the state, and there is no supervision of the children’s fate from the state; and they do not have standardised norms and standards (on nutrition, welfare; education, health and development).
Introduce a moratorium on the opening of both new residential state institutions with large capacity, and private orphanage-type children’s institutions; For the existing private institutions, create a monitoring and supervision system for the activities in the best interests of the child Create new and/or restructure existing state services so that they are better oriented towards providing a family environment for children without parental supervision. For example, introduce a system of foster families, and create daycare departments at institutions, family and child support centres, as well as other forms of alternative adaptation services for children Recommend that FCSDs and territorial social protection departments ensure access to services to families and children living in difficult circumstances in their own areas, with the aim of ensuring the child remains in familiar surroundings, preventing further psychological trauma and preserving child-parent relationships; Expand child protection services in every district for the psychosocial rehabilitation of children in residential care, including additional educational services to meet their interests; Introduce multiple sustainable models to prevent children being deprived of parental care; Develop the professional skills essential for care and rehabilitation of children in institutional care; Resolve the issue of taking educational services out of the institutions, in the best interests of the integration and adaptation of children in institutional care into society Resolve the issue of receiving a quality education at the child’s place of residence, as one of the reasons for children ending up in institutions is lack of access to education.
Thank you foryour attention Moya Semya Public Foundation 2012