18th July 2012
Type of Review: Annual Review
Project Title
Child Protection Fund in support of the Government of Zimbabwe’s National Action Plan for Orphans
and Vulnerable Children phase II 2011-2015
Date started
Financial Reporting Start Date : 01 July 2011
Implementation Reporting Start Date: 27 September 2011.
Date review undertaken
25 June 2012 – 6 July 2012
Instructions to help complete this template:
Before commencing the annual review you should have to hand:






the Business Case or earlier project documentation.
the Logframe
the detailed guidance (How to Note)- Reviewing and Scoring Projects
the most recent annual review (where appropriate) and other related monitoring reports
key data from ARIES, including the risk rating
the separate project scoring calculation sheet (pending access to ARIES)
You should assess and rate the individual outputs using the following rating scale and description. ARIES
and the separate project scoring calculation sheet will calculate the overall output score taking account
of the weightings and individual outputs scores:
Description
Outputs substantially exceeded expectation
Outputs moderately exceeded expectation
Outputs met expectation
Outputs moderately did not meet expectation
Outputs substantially did not meet expectation
1
Scale
A++
A+
A
B
C
18th July 2012
Introduction and Context
What support is the UK providing?
The United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID – UK Aid) has committed
GBP19,000,000 to the UNICEF managed Child Protection Fund (CPF) and as of June 2012 has
disbursed GBP11,400,000.
In addition the University of North Carolina has been awarded funding from 3ie (through the 3ie/DFID
partnership) to undertake the final programme impact evaluation.
The CPF is a multi-donor aligned fund supporting the implementation of the Government of
Zimbabwe’s (GoZ) National Action Plan for Orphans and Vulnerable Children Phase II (NAP II). It
builds on the successful 2007-2010 Programme of Support (PoS) to the NAP I which was designed to
cope with the increasing vulnerabilities faced by children, particularly in response to the HIV epidemic
in Zimbabwe. The CPF adopts a multi-dimensional approach to child vulnerability which
simultaneously addresses household poverty, gender disparities, disability, HIV and risk of violence,
exploitation and abuse to expand the reach and impact of interventions. Special attention is paid to
bolstering child protection interventions, particularly those to prevent and respond to violence against
children. At the heart of the initiative is an effort to reduce extreme poverty in the most vulnerable
households’ thereby reducing poverty related abuse, neglect and violence against children.
The purpose of CPF is to secure the basic rights of the most vulnerable children in Zimbabwe through
provision of critical child protection interventions within a child and HIV sensitive social protection
framework.
The objectives of CPF are to:
 Reduce household poverty by implementing a national cash transfer programme targeting food
poor and labour constrained households
 Enhance access to child protection services for all vulnerable children including legal, welfare
and judicial for children affected by violence, abuse and exploitation
 Improved access to basic education for poor orphans and other vulnerable children
The CPF is not a standalone programme but rather a mechanism to support a government programme in
a transitional context. It is designed to be cost-effective, flexible to risks and shocks, and led by
Government.
In addition to the financial contribution noted above, DFID is a technical partner with UNICEF, GoZ
and civil society organisations in the design and delivery of the CPF interventions. This includes
membership of the co-ordinating body for implementation of NAP II, The Working Party of Officials, a
Cabinet mandated multi-sector National Child Protection Committee, as well as donor coordination
through the OECD OVC Donor Group which meets monthly to discuss progress and challenges during
CPF/ NAP II implementation. For the past 12 months, DFID has chaired the OECD OVC meetings and
is a leader in social protection and child protection discussions.
DFID’s support is appreciated by UNICEF as a critical technical partner as well as partner to leverage
complementary financial support (e.g. through 3ie). DFID is also the largest donor to the CPF and has
been able to provide significant advice and ongoing support to the design and implementation of the
programme.
What are the expected results?
By 2013 the most vulnerable children in Zimbabwe are able to secure their basic rights (through the
2
18th July 2012
provision of quality social protection and child protection services).
1. By year 3, increased equity, health, nutrition, protection and education outcomes for orphans and
other vulnerable children living in at least 55,000 of the poorest and most vulnerable families
through a national child-sensitive social protection CPF that delivers reliable, regular cash
transfers across the country
2. At least 25,000 child survivors of violence, exploitation and abuse access effective, quality
support and care services (legal, health, psychosocial) every year
3. At least 500,000 primary school-age vulnerable children benefit from free education services in
Year 1
4. Legislation and policy frameworks promoting the protection and care of children are enhanced, in
line with national and international standards of good practice, every year
5. CPF wide participatory learning and knowledge management systems are in place to measure
impact and ensure good practice evaluations for vulnerable children programming regularly
What is the context in which UK support is provided?
The context in Zimbabwe is characterised by a) poverty and its effects and b) the transition from an
emergency to a development environment. The UNICEF Country Programme of Cooperation and
Country Programme Action Plan with the Government of Zimbabwe 2012-2015 recognises that,
“Institutional flexibility and agility are required to maximise UNICEF’s effectiveness during time
sensitive and strategic periods of opportunity…in finding innovative ways to strengthen national
capacity in complex political contexts.
The CPF project design (2011), UNICEF’s recent Situational Analysis on Children and Women in
Zimbabwe (2010) and other new and emerging surveys highlight the extreme vulnerability of certain
groups of children, particularly those affected by HIV/AIDS, those in extremely poor households and
those who are part of marginalised groups.
Evidence shows that:
 A quarter of all children in Zimbabwe – approximately 1.6 million – have lost one or both
parents due to HIV/AIDS and related causes (UNICEF Situational Analysis 2010). Many
orphans live in extremely poor households and are less likely to access health care, attend school
or have basic clothing, shoes and bedding than other children from the same communities.
Orphans are also more likely to suffer from psychological problems and to be subjected to child
abuse, including forced sex in adolescence, which increases their likelihood of contracting HIV
(My Life Now, 2010; MIMS 2010 and localised studies cited in UNICEF Situational Analysis
2010).

However, not all orphans are poor and children from all parts of society may be exposed to
physical, sexual and psychological violence, abuse and exploitation - not just orphaned children
or children living in poor households. The National Baseline Survey on the Life Experiences of
Adolescents (NBSLEA, 2012, Government of Zimbabwe/ UNICEF/ CCORE/ Center for
Disease Control) highlights that one third of girls experience sexual violence before their
18thbirthdayand almost half of girls and two thirds of boys experience physical violence by a
parent or adult relative before their 18th birthday.
3
18th July 2012
Although Zimbabwe has emerged from an emergency period, and in a context of prevailing recovery
and transition, the capacity of government to implement large scale social and child protection
programming remains limited. A 2010 Institutional Capacity Assessment of the Department of Social
Services (DSS) shows that the ratio of children to social workers is approximately 50,000:1. As
evidenced by the study, the ability of DSS to implement programming at national and district level is
thought to have diminished through attrition and apathy linked to availability of incentives as well as
due to failure to implement the fundamental recommendations of the report
“The accumulated evidence has indicated to us very strongly the enormity of the crisis facing
Zimbabwe’s social protection system, which no amount of clever planning, redistribution of effort or
building of shiny new management systems will do much to alleviate without a substantial injection of
additional money – either from the national budget or (by whatever mechanism) from development
partners – to staunch the haemorrhage of professional expertise and to give the staff the essential tools
to do the job.”
The CPF is designed to support a government programme, and every effort is made to assure
government ownership is evident; during a recent donor visit to a cash transfer payment site DFID noted
the successful impact of this strategy. Government ownership and leadership is a key feature of this
programme, as it is working towards a national programme that can be transitioned to direct
Government support in the future. Government leadership and participation is therefore central to the
governance and delivery of this programme.
The continued successful delivery of this programme by government within a high risk environment,
however, relies on availability of DSS at national and district level. It also relies on the Child Protection
Committees and on UNICEF technical support and advice, as well as a strong partnership between both
organisations. Government capacity to implement statutory obligations remains extremely weak
especially at sub-national level.
