5. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 iii
Acknowledgements
This research would not have been possible without the hundreds of girls, boys, women and men throughout the country who gave
freely of their time to participate in this project. Our thanks go primarily to the communities and professionals who contributed their
valuable thoughts and experiences.
A large team of people devoted considerable time and effort to the production of this report. Sincere thanks to everyone for their
invaluable contributions and hard work.
National Research Team:
Tinai Iuta (National Researcher), Tib’a Tooki Koraubara (Administrative / Research Assistant).
Field Research Team:
Toube Maerere and Maata Y Pine (Field Supervisors); Tetiria Bebeia and Emaima Tauteba (Field Counsellors); Danny Ah-Chew Fay,
Bairee Beniamina, Uriam Erabute, Eritabeta Erikate, Kautuna Itaia, Tekurabo Karebou, Nnakina Katimero, Ereniti Mareko, Tiina Ritati, Namoriki
Tebatei, Etita Teiabauri, Kaburere Teikarawa, Taateata Tenio, Rakera Tiaon, Teuota K Tuteke and Sieneen Ueantabo (Field Researchers).
Regional Research Team:
Marie Wernham (Lead Researcher), Penelope Taylor (Legal Specialist) and Anafia Norton (Institutional Stocktaking Researcher).
National Steering Committee:
Representing government and non-governmental organizations.
UNICEF Kiribati Child Protection Team:
Joao Mendes (Child Protection Officer), Berenike Iuta (Child Protection Officer), Yun Jong Kang (Chief of Kiribati Field office)
with special thanks to Kakiateiti Erikate (Child Protection Officer, MISA).
UNICEF Pacific Regional Office:
Johanna Eriksson Takyo (Chief of Child Protection), Ravi Cannetta (Officer in Charge), Laisani Petersen (Child Protection Officer),
Salote Kaimacuata (Child Protection Specialist), Filomena Ratumaibuca (Child Protection Programme Assistant), Vika Namuaira
(Child Protection Programme Assistant and Baseline Research Administrative Assistant), Mere Nailatikau (Child Protection Intern),
Christine Calo-oy (Senior Supply Assistant), Joseph Hing (Senior Communication Assistant), Will Parks (Chief of Policy, Advocacy,
Planning and Evaluation), Tim Sutton (Deputy Representative) Snehal Morris (Child Protection Communications Officer).
Others:
Sameer Thapar (DevInfo Support Team), Patrick Shing (Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, UNICEF Vanuatu), Allon Leever (Data Analyst).
The National Researcher would also like to personally thank the following: the families of all field researchers for their support; the Island
Council Clerks and Island Council Officers and villagers on the islands visited for their great support and hospitality which made the research
easier and enjoyable.
6. iv PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments
Contents
Acronyms
Foreword
Statement by the UNICEF Pacific Representative
Executive summary
1. Background
1.1 Government / UNICEF partnership
1.2 UNICEF Protective Environment Framework
1.3 Country context
2. Methodology
2.1 Aims of Child Protection Baseline Research
2.2 Structure and roles
2.3 Stages and timeline
2.4 Research tools
2.4.1 Outcome 1: Children are increasingly protected by legislation and are better
served by justice systems that protect them as victims, offenders and
witnesses
2.4.2 Outcome 2: Children are better served by well-informed and coordinated
child protection social services which ensure greater protection against, and
responds to violence, abuse, exploitation and neglect
2.4.3 Outcome 3: Children in selected geographical areas grow up in home and
community environments that are increasingly free from violence, abuse,
exploitation and neglect
a. Overview
b. Locations
c. Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs)
d. Completed data log
2.5 Child participation
2.6 Ethics
2.7 Data analysis
2.7.1 Outcome 1: Children are increasingly protected by legislation and are better
vserved by justice systems that protect them as victims, offenders and
witnesses
2.7.2 Outcome 2: Children are better served by well-informed and coordinated
child protection social services which ensure greater protection against, and
responds to violence, abuse, exploitation and neglect
2.7.3 Outcome 3: Children in selected geographical areas grow up in home and
community environments that are increasingly free from violence, abuse,
exploitation and neglect
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
1
5
5
6
7
9
9
9
11
12
12
12
13
15
16
16
16
16
17
7. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 v
2.8 Lessons learned
2.8.1 Successes
2.8.2 Challenges
2.9 Recommendations regarding methodology for future research
3. Findings
3.1 Overview
3.2 Matrix of findings per output indicator
3.3 Respondent information
3.4 Detailed findings per output
3.4.1 Detailed findings for Outcome 1
3.4.2 Detailed findings for Outcome 2
3.4.3 Detailed findings for Outcome 3
4. Recommendations
5. Concluding statement
Appendices
A. Index of tables and charts
B. Results and Resources Framework
C. Terms of reference
D. Code of Conduct for field research
E. Bibliography
F. List of people interviewed or consulted
CD-Rom contents
1. Government / UNICEF Child Protection Baseline Research, Kiribati 2008 National Report (full text)
2. Kiribati 2008 Child Protection Legislative Review (full text)
3. Kiribati 2008 Child Protection Institutional Stocktake (full text)
4. Terms of Reference for Government / UNICEF Child Protection Baseline Research, Kiribati 2008:
a. TOR for CPBR overall
b. TORs for Regional Research Team
5. Methodology
a. Outcomes 1 and 2
b. Outcome 3
6. Analysis frameworks
a. Kiribati overall analysis framework
b. Kiribati graphics analysis frameworks
7. Data from field research
a. Databases
b. Processed data (tables, charts and graphs)
17
18
18
19
20
20
20
35
38
38
77
97
172
181
182
183
188
192
193
196
198
8. vi PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
Acronyms
AHHQ Adult Household Questionnaire
ARA Administrative / Research Assistant
AWP Annual Work Plan
CHHQ Child Household Questionnaire
CP Child Protection
CPAP Country Programme Action Plan
CPBR Child Protection Baseline Research
CSO Civil Society Organisation
DevInfo [Name of computer software used for PDA data collection and analysis]
FASO Family Assault and Sexual Offences Unit of the police
FD Field Diary
FSPK Foundation for Peoples of the South Pacific - Kiribati
GA Group Activity
GOK Government of Kiribati
ISR Institutional Stocktaking Researcher
KII Key informant interview
KNACC Kiribati National Advisory Committee for Children
LR Lead Researcher
LS Legal Specialist
MISA Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs
NR National Researcher
NSC National Steering Committee
OLON Overall Location Observation Notes
PDA Personal Digital Assistant
PPDVP Pacific Prevention of Domestic Violence Programme
PEF Protective Environment Framework
PJDP Pacific Judicial Development Program
PRPI Pacific Regional Policing Initiative
RRF Results and Resources Framework
RRRT Regional Rights and Resources Team
UNCRC United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
9. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 vii
Foreword
The Child Protection Baseline Research Report (CPBLR) is the outcome of the first comprehensive global attempt to identify and describe the cur-
rent status of the children in Kiribati. The gap of information and data on the children situation in the country calls for a multi-sectoral response
by establishing a periodic monitoring and evaluation mechanism to assess the situation of children. This report approaches the issue from the
combined perspectives of monitoring mechanism, child protection and human rights in general.
The results of the child protection baseline research bring out key indicators and relevant information on the situation of Kiribati children that will
serve for social welfare planning. Equally, the CPBLR are a very powerful tool for advocate for child rights and will serves to identify new areas of
intervention. At the same time, it will help us to track our strategies and redefine our priorities to better implement Child Protection Program in
Kiribati.
The participatory processes that led to this report brought together the experience of Governments, international organizations, civil society
organisations, research institutions and children. This rich collaborative effort has generated expectations of renewed action toward child protec-
tion protective environment
Now, that action is urgently needed.
This report asserts that no action toward protection of the rights of the child is un-justifiable for any reasons. The commitments made at inter-
national and national levels and the accumulated information and knowledge described in this report give us the necessary tools to protect
children from violence, abuse and protect and promote their rights.
The CPBLR for sure will bring changes at all level community, government and community in dealing with children and will promote a better
understanding of children situation in the country generate our responsibility to act and protect children rights.
Mr Rikiaua Takeke
Chair KNACC
Permanent Secretary MISA
10. viii PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
Statement by the UNICEF Pacific Representative
The geographical scatter of the Pacific Island Countries (covering over 30 million km2
of ocean) and the high cost of doing business in this region
make development programming a major challenge, particularly when reliable data is scarce. This is why generating good data such as the report
“Protect me with Love and Care: A baseline report for creating a future free from violence, abuse and exploitation of girls and boys in Kiribati” is
necessary to promote evidence-informed programming.
