welcome to the webinar social accountability in the...

Welcome to the webinar

Social accountability in the delivery of social protection:

Exploration of approaches and principlesorganized by

HelpAge International and International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth

(IPC-IG)

socialprotection.org presents:


Exploration of approaches and principles

organized by HelpAge International and International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth, IPC-IG

Panellists: Salum Rashid Mohamed, Head of the Social Protection Unit, ZanzibarAbdurrahman Syebubakar, Chief Technical Advisor, Integrated Referral and Service (IRS) System for Social Protection and Poverty Reduction, IndonesiaModerator: Alice Livingstone, Social Protection Adviser at HelpAge International

http://socialprotection.org/

Submit your questions to the panellists of the webinar

Simply type them in the GoToWebinar chat bar!

SPGateway SP_Gateway

https://www.facebook.com/SPGateway/

https://twitter.com/SP_Gateway



Moderator

Alice Livingstone, Social Protection Adviser at HelpAgeInternational

Alice Livingstone has more than ten years experience working inpolicy, research and advocacy related to income security in olderage in low and middle income countries. This has largely focusedon social protection and related areas including voice and socialaccountability, work/livelihoods, labour migration, financialinclusion, and mobile technology. She has a background ininternational development, human rights advocacy and MSc inSocial Policy Research from the London School of Economics andPolitical Science.

Social accountability in the delivery of social protection: Exploration of approaches and principles

PanellistSalum Rashid Mohamed, Head of the Social Protection Unit, Zanzibar

Head of Social Protection Unit, Department of Elderly and Social Welfare of the Ministryof Labour, Empowerment, Elders, Youth, Women and Children Zanzibar, Tanzania. Since2011, he has been involved in building social protection system in Zanzibar, includingdeveloping the Zanzibar Social Protection Policy and monitoring its implementation. Hewas also involved in the design and implementation of the Zanzibar Universal PensionScheme as a ministry’s leading technical officer and advisor, including preparing cabinetpolicy papers, operational manual, kick-off plans etc. He has over seven years experienceworking with UNICEF, HelpAge International, Save the Children, USAID, ILO, UNDESA,Socieux (supported by EU) and several local organisations on issues related to socialprotection, child protection and the general social welfare. His language ability includesSwahili (local), English, French, Turkish and Arabic. He holds a BA in Sociology and MSc. inSocial Protection Financing. Currently, he is a PhD candidate at the University of Kocaeliin Turkey.


PanellistAbdurrahman Syebubakar, Chief Technical Advisor, Integrated

Referral and Service (IRS) System for Social Protection and Poverty Reduction, Indonesia

Mr. Syebubakar holds Masters degree in Development Administration from theAustralian National University. He has more than 20 years of progressive andprofessional experience working with national and international NGOs, the ASEANSecretariat, UNDP and the Vice President’s National Team for Accelerating PovertyReduction (TNP2K).

Mr. Syebubakar has developed several areas of expertise: social policy workincluding MDG and human development analysis and reporting; poverty reductionand social protection; regional pro-poor planning, budgeting and monitoring;qualitative research and analysis; local governance and decentralization; politicaldevelopment and democratization; and civil society and private sectorpartnerships.


➢ Development of the Zanzibar Social ProtectionPolicy (ZSPP), 2014;

➢ Strong commitment of the Ministry: establishmentof universal pension for OP was the first priority ofthe Ministry;

➢ Good political support within the ZHR – HelpAgeplayed important role to creating this support;

➢ Pressure from CSOs and older people themselves;

➢ Existence of statements by government leaders insupport of universal pension idea;

➢ Existence of some mini programs that supportolder people;

➢ Small proportion of older people in overallpopulation (58,311 OPs = 4.5% in 2012);

7

Accountability mechanism is presented in the complaint andappeal (grievance) mechanism, which allows OP and their reps tocomplain whenever they feel dissatisfied with the service.

Complaints and appeal mechanism involves the following actors:

1. Shehia authorities 2. Older people structures and their organisations3. District offices 4. Social Welfare Officers (SWO) in the Cash Payment Team (CPT);5. UPU and the DSW6. The Ministry

People are free to send their complaints about the programme at any level depending on their concerns.