Further, the CPF is designed so that the delivery of critical child protection services by NGOs may
bolster government interventions. Civil society has a role to play as participants in the design of
strategies, as service providers, and as watchdogs to ensure government fulfilment of commitments. As
such UNICEF maintains a large network of NGOs, Faith Based Organisations and private sector
partners within the Child Protection Network to regularly monitor and report on the child protection
situation and inform standard-setting as well as policy implementation. At the same time,UNICEF has a
key role to play to broker dialogue and partnerships between the respective government Ministries
involved (including Ministry of Labour and Social Services, Ministry of Health and Child Welfare,
Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs and Judicial Services Commission) to ensure NGOs support
sustainable models, replicable for national scale-up. Partnerships, characterised by the “Tripartite
Agreements” signed by NGOs, UNICEF and the ministry of Labour and Social Services (MoLSS)
accompany all funding agreements to ensure Government ownership, leadership and sustainability at
field level. NGO partnerships are selected through a transparent and competitive bidding process
whereby clear terms of reference are defined for a particular service area (e.g. children with disabilities),
minimum standards for performance are articulated and final candidates selected based on cost
effectiveness, proven ability to demonstrate results in previous programming and the quality of
proposals submitted.
4
18th July 2012
Section A: Detailed Output Scoring
Output 1: Incomes of beneficiary households receiving social cash transfers are increased
Score and performance description: B outputs moderately did not meet expectation
Progress against expected results: As noted above 18,940 households (HH) from a planned year 1
target of 25,000 HHsin 10 districts and including 57,392 children have benefitted from 2 bi-monthly
cash disbursements totalling USD1,613,021 (including 1% bank charges).
Independent contractors were selected for the 1) targeting, 2) delivery and 3) monitoring components of
the HSCT to mitigate fiduciary risk in Zimbabwe’s highly politically polarised and fragile operating
environment.
The HSCT targeting process was conducted by independent contractors in 3rd and 4th quarters of 2011.
Cash transfers were initiated in 1st Q 2012, following extensive field monitoring and verification efforts
by UNICEF/ DSS and TEAM CONSULT- a contractor for UNICEF (funded by UNICEF internally) to
ensure adherence to the highest standards of programming.
As of 23 May 2012, OECD donors and UNICEF agreed it was best to adopt a targeting strategy aimed
at minimising inclusion errors. This was in response to the risks identified by running the programme in
a highly politicised and polarized operating context. Therefore, it was accepted that an increased
exclusion error rate, and a decreased number of households benefiting from the programme, would be
observed during the first round of the HSCT.
In order to mitigate risk of political manipulation an independent targeting process and methodology
was defined in the HSCT Operational Manual. A two-stage household census was applied, stage 1 to all
households in the district, followed by those identified as labour constrained in stage 2. The
Management Information System (MIS) database for the HSCT consequently generates the beneficiary
selection lists and thus has been a significant component of the success of the transfer programme. The
MIS was tested and carefully reviewed at each stage of implementation and on-going technical support
is provided with the intention of capacitating government to manage the processes independently. The
MIS is also recognised as a good practice innovation internationally in that for the first time it has the
capacity to manage and cross reference comprehensive household level data for cash but also other
social welfare initiatives, including Basic Education Assistance Module (BEAM) and case management
for child protection. Significant field monitoring was instituted by UNICEF and DSS during the
targeting process and a full review conducted on completion. The HSCT Targeting Report, April 2012,
is an analysis of the process and results of targeting labour constrained food poor households in the first
10 districts. Lessons learned from the process will be used to up-date the mechanism for phase 2
targeting.
Targeting was conducted by JIMAT consultants, in partnership with the Government Statistics Agency
(ZIMSTAT) whose experience in Government census and other related surveys was required for
thorough coverage. The partnership was selected through UNICEF procurement processes with
government and donor involvement, and contracted by the Department of Social Services. This
partnership was problematic, in part as a result of budget underestimates1but largely due to the
inexperience of the selected contractors in managing large scale surveys and the associated operational
management. UNICEF proceeded to negotiate additional funds (approximately 40,000 USD) from the
1
The estimated number of households to be targeted was based on the 2002 Population Census data, however on
the ground experience noted a considerable increase.
5
18th July 2012
CPF donors to accommodate additional households and difficult geographic terrains/ the rainy season
during the targeting process. Acknowledging that this exercise was new and involved numerous
complexities, UNICEF also contributed approximately 100,000 USD of its own resources to the
process. Government finally amended the contract with JIMAT to the amount of 712,000 USD and to
extend the period of the targeting to 120 days. UNICEF and DSS closely managed and supervised the
contract on a weekly and daily basis but werenot informed of additional costs incurred by JIMAT until
the contract was completed, in January 2012. These additional costs will not be absorbed by CPF donors
or UNICEF. UNICEF has incorporated the lessons learned from this experience and will re-tender to an
experienced international institution in August 2012, in partnership with MoLSS, to ensure an
organisation with significant expertise in contract management, operational oversight, a strong track
record in conducting surveys of this kind and with excellent references for political impartiality is
selected. Technical feedback from ZIMSTATS/JIMAT on the survey process itself has already been
incorporated into the Operational Manual for the HSCT.
Independent contractors were also selected to manage the cash delivery. The first two payment cycles
have been completed without major incident, although there were some local challenges. Two wards,
for example, did not wish to initially distribute the cash as some political leaders claimed lack of
involvement in the targeting process. DSS management quickly intervened and these wards are now
distributing the cash transfers to the targeted beneficiaries. Monthly reports from the contractor
(SECURICO) are shared with UNICEF and MoLSS and to date the majority of the challenges are those
resulting from a national scale first roll-out, e.g. timing of disbursements, communication with
beneficiaries, coordination with all stakeholders at sub-national levels (e.g. District Authorities, District
Social Service Officers, NGO partners, Child Protection Committees, etc.). These reports, alongside
UNICEF and DSS monitoring continue to inform necessary updates to the HSCT.
Challenges with migrating data from the targeting exercise to the MIS contributed to early concerns
over exclusion and inclusion error, however these system anomalies have been adjusted.Further
challenges: due to restricted national resources the government contribution is unlikely to materialise (as
per the national budget commitment 2012) until at least August 2012. The Government fiscus is
currently under strain due to less than anticipated revenue in April/ May and a monthly civil service
wage bill of approximately 160m USD. UNICEF Social Policy is working with the UNICEF Child
Protection team to analyse the overall Government commitments to social protection and related
activities for a costing analysis in line with the newly developed ILO Social Protection costing tool.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the current level of GoZ funding for NAP II implementation is relatively
low, Government’s recognition of the importance of the HSCT and its place in broader Government
programming is represented by the significant (7 million USD) commitment in the annual published
budget. DSS ownership of the HSCT is also generally visible and demonstrable as it negotiates access
to the transfer for beneficiaries in politically sensitive districts, leads payment disbursements,
coordinates information sharing events and publishes data every week on the profile of beneficiaries (by
age, gender, chronic illness/ disability).
The measurement of positive HIV, education, health, nutrition and protection benefits will be
undertaken through a planned baseline and 2 follow-up surveys. UNICEF Zimbabwe issued a global
Request for Proposals (RFP) in December 2011 for institutions to apply for the baseline and follow up
surveys, the second bidding process for this area of work. The bid was advertised due to initial
complications with the first bid. This re-advertisement caused delays in the start of the baseline. The
baseline work was due to start in January, in complement to the beginning of the national social cash
transfer programme led by the Ministry of Labour and Social Services (MoLSS) supported by UNICEF
and the Child Protection Fund (CPF) in support of the National Action Plan for Orphans and Vulnerable
Children, but has now been delayed. The contract commenced on 25 May 2012.
Regarding the selection of the contractor for the baseline and follow-up surveys, several bids were
received in January and these were reviewed by a technical panel of Government, donors (represented
6
18th July 2012
by the EC) and UNICEF. UNICEF began negotiations with the top technical scoring bidder, but as these
negotiations were underway, UNICEF was notified of the successful application of the University of
North Carolina (UNC) to receive 3ie co-funding for social protection research in Zimbabwe. This
proposal was developed with UNICEF, DFID and EC participation, as well as DSS review and inputs.
In practical terms, this means that the third follow-up survey (outcome survey) will be led by UNC and
funded by 3ie (through a 3ie/DFID partnership), rather than UNICEF, saving approximately 500,000
USD to the overall budget for this initiative. In addition to the significant cost-savings, the involvement
of UNC introduces increased quality, independence and rigour to the impact evaluation. The RFP was
adjusted accordingly and negotiations with the contractors were therefore re-initiated. This process of
negotiations thus significantly delayed the finalisation of a contract. The proposed baseline survey and
follow-up survey are expected to be conducted as per the revised timelines below. The 3ie proposal to
co-sponsor the baseline study and subsequent outcome evaluations has been successfully integrated into
the process. A contractor for the assessments, American Institutes for Research (AIR) has been engaged.
Complementary funding has also been provided through the FAO Protection to Production Project for
additional economic analysis.