This baseline report answers what is perhaps a more difficult and technical examination, of legal frameworks, formal social service structures, and
the various environments provided by our communities and families; to see how effectively each of these circles of child protection, as duty bearers
can work alone in concert with each other to keep our children safe.
The report provides an in-depth analysis of the findings of the research and includes strategic recommendations for programme design and direction
based on three pillars of the Child Protection Framework, legal and regulatory systems, social welfare systems and social behaviour change system.
This research provides an opportunity to build on and complement the existing studies to arrive at a more comprehensive situational analysis of
child protection in Kiribati that is both qualitative and quantitatively sound. It serves as a marker in 2008 for measuring progress and achievement of
the child protection interventions by the end of the Government of Kiribati and UNICEF programme cycle in 2012.
I thank the Government of Kiribati for it’s commitment to the protection of children of Kiribati to live in an environment that is free from violence,
abuse and exploitation and soundly protected by family, community and government effectively working in collaboration.
Let us take lead from the title “Protect me with Love and Care” – derived from the findings of the Kiribati baseline research that highlights the key
response from children stating they wished to be protected with love and care by their parents, teachers and guardians – to work together with
partners and stakeholders to utilise the data from this report to make results-focused programming more efficient and achievable and ultimately
make progress towards the targets of the Millennium Development Goals.
Isiye Ndombi
11. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 1
Background
Kiribati is one of the least developed Pacific Island nations. Poor eco-
nomic conditions result in many children living away from their families
in areas that have better schooling and work opportunities but are also
overcrowded and dangerous. This contributes to children’s vulnerability
to violence, abuse and exploitation. They are also vulnerable because of
the widespread use of physical violence as a form of discipline, a system
of traditional community governance in which women and children
have little or no say, and the existence of child sexual abuse and exploi-
tation.
The Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP), agreed by the Government
of Kiribati and UNICEF Pacific, and its Results and Resources Framework
(RRF), provide strategic direction for child protection interventions in
the country to address these vulnerabilities. It provides the basis for the
joint Kiribati Government/UNICEF Pacific Child Protection Programme,
which runs from 2008-2012.
The Child Protection Programme is guided by the Protective Environ-
ment Framework, a child-centred, holistic and long-term approach to
keeping children from harmful situations, preventing child abuse and
exploitation, and addressing the social reintegration and recovery of
those who have been abused. The Child Protection Programme articu-
lates the following outcomes:
1. Children are increasingly protected by legislation and are
better served by justice systems that protect them as victims,
offenders and witnesses.
2. Children are better served by well-informed and coordinated
childprotectionsocialservices,whichensuregreaterprotection
against, and respond to violence, abuse and exploitation.
3. Families and communities establish home and community en-
vironments for children that are increasingly free from violence,
abuse and exploitation.
The Kiribati Child Protection Baseline Report was guided by these out-
comes. It reviews the situation in 2008, develops recommendations, and
aims to promote capacity-building, networking and inter-agency col-
laboration.
Methodology
The research consisted of a legislative compliance review, desk review,
key informant interviews with stakeholders at national level, and exten-
sive field research with communities in 20 purposively sampled loca-
tions throughout five districts in the country (although due to popula-
tion weighting the research findings were biased towards the capital,
Tarawa). The field research included 200 child household questionnaires
(CHHQ, 16-17 year-olds only); 199 adult household questionnaires
(AHHQ); 200 group activities (GA) with children aged between 7-18
years, young adults aged 19-25 years, and adults aged over 25 years,
divided by age and segregated by gender; and 173 key informant in-
terviews (KII). Key informants included justice representatives; police;
religious leaders; education representatives; health workers; civil soci-
ety organisations (CSOs); social welfare; youth leaders; and traditional or
administrative community leaders. Workshops were also held with chil-
dren in the justice system and with key stakeholders at national level.
Findings
Outcome 1: Children are increasingly protected by legisla-
tion and are better served by justice systems that protect
them as victims, offenders and witnesses
Output 1.1 Child Welfare and Protection Laws are aligned with the
CRC and its Optional Protocols and give authority to mandated
agencies to enforce and apply them
The legislative review component of the research identified the articles
of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) relating to
child protection standards. These articles were then fleshed out to their
full legal ramifications and domestic law and policy evaluated against a
list of 13 categories: child welfare/child protection system; family sepa-
ration and alternative care; violence against children; sexual abuse and
sexual exploitation of children; abduction, sale and trafficking; child
labour and children in street situations; child-friendly investigative and
court processes; rehabilitation; children in conflict with the law; refu-
gee/unaccompanied migrant children; children in armed conflict; infor-
mation access; and birth registration.
Of the indicators investigated within each category [total of 227], 40
were fully compliant, 49 were partially compliant and 137 were non-
compliant with UNCRC provisions (one was not applicable).
The legislative review also found:
• Although there is some basic provision for intervention by the
courts in specific circumstances, no formal, detailed legal or pol-
icy framework exists for child welfare/child protection, specify-
ing rights, powers and responsibilities of government services,
the courts, traditional authorities, parents and children, and de-
fining the forms of abuse.
• Strong provisions exist for: sexual assault and abuse; minimum
marriage age; and protecting children in conflict with the law.
• Provisions also exist but require further strengthening for: regu-
lating child custody; trafficking; minimum standards and forced
labour; standard minimum human rights; minimum age of
criminal responsibility; alternative sentencing procedures; de-
privation of liberty as a last resort; and birth registration.
Executive Summary:
KIRIBATI ISLANDS CHILD PROTECTION BASELINE REPORT 2008
12. 2 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
the community handles children in conflict with the law. The majority
indicate the use of fines and ‘other’ measures. Only 6% mentioned re-
ferring the matter to the police. Initiatives such as counselling, supervi-
sion, community work and education or vocational training potentially
display the use of ‘child-friendly’ principles. 61% of respondents agree
that children who have committed crimes are accepted back into the
community.
Outcome 2: Children are better served by well-informed
and coordinated child protection social services which
ensure greater protection against, and responds to vio-
lence, abuse, exploitation and neglect
Output 2.1 Social Welfare Officers (including ASWO); judiciary,
police and health professionals at national and provincial level
effectively manage and coordinate/refer cases of child abuse,
violence, exploitation and children in conflict with the law
National level
Kiribati has an active National Advisory Committee on Children
(KNACC), composed of representatives from different agencies and
NGOs.The KNACC has produced a draft National Children’s Plan which,
at the time of the research, still required Cabinet approval.
Social welfare (Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs – MISA):
The Kiribati MISA’s Social Welfare Division (SWD) has responsibility for
child and family welfare services. SWD Assistant Social Welfare Officers
(ASWOs) are present throughout Kiribati’s islands. The research found
the following:
- There are no finalised policies and procedures based on:
international provisions; directions on care and protection;
inter-agency policy guidance; reporting systems; and referral
systems for child protection cases.
- The following indicate some progress: there is an SWD Draft
Case Management Policy and Procedures; 28 Officers in MISA
Social Welfare Division are available to case manage child pro-
tection cases.
- There is need for: further professional / para-professional
training for officers; greater capacity to provide services to
child victims/survivors who experience the justice system;
additional capacity building of social welfare staff; and the
provision of basic supplies.
Hospitals and healthcare
- Policies relating to child protection and other services for chil-
dren in hospitals and health centres do not exist.
- An adolescent health clinic is available on South Tarawa and
children can be treated at the clinic and hospital following an
assault.
- Data abut child sexual abuse and child abuse from hospitals
and health clinics is not passed to MISA Social Welfare Divi-
sion.
- Census data is not available on the health of children or hospi-
tal admissions.
Police
- In Tarawa, the Draft Diversion Policy provides for the referral of
cases to MISA, but service partnerships and formal referral and
case management systems are not in place.
• Provisions for male children and especially vulnerable children
(e.g. with children disabilities) are limited.
• Definitions of different forms of violence are insufficiently
clear, as are definitions of what constitutes‘child’, and‘rape’and
‘sexual harassment’.
• The law is essentially silent on: domestic violence; violence
between children; harmful traditional practices; child-friendly
investigative and court procedures; rehabilitation and protec-
tion of child victims/survivors; wellbeing of child refugees/
asylum seekers; legal rights; and sex education.
A number of policies are currently under consideration or have been
recently implemented which should address some of the gaps high-
lighted above. These include a policy on police diversion and a Juve-
nile Justice Manual. As welcome as these initiatives are at policy level,
however, comprehensive legislative reform must remain the priority.
