31
Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social Protection System: A Brief Review of International Experience and an Analysis of Data on the Philippine Pilot Program David Barua Yap (Asian Institute of Management Policy Center, Philippines) Child Poverty and Social Protection Conference 1011 September 2013

Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social Protection System:

A Brief Review of International Experience and an Analysis of Data on the Philippine Pilot Program

David Barua Yap (Asian Institute of Management Policy Center, Philippines)

Child Poverty and Social Protection Conference 10–11 September 2013

Page 2: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

2

Overview

1. Primer on the Philippine Cash Transfer Program: Pantawid PamilyangPilipino Program

2. Explanation of the Philippine social protection program for the homeless: Modified Conditional Cash Transfer for the Homeless Street Families or MCCT-HSF

3. Summary of statistics from the pilot implementation of the MCCT-HSF

4. Overview of social protection programs from selected countries

5. Discussion of mechanisms employed by the social protection programs of other countries that could be adopted by the MCCT-HSF

Page 3: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

3

Introduction

• The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) is a rights-based and social development program of the national government which aims to contribute to medium-term and long-term poverty reduction efforts.

Page 4: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

4

Introduction

• The beneficiaries are identified through a Proxy Means Test.

– The proxy means test was employed to ensure that the basis involved more than just income-based measurements

• As of May 2012, the program has provided financial assistance to almost eight million children belonging to over three million families living below the poverty line.

Page 5: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

5

Introduction

• The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) is a conditional cash transfer program. Targeted beneficiaries are given a maximum of P1400 a month for five years provided that the beneficiaries meet the conditionality provisions.

– Education: P300 for every child 3-14 years old, up to a maximum of three children.

– Health: P500 for the household

Page 6: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

6

SOCIAL SAFETY NET (POLICIES TO PROTECT)

PUBLIC GOODSREPRODUCTIVE HEALTH POLICY

POVERTY REDUCTION POLICIES (POLICIES TO EMPOWER)

INFRA AND PPPs

Page 7: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

7

Conditional Transfers to the Homeless

• The 4Ps, however, is limited to poor families with permanent residences.

– The homeless are beyond the coverage of the 4Ps

• The Modified Conditional Cash Transfer for Homeless Street Families (MCCT-HSF) was designed to extend social protection to the homeless.

– It is designed to provide immediate relief to homeless street families

– It is designed as a means for homeless street families to graduate to the formal CCT program

Page 8: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

8

Conditional Transfers to the Homeless

• The MCCT-HSF intends to provide homeless families education grants, health grants, transportation grants, and housing grants.

– Education: P300 for every child 3-14 years old, up to a maximum of three children.

– Health: P500 for the family

– Transportation or Housing Grant: P7000 for the family to either return to their province of origin or avail of affordable housing options.

• The MCCT-HSF also provides families support services. Older children are provided opportunities to enroll in alternative learning programs and accelerated programs to help them return to school.

Page 9: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

9

Pilot Implementation of the MCCT-HSF

• The pilot implementation of the MCCT-HSF was conducted during the latter half of 2012.

– The program was implemented in the National Capital Region

– 507 families divided into four batches

– The pilot implementation was conducted from August to November 2012

Page 10: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

10

Introduction

• Rapid urbanization has resulted in resulted in a geographically imbalanced growth pattern.

– Over 50% of the Philippine Population live in urban areas

• Over 47 Million

– Economic growth is concentrated in urban centers

Page 11: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

11

Introduction

Source: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

62.52%

56.95%

51.41% 51.71% 52.01% 51.97% 51.35%

37.48%

43.05%

48.59% 48.29% 47.99% 48.03% 48.65%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

RURAL

URBAN

Page 12: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

12

Limitations

1. Not all of the respondents elected to answer all of the questions included in the survey.

2. The datasets from the third and fourth batches of the pilot implementation of the survey are incomplete

3. The datasets do not have a lot of continuous variables.

Page 13: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

13

Motivations

1. The dataset still has the capacity to reveal important insights into the characteristics and motivations of people who belong to the homeless population of Metro Manila

2. These insights are invaluable to developing the social protection framework that would best address the needs of the homeless.

3. These insights are also critical in ensuring that the programs subsumed within the framework will not incentivize homelessness or create similar adverse systems of incentives.