Value for Money: The operational costs for the first year (October 2011 to September 2012) of the
HSCT were analysed in the May 2012 “Targeting Report” (UNICEF, DSS, TEAM CONSULT) and
consist of the actual costs spent until March 2012 and the estimated costs for the period April to
September 2012.
According to the calculation given in the table below, the beneficiaries receive 87.5% of the total HSCT
funds while 12.5% are spend on operational costs which are significantly lower compared to the
planned amounts and global averages (where costs can be compared). This means that the programme is
highly cost effective. Delivery was nearly twice as costly as projected, and bank charges (1%) still apply
however the 4% charge applied by the delivery contractor is also significantly lower than regional
averages2.
Costs at DSS level are also much lower than predicted. This means that there is scope for allocating
additional funds for strengthening DSS capacities e.g. with regard to the MIS and also CPC training and
surveillance monitoring.
Table: Breakdown of HSCT costs during the period October 2011 to September 2012
Transfer payments to
beneficiary household:
6 times average USD
40
for
20,000
households
Targeting costs: 50% of
payments
to
the
consortium
JIMAT/ZIMSTAT3
Costs for delivery of
transfers
6
times
including bank charges
DSS costs at district
2
USD
In % of total costs
Cumulative
operational costs
4,800,000
87.30%
356,491
6.48%
6.48%
192,000
3.49%
9.97%
Approximately
2.73%
12.7%
Team Consult, 2010: internal report on lessons learned from cash transfer programmes, for MoLSS
contract value for the exercise US$712,981.91
3total
7
18th July 2012
level including USD USD 150,000
50,000
spent
for
training and supporting
CPCs
DSS costs at provincial
level
DSS costs at HQ level
Total costs
5,598,491
100%
12.7%
Further, significant value for money is represented through the complementary funding which has been
leveraged for the Impact Evaluation through 3ie and FAO: The scope of the evaluation has been
significantly extended at no additional cost to the programme or donors.
Recommendations: i) Programme targets and milestones to be revised in programme logframe to
adjust for slightly delayed baseline and also new research and data available (for example NBSLEA,
DHS, Child Labour Survey, Quality Monitoring Report) ii) UNICEF to continue sharing the targeting
design results and findings as well as lessons learned with other cash transfer agencies such as WFP,
GRM, PRP etc. iii) UNICEF to jointly continue advocacy with WB/WFP/PRP to initiate a high level
social protection forum led by government to coordinate efforts at national scale iv) criteria for selection
of second round targeting agency to be expanded to include a requirement for significant regional and
international experience in managing the logistics of national scale surveys
Impact Weighting: 40%
Revised since last Annual Review? Y
Risk: Medium
Revised since last Annual Review? Y (previously M/H risk revised down as a result of implementation
experience to date and in line with Risk Mitigation Matrix)
8
18th July 2012
Output 2: An increased number of orphans and vulnerable children who are survivors of violence,
exploitation and abuse are receiving free protective services.
Score and performance description:A+ outputs moderately exceeding expectation
Progress against expected results:Target was for at least 25,000 child survivors of violence,
exploitation and abuse access effective, quality support and care services (legal, health, psychosocial)
every year.
A minimum of 27,0984 children at risk of and exposed to violence, abuse and exploitation received free
care and support during the six month period September 2011- March 2012 as evidenced in the
summary below, per implementing partner:
Africaid
01. 09.2011 – 30. 11.2011
# of children with increased
knowledge, confidence, skills,
emotional self-awareness, selfesteem, self-worth, resilience,
problem solving skills and
social networks
%
children
accessing
community outreach services
#
infants
and
children
receiving HIV testing services
01. 12.2011-31.03.2012
# beneficiaries receiving a
service
# beneficiaries receiving a
referral service only
#
beneficiaries
information only
Total
Childline8
1 September
receiving
F 237
M 161
T 398
F 178
M 162
T 340
F 1,920
M 1,271
T 3,191
F 643
M 636
T 1,2795
F 1,872
M 1,253
T 3,1256
F 3,619
M 3,331
T 6,9507
15,283
2011-15 # new cases received through F 1698
4Data
mined from NGO quarterly reports submitted to UNICEF and DSS. This is a conservative figure and includes
only new cases. It does not include cumulative numbers of children receiving a service whose case has not been
closed or number of responsive contacts via the freecall Child Helpline which is in the region of 26,000 for the six
months September 2011-March 2012
5# direct beneficiaries nationally, in Harare and per province
6# children HIV testing and counselling through referrals; # other referrals
7# children trained personal growth and development; # caregivers training and counselling; # beneficiaries
accessing positive prevention through training and counselling; # CATs trained; # focal persons trained; # youth led
advocacy and information in schools
8Does not include children interviewed during the National Baseline Survey on the Life Experiences of Adolescents
who received a service, children calling the Childline helpline, ongoing cumulative cases managed where children
continue to receive a service
9
18th July 2012
December 2011
the drop-in centres and were
offered psychosocial support
during the reporting period
15 December 2011-15 April # new cases received through
2012
the drop-in centres and were
offered psychosocial support
during the reporting period
Total
Family Support Trust
01.07.2011-31.08.2011
01.09.2011-31.12.2011
01.01.2012- 31.03.2012
Total
J F Kapnek Trust11
01.09.2011-31.12.2011
M 1,137
T2,8359
F 1488
M 1012
T 2,500
5,335
# children who received F 450
medical
examination
and M 43
treatment, PEP, and case T 493
management
# children who received
medical
examination
and
treatment, PEP, and case
management
# children who received
medical
examination
and
treatment, PEP, and case
management
F 975
M 97
T 1072
F 851
M 91
T 942
# children enrolled in PSS 17910
support groups
2,686
# parents and caregivers 532
attending specialist workshops
01.01.2012-31.01.2012
# parents and caregivers 218
attending specialist workshops
01.02.2012-31.03.2012
# parents and caregivers 1877
attending specialist workshops
Total
2,627
CATCH (with complementary funding)
01.01.2012-31.03.2012
# children provided with F 14
legal assistance
M 51
T 63
Total
63
Mercy Corps (with Complementary Funding)
01.09.2011-31.12.2011
# children receiving small F 329
grants for purchase of M 223
assistive devices and other T 552
needs
01.02.2012-15.04.2012
# children receiving small F 329
grants for purchase of M 223
9
Data disaggregated by sex is not available
Data disaggregated by sex is not available
11J F Kapnek are working to build back capacity of MoHCW rehabilitation service and do not view themselves as
direct service provider. Therefore they have been reporting on processes. This will be rectified in 2Q 2012. In the
interim number of caregivers attending training is provided as a proxy indicator (thus estimates are likely to be low)
10
10
18th July 2012
12
assistive devices and other T 552
needs
Total
1104
Grand Total 09.2011-03.2012
27,098
This exceptional output, during only a 7 month period (September 2011 – May 2012) is due to a long
term investment of capacity building in child protection service delivery by UNICEF and donors in
Zimbabwe. UNICEF has led, over the past 3 years, consistent child protection trainings in quality care
and support for child survivors of violence, exploitation and abuse in partnership with the DSS and
other relevant Government stakeholders directed at key NGO partners. Resource packages have been
developed and distributed to partners and continuous field monitoring and technical assistance visits by
UNICEF offered to partners in the field to ensure the highest standards of care and support to vulnerable
children.
In addition, during the period between closure of the predecessor programme to CPF, Programme of
Support (PoS), UNICEF applied its own resources to ensure that critical and life-saving child protection
interventions were not disrupted. This bridge funding from January to September 2011 meant that
service delivery continued as adjustments were made to the programme and partners responded to the
Request for Proposals under the child protection pillar. Subsequently selected partners had no
requirement for lengthy inception, design and start-up which is reflected in the numbers of children
reached. Since many of these children will remain in the system (case managed) for a significant period,
and due to resource constraints the NGO service delivery partners will be unable to move into additional
districts and thus the number is not likely to increase further. However this will be continuously
monitored in case the situation should change significantly, for example in response to an emergency or
with the addition of resources.
Following the issue of a detailed Request for Proposals by MoLSS Department of Social Services four
(4) partners were selected and tripartite Agreements signed for commencement of activity during
September 2011. Childline and Family Support Trust are both delivering critical services delivery under
the Thematic Area, Specialist Service Provision for Children and Women Affected by Violence, Abuse
and Neglect, Africaid under thematic area Specialist Services Provision for Children to be Confident
and Keep Safe and J. F. Kapnek Trust under Thematic Area Specialist Services Provision for Children
with Disabilities.