The proposed 2008 Police Powers and Responsibilities Bill is a case in
point.
A related aspect is whether stakeholders have the ability to apply
and implement child welfare and protection laws, as far as they exist.
Overall, stakeholders interviewed were able to identify child welfare
and protection laws but are currently unable to apply and implement
them in any detail.
Output 1.2 The judiciary , the police and social welfare officers
/ assistant social welfare officers apply principles of juvenile
justice and have support programmes for young offenders, child
victims and witnesses to protect their rights throughout the
proceedings
Police
There is no specific allocation for child justice in the police budget.
However, the Police Diversion Policy provides opportunities to improve
relationships between the different parties involved in child welfare
and both the Kiribati Community Policing and the Family and Sexual
Offences Unit (FASO) provide an outstanding example of prevention
and awareness-raising activities for children and young people.
There are regional differences though between outer islands, which
tend to defer to traditional mechanisms and in the capital Tarawa,
where investigations are taken very seriously and anything related to
domestic violence or sexual abuse is referred to FASO.
Justice
The recent Juvenile Justice Manual provides for specialised procedures
for Juvenile Court. Other policy manuals, such as Guidelines and Pro-
cedures for Juveniles in Need of Care and Protection, are also being
introduced. However, currently there is no special provision for child
witnesses. Both public prosecutors and legal aid are found to be large-
ly non-compliant with regard to policy, services and capacity. Very few
children are held in detention or sentenced but greater awareness is
needed on introducing standards in line with international child jus-
tice and child rights principles.
Output 1.3 More ‘Unimanes’ / Island Councils in three outer is-
lands and on Tarawa practice principles of juvenile justice and
child-friendly practices in line with national laws
Key informants in each of the research locations were asked about how
13. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 3
- However, diversion referrals are occurring: there are currently
more than 30 cases of offenders with MISA. One of the main
problems is the lack of capacity in MISA to absorb all of the
cases.
Court procedures
- Court clerks were trained on justice for children in conflict with
the law and international standards in 2008.
- The Penal Code allows for alternative sentencing but there
are difficulties appointing a‘fit person’(a person under whose
supervision a child can be placed for the purposes of a ‘care,
protection or control’order).
- Generally, the courts do not formally seek information from
SWD but they are aware they can ask for a pre-sentence re-
port. Sometimes such reports are not produced in time.
Schools and early education
- Schools currently lack a child protection policy and trained
counsellors.
- However, teachers have been informed about child protection
through the Child Friendly Schools Programme and a course
at the Kiribati Teachers College teaches counselling.
Youth leaders
- A National Youth Policy and representative youth panel exists
in Kiribati. The Youth Division of MISA, although lacking in
funds, is the leading actor in the youth sector and has provided
training for young people, including training about life skills
and leadership.
In order to make progress the following advances need to be made:
establishment of inter-agency protocols and intra-agency child protec-
tion protocols; finalising of draft procedures; provision of training and
procedures support to ASWOs; coordination of referral mechanisms;
implementation of data collection and record keeping; improvement
of community policing; and recruiting and training of more female po-
lice officers.
Output 2.2 Children on three outer islands have knowledge of
social protection services and are accessing them
The majority (87%) of children interviewed in CHHQs know who to
talk to if they are badly hurt by someone. As expected, these children
rely much more on immediate family and friends for help than formal
services, although they are aware of the existence of a range of formal
services in their local area and report feeling confident and comfort-
able about approaching these services. However, reliance on informal
contacts emphasises the need to make sure that caregivers, peers and
community members are empowered to best help children in need of
protection, as well as further empowering children to know about the
full range of services available in their area.
Output 2.3 More children in three outer islands and on Tarawa
are registered and have access to correct information on their
parentage
Although birth registration is both free (up to three months) and com-
pulsory by law, most school-going children in Kiribati do not have a
birth certificate. There are some issues surrounding inheritance rights
and denial of paternity in connection with the current birth registra-
tion provisions which need to be addressed in legislation or policy to
ensure that the best interests of the child are the first priority.
In the survey, AHHQ respondents claim that 92% of their children aged
under 5 have been registered. However, only 35% of relevant respon-
dents were able to show birth certificates for all of these children
Outcome 3: Children in selected geographical areas
grow up in home and community environments that are
increasingly free from violence, abuse, exploitation and
neglect
Output 3.1 Parents, care-givers and community members in three
outer islands and on Tarawa understand and are able to practice
positive behaviour that protects children from violence, abuse
and exploitation
- 89% of AHHQ and 90% of KII respondents report being confi-
dent about knowing what to do if a child in their household
or community were badly hurt by someone. Caregivers’ most
likely reactions are to talk to the child and to confront the per-
petrator.
- AHHQ and KII respondents are more likely to take ‘informal’
actions than refer the issue to state actors, although both
groups cited mostly formal (state) services – especially police
and health services – when asked about services available.
- Children appear more likely to report child protection issues to
male family members rather than females.
- 16-18 year-olds in group activities indicate that as children get
older they are expected to‘toughen up’in reaction to being hit
or bullied as caregivers become increasingly less sympathetic.
- 25% of AHHQ respondents had biological children of their
own currently living outside their households, mostly living
with other relatives. 89% of these respondents feel that their
children are safe in their alternative places of residence, but
this conviction is largely based on assumptions, trust in the
hosts and feedback from the hosts rather than from the chil-
dren themselves.
- 81% of AHHQ respondents admit to physically hurting children
in their household. 29% of CHHQ respondents report having
been physically hurt by an adult in the household within the
past month, mostly by members of the immediate family
– particularly siblings and fathers. The main reason given
by CHHQ (62%) and AHHQ (80%) respondents for corporal
punishment is‘discipline’or‘education’.
- AHHQ respondents demonstrate a high level of awareness
of positive discipline techniques and proactive ways to show
children that they are loved and cared for. However, this is
undermined in practice by physical punishment, inappropriate
name-calling and making children feel unwanted.
Output 3.2 Island Councils/ Village Communities in three outer
islands and in Tarawa incorporate child protection into their
development plans, involving religious leaders, civil society
organizations and other community members, including young
people
On average, 16% of CHHQ, AHHQ and KII respondents stated that
14. 4 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
their community has a plan to help keep children safe from violence.
Overall, in all locations, respondents’ knowledge of the existence of
plans to help keep children safe from violence appears very patchy.
The majority of respondents heard about plans verbally. Respondents’
lack of knowledge in general about plans and inconsistencies about
information given even within the same location raises questions
about their profile and how aware people really are of them.
Although it is encouraging to hear of the wide range of activities
taking place to keep children safe from violence, it is nonetheless
of some concern that some important issues do not feature very
prominently - such as parenting classes and awareness-raising directly
with children.
The process of developing plans to keep children safe from violence
does not appear to be as participatory as it should – only 12% of CHHQ
respondents claim they have been consulted; it may be assumed that
younger children were involved even less.
The vast majority (89%) of respondents who stated that there are plans
in place feel that these plans do help to keep children safe from vio-
lence, mainly by raising awareness of abuse and how to prevent it and
by clarifying acceptable and unacceptable behaviour towards children.
Knowing what to do in case of child abuse did not feature highly.
Output 3.3 Teachers on three outer islands and in Tarawa have
knowledge of and practice non-violent forms of discipline
29% of school-going CHHQ respondents stated they had been
physically hurt by a teacher in the past month, and 40% of education
key informants admitted that‘teachers in this school hit, smack, pinch,
kick, flick or pull or twist children’s ears’. These results suggest that
corporal punishment by teachers is relatively common and raises
questions about teacher’s awareness and practice of alternative means
of discipline. Both CHHQ and education KII respondents identified
’children are afraid of teachers’ amongst the top things which make
children not feel safe in schools.
7% of CHHQ respondents reported experiencing inappropriate
touching at school within the past month, 80% perpetrated by other
children but 20% perpetrated by teachers. 60% of all stakeholders
agree that children can speak out freely at school and 67% agree that
children are safe and protected at school.
Both CHHQ and education key informants indicate that the emphasis
in school rules is on ‘general school rules and discipline’ and regulat-
ing the behaviour of children. There is much less emphasis on the role
of teachers. However, nearly all respondents agree that existing rules
help to keep children safe, although children have had limited involve-
ment in developing the rules.
Output 3.4 Children from three outer islands and in Tarawa are
aware of their protection rights, form and express their views at
home, in school and amongst peers and are less likely to get in-
volved in criminal activities
- In general children appear able to speak out more freely in
informal spaces (with friends or at home) compared with
more formal spaces (at school or in the community).