Number of channels exists:

8

1. Older people and or

their representatives

Shehia

Authorities

District

Offices UPU/DSW Ministry


their representatives

Shehia OP

Forum

Z’bar

Organisation

for OP

UPU/DSW Ministry


their representatives Cash Payment Team UPU/DSW Ministry


their representatives District Offices UPU/DSW Ministry


their representatives UPU DSW Ministry

9

Call centre has also been established with similar objective.

Provide awareness to OP on the grievancemechanism of the scheme;

Support those complainants (particularly thedisabled and marginalised) to voice theircomplaints and appeals;

Represent OP in local and national forums on thismatter;

Link OP with the relevant authorities (DSW, UPU,District offices);

Monitor the overall implementation of thescheme, and accountability framework inparticular;

Pressure government response on matters thatconcern OP

10

Denial of registration at shehia level;

Dishonesty from their representatives/next of kin;

Traveling distance to pay points;

Late arrival at pay points;

Use of inappropriate language from the side of cashiers;

Delayed individual payment, mainly caused by late submission of application forms by shehia offices;

11

Most collective concerns such as regarding distance,late arrival at pay points, change of reps, etc. arebeing responded by the government;

The government intends to make the programme asfriendly as possible for the OP to access the benefits;

Local authorities are less responsive and often delaysin taking appropriate actions. Most individualcomplaints are directed to local authorities;

In general, so far the state response to OP concernscan be rated as intermediate, at the national level,but low at local level.

12

Use of local structures (OPF) and their organisations. Thisreduce government cost and ensure sustainability;

Simplicity of the scheme design: simple eligibility criteria, flatrate benefit level, simple and easily accessible applicationprocess;

Frequent meetings with beneficiaries: monthly cash paymentoccasion is also used to collect complaints and giveclarifications;

13

Work closely with the respective ministry/ office.The idea is to develop friendship and notenemity;

Use tangible evidence and existing policydocuments and presidential statements =strategic use of all appropriate opportunitiesavailable (eg. the use of ZSPP to enforce ZUPS);

Use of important people (former high level gov.Officials – presidents, ministers .. ) in thestruggle;

Require to meet most influential leader(s) in thesystem: why not the president? (ref. the case ofJUWAZA in the struggle for the ZUPS)

Proper use of politicians.

14

Not all shehias has older people structures;

The current system is still so manual and so is not easy todocument every detail;

There is no legal framework that support implementation ofthe scheme, so some operations such as appeals may bedifficult to solve legally;

In early stages, enough priority was not allocated by thegovernment to building strong accountability framework;

15

Some older people are also benefiting from other programmes-others are claiming;

Lack of strong MIS that facilitates all operations and reduce manualwork;

Some OP do not have birth certificates or any other document toprove their age;

Cash management (to avoid late arrival at pay points);

16

17

➢ Develop a legal framework to support ZUPSimplementation – the development of a law for olderpeople is about to start;

➢ Improve delivering channels by assessing otherpossibilities (mobile phones and bank accounts);

➢ Develop a comprehensive MIS to supportimplementation of the scheme at all levels – phaseone of the exercise has already started;

➢ Struggle to minimize age threshold and increase thebenefit level, as early as possible. OP and CSOs havea lot to do on this matter;

➢ Improve the grievance redress mechanism to increaseresponse;

➢ Build capacities of local authorities on the program.

Older citizens and CSOs are important in creatingdemand and bring about policy changes;

Programme design and local structures arecrucial in building a functional and sustainablegrievance redress mechanism;

Capacity building at low level is the key tosuccess for the ZUPS complaint and appealmechanism;

More investment is still required to buildingbetter social accountability framework and eventhe ZUPS in general.

18

Thank you for your attention!

19

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

WHY SLRT?