Whilst the quantity of proposals received reflected the interest shown by the NGO community, the
quality did not fully reflect a true understanding of the requirements of the ToR. Following the
Technical Review Committee recommendations the Terms of Reference under the remaining Thematic
Areas were reviewed in preparation for a second targeted RFP issued in January 2012. The Technical
Review Committee met on 22 March 2012 and conditionally approved funding under the remaining
Thematic Areas: World Education Inc., National Case Management System Development; Concern
Worldwide, Facilitation of Family Clubs; Legal Resources Foundation, Specialist Service Provision for
Children to Access Justice. A hybrid arrangement was agreed for Specialist Services Provision for
Children Separated from Family and Community with Child Protection Society undertaking a limited
service delivery component, and Save the Children the research component.
Each organisation has either signed or is in process of signing a tri-partite Memorandum of Agreement
with the Ministry of Labour and Social Services which details the parameters of the partnership
including requirements for reporting and monitoring and evaluation. This Agreement represents the
government effectively sub-contracting civil society partners to deliver much needed child protection
services to scale across the country. Such a model bodes well for future bilateral and sustainable support
to the government in the future.
12Estimate
based on previous Q whilst awaiting submission of final report
11
18th July 2012
In 2012 through the CPF, UNICEF is engaging with NGO service providers to ensure the delivery of
critical child protection services, complementary to government interventions and within international
and national legislative and normative frameworks. Making sure that these partners deliver excellent
services for children is a primary responsibility. In 2011, UNICEF engaged an independent consultant
to review current civil society partnerships in child protection to address the quality gap in M&E of
child protection service delivery. Together with its NGO service delivery partners, government
counterparts and children UNICEF worked to identify how they could make a promise of quality in
service delivery to children, to ask, “did the help we gave you make your life better?”
This is also a response to the strategic shift during the design of the CPF which requires programmers to
consider not only reach (number of children served) but also the quality and standard of the services
provided. A set of reporting tools and templates were designed with the participation of children and
other stakeholders. These have been used to inform the development of baselines for child protection
quality service delivery and case management reflected in the revised Logframe for the CPF.
UNICEF is working closely with Department of Social Services to technically support partners to
follow-up recommendations and track progress for children in delivering quality services and referrals
for holistic care and support e.g. Childline M&E Report May 2012.
Noting the feedback from the independent review of the predecessor Programme of Support, UNICEF
has instigated a number of changes to partner management including submission of quarterly reports,
field monitoring and formal follow-up quarterly meetings to review progress against results and provide
a forum for technical dialogue and advice. Wherever possible, this interaction is a three way partnership
with includes DSS, and thus contributes to lateral capacity building.
Value for Money: A Request for Proposals was issued with detailed Terms of Reference for seven
specific key thematic areas. Registered Private and Voluntary Organisations (PVOs) were invited to
submit applications whilst taking note of key requirements including ability to demonstrate capacity of
model to scale-up nationally and to mainstream equal opportunities. Technical Scoring criteria were
made available in the RFP and included cost per child, and historical performance of financial and
organisational management (assessed by disbursement and liquidation history, quarterly reporting and
spot checks through previous partnerships with UNICEF or references from previous donors). Selected
organisations were approved through a rigorous process which included DSS and UNICEF at the first
stage with final approval provided through the Technical Review Committee of the Working Party of
Officials, including National Aids Council, donor, INGO and multi-agency representation from
government. Negotiations were conducted prior to finalisation of agreements to reduce budgets prorated against available funding (in consideration of CPF being 65% funded).
Recommendation:UNICEF and DSS - The M&E system for monitoring reach and qualityin NGO
service provision, including the standardised tools for data collection, is extended to all partner NGOs
and adopted as the template for standardised reporting
The output indicator is being revised in the Logframe to better reflect quality service delivery and the
strategic focus of the programme on child protection system building.
Impact Weighting: 25%
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Risk: Medium
Revised since last Annual Review? N
12
18th July 2012
Output 3: Increased numbers of orphans and other vulnerable children facilitated in accessing basic
education
Score and performance description: A outputs met expectation
Progress against expected results: 405,01313 children (199,992 boys and 205,021 girls) out of a
targeted 520,000 vulnerable children received direct primary school support. 72 District Education
Officers, 72 District Social Services Officers and 80 School Inspectors were trained in BEAM
management issues bringing the total number of district trainers to 224. The report of an independent
evaluation of BEAM was presented to government in March 2012 to inform future BEAM
programming.The evaluation noted that BEAM is a relevant and effective mechanism for reaching
children, but not in reaching children with disabilities. Donors committed $10 million USD to BEAM
during 2011 for primary schooling through the CPF.
It should be noted that if education costs had remained stable between programme design and BEAM
delivery, this output would have fully met the expected target of 520,000 children, which is why this
output has been rated as meeting expectations. However,children’s access to education continues to be
impeded due to lack of education resources and rising school fees and levies inZimbabwe. The per unit
BEAM costs for 2010/11 increased by 48%: USD$8.30 per term (2010) and USD $12.25 per term
(2011). This rise in the level of fees and levies could not reasonably have been anticipated at the design
stage of the programme.
As noted in the independent BEAM Evaluation, therefore, the per capita allocation for primary school
children rose by 151% from 2010 to 2011; the number of primary school beneficiaries therefore
dropped 25% from 537,594 to 403,398 over the same years even though the amounts disbursed
increased (US$13.4 million in 2010 to US$14.9 million in 2011, an increase of 113%). During 2012,
BEAM is outside the scope of CPF.
While the donor group did not formally review targets during the course of the year, they acknowledged
that the BEAM target would not be met, sanctioned the lower number of grants, and downgraded their
expectations accordingly. The review team therefore concluded that, taking the change of
circumstances into account, expectations were met even if the original target had not been, on the basis
that this was entirely outside of the programme’s control.
The Ministry has verbally advised that it has made a policy decision that all children in HSCT
beneficiary households are eligible for BEAM. Unfortunately this policy decision did not reach school
selection committees in time for this year’s selection, thus these most vulnerable children are likely to
remain out of school for another year. This will likely mitigate the impact of the cash transfer itself. The
policy for BEAM still has to be amended to reflect this decision, which is likely to take place towards
the end of the year in 2012.
Recommendations: It is recommended that all CPF partners work to build on existing relationships at
all levels with stakeholders in the education system to plan for coming changes to BEAM and school
grant programme. The new Permanent Secretary at the MoESAC presents a timely opportunity to
establish dialogue. Prior to the end of 2012 there should be mechanisms in place to harmonise CTs,
BEAM and school grants so that the net effect is that there is less systemic and informal exclusion of
children from school (in particular at primary level) and less requirement for CT payments to cover
school levies. UNICEF and MoLSS will need the support of government and donor partners in this
respect; they should also ensure that CPF actors at the province, district and field levels all correctly
13403,398
primary school children plus ,1615 children in special schools
13
18th July 2012
understand the education laws and guidelines with respect to fees, levies and child exclusion.
Value for Money: As noted in the BEAM Evaluation, BEAM is a highly cost effective programme
with high impact. Less than 2% of the total funds for primary and secondary school support, for
example is spent on operational costs. This does come at a price however: “the relatively small portion
of BEAM funds that is set aside for programme management and administration is insufficient, and is
the cause of weak management capacity, weak capacity for monitoring and evaluation and overload in
the Planning and Monitoring Unit…of the DSS” (BEAM Evaluation, 2012)
Impact Weighting (%): 10%
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Risk: Medium
Revised since last Annual Review? N (not applicable beyond 2011 since funding committed for
implementation solely during 2011)
Output 4: Programme wide participatory learning and knowledge management systems in place to
measure impact and ensure best practice interventions, including within relevant Government
institutions.
Score and performance description: B Outputs moderately did not meet expectation
Progress against expected results:The reason this output has been rated as not meeting expectations is
the delay of baseline data collection. This data collection is now scheduled to take place in early 2013.
All other aspects of this output are on track and performing well.
The milestone of December 2011 for completion of the baseline survey was based on 12 months
implementation and an assumption that programming would begin in January 2011. Donor agreements
were signed later in 2011, however (with DFID in June 2011) and, upon the request of donors and
government, the initial tranches of funds were allocated to BEAM in its entirety. Combined with the
protracted negotiation process with contractors and 3ie (noted in Output 2 above), the baseline survey is
programmed for completion in 1st Q 2013. AIR, the selected impact evaluation contractorstogether with
co-funding partners FAO and UNC (through 3ie) held their inception workshop in Harare 22-27 June
2012. The baseline survey will be conducted immediately on completion of the HSCT Phase 2 targeting
and selection of HH beneficiaries.