- Whilst it is reassuring that some children speak out when
experiencing various forms of violence (38% of CHHQ
respondents), there are still many incidences of violence,
including ‘inappropriate touching’, which are unreported by
children. Children are more likely to tell their friends about
experiencing violence, followed by their father and then their
mother.
- The majority of CHHQ respondents (aged 16-17 years) claim
to understand appropriate and inappropriate touching. In
spite of the generally satisfactory levels of understanding, it is
nonetheless worth highlighting that some children aged 16-
17 years, let alone younger children, do not fully understand
what constitutes acceptable and unacceptable touching and
when they should speak out.
- 11% of CHHQ respondents reported being touched in a way
that made them feel uncomfortable within the past month, at
home, school or in the community.
Conclusions
Caregivers and children at community level were able to identify a
range of ways in which children are loved and cared for. Furthermore,
professionals demonstrate a willingness to build on existing strengths
in order to improve child protection practices in general.
However, Kiribati lacks sufficient legal provisions for child welfare and
protection. Alongside implementing policies and developing stan-
dards, legislation must be introduced that is aligned with international
protection standards.
Themaneaba(traditionaljustice)systemisprevalentanditisimperative
to develop policies that consider these practices, ranging from police
practice and court sentencing to compensation and community
rehabilitation. The potential for these practices to discriminate against
women and children, and their continued use of corporal punishment
must be carefully handled. Greater awareness about what constitutes
abuse is needed, in schools, in the community, and among children
themselves.
The SWD, the police, justice systems and other agencies related to child
protection need more specific guidelines, standards and processes –
including for community work, probation procedures, child-friendly
practices, and inter-agency collaboration.
15. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 5
1.1 Government / UNICEF partnership
To guide and support the collaboration between UNICEF and the
Pacific Island countries working together for the protection of children,
a‘Pacific Regional Framework’document was developed in 2006. This
document was the result of a consultation process involving partners1
in Vanuatu, Fiji, Samoa, Kiribati, Solomon Islands, UNICEF and AusAid2
from August to November 2006. The ‘Regional Framework’ emerged
as a new strategic direction for child protection interventions to be
implemented by the five Pacific Island Countries and provided the
basis for the development of the Pacific Governments/UNICEF Child
Protection Programme, 2008-2012.
The document draws on global and regional (South East Asia and the
Pacific region) experience in the area of child protection, including the
1. Children are increasingly
protected by legislation and are
better served by justice systems
that protect them as victims,
offenders and witnesses.
2. Children are better served by well
informed and coordinated child
protection social services which
ensure greater protection against
and respond to violence, abuse
and exploitation.
3. Families and communities
establish home and community
environments for children that are
increasingly free from violence,
abuse and exploitation.
1
Government Departments / Ministries and NGOs who have a mandate to work on child protection issues and/or work or have activities on the issue.
2
AusAid and UNICEF entered into a Multi-Country Programme Contribution Agreement in March 2005, confirming AusAID’s commitment to provide AUD$7,35 million for a five-year period (2005-2010).
3
`See Appendix B for the Results and Resources Framework for Vanuatu.
Section 1: Background
UNICEF Child Protection Strategy of May 2008, and offers a programme
strategy for building a‘Protective Environment’for children.
The ultimate goal of the Child Protection Programme is to contribute
to the reduction of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of
children in Pacific Island Countries.
The Pacific Governments/UNICEF Child Protection Programme 2008-
2012 has identified three key outcomes expected to be achieved by
the end of 2012.These have been further articulated in country-specific
Country Programme Action Plans (CPAP) and Results and Resource
Frameworks (RRF) for the period 2008-2012.3
The three outcomes
which are expected to be fulfilled by the end of 2012 are:
16. 6 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
Targeting the child’s immediate environment, the Programme will work closely with parents, caregivers and other community members such as
teachers in preventing child abuse and mitigating risks for violence, abuse and exploitation. The Programme will relate to the socio-economic,
political and cultural context by addressing values and norms that have a fundamental impact on children’s protection.4
The Programme promotes a systems-building approach that identifies and meets capacity building needs of institutions providing social,
justice and birth registration services for children. Lessons learnt from work done previously by the Pacific Children’s Programme (PCP) endorse
the need to involve a wide range of relevant stakeholders - including civil society and faith-based organizations, as well as those from other
programme areas within UNICEF - in exploring synergies and collectively developing rights-based and protective national frameworks, policies
and programme interventions.
1.2 UNICEF Protective Environment Framework
Agencies and development partners working in the area of child
protection developed the ‘Protective Environment Approach’ to child
protection programming. The‘Protective Environment’was introduced
as the key principle in the ‘Pacific Regional Framework’ mentioned
above.
Programmatically, the Protective Environment Approach can be
categorized into three broad areas of intervention that build or
strengthen systems for protecting children, recognizing the socio-
economic, political and cultural contexts in which children grow (see
the diagram). These three areas form the basis for the Child Protection
Programme as articulated in the CPAPs and RRFs, and as reflected in the
three outcome areas highlighted above.
Within these three broad areas, the Protective Environment Framework
identifies eight factors that are instrumental in keeping children safe
from harmful situations. These factors can all be strengthened, and
changes measured, through the targeted support of national and
international actors.
The Protective Environment Approach has two key features. Firstly, it
seeks to comprehensively address the environment around children
and repositions community members as duty-bearers with primary
responsibility for children’s well-being and protection. Secondly, the Protective Environment Approach aims to provide protection for all children
over time, rather than targeting specific responses just for children in need of special protection, for example children who live on the streets.
The Protective Environment Approach is therefore a child-centred, holistic and long-term approach to preventing abuse and exploitation for all
children as well as addressing the social reintegration and recovery of those who have been abused.
CHILD
Family
Socio-economic
political and
cultural context
Child’s immediate
environment
Prevention
and response
systems
Community & peer
s
Societal behaviour
change system
Socialwelfare
system
Legalandregulatory
system
4
UNICEF’s Multi-Country Programme Document (CPD) for Pacific Island Countries.
17. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 7
5
Ibid
1.3 Country context
Total population • 92,533
• 37% of the population is under the age of 15 years.
• The capital, South Tarawa, is the most densely populated island in Kiribati with 44% of the country’s population
(2558 people per km2).
(Source: Population Census 2005)
Ethnic groups • Micronesian 92,013 (99.4%)
• Polynesian 143 (0.2%)
• European 59 (0.1%)
• Others 318 (0.3%)
(Source: Population Census 2005)
Religions • Christian: 89,216 (96.4%)
• Catholic 51,144 (55.3%)
• Kiribati Protestant Church 33,042 (35.7%)
• Mormon (Latter Day Saints) 2,910 (3.1%)
• Seventh Day Adventist 1,756 (1.9%)
• Church of God 364 (0.4%)
• Bahai: 2,034 (2.2%)
• Other: 1,238 (1.4%)
• None: 23 (0.0%)
• Not specified: 22 (0.0%)
(Source: Population Census 2005)
Languages spoken • Kiribati language (main language of written and spoken communication)
• English (used for official purposes)
GDP per capita (US$) In year 2008 is US$ 1,372.46
UNDP Human
Development Index
ranking
No HDI ranking available 5
Kiribati is one of the least developed Pacific Island nations. It has few natural resources, a large subsistence / semi-
subsistence sector and minimal industry
‘Cultural’factors
which impact on
child protection
• Children are very important in the Kiribati culture, as is bringing up children to abide with the norms of Kiribati
society, for example obedience without question to adults.
• The disciplining of children through the use of physical force, humiliation and verbal abuse is often considered
to be a parent’s right.
• Children shoulder a lot of responsibility once they are mature (menarche in girls) and also when there are
younger siblings for girls and boys to look after.
• Gender socialisation takes place from an early age. Although the situation is changing, women are still often
considered subordinate to men in I-Kiribati culture and gender roles are strictly defined. Women are under-
represented in government and decision-making / managerial roles.
• Not fighting back is regarded as cowardice and is shameful for males. Boys are therefore taught to fight back
physically.
• Traditional government of communities in Kiribati is through the unimane (male elders representing families of
clans) and the maneaba (community council). The influence of these groups is still strong in many communities.
Women and children have limited or no direct influence through this system, instead inputting ideas through
male family or clan members (although this is said to be changing for women in some communities)..