1

2

3

4

SLRT

Solution

Integration of information, data and services

Contribution to dynamic data

updating by local governments

Identification, referrals and

complaint handling

Identification of program

participation and needs

SINGLE WINDOW SERVICE

MA

IN F

UN

CT

ION

S

KEY FEATURES

Horizontal and vertical linkages

Practical, user-friendly and real-time android & web based applications

Integrated into local mechanisms and

institutions

24

FLOW OF SERVICES AND COMPLAINT HANDLING

People visit village level SLRT

Facilitator reaches out to people3 channels of complaint reporting

People visit SLRT office at the district/city level

EXPECTED RESULTS

ACCESS AWARENESS

INTEGRATION CAPACITY THE POOR

GOVERNMENT

PLANNING AND BUDGETING

Extended bureaucratic outreach for social services

ACCOUNTABILITY AND MONEV

SLRT as GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL MECHANISM FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION

▪ Multiple channels for receiving and resolving complaints (i.e. facilitator reaching out to

people, Puskesos at the village level, supervisor at the sub-district level, SLRT Secretariat

office in districts/cities). Also connected to other channels available at the local level

(relevant local line agencies, PKH village facilitator, village apparatus, private sectors,

NGOs etc.)

▪ Dedicated and trained facilitators, supervisors, managers, staffing of Puskesos and SLRT

offices, technical assistants in districts/cities

▪ Face to face discussions between the SLRT local implementers and complainants

▪ Real-time horizontal and vertical linkages via android and web based applications

▪ Wherever possible, complaints resolved at the point of service delivery to ensure that

complaints are responded speedily and accurately, hence transaction costs are low

✓ These interrelated features help address some of the challenges identified by the 2012 OPM study on Grievance Mechanisms, including among others: (i) lack of awareness of entitlements and grievance mechanisms; (ii) unwillingness to complain for different reasons ; (iii) complaints at higher level (especially targeting) not addressed; and (iv) limited access

SOME RESULTS

Mindset change of local leaderships and their apparatus towards the importance of horizontal and vertical integration of social protection and poverty reduction

Buy-in and commitment of local governments through provision of regulatory frameworks, local budget allocations, institutional arrangements and human resources

Awareness and understanding of the importance of integrated data being updated in a dynamic and regular way

Data and information flow in almost all districts/cities of SLRT as being captured in the dashboard

SLRT offices established at the district/city level and Puskesos (village-level SLRT) in some 78 districts/cities, through state funding (APBN) and/or local funding (APBD) modalities

Majority of SLRT offices and Puskesos active in receiving people’s visits to report and register their complaints, processing referrals and handling complaints