A programme innovation in M&E has been the introduction of an independent contract for verification
of HSCT beneficiaries. This means that the selected organisation, Deloitte, will randomly sample 3% of
HSCT beneficiaries every month to find out if they received their cash in a timely and respectful manner
and without harassment. Plans are in place to contract separately for a similar verification for child
protection service delivery.
The remaining elements of this output remains on track. A total of 65 reports (in 9 months) have been
generated, against the anticipated target of 70 reports over 12 months.
NGO partners have submitted the requisite quarterly reports (2 Q x 4 partners) and in a timely manner.
Four (4) quality review reports were also completed by an independent M&E consultant for each of
these partners.One (1) report has been issuedfrom the information sharing workshop hosted by DSS on
02 & 03 April for NGO partners, DSS national, provincial and district officers, and other stakeholders
including UNICEF, donors and private sector partners. In connection with the targeting processes, 22
reports were submitted including 4 from the contractor, 16 field monitoring reports, 1 independent
review and analysis of the targeting process, and 1 review report from DSS on the process. With respect
to the cash delivery, 10 reports received from the contractor, and 13 field monitoring reports provided
14
18th July 2012
(up to 24 May 2012).
Seven (7) operational research reports completed including National Baseline Survey on Life
Experience of Adolescents (NBSLEA), a national prevalence survey of violence, including sexual
violence, against children; Promising Quality: Making sure that we deliver excellent services for
children, the experience of developing methodology using participative techniques and the subsequent
finalisation of tools for monitoring and evaluating quality in NGO child protection service delivery; the
Justice Sector Analysis, an examination of four key areas within the justice for children sector: juvenile
justice (the criminal justice system as applicable to minors), inheritance, custody, and the Victim
Friendly System; Review of the Protocol on the Multi-sectoral Management of Child Sexual Abuse In
Zimbabwe,a review of existing legislative and policy frameworks including an overview of the
protection rights of girls and boys and witnesses; Demographic and Health Profiles of Children with
Disabilities attending the Child Rehabilitation Unit (CRU) July 2005 - May 2011, a secondarydata
analysis to inform the planning and disability programming processes; Zvimba District Baseline
Disability Survey, an assessment of the prevalence of disability and to assess the effectiveness of a
community disability survey tool to be used by community volunteers and a screening tool to be used
by rehabilitation personnel at nationally; Child Protection Committees – Rapid Review and Assessment
of Capacity (CPC Assessment), an assessment of these community based protection structures and the
scope for their participation in the implementation and monitoring of the NAP II.
One (1) Handbook for Child Rights and Child Care for Caregivers, (a companion volume to the
National Residential Child Care Standards) has been published.
UNICEF is currently working to produce selected documents in child friendly versions.
Significant learning partnerships were also established with The Economic Policy Research Institute South Africa (EPRI) and Council of Social Workers - Zimbabwe, for them to work with government to
enhance their capacity to lead, coordinate, regulate and monitor child and family protection service
delivery. EPRI provided a one week, tailored training course in November 2011 for MoLSS officers on
designing and implementing social protection programmes. The programme aimed to build the capacity
of policy makers and programme officials to more effectively identify, design and implement social
protection programmes. Thirty (30) participants from national, provincial and district level Department
of Social Services offices were selected based on their involvement in the first phase roll-out of the
HSCT and this partnership is expected to continue to support roll out as new districts are prepared for
cash delivery.
The partnership with the Council of Social Work has ensured that mechanisms for consistent
registration and regulation of social workers are in place in order to allow the Social Work Act to be
fully implemented. The Council, together with the National Association of Social Work Students has
developed and is implemented a complementary lecture series for social work students to support the
application of social work theory to service delivery in the local context.
Value for Money: No-cost technical partnerships e.g. with National Association of Social Work
Students for lunchtime technical partnerships, provision of internships and networking for facilitation of
small-scale projects on a voluntary basis have contributed to the broader capacity building agenda.
UNICEF partnering actively with USAID at no cost, utilising its own technical experts, to support DSS
strategic planning and capacity building efforts as well as broader social welfare workforce
strengthening activities.
Following the publication of the DSS Audit in 2010 by UNICEF, PoS Donors, the DSS and OPM
consultants, considerable technical inputs have also been provided by UNICEF to the DSS for enhanced
child and social protection programming and system building, including one on one face to face
coaching and mentoring, involvement in meetings partnerships, drafting and review of documents and
advocacy for policy and legislative reform for children.
15
18th July 2012
UNICEF has also encouraged and brokered close working relationships with NGOsand DSS (as well as
the Ministry of Justice, Women’s Affairs Ministry and Ministry of Health) to ensure joint monitoring,
sharing of narrative and financial reports and quarterly tri-partite meetings to discuss progress, as well
as broader quarterly information-sharing meetings with all partners including district and provincial
DSS officers, private sector partners, NGOs and government agencies. This work provides evidence
based data for change and innovation in programme delivery. For example a multi-sectoral response
plan on violence against children has been generated as a result of the NBSLEA; changes to early
intervention protocols and midwifery training by MoHCW have been informed by the secondary data
analysis at CRU; complementary partnerships have been established to fill identified service delivery
gaps (such as the small grants programme for children with disabilities); measures to strengthen the
community response for child protection have been developed in response to recommendations of CPC
Assessment and a partnership with a USAID funded World Education programme.
Most notable, however, is the ongoing policy/advocacy work by UNICEF (at no cost to CPF donors)
with the Government of Zimbabwe Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) on Human Rights led by the
Ministry of Justice to ratify the Optional Protocol on the Convention on the Rights of Children on the
Sale and Trafficking of Children which took place in 2011/2012. This milestone for child rights
programming follows a decade of persistent and sustained advocacy, culminating in a series of debates
and technical workshops in 2011. UNICEF continues to provide technical support to the IMC to
develop an action plan on the Protocol and ensure regular reporting to international treaty reporting
bodies such as the International Committee on the Rights of the Child.
Recommendations:i) It is recommended that future social protection research and learning is linked to
providing access to quality child protection (welfare and justice), to identifying best practice in social
protection interventions and to institutional strengthening and capacity building.
Impact Weighting (%): 10%
Revised since last Annual Review? Y (in line with DFID guidance on Log frames)
Risk: Low
Revised since last Annual Review? N
Output 6: Programme effectively managed
Score and performance description: A outputs met expectation
Progress against expected results: This output is measured according to the following indicators:
implementation burn rates, effective national level co-ordination and $ contribution into the programme
by UNICEF, GoZ and other donors.
Nine (9) OECD donor group meeting reports from January 2011-May 2012. Two (2) Working Party of
Officials (National Child Protection Committee) Meetings and seven (7) sub-committee meetings
including M&E Sub-committee, Child Protection and Justice Sub-committee, Social Protection Subcommittee and Education and Health Sub-committee. Four (4) National Core Team Meetings held and
two (2) Technical Review Committee Meetings. Whilst frequency of meetings is not typically an
indicator of success, in Zimbabwe this reflects a harmonised and well- coordinated programme that is
operating effectively and regularly revising its activities and results in collaboration with many
Government, NGO, private sector, UN and donor stakeholders.
Following ongoing UNICEF support and advice, partners are managing to provide timely financial and
narrative reports on the use of their funding under the CPF and these are analysed and reviewed jointly
by UNICEF and DSS for future programmatic action. Most partners signed agreements with UNICEF
16
18th July 2012
in September of 2011 for 1 year start (subject to performance) and as such the majority have been
funded for the first 3 quarters of 12 months from start date. Current “burn/ implementation rates” are
55% on average with an anticipated 85% burn rate (on target) by September 2012.
For the period July- 31 December 2011, most funds were allocated to BEAM primary schools. Based on
OECD OVC donor group discussions and bilateral agreements, the full amount of approximately $10
million USD was utilized for BEAM primary schools in 2011 which represented a 124% utilization of
the planned budget, although only 65% of CPF funds were received against the proposal. This
exhausted initial CPF funds (received from DFID and the Netherlands) until the next tranche of funds
were received from other donors (SIDE and the European Commission) in October 2011. The overexpenditure on BEAM primary, at the request of OECD OVC donors, will result in a less-than planned
budget for cash transfers in 2012 (i.e. approx. $1,900,000 USD available rather than $3,900,000 USD).
Complementary funding has been made available by the governments of Japan and Denmark which
have been strategically aligned with relevant components of the CPF.
UNICEF regularly solicits feedback from children to contribute to improvements in programme
performance for example the NBSLEA implementation and response plan, development of NGO
Promise Cards, feedback meetings with children with disabilities and their siblings and is also working
together with all humanitarian development networks and organisations to share information
transparently, to highlight results and successes as well as to learn from partners in the sector.