• Kiribati people do not consult a lot through discussions to solve problems but resort instead to fighting
physically or beating children. For example, when young people commit misbehaviour as a result of alcohol
consumption they are taken to the maneaba and the unimane can decide to apply punishment such as
beating or exclusion from the community
• Churches are very influential in Kiribati.
18. 8 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
KIRIBATI
North Pacific Ocean
South Pacific Ocean
TARAWA
Banana
Paris
Lagoon
Lagoon
Bonriki
Bonriki
KIRITIMATI
Banaba
Tarawa Gilbert Is.
Line Is.Rawaki
(Phoenix Is.)
Kiritimati
(Christmas Is.)
Bonriki
London
Betio
Cook Island
Passage
TARAWA
Other factors which
impact on child
protection
• Many children are living in situations without their biological parents. Many families seeking the best conditions
for their children send them from the outer islands to South Tarawa. This is as a result of poor economic
conditions, non-availability of secondary schools in outer islands and improved job opportunities in South
Tarawa.
• However, South Tarawa is subject to overcrowding, unemployment, high cost of living and greater availability
of alcohol compared to the outer islands. These factors, although not a cause of violence against children and
women, can nonetheless exacerbate or trigger such violence.
• Commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) and child sexual abuse are of increasing concern in Kiribati.
19. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 9
6
Full Terms of Reference can be found on the accompanying CD-Rom to this report.
Section 2: Methodology
2.1 Aims of Child Protection Baseline Research
The Baseline Research covered all 3 components of the Protective
Environment Framework:
• Legislative and regulatory framework compliance review.
• Institutional stocktaking of child protection social welfare and
protection systems in theory and in practice, and inter-agency
collaboration.
• Review of societal behaviour regarding child protection, includ-
ing positive practices, at family and community level.
Aims of the Baseline Research:
1. To review the current situation in all 3 Protective Environ-
ment Framework areas, including acknowledgement of exist-
ing work and strengths.
2. To develop recommendations to help shape the 5-year Gov-
ernment / UNICEF Pacific Child Protection Programme: how
best to move towards a more protective environment for chil-
dren.
3. To further promote capacity-building, networking and
inter-agency collaboration through the process of the
research, with a focus on broad ownership of data and the
sustainability of any resulting programme interventions.
2.2 Structure and roles 6
• National Research Team:
• National Researcher: Overall coordination of the societal
behaviour component of the research, including planning and
managing the field research, inputting and analysing data and
commenting on report findings.
• Administrative / Research Assistant: Logistical and adminis-
trative support to the National Researcher and Field Research
Team.
• Field Research Team x 2:
• Field Supervisors: 1 per team; on-site management,
monitoring and coordination.
• Field Counsellors: 1 per team; emotional support to
respondents and team members.
• Field Researchers: 8 per team; data collection.
• National Steering Committee: Advisory group of government
and civil society representatives [specially formed sub-committee
of the Kiribati National Advisory Committee for Children (KNACC)].
• Regional Research Team:
• Lead Researcher: Overall coordination of the 4-country
research project including: technical assistance in planning,
implementation and data analysis; writing up findings for the
20. 10 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
societal behaviour component of the report; overall report
editing.
• Legal Specialist: Responsible for legislative compliance
reviews, analysing the functioning of justice systems in each
country and writing up the results.
• Institutional Researcher: Responsible for researching and
writing up the institutional stocktaking component.
• Regional Reference Group: Advisory group of representatives
from government, UN agencies, regional organisations, CSOs
operating at regional level and universities.
Regional
Reference
Group
National
Steering
Committee:
Government
& Civil Society
Organisations
UNICEF
Field
Office
Regional Research Team
Institutional
Researcher:
Anafia Norton
Lead
Researcher:
Marie
Wernham
Legal
Specialist:
Penelope
Taylor
National
Researcher:
Tinai Iuta
National
Research
Team
Field Research Teams x 2:
• Field Supervisor
• Field Counselor
• Field Researchers
Administrative /
Research Assistant:
Tib’a Tooki Koraubara
Directly contracted
by UNICEF, housed in MISA
Directly contracted by
MISA
22. 12 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
2.4 Research tools
All research tools were designed to specifically measure the output indicators agreed upon by the government and UNICEF in the country
RRF. See Appendix B for the full RRF.
2.4.1 Outcome 1: Children are increasingly protected by legislation and are better served by justice systems that pro-
tect them as victims, offenders and witnesses
Research tool Quantity
1. Desk review Primary sources:
3 sets of institutional records
7 policy documents from 2 departments / institutions / organisations
Secondary sources:
17 reports
2. Legislative compliance
review
37 laws in place
1 draft law
1 regulations list
6 international instruments
3. Key informant interviews 43 Key Informant Infenraus (KIIs) with 35 people (16 female, 19 male) from 20 different departments /
institutions / organisations
1 other person provided feedback by email
4. Workshops with children in
the justice system
1 workshop with 7 boys (approximate age range 13 – 18 years old)
5. Questionnaires to police 1 questionnaire to police throughout Kiribati of which 27 were completed (26 from Tarawa)
6. Questionnaires to
Magistrates
1 questionnaire to all magistrates in Tarawa of which 0 were completed
2.4.2 Outcome 2: Children are better served by well-informed and coordinated child protection social services which
ensure greater protection against, and responds to violence, abuse, exploitation and neglect
The information collected for Outcome 2 was sourced via:
Research tool Quantity
1. Desk review Primary sources:
1 set of institutional records (Census)
1 draft policy document from Social Welfare Department
1 set of Social Welfare Departmental training materials
1 set of minutes
1 draft terms of reference (KNACC)
1 act of parliament
Secondary sources:
10 reports / publications
1 source book (ILO)
2 situational analyses
2. Key informant interviews 21 KIIS with 23 people (9 male/15 female) from 14 different institutions
2 other people provided feedback by email
3. Workshops with key stakeholders 1 day workshop with 12 people (4 male/8 female) from 11 different departments / institutions /
organisations
23. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 13
• Key informant interviews (KII): Up to 9 per location.
1. ‘Community leader’(administrative and/or traditional)
2. Religious leader
3. Youth leader
4. Representative from the health sector
5. Representative from the education sector
6. Representative from the social welfare sector
7. Representative from the police
8. Representative from the judiciary
9. Representative from a civil society organisation
• Overall location observation notes (OLON): 1 per location,
completed by the field research team to record general obser-
vations of the location and any factors affecting data collection
and / or data analysis.
2.4.3 Outcome 3: Children in selected geographical areas grow up in home and community environments that are
increasingly free from violence, abuse, exploitation and neglect
Note on translation of tools for field research:
All tools were originally developed in English. All research tools were translated into Kiribati. During the training and pilot test researchers
clarified and systematised specific phrases in order to ensure consistency in the language used in the field. The results were then translated
back to English after completion of data entry.
a. Overview
The information collected for Outcome 3 was sourced via:
• Adult household questionnaires (AHHQ): 10 per location; randomly selected primary caregiver in a household where children are
present.
• Child household questionnaires (CHHQ): 10 per location; randomly selected 16 and 17 year-olds in households where children of this
age are present. Due to the length, format and content of the CHHQ, it was deemed appropriate as a research tool only for older chil-
dren.
• Group activities (GA): 10 per location; 8-10 people per group.
Outline of activity
1 7-11 year-old girls Drawing or writing“Words and actions we like or don’t like at home and at school”and discussion
2 7-11 year-old boys
3 12-15 year-old girls Drawing or writing“Who do you go to when…?”and discussion
4 12-15 year-old boys
5 16-18 year-old girls Writing and discussion“What did your caregiver do when…?” [range of situations] comparison between
when they were in primary school and now. Individual or group exercise6 16-18 year-old boys
7 19-25 year-old young
women
Drawing a map of the community and marking safe and unsafe places for children followed by discussion
on how safe places can be kept safe and how unsafe places can be made safer (pair work)
8 19-25 year-old young
men
9 +25 year-old women Writing and discussion“What did your caregiver do when you were a child when….?”And“What do you as
a caregiver do now when…?”[range of situations] comparing possible changes in behaviour. Individual or
group exercise
10 +25 year-old men
• Field diaries (FD): 1 per field researcher to record professional
and personal observations in relation to use of the tools and
the location.
• Polaroid photo display: 10 Polaroid (instant) photos per loca-
tion to represent “how we keep children safe in this commu-
nity”, chosen by community members, displayed on plastic-
covered card by children within the community and left as a
gift / positive reminder for the community of the field research
team’s visit. Where possible, this display was photographed
digitally as a record for the national report.
• Photographs: Visual record of group activities and research
locations as a whole where possible.