50

20 128

Location of SLRT 2016

No. District/City No. District/City No. District/City

1 BANDUNG 18 KEDIRI 35 PIDIE

2 BANDUNG BARAT 19 KENDAL 36 SEMARANG

3 BANTAENG 20 KEPULAUAN SELAYAR 37 SIDOARJO

4 BANYU ASIN 21 KOTA MALANG 38 SITUBONDO

5 BARITO KUALA 22 KOTA PAYAKUMBUH 39 SLEMAN

6 BATANG HARI 23 KOTA SUKABUMI 40 SRAGEN

7 BELITUNG TIMUR 24 KUBU RAYA 41 SUKABUMI

8 BERAU 25 KULON PROGO 42 SUKOHARJO

9 CIANJUR 26 KUTAI KARTANEGARA 43 TAKALAR

10 DELI SERDANG 27 LOMBOK TENGAH 44 TANAH DATAR

11 DEMAK 28 MALANG 45 TANGGAMUS

12 GOWA 29 MUARO JAMBI 46 TAPIN

13 HULU SUNGAI SELATAN 30 MUSI RAWAS 47 TIMOR TENGAH SELATAN

14 JEMBER 31 PAMEKASAN 48 TULUNGAGUNG

15 JENEPONTO 32 PASAMAN 49 SIKKA

16 JOMBANG 33 PASAMAN BARAT 50 KEPULAUAN MENTAWAI

17 KARAWANG 34 PESISIR SELATAN

Location of SLRT 2017

No. District/City No. District/City

1 KOTA DENPASAR 11 OKU TIMUR

2 KOTA SURAKARTA 12 KOTA MADIUN

3 KOTA SERANG 13 KOTA MOJOKERTO

4 SIAK 14 PACITAN

5 KOTA SOLOK 15 SOPENG

6 KOTA PANGKALPINANG 16 PRINGSEWU

7 BANGKA 17 GORONTALO UTARA

8 BANJAR 18 SUMBAWA

9 KOTA PEKAN BARU 19 KOTA MATARAM

10 KOTA BATAM 20 SAROLANGUN

Location of Autonomous SLRT

No. Socialization No. Technical Training

1 KEPULAUAN ARU 1 LOMBOK TIMUR

2 SIMEULEU 2 LOMBOK BARAT

3 CIREBON 3 BIMA

4 KOTA BOGOR 4 KOTA BIMA

5 BOGOR 5 DOMPU

6 GARUT 6 SUMBAWA BARAT

7 KOTA DEPOK 7 LOMBOK UTARA

8 KOTA BEKASI 8 PHAK-PHAK BARAT

9 KOTA BANJAR

10 SERAM BAGIAN TIMUR

11 WONOGIRI

12 KOTA BANDUNG

SLRT DISTRICTS/CITIES 2016-2017

LegendSLRT District/City Location

Non SLRTSLRT APBN 2016 + APBD Cost SharingSLRT APBN 2017 + APBD Cost SharingSLRT Socialization – APBD

SLRT Technical Training - APBD

✓ 60 new locations in 2018✓ 150 locations by 2019

SOME EXAMPLES OF THE TYPES OF COMPLAINTS

▪ Targeting or participation issues across all programs, especially the four major national programs (PKH, PIP, RASTRA, PIS)

▪ PKH being excluded from other programs – about 13 % of PKH beneficiaries receiving 4 programs, late receipt of payment etc

▪ Rastra: the quantity and quality of rice received, lost cards▪ PIS: slow services, lost cards, misspelt names, mistaken dates of

birth, wrong addresses, less beds etc.

▪ PIP: no card, late receipt of payment, etc.

▪ Access to legal identity documents (i.e. ID card, birth certificate, etc.)

▪ Limited social assistance for people with disability, elderly, displaced persons

▪ Un-decent housing, lack of livelihoods/income generation including that of people with disability

SOME GOOD PRACTICES

▪ Single database: all related line agencies obliged to use SLRT data

▪ Quick Reaction/Response Unit of SLRT equipped with Free Ambulance, Free Car for Poor School Children

▪ Partnerships with private sectors (CSR) and civil society organizations (e.g. BAZNASDA)

▪ Productive economic enterprising for the poor including people with disability through local KUBE (joint venture group) on goat raising, dry food, garments etc.

▪ Funding for facilitators and staffing of SLRT offices in districts/cities and villages with equipment and operational costs

▪ Free ride for those registering complaints at the SLRT Secretariat for further referrals and/or going back home

▪ Services for accessing legal identity documents

▪ Local regulations related to the establishment of SLRT – to ensure sustainability

▪ Local programs: health insurance (Jamkesda/Jamkesos), un-decent housing –(RTLH), joint venture group (KUBE), Subsidized Rice for the Poor (Rasda), to respond to people’s needs and complaints

CHALLENGES

▪ Limited referrals of complaints to provincial and national programs. SLRT applications are being connected to the MIS of respective program.

▪ Complaints at the SLRT office manually registered and processed. The SLRT applications and its infrastructures are being built in SLRT offices at the district/city and village level.

▪ Links to other systems and mechanisms of updating integrated data for poverty reduction. SOPs for complaint handling of programs have been finalized.

▪ Use of SLRT data and information for planning and budgeting of social protection and poverty reduction. Analytical tools for the use of SLRT data have been developed.

▪ The need to accelerate the SLRT roll out to more districts/cities across Indonesia beyond national state budget (APBN). Budget of the central government is limited.

▪ Limited roles of provinces in the development and implementation of SLRT

▪ Sustainability beyond 2019 - end of the current RPJMN timeframe

Terimakasih

Questions and Answers

Submit your questions! Type them in the GoToWebinar chat bar

Salum Rashid Mohamed Abdurrahman SyebubakarAlice Livingstone

To stay up to date on the



follow socialprotection.org on social media:

#SPorgWebinar



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVULbH8Ox7HsMpotD0cAo2g

Thank you for joining the Webinar



http://socialprotection.org/user/register?destination=front

welcome to the webinar social accountability in the...

Documents