Quarterly meetings have been held with donors (Denmark) and the Judicial Services Commission (SC)
to scale-up the nature and quality of work by the SC for children, including development of a database
and measures for standardised monitoring and effective functioning of children’s courts.
UNICEF has also advocated strongly for a multi-sectoral approach to service delivery with other
transition fund mechanisms for example Health Transition Fund to provide supplies for clinics treating
child and women survivors of sexual violence.
In parallel, UNICEF has also instigated (with its own funding) a community grants mechanism to
benefit children with disabilities and their families for purchase of assistive devices and other supplies
which improve quality of life. This small grants programme, managed by Mercy Corps is premised on a
participatory approach in which children and their families decide what they need. Most of the
assistance requested relates to high-value items and thus cost requirements of the programme limit
scope. This is designed to complement disability service delivery needs which fall outside the scope of
the CPF.
UNICEF acts as Secretariat for the OECD-CPF donor group in which role has successfully advocated
for significant partnership working in the design and delivery of the programme.
Recommendations of the 2010 PoS impact evaluation and financial systems assessment have been fully
implemented and incorporated into the design of the CPF. This includes advocating for and supporting
government leadership of the NAP II through CPF, contracting and finalising an institutional Capacity
Assessment of DSS and advocating for implementation of the recommendations, reducing the number
of NGO partnerships, ensuring CPF is implemented within minimum design standards, and
operationalization of an internal Projects Management Unit to address monitoring and planning issues.
Contracting processes with NGOs, for example, now take less than 15 working days on average and
UNICEF processes all financial disbursements within 10 working days of receipt of correct
documentation from partners. Partners have also been micro-assessed for their financial accounting
procedures in line with international Harmonised Cash Transfer processes for the United Nations and as
such UNICEF has authorised low –risk partners to procure their own supplies up to a limit of 10,000
USD per year. This has allowed for significant flexibility in the operations of the contracted partners.
17
18th July 2012
UNICEF continues to review the contractual arrangements with SECURICO and the DSS to ensure the
highest quality of service delivery and minimal fiduciary risk. DSS and UNICEF have successfully
advocated with SECURICO to adopt a protection and referral protocol including a robust code of
conduct to protect vulnerable children and adults, regular sharing of field implementation reports and
follow-up meetings to review progress and address challenges.
Value for Money:Leveraging co-funding from FAO and 3ie for the Impact Evaluation has significantly
expanded the scope of the impact evaluation with no additional costs to UNICEF or donors.
UNICEF is also advocating for complementary funding to the scale-up of child protection interventions
and strengthening of social welfare workforce through the current FRA for OVC led by USAID.
Utilising its own technical expertise- at no cost to CPF donors – UNICEF is also leveraging partnerships
With key UN Agencies involved in the social protection arena (FAO, ILO, and WFP) and World Bank
to identify synergies and where practical harmonise approaches. This includes working to encourage
DSS to share MIS information for harmonised targeting. It should also be noted thatDFID is
contributing significantly to harmonised programming and policy/advocacy as well in this area as
UNICEF and DFID jointly pursue the establishment of a national social protection high level forum
with the DSS.
The selection process for partners under the child protection pillar was conducted in an open and
transparent manner against robust criteria developed with DSS and shared with donors. This included an
invitation for all interested parties to attend an open information session (more than 200 NGOs
participated) led by DSS, donors and UNICEF. The two stage selection, monitored by the Technical
Review Committee contributed to risk mitigation by ensuring that selected partnerships were proven to
be technically proficient and managerially competent.
Recommendations: i) continue the on-going dialogue on DSS capacity to implement NAP II especially
at sub-national level. This is of increasing importance as this is likely to worsen in the immediate future
as a result of the removal of Global Fund allowances for social services staff at national and subnational levels ii) UNICEF shall consider the benefits of applying to donors for a no-cost extension to
CPF to extend its life in line with the NAP II, up to 2015. This would enable the final impact evaluation
survey to be conducted within the lifetime of the programme.
Impact Weighting (%):15%
Revised since last Annual Review? Y (previous score below 10% threshold)
Risk: Revised since last Annual Review? N
Section B: Results andValue for Money.
18
18th July 2012
1. Progress and results
NOTE: UNICEF recommends that the start and end dates for the CPF be adjusted to begin in
September 2011 (Year 1) for 3 years until September 2014. This will require action on behalf of DFID
to revise the date of the annual review in-line with the new start and end dates. UNICEF shall also give
consideration for a request to donors for a no-cost extension to align with NAP II end date of 2015 and
will communicate formally with DFID on this request following the Annual Review process.
1.1 Has the logframe been updated since last review?The logframe has been up-dated in preparation
for this current review. This is in part due to changes in the logframe template provided by DFID
and in part due to lessons learned during project implementation. The up-dated version has been
reviewed by the NAP II M&E sub-committee of the Working Party of Officials. Major changes
include:
a) More explicit references to risk and assumptions have been made.
b) Adjustments to the baseline and milestones (given that the CPF was only officially launched in
September 2011 and most funding arrived at this time as well), whilst more changes will be
made when baseline data is available in Q 1 of 2013.
c) Adjustments to the baselines and targets based on new evidence and data (such as the National
Baseline Survey on the Life Experiences of Adolescents and the updated 2010/2011 DHS)
d) New ways to calculate quality in NGO service delivery for child protection based on the 2012
Report “Promising Quality”
e) A more pragmatic calculation of “implementation rates” for partners to ensure accountability to
planned and actual funding utilisation.
1.2 Overall Output Score and Description: A Outputs meet expectation
1.2 Direct feedback from beneficiaries:
In one session facilitated by Mercy Corps children provided feedback through their art work drawn
presented by children with disabilities and their siblings and also siblings representing those who could
not be present. Children cited difficulties in movement due to physical obstacles, noise, harassment and
discriminatory comments. The provision of assistive devices, blankets, clothes, sunscreen and hats (for
children with albinism), and detergents was presented in art indicating the person before and after
receiving the supplies. Their presentations depicted discomfort due to cold nights, lack of hygiene and
how the children felt better after receiving the supplies. The group recommended that the NGO partner
should consult with the children and not only the parents when deciding the small grants allocation.
They felt that for some supplies these did not match the preference of children.
© Photo: UNICEF Zimbabwe/2012/Allet Sibanda
Mercy Corps Child Feedback Meeting
19
© Photo: Family Support Trust/2012
Children’s Feedback Meetings ‘Body Mapping’
18th July 2012
Forty (40) children in two locations provided feedback on Family Support Trust services. The
participatory tools used included: (1).Body Mapping which enabled children to review their situation
before and after FST’s interventions (2). ‘H assessment’ comprised of 3 critical questions, what we like
about FST, what we don’t like about FST, what can FST do to improve? (3). Individual assessments on
knowledge about FST: Children used plain pieces of paper to either write about FST or draw pictures
about FST. They also a role played to communicate their messages. The adult service providers in both
workshops then had a gallery walk to view the children work. Children were asked to volunteer their
feedback in plenary.
Children said, ‘We don’t want them to abandon us (Hatidi kuti vatisiye toga)’. This points to importance
of referrals, and, ‘We do not want FST to stop the good work it is doing (Hatidi kuti isiye basa rayo
rakanaka)’. They also said
1. They (FST) should consider those in need first before those who have things.
2. Staff members should improve on their communication skills with survivors as they are rude.
3. Increase staff member. We feel that maybe staff members are failing to be child friendly because
of the load of work.
4. Only professional counsellors should be involved in support groups because not all FST are
professional counsellors.
5. FST clinics should be in rural areas because that’s where most abuses are taking place.
6. FST should go from school to school so children are knowledgeable about FST.
FST are working to address the recommendations.
Additional direct beneficiary feedback was generated during the annual review process when the
Review Team had the opportunity to meet HSCT beneficiary households, child beneficiaries of the child
protection pillar, and grassroots community members involved in programme implementation.
1.4Summary of overall progress
1. By year 3, increased equity, health, nutrition,
protection and education outcomes for orphans
and other vulnerable children living in at least
55,000 of the poorest and most vulnerable
families through a national child-sensitive social
protection CPF that delivers reliable, regular cash
transfers across the country
Data will be provided from independently
contracted impact evaluation conducted by AIR
and UNC, with inputs and reports from P to P
Project. No data expected at this stage.
2. At least 25,000 child survivors of violence,
exploitation and abuse access effective, quality
support and care services (legal, health,
psychosocial) every year
The target has been exceeded; minimum 27,098
children at risk of and exposed to violence, abuse
and exploitation received free care and support
during the six month period September 2011March 2012.