24. 14 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
b. Locations
• 20 locations were identified throughout 5 districts of the country
(Northern,Central,Southern,SouthWesternandLineandPhoenix),
distributed according to population weighting, and chosen
through purposive sampling based on the following criteria:
Cross-section of the population:
• Type of location:
• Urban (wealthy / middle class / poor / slum)
• Peri-urban (wealthy / middle class / poor / slum)
• Rural (interior / coastal) (wealthy / middle class / poor)
• Central island
• Remote island
• Stable population (low migration / flux)
• Unstable population (high migration / flux)
Specific focus communities
• UNICEF programme focus areas. These are geographic areas
where UNICEF’s five supported programmes – Health, Water
and Sanitation; Education; Child Protection; HIV/AIDS; and the
Policy, Advocacy, Planning and Evaluation (PAPE) Programme
will converge.
• Non-UNICEF programme focus areas (control group)
• Particularly low socio-economic development or isolation
from mainstream development and government processes
• Identified high-risk in relation to specific issues
(e.g. commercial sexual exploitation of children)
Previous research
• Areas experiencing‘research-fatigue’
• Areas flagged for further research
Selection of research sites
Selection of the locations was based on the population distribution
throughout the whole of Kiribati. The 5 major districts were identified
because of their different cultures and traditions as well as land tenure,
all of which influence people’s behaviour. Within each district islands
were selected according to population weighting. The very low popu-
lation in some villages on the outer islands of Kiribati, combined with
the need to complete a certain number of research tools per location,
led the research team to select the most populated villages, as shown
in the table below.
7
The three main villages were selected in Betio because of the population density (47% of South Tarawa).
8
Initially the choice was Bikati, an islet of Butaritari, but because of safety concerns regarding boat travel, the researchers decided to replace Bikati with the very end village of Butaritari.
District Island Island Location
Central District [12 locations] South Tarawa7
North Tarawa
Abemama
Maiana
Temakin Betio
Temwanoku Betio
Takoronga Betio
Bairiki
Teaoraereke
Antebuka
Ambo
Eita
Temwaiku
Buariki
Tabiang
Bubutei
Northern District [3 locations] Butaritari
Marakei
Butaritari8
Kuma
Norauea
Southern District
[2 locations]
Onotoa
South Tabiteuea
Buamao
Buariki (‘TabBuariki’)
South Western District [1 location] Arorae Roreti
Line & Phoenix Group [2 locations] Kiritimati Tabwakea
Banana
25. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 15
9
“DevInfo is a database system for monitoring human development. It is a tool for organizing, storing and presenting data in a uniform way to facilitate data sharing at the country level across government depart-
ments, UN agencies and development partners. DevInfo has features that produce tables, graphs and maps for inclusion in reports, presentations and advocacy materials.”www.devinfo.org
10
Children selected came from 3 areas where FSPK runs two projects: the‘Good Governance’project in Bonriki and the‘Youth Mental Health’project in Betio and Teaoraereke.
c. Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs)
An important feature of the CPBR was the pioneering use of PDAs for
electronic data capture. PDAs are hand-held computers. AHHQs and
CHHQs were programmed as ‘templates’ and corresponding ‘PDA
questionnaires’ using DevInfo software9
. The ‘PDA questionnaires’
were then copied as many as times necessary, each with a unique file
name, loaded onto PDAs, and programmed with basic information
such as location, time period and a unique identity code. In order to
avoid duplication of data, each individual PDA contained only the
questionnaires relevant for the researchers who would be using that
PDA.
Researchers worked in pairs to conduct AHHQs and CHHQs with one
researcher asking the questions from a paper copy of the questionnaire
and the other recording the answers in the PDA. On completion the
questionnaires were downloaded onto a computer via a USB connec-
tion and then imported directly into the‘template’/ database ready for
data analysis. In theory some of the benefits of using PDAs for data col-
lection are as follows: no need for copying and carrying large numbers
of paper questionnaires in the field; ‘skips’in the questionnaire can be
programmed to jump automatically between questions (e.g. ‘if no, go
to question 10’) and this helps to reduce data collection error; a huge
amount of time is saved by eliminating the need to manually enter
data from paper questionnaires into a database.
The use of PDAs in this research was innovative in that the types of
questionnaires being used were much longer and more complex than
those which have previously been used internationally with this tech-
nology and software. The CPBR was deliberately testing the appropri-
ateness of this technology for qualitative as well as quantitative data
collection.
See Section 2.8 for lessons learned.
d. Completed data log and feedback on the use of field
research tools
The following research tools were completed as part of the field
research:
• 200 CHHQs
• 199 AHHQs
• 200 GAs (40 with 7-11 year-olds; 40 with 12-15 year-olds; 40 with
16-18 year-olds; 40 with 19-25 year-olds; 40 with +25 year-olds)
• 173 KIIs (22 with traditional or administrative community lead
ers; 20 with religious leaders; 20 with youth leaders; 14 with so-
cial welfare representatives; 20 with education representatives; 19
with health representatives; 19 with police; 19 with justice repre-
sentatives; 20 with CSO representatives)
• OLONs Ref. Appendix C
2.5 Child participation
There were two types of child participation in relation to the CPBR.
Type A: Children as ‘respondents’ in the baseline re-
search
• As part of the field research for the CPBR component on soci-
etal behaviour: 16-17 year-olds were involved in CHHQs; 7-11
year-olds, 12-15 year-olds and 17-18 year-olds were involved
in group activities (segregated by age and sex). Young people
aged 19-25 also took part in specific group activities.
• All Field Researchers were over the age of 18, but Field Research
Teams included some young people under the age of 25.
Type B: Children as‘participants’in the baseline research
process
• This type of participation, not to be confused with Type A, refers
to involvement in the project cycle management of the CPBR.
The diagram on the right represents the difference stages of
project cycle management.
• For the purposes of the CPBR, it was decided – due to ethical
and time constraints – not to involve under-18s in actual data-
collection (‘implementation’). However, under-18s who were
part of existing, well-supported groups were intended to be
involved in the‘planning’stage (commenting on methodology)
and the ‘evaluation’stage (analysis of results and inputting into
recommendations).
• In Kiribati, from 6-8 October 2008, 45 children (25 girls
and 20 boys) aged 16 and 17 years old from Tarawa (Betio,
Teaoraereke and Bonriki) participated in a 3-day consultation
workshopfacilitated by Save the Children Fiji in association
with the Foundation for Peoples of the South Pacific – Kiribati
(FSPK).10
The intention was to invite children to input into the
CPBR field research methodology and the original workshop
was scheduled for earlier in the process. However, due to
organisational and logistical constraints, the workshop had to
be delayed, by which time the field research had already started.
The workshop instead took the opportunity to introduce the
CPBR to the children and to conduct a series of activities to
promote open discussions about child rights and violence
against children in Kiribati in order to contribute to the research
findings and recommendations.
Activities included discussions on rights and responsibilities, the
UNCRC and community mapping of safe and unsafe spaces for
children.
• The intention was that FSPK would continue to work with
these same children to facilitate consultations comment
on the research findings and input into the National Report
recommendations. Unfortunately, due to logistical constraints,
this did not happen. It should be noted, however, that child
participation is a very new concept in Kiribati where children
are expected culturally not to ‘speak out’. In this context the
CPBR nonetheless provided an opportunity to promote new
methods of working and consulting with children.
26. 16 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
11
See Appendix D.
12
The Ministry of Education had given prior approval for research teams to recruit children from schools for the purpose of the research.
2.6 Ethics
Code of Conduct
• A Code of Conduct (CoC) was developed for the research in Kiri-
bati11
, covering the following three areas:
1. Behaviour guidelines: between researchers and children,
between researchers and respondents, between research-
ers and the community and between the researchers them-
selves.
2. Guidelines for photographs: both official and personal.
3. Communication guidelines: concerning images and
narratives about children involved in the study.
• The CoC was developed in consultation with researchers who-
signed a statement of commitment to the CoC prior to embarking
on the pilot phase of the research.
Informed consent of respondents
• Informed consent was required from respondents for all research
activities. For every AHHQ, CHHQ, GA and KII researchers were
required to sign a consent sheet proving that they had read out
the required information to the participant(s) and obtained
informed consent for their participation in the activity. Participants
were informed that they had the right to stop the interview /
activity at any point and they had the right to refuse to answer any
or all questions.
• Child participants in the research were recruited from households
and schools. For children from households participating in either
the CHHQ or any of the group activities, consent was first sought
from a parent or caregiver. In cases where children were recruited
in schools, consent was initially sought from the head teachers
and principals concerned.12
In both settings the children were
explained the nature of the research and asked to give informed
consent indicating their willingness to participate.