3.At least 500,000 primary school-age vulnerable 405 013 vulnerablechildren (199 992 boys and
children benefit from free education services in 205,021 girls) received direct primary school
Year 1
support. The increased cost of education in
20
18th July 2012
Zimbabwe from 2010 to 2011 resulted in the
reduction in number of beneficiaries.
4. Legislation and policy frameworks promoting
the protection and care of children are enhanced,
in line with national and international standards
of good practice every year
National Baseline Survey on Life Experience of
Adolescents (NBSLEA); Promising Quality:
Making sure that we deliver excellent services for
children; the Justice Sector Analysis; Review of
the Protocol on the Multi-sectoral Management
of Child Sexual Abuse In Zimbabwe;
Demographic and Health Profiles of Children
with
Disabilities
attending
the
Child
Rehabilitation Unit July 2005 - May 2011;
Zvimba District Baseline Disability Survey:
Child Protection committees – Rapid Review and
Assessment of Capacity; Handbook for Child
Rights and Child Care for Caregivers.
5. CPF wide participatory learning and
knowledge management systems are in place to
measure impact and ensure good practice
evaluations for vulnerable children programming
regularly
Quarterly stakeholder workshops, WPO meetings
and Sub-committee meetings (M&E, Child
Protection and justice, Education and Health,
Social Protection), OECD donor group meetings,
National Core Team Meetings, quarterly partner
meetings, field visits, dissemination of reports.
1.5 Key challenges
Several issues were noted during the first phase of the cash transfer targeting exercise conducted by
external contractors; as a consequence the exercise took longer than originally anticipated. An
unanticipated number of call-backs to households due to unavailability of head of household ID or
absence resulted in reduced enumeration rates. The remaining survey therefore required additional days
to complete. This resulted in the survey spilling over into the rainy season compounding the delay as
some areas became inaccessible. The age of household members was often difficult to determine and
may have impacted on inclusion/exclusion error. Importantly, the number of households for interview
was significantly larger than anticipated (more than 35,000 additional households were interviewed than
planned) due to the absence of a recent census to inform planning. The costs of the targeting exercise
were therefore more than anticipated, especially in view of the additional numbers and challenging field
conditions for the survey.
Non-governmental organisations have struggled with the transition from PoS to CPF, as reflected in the
responses to the RFP. In spite of significant investment in communications many organisations
remained in the ‘business as usual’ mind-set. The systems building approach to child protection which
is the fundamental platform of the CPF has not been well understood. As a consequence the contracting
for NGO service providers has been delayed. However this has enabled refinements to be introduced to
the ToR and improvement in quality of proposals submitted. This has also been an opportunity for
UNICEF to work closely with partners to understand the systems approach build sustainable models for
child protection service delivery.
There remains the inevitable tension between balancing ownership and sustainability (including
ensuring meaningful government leadership) and the concurrent accountability and programme delivery
targets required for donor partners. This has been managed through careful brokering and oversight
from UNICEF, but remains a contributing factor in programme delays and remains a key challenge,
given the high potential for rapid changes to the programming environment.
21
18th July 2012
Finally, limited donor investments in human resources in the DSS due to the prevailing donor
conditions in Zimbabwe are severely impacting on the DSS’ ability to lead and manage complex
programmes such as the NAP II. UNICEF is supporting funding for 6 positions within the Ministry to
oversee and support coordination of the NAP II, but support to sub-national structures is extremely
limited. It is hoped that the investments in institutional capacity building will help to address some gaps
but an on-going lack of social workers in the country, and minimal staff in place in DSS to carry out the
statutory obligations of the 2004 Children’s Act for vulnerable children, continues to impede long term
progress and change in the child and social protection sectors. The capacity of government captured in
the 2010 DSS Institutional Capacity Assessment has been further compounded by continued retention
problems. This has resulted in increased pressure on UNICEF technical and monitoring support,
including multiple, unplanned field monitoring and technical support visits. Creative options are being
considered to address this without tying any organisations into long-term unsustainable support.
1.6Annual Outcome Assessment
Based on the available evidence and assessment of institutional processes, it is highly likely that the
expected results of the project will be achieved
2. Costs and timescale
2.1 Is the project on-track against financial forecasts: Y
At present, CPF is 65 per cent funded. Consequently, all activities besides targeting and BEAM are
being pro-rated. Details of funding availability and donors are outlined in earlier sections of this
Assessment.
2.2 Key cost drivers
The most significant change has been the increase in education costs which meant that fewer children
benefitted from BEAM. Additionally the cost of targeting for the HSCT was significantly higher than
anticipated, although the difference was funded by UNICEF (with donor agreement) outside the scope
of CPF.
2.3 Is the project on-track against original timescale: N
The project was delayed until donor agreements were signed and the project officially launched in
September 2011 by donors and Government. Donor agreement signature dates as follows:
DFID 03.07.2011; Netherlands 21.07.2011; EC 30.09.11; Sweden thematic funding (July 2011 and
being revised July 2012).
Since the first tranche of funding was allocated in its entirety to BEAM, other activities were delayed.
NGO implementation commenced in September 2011.
It is recommended that the dates of the CPF be finalised as
Year 1>27 September 2011- 26 September 2012
Year 2>27 September 2012-26 September 2013
Year 3>27 September 2013-26 September 2014
22
18th July 2012
This is in line with existing donor agreements and NAP II and could be adopted and ratified by the
WPO.
3. Evidence and Evaluation
3.1 Assess any changes in evidence and implications for the project
The monitoring and review processes, coupled with the operational research above, suggest that there
are several implications for programme design – specifically for the HSCT- that need revision in 2012.
These include:
 It is worth considering the benefits of focussing cash transfers on rural populations given the
highly mobile and migrant nature of urban dwellings (urban areas are also not the primary
location for labour constrained and food poor households)
 Increasing the current allocation of resources to targeting for HSCT to allow for the scale and
complexity of the programme and mitigate targeting risks (inclusion/ exclusion error)
 Increasing the timeframe for targeting through a phased approach.
Overall, the broader macro political and economic environment has remained stable, and both the
government and funding agencies continue to prioritise cash transfers as an instrument to combat
poverty. The design of the HSCT and complementary case management “gap filling” by NGOs for child
protection service delivery therefore remains largely unchanged.
3.2 Where an evaluation is planned, what progress has been made?
A proposal to co- sponsor the baseline study and subsequent outcome evaluations has been successful.
The contractor for the outcome evaluations will undertake baseline and one follow-up survey. The
University of North Carolina (UNC), funded through 3ie, will complete the second follow-up. The
selected contractors AIR, together with UNC and FAO P to P Project held their inception workshop in
Harare 22-27 June 2012 and contributed to the annual review including revision of impact indicator in
the logframe. Baseline survey is planned for completion 1st Q 2013 following completion of Phase 2
targeting exercise.
As noted above innovative M&E systems for evidence and evaluation have been introduced in the form
of independently contracted randomly sampled verification for HSCT beneficiaries and proposed
similar procedures for child protection service delivery.
4. Risk
4.1 Output Risk Rating: Medium
4.2 Assessment of the risk level
Please see separate Risk Mitigation Matrix but in general the operating environment remains fragile.
Election dates are uncertain and UNICEF must constantly revise its contingency planning, including
training for partners on Child Protection in Emergencies, and up-dating risk mitigation strategies.
4.3 Risk of funds not being used as intended
23
18th July 2012
Key checks and balances have been instituted to ensure that funds are not lost to fraud and
corruption.UNICEF has instituted mechanisms to ensure that whenever there is a distribution of inputs,
cash or otherwise, a representative from the organization is available to observe the process and provide
support. Independent contracts at all stages of the cash transfer component have been implemented
including during design, delivery, targeting and monitoring.
For example, with cash transfers, planning, feedback and reconciliation meetings are held among the
MoLSS, UNICEF and SECURICO, the private sector company that is transporting the cash on behalf of
the GoZ. To date, records from all the three agencies have been consistent with house to house
verification exercises conducted.
There remains a limited choice of partners with adequate capacity – particularly as the role of
international NGOs in monitoring or capacity strengthening can be sensitive. In response to this,
Government has indicated a preference for for-profit organisations. These require a different model of
engagement, based largely on contractual arrangements which do not have the flexibility often available
in partnerships. UNICEF has also initiated an independent contract for HSCT beneficiary verification
through 3% randomised sampling per month, which will require careful management, drawing on the
lessons learned from the private sector targeting partnership.
UNICEF has updated its internal mechanisms for partner management including for disbursement of
cash to partners (HACT) including micro assessment of partners, regular financial and programmatic
spot-checks and on-going financial management support.
Please also see separate Risk Mitigation Strategy.
4.4 Climate and Environment Risk
Currently, the NAP II/ CPF do not have activities that have the potential to directly cause significant
environmental degradation. Moving forward, discussions are underway, though, to determine how the
technological advancement can be integrated into development assistance, for instance, using cell phone
technology to distribute cash to claim holders. This has the potential to reduce carbon emissions from
vehicles.
5. Value for Money
5.1 Performance on VfM measures
No VfM assessment was undertaken prior to project commencement but each output has now been
assessed against VfM measures. As noted under each Output (above) Value for Money has been taken
into consideration during project design and reviewed in the light of the challenging programme
objectives. Cost is measured in relation to quality and within the framework of a significant risk
mitigation strategy which considers the context of a fragile operating environment. Detailed VfM
assessments provided under each output relate to processes for implementation, partnerships to extend
impact and sustainability as well as programme management. Full implementation of the 2010 PoS
impact evaluation and financial systems assessment are key indicators of the VfM approach adopted.
As the fund manager for the CPF as well as other transition funds, and thus a significant budget holder
UNICEF is subject to stringent internal controls including annual internal audit which also considers
VfM.
24
18th July 2012
UNICEF in a further programme innovation is proceeding with a consultancy against defined Terms of
Reference to develop a modelled cost benefit analysis, using existing data to estimate the cost benefit of
the Zimbabwean Child Protection Systemat both outcome and impact level. This model will then be
used to inform data collection over the next three years, with a view to enabling government and
UNICEF to undertake a full CBA in 2015/2016.
5.2 Commercial Improvement and Value for Money
UNICEF procurement processes for supply and contracting are cognisant of the high risk environment
and are in line with World Bank systems. Identifying partners who bring best value has included
engagement with private sector for HSCT targeting and cash delivery, verification and impact
evaluation, and detailed technical scoring criteria which include assessment of technical and
management capacity for NGO service delivery partners. In addition UNICEF has leveraged
complementary funding for service delivery, particularly in the access to justice sector as well as for the
impact evaluation. Engagement with commercial companies has also resulted in the donation of mobile
phones and services which may be utilised in the second round of cash transfer targeting.
5.3 Role of project partners
All partners are tracked for effective liquidation of funds against monies disbursed and activities
implemented. Quality measures have been introduced to track key deliverables in child protection
service delivery where outputs are often less tangible. Private sector contracts link payments to
deliverables and are monitored at section level. An organisational Project Management Unit has also
been established to track partnerships to ensure effective and efficient implementation.
5.4 Does the project still represent Value for Money : Y
5.5 If not, what action will you take? N/A
6. Conditionality
6.1 Update on specific conditions
UNICEF donor funding through CPF is restricted and thus no direct financing of government
institutions is permitted. UNICEF adopts measures such as direct payment for travel and workshops to
address this conditionality.
7.Issues and Recommendations
7.1
Programme management
Incorporate lessons learned during procurement contracts with private and civil society partners in all
future contracts to enhance DSS and UNICEF procurement processes. For example, criteria for the
selection of a second round targeting agency should be expanded to include a requirement for significant
regional and international experience in managing the logistics of national scale surveys.
UNICEF, DSS and Securico should urgently prioritise formulation of a roll out plan for the next 10
districts as soon as DSS confirms the 10 districts. The plan should adequately cover financial planning
and logistics of targeting surveys, verifications, economic routing of the cash transfer deliveries, advance
communication with beneficiaries and timing of disbursements.
25
18th July 2012
OECD OVC donors should consider agreeing on a set rotation for the chairing of OECD OVC donor
meetings.
7.2
Capacity building
Give further consideration to how delivery partners in DSS (social workers) and at community
level (e.g. Child Protection Committees, Case Workers) can be further supported and
empowered:
Community level

Consider increased provision of material resources (e.g. stationery, transport, Tshirts) to community partners (e.g. community case workers) – a small investment in
resources at local level can have significant positive impacts on efficiency and
visibility of community workers.
DSS

The review highlighted how lack of funds for operational support costs and
administration were adversely affecting case management follow-up and HSCT
monitoring. Consider how the CPF can meet these resource constraints.

The review also highlighted knowledge and skill deficits within the SW workforce
in Zimbabwe, limiting effective delivery of certain aspects of the NAP/CPF (for
example, SW competency in report writing skills, maintaining up to date knowledge
of legislation). CPF partners should, however, consider how best to further support
measures to address these skill deficits.

DSS capacity is also very highly constrained in terms of staff numbers. Some
measures are being taken to address this as part of the CPF (e.g. basing Concern and
WEI staff within DSS offices to conduct certain social work functions, work by
CSW to advocate for changes to legislation in order to reduce bottlenecks and
maximise best use of professionals’ time). CPF partners should, however, consider
how best to further address these resource constraints.
Both

7.3
Ensure that delivery partners correctly understand the education laws and guidelines
with respect to school fees, levies and child exclusion.
Coordination with other sectors
The review highlighted that many beneficiary households are using CTs to pay for school fees and levies,
and that any adverse changes to the situation regarding poor families’ access to education is likely to
impact on the effectiveness of the HSCT programme on other outcomes (particularly health and
nutrition).
While recommendations on broader education policies and programmes are outside the scope of this
26
18th July 2012
review, every opportunity should be taken to harmonise CTs and BEAM/school grants. For example,
there is scope to ensure that CT beneficiaries are automatically on BEAM. Better relationships may also
be developed with the education sector at all levels (from the new Permanent Secretary, to community
level – for example, involvement of school boards in the Child Protection Committees).
Better co-ordination with health officials and structures may also benefit the programme. Since 2009
there has been a distinct improvement in health service availability, in particular free HIV/AIDS
counselling, testing and treatment services are increasingly available and spreading. The CPF should
exploit every opportunity to promote and monitor the uptake of these 'non CPF' services to support
tackling one of the root causes of poverty and ensure that OVCs are not excluded from treatment if they
need it.
7.4
Risk management
While project stakeholders including UNICEF, SECURICO and implementing partners are aware of the
risks that could affect the programme, risk management in the programme needs to be undertaken
systematically and frequently, through regular monitoring.
The timing of the 2012 demographic census may inhibit ZIMSTATS involvement in data collection for
targeting purposes, and national elections may disrupt both targeting and impact evaluation baseline data
collection in early 2013. Contingencies need to be developed accordingly.
DFID should consider sensitising UNICEF, SECURICO and implementing partners about its anticorruption and fraud policy, and influence partners to develop theirs in cases where these are not in place.
7.5
Log frame
Keep track of programme log frame and inform donors during the course of programme implementation
where minor changes may be required before a formal annual review. Donors should collectively consider
the changes suggested by UNICEF within a reasonable timeframe.
Adjust some of the programme log frame indicators to better measure impact through the use of control
groups and the quantification of trends. Whilst the log frame is becoming more robust, it is essential there
are no further delays in implementing the impact evaluation baseline and starting regular external
verification exercises.
Consider further VfM indicators associated with the child protection elements of the programme. This
should be informed by the child protection CBA study being commissioned by UNICEF, and in
consultation with the DFID Results Advisor.
7.6
Community involvement
Consideration should be given to greater involvement of community members (particularly Child
Protection Committees) in the cash transfer process, particularly in communication efforts and dealing
with complaints from beneficiaries and others.
7.7
Donor visibility
Donor visibility is low – and in the first year of the programme, was kept deliberately so, in order to
minimise any political challenges with the first phase roll out of the HSCT. This strategy has worked and
the HSCT is very much seen as government-owned. It is, however, now desirable to improve donor
27
18th July 2012
visibility. For example, a flyer could be designed and inserted in CT payment envelopes. As well as
raising awareness of donors among beneficiaries, their communities and local staff, the flyers could also
be used to deliver other relevant information – for example, public health messages, a basic overview of
the CPF, and information on the CT targeting criteria.
8. Review Process
The Annual Review of CPF for NAP II was the first since the programme’s inception in June 2011. It
was commissioned by DFID and conducted jointly with other OECD donors, UNICEF, and the
Government of Zimbabwe. The AR process was participatory with all stakeholders, DSS, UNICEF,
donors, civil society and private sector partners, and beneficiaries all contributing to outputs and
outcomes. Field visits were conducted to selected project sites implementing the HSCT and CP
activities, in Harare and Matabeleland (North and South).
28