2.7 Data analysis
2.7.1 Outcome 1: Children are increasingly protected
by legislation and are better served by justice sys-
tems that protect them as victims, offenders and
witnesses
Legislative review:
• The legislative review component was undertaken by identify-
ing the articles of the UNCRC relating to child protection stan-
dards. These articles were then fleshed out to their full legal
ramifications and a list of 227 indicators developed, drawing
heavily on existing UNICEF tools for legislative analysis. The
indicators were categorised into specific areas of child protec-
tion e.g. child labour, violence against children, treatment of
children in conflict with the law and so on.
• Existing law and policy was then measured against these indi-
cators and a compliance table created displaying the strengths
and weaknesses in the regulatory framework.
• Findings of existing reviews and draft legislation were also
considered against gaps identified in the compliance table.
• The findings were summarised and tentative recommenda-
tions drafted. A stakeholder workshop, in addition to some
individual interviews, were then undertaken to confirm the
findings and finalise the recommendations.
• A final report was then prepared incorporating feedback from
this workshop.
Justice system review:
• The review of the justice system was undertaken through the
development of both comprehensive ‘ideal system’ indicators
based on international standards and indicators that were
directly responsive to the RRF Output Indicators.
• Existing reports and compiled data were reviewed, representa-
tives of the key institutions interviewed, workshops run with
children who had experienced the system as either victims/
survivors or offenders, and questionnaires distributed to police
and magistrates.
• A list of findings and recommendations were then made in
relation to each legal institution (Police, Courts, ODPP and
Legal Aid) and stakeholders consulted as to the accuracy and
efficacy of those findings in a 1-day workshop.
• The final report was then prepared incorporating feedback
from the workshop.
2.7.2 Outcome 2: Children are better served by well-
informed and coordinated child protection social
services which ensure greater protection against,
and respond to violence, abuse, exploitation and
neglect
The process for data analysis for the Institutional Stocktake was based
on the following steps:
• An ‘ideal system’ matrix for child protection institutions was
developed based on international experience and including
elements of a Child Protection Social Welfare check list devel-
oped by UNICEF East Asia Pacific Regional Office (EAPRO).
implement
planevaluate
assess/
identify
need
monitor
27. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 17
• Desktop research information was converted into table for-
mat.
• Initial interviews with UNICEF Child Protection Officers in
Kiribati and other key informants were conducted.
• Questionnaires were distributed to the police and to the
magistrates on Tarawa.
• Resulting data were converted into a consultation document
containing findings and recommendations.
• A consultation workshop was held with key stakeholders.
• After consultation this document was converted into the
Kiribati Baseline Research Institutional Stocktake Report
(available separately) and information from this full report was
summarised for inclusion in this National Report against
the RRF indicators.
2.7.3 Outcome 3: Children in selected geographical
areas grow up in home and community environ-
ments that are increasingly free from violence,
abuse, exploitation and neglect
Field Research Team Review Meeting:
• FRTs gathered together for three days after completion of the
field research in order to tidy up completed research tools,
reflect on their experiences, make recommendations for any
future similar research, and to generally provide‘closure’for the
FRTs which was deemed necessary due to the sensitive nature
of the research.
• The FRTs took this opportunity to share their experiences with
the National Steering Committee.
Child and adult household questionnaires:
• Completed questionnaires were downloaded onto a computer
by the National Researcher and imported into the pre-
prepared DevInfo template / database by the Lead Researcher.
Errors were corrected (e.g. mistakes in file names or accidental
mapping of questionnaires to the wrong location).
• A comprehensive set of charts and graphs was produced
according to the detailed ‘graphics analysis frameworks’
(Excel spreadsheets setting out what information is needed
in order to measure each of the RRF indicators). The ‘graphics
analysis frameworks’ are based, in turn on the ‘overall analysis
framework’which sets out which research tools and questions
measure each indicator. All analysis frameworks and the full set
of charts and graphs for the CHHQs and AHHQs are available
on the accompanying CD-Rom, grouped per RRF indicator.
• The completed charts and graphs were sent to the National
Researcher and key data was presented to the National
Steering Committee for discussion and the formulation of
initial recommendations in December 2008 and again in
February 2009.
• The Lead Researcher wrote up the detailed findings into the
societal behaviour component of the National Report which
was then circulated to the NSC for comment before being
finalised.
Group activities:
• Hard copies of flipcharts and researchers’notes were collected
by the National Researcher, translated into English, and the
data entered into pre-prepared, ‘coded’ Excel spreadsheets
which were then sent to the Lead Researcher for analysis.
• Tables, charts and graphs were produced, based on the‘overall
analysis framework’, which were then used to inform the writ-
ing up of the societal behaviour component of the National
Report (circulated for comment, as above).
• Copies of the ‘raw data’ and accompanying charts and graphs
are available on the accompanying CD-Rom.
Key informant interviews:
• Hard copies of the KIIs were collected by the National
Researcher, and the results for each type of key informant
interview (e.g.police) were translated where necessary
into English and compiled into one amalgamated, ‘master’
electronic version (mixture of Excel & Word) which was then
forwarded to the Lead Researcher.
• The Lead Researcher produced tables, graphs and charts,
based on the ‘overall analysis framework’, which were then
used to inform the writing up of all three components of the
National Report (circulated for comment, as above).
• Copies of the ‘raw data’ and accompanying charts and graphs
are available on the accompanying CD-Rom.
Other:
• The National and Lead Researcher also drew on additional
information from background reading and photographs as
relevant.
2.8 Lessons learned
2.8.1 Successes (what went well)
Outcome 1:
• Workshop held with stakeholders to review the legislative/
regulatory framework findings towards the end of the research
was very successful. The overview of the legislative situation for
children was well received and the group dynamic resulted in a
large amount of context information being shared in relation to
legislativeneedsandcurrentimplementationissues.Thisworkshop
could have had an even higher impact had it been held earlier in
the process and followed up by a second workshop.
• The use of individual interviews with key institution
representativestogothroughthefindingsandrecommendations
for a second time after the full stakeholder workshop resulted in
clear and informed recommendations for those institutions.
Outcome 2:
• Collaboration and teamwork of the Institutional Researcher
and Legal Specialist: This benefited both Outcomes 1 and 2.
• Research design and implementation: This process was
successful- i.e. desktop review followed by interviews and then
workshops.The process supported itself and gave those who were
committed to the process a chance to participate meaningfully.
28. 18 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
• Consultation workshops: They provided a mechanism for
networking and participants were able to learn about the work
of other institutions and make connections that will help protect
children in the future. Some participants had not previously met
each other even though they are working in a small sector and
in the same geographical area. New ideas were generated at the
workshops through the interaction of participants.
• Workshop consultation paper: The consultation paper prepared
in advance of the workshop worked well in terms of guiding the
discussion. In some ways the information in the consultation paper
was too detailed. However, it was made clear at the beginning of
the consultations that the researchers did not expect participants
to fully read the paper but that during the course of the workshop
the content would be thoroughly interrogated and time would be
allocated to review each section before talking about it in detail.
Outcome 3:
• Training of researchers and piloting of research tools: This
was successful. Within two hectic weeks the Field Researchers
understood what the research was about, knew their working
ethics and were able to use the research tools.This was later proven
during piloting in Nanikai village whereafter additional queries
were solved and the researchers were ready and eager to start.
Team building was very successful and this resulted in a natural
splitting of the group to form two teams who then identified their
Supervisors and Counsellors.
• TheuseofPDAs: This was very interesting. All the researchers were
quick to master the PDAs and it made the research quicker and
more interesting. They are light to carry and gave the researchers
an air of sophistication which helped raise the morale of the
researchers.
• Research implementation: This was fun. The best part of the
research was the travelling to many different locations outside
South Tarawa, meeting different people and experiencing the
different cultures and behaviours of the islands within Kiribati,
especially having to talk in the maneaba (village meeting house) in
front of unimane (community elders).
• Use of Polaroid cameras: The Kiribati people love to be
photographed, especially when they can see their photos
immediately and this helped to improve participation.
2.8.2 Challenges (what didn’t work so well)
Outcome 1:
• Children’s workshop: The workshop with the children who had
been in conflict of the law was successful in that the nature of
the information gleaned was unexpected, but would have been
more useful had a greater number of children been sourced and
if those sourced had included children with a more extensive
experience of the legal system. The children interviewed had had
limited contact with the justice system beyond the police.
• The lack of time spent in country compromised the researchers’
ability to form relationships with stakeholders and to fully explore
issues and information. In addition this meant that the researchers
had to rely heavily on an already overburdened UNICEF field office
for support and follow-up in country.
• The use of questionnaires was an extremely ineffective research
tool for a number of reasons. Poor communication, timeframe
limitations and the involvement of too many parties in the process
(i.e. the Legal Specialist, the Field Office and the contact in the rel-
evant institution) resulted in unclear distribution of questionnaires
and the distribution of incorrect versions of questionnaires, among
other things. Inadequate time was spent with each institution face
to face to finalise appropriate questions and the questionnaires to
magistrates were not filled out at all as a result. The questionnaires
that were returned from the police were informative but unable to
be used in a statistically meaningful way.
• The research was veryTarawa-centric. Observations were made
by informants as to the situation on the outer islands, but many of
the findings related to the situation inTarawa as this was where the
research was carried out and where the institutional representa-
tives consulted were based.
Outcome 2:
• The Institutional Stocktake component was completed in some
isolation from the other components of the baseline research
because of resource constraints. UNICEF Kiribati Child Protection
Officers were very helpful when they could be but were often busy
trying to undertake programme work or assist the work under
Outcome 3 which was resource intensive. As a result UNICEF field
officers did not attend key informant interviews or the consultation
workshop.
• Althoughitwasfoundtobevery usefulasareferencetool,the‘ideal
systems matrix’approach was not utilised fully.The Legal Specialist
followed a data collection approach for the justice institutions
based on the RRF indicators, an approach which should also have
been taken by the institutional researcher to ensure consistency.
The‘ideal systems matrix’was not utilised innthe justice section of
the Institutional Stocktake.
• The volume of information available about each institution and
the length of the report was time and resource intensive. It is
suggested that the next Baseline be limited to a smaller number
of institutions or a more confined information gathering exercise.
This would also make it possible for the stocktake to be undertaken
by one person rather than two.
Outcome 3:
• Capacity building to use DevInfo software: The National
Researcher found this aspect of the research interesting and would
have benefited from additional training in order to master the skill.
It would helped in the analysis process and would have greatly
reduced the burden on the Lead Researcher. However, bearing in
mind that this was a new area for all concerned, there was not
enough time or human resource capacity to devote to this transfer
of skills during the research process.
• Data analysis: This consisted of a large amount of painstaking
work to sort through hard copy GAs and KIIs and the burden of
this fell on the National Researcher, mostly working in isolation
(although additional funds were eventually released to allow
assistance from some FRT members). Following data collection,
only two weeks were allocated for the Supervisors to organise their
29. PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008 19
data.Translation from Kiribati language into English was necessary,
although it added considerably to the workload and therefore the
time needed. Because the amount of work involved was under-
estimated during the planning stage, the data analysis significantly
overran the National and Lead Researchers’contracts.
• Time span of the research: From day one of the training everyone
was running to get things done. Independence week gave the
researchers a welcome break before the actual field research
commenced. It was very stressful conducting research in South
Tarawa with only one and a half days per location, particularly as
the people on South Tarawa are very busy and more independent
compared with the outer island locations. Most of the days started
at 8am and finish at 9pm and involved a lot of revisits. Some revisits
were done after completion of outer island locations.
2.9 Recommendations regarding
methodology for future research
Outcome 1:
1.1 Greater time spent in country, particularly in the first information
gathering trip.
1.2 Stakeholder workshops to be followed up by one-on-one
interviews with key stakeholders.
1.3 Desk review and legislative review to be completed earlier in
the process to allow for more informed in-country information
gathering and better use of time with key informants.
1.4 Questionnaires to be used only as a supplementary tool to
face-to-face interviews and focus group discussions. They
should also be prepared in close cooperation with institutional
representatives.
1.5 Greater numbers of children to be sourced for children in conflict
with the law workshops.
1.6 More time and resources to be committed to research outside of
Tarawa.
Outcome 2:
2.1 Refine the‘ideal systems matrix’for use next time in consultation
with national partners and the EAPRO toolkit authors.
2.2 Ensure the methods for gathering data under RRF indicators are
consistent with the broader institutional stocktake.
2.3 Depending on resources available, consider confining the
research to a smaller number of institutions.
2.4 Spend less time on desktop research before the stage of the
first in-country interviews process and more time on it after the
interview process. Allow time to conduct additional interviews in
country in the time immediately before the workshops. Overall,
allow more time in country.
2.5 Do not limit the reporting to the RRF indicators in the National
Research as these categories leave out some major components
of a child protection system.
2.6 To ensure the integrity of information, another step in the
methodology must be to have a process of feedback on the
consultation report specifically from interviewees before the
report is circulated more widely for consultation. This will help
clear issues of misunderstanding and other language / culture
barriers.
2.7 An opportunity for capacity building would be to empower
the UNICEF I-Kiribati Child Protection Officer (or another
I-Kiribati stakeholder) to conduct some of the key informant
interviews (with or without the Institutional Researcher) and
take ownership of some of the information gathering. There are
many advantages to having someone with I-Kiribati language
skills. It may be the case that much information was not able
to be gathered because of the language and cultural barriers in
Kiribati.
Outcome 3:
3.1 More time allocated to all stages of the research.
3.2 More training and practice time on the use of DevInfo by the
National Researcher. A second visit would have helped in
mastering its use and to transfer knowledge to country level.
3.3 More time spent observing behaviour around children would
have given a better insight as children are afraid to talk about
things that adults do to them. The‘overall location observation
notes’could be adapted to take this into account.
30. 20 PROTECT ME WITH LOVE AND CARE • A BASELINE REPORT FOR KIRIBATI - 2008
3.1 Overview
Findings reflect the situation in 2008 and may not include
reference to more recent developments.
Findings are grouped according to the three RRF‘Outcome’areas:
1. Children are increasingly protected by legislation and are better
served by justice systems that protect them as victims, offenders
and witnesses.
2. Children are better served by well informed and coordinated
child protection social services which ensure greater protection
against and respond to violence, abuse and exploitation.
3. Families and communities establish home and community
environments for children that are increasingly free from violence,
abuse and exploitation.
WithintheRRF,asagreedbetweenthegovernmentandUNICEF,eachof
these high level ‘Outcomes’is broken down into a series of ‘Outputs’.
For example, in Kiribati Outcome 1 has three Outputs which are
numbered Output 1.1, Output 1.2 and Output 1.3. Each of these mid-
level‘Outputs’is then further broken down into a series of ‘Indicators’.
There may be one or more Indicators per Output. For example, Kiribati
Output 1.1 has only two Indicators, labelled Indicator 1.1.1 and 1.1.2.
However, Kiribati Output 1.3 has only one Indicators numbered 1.3.1.
These Indicators may or may not have ‘targets’ attached to them. For
example, Kiribati Indicator 1.1.2 has the target‘50% of stakeholders’.
There is an assumption that working on the more‘manageable’Indica-
tors will contribute to achieving the Outputs, which will in turn result
in progress towards achieving the over-arching Outcomes.
TheBaselineResearchmeasuredthecurrentstatusoftheRRFIndicators.
However, in some cases, ‘Additional Indicators’ were also measured
as a means to gather further information relating to the Outputs or
Outcomes more broadly, above and beyond the child protection
‘picture’ painted by the more specific RRF Indicators. An example of
an Additional Indicator is‘Indicator 3.1 Additional 1’which is related to
Output 3.1. There is also an‘Additional General Indicator’at the end of
Outcome 3. It is important to note that these‘additional indicators’do
not form part of the official Government / UNICEF RRF. They are merely
intendedtocontributeadditionalinformationwhichitishopedmaybe
of use in partners’efforts to create protective environment frameworks
for children in Kiribati.
The summary matrix in Section 3.2 pulls out key findings and statistics
per indicator. This matrix can be used as a stand-alone summary.
However, important additional analysis and comment, as well as
recommendations, are included in the detailed findings in Section 3.4.
Further supporting information can be found on the accompanying
CD-Rom, including: full legislative compliance review; full institutional
stocktaking report; raw data and comprehensive charts for CHHQs,
AHHQs, KIIs and GAs from the field research. Section 3.3 summarises
the profile of CHHQ, AHHQ and KII respondents who participated in
the field research.
3.2 Matrix of findings per output indicator
Please note: The findings here have been summarised for ease of ref-
erence. For further information on how each indicator was interpreted
and how the findings were calculated, see Section 3.4 below.
Section 3: Findings