Page 14: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

14

Region of Origin

NCR

CAR Region I

Region II

Region IIIRegion IV-A

Region IV-B

Region V

Region VI

Region VII

Region VIII

Region IX

Region X

Region XI

Region XII

CaragaARMM

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 5 10 15 20 25

Po

vert

y in

cid

en

ce a

mo

ng

fam

ilie

s %

Homeless street families' region of origin %

Page 15: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

15

Results from Pilot Implementation

Page 16: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

16

Reasons for Being Homeless

10

34

34

54

91

115

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

MARRIAGE / WANT TO LIVE APART

LOSS OF JOB / DEATH OF FAMILY MEMBER WITH JOB

NATURAL DISASTER

FAMILY CONFLICT

DEMOLITION / EVICTION

NO MONEY / NO LIVELIHOOD

Page 17: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

17

Length of Homelessness

1

24

33

10

68

51

72

27

145

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

LESS THAN A MONTH

1 TO 3 MONTHS

3 TO 6 MONTHS

6 TO 11 MONTHS

1 TO 3 YEARS

3 TO 4 YEARS

5 TO 7 YEARS

8 TO 10 YEARS

ABOVE 10 YEARS

Page 18: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

18

Family Size Statistics

20

50

38

32

17

12

6

7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

FS 2

FS 3

FS 4

FS 5

FS 6

FS 7

FS 8

FS 9+

Page 19: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

19

Number of Children

8

52

54

32

15

11

8

1

1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

NONE

NC 1

NC 2

NC 3

NC 4

NC 5

NC 6

NC 8

NC 9

Page 20: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

20

Homeless Families with Children

8, 4%

175, 96%

NO CHILDREN BELOW 18

WITH CHILDREN BELOW 18

Page 21: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

21

Educational Attainment

10

5

67

33

44

25

3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

NO FORMAL EDUCATION

PREPARATORY SCHOOL

ELEMENTARY LEVEL

ELEMENTARY GRADUATE

HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL

HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE

COLLEGE

Page 22: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

22

Sources of Livelihood

56

37

20

18

11

24

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

DRIVER

SCAVENGER

VENDOR

BARKER

LABORER

OTHERS

NONE

Page 23: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

23

Programs for the Homeless

• South Africa - Housing for the Poor:

– The South African program for the poor places emphasis on improving the living, specifically housing, conditions of the poorest South Africans. The system provides transitional shelters to the homeless to help them accumulate enough savings to afford housing of their own.

Page 24: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

24

Programs for the Homeless

• India – Shelter and Sanitation Facilities

– The Indian program for the homeless is similar to the South African program. The government provides temporary shelters for the homeless. The design of the program was motivated by the desire to provide immediate relief to the homeless.

Page 25: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

25

Programs for the Homeless

• Chile - Solidario:

– Solidario is the social protection system of Chile. It was introduced in 2002. The program design was motivated by the recognition of poverty as a multidimensional problem that not only centers on low income but also considers lack of social, economical, human, and psychosocial assets. Beyond cash transfers, Solidario provides psychosocial support to beneficiaries.

Page 26: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

26

Programs for the Homeless

• Brazil – Bolsa Familia

– Bolsa Familia shares several characteristics with Solidario. It also goes beyond conditional cash transfers and places emphasis on improving the psychosocial conditions of the poor.

Page 27: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

27

Programs for the Homeless

1

• Identification of Eligible Households

• Social Protection Scorecard – Chile

• Specialized Social Assistance Reference Center - Brazil

2• Provision of Cash Transfers and Grants

• Provision of Specialized and Personalized Psychosocial Programs

3

• Provision of Graduation Programs

• Skills Training for Reintegration or better Integration into the (Formal) Labor Market

Page 28: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

28

Programs for the Homeless

CountryProgram for the

homeless

Psychosocial

support

Cash

transfer

Temporary

shelters

Subsidized

housing

development

Chile Calle

Chile Solidario

South AfricaDept. of Human

Settlements

Dep’t. of Social

Development

IndiaNight Shelter for

Urban Shelterless

Supreme Court

Brazil CREAS

Bolsa Familia

Page 29: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

29

Programs for the Homeless

• High-quality, high-capacity, and cost-efficient temporary shelters are important to providing immediate relief to the homeless.

• Development and implementation of personalized psychosocial support systems for the poor and the homeless.

• Development of an integrated and efficient targeting and monitoring system.

• Inter-agency cooperation.

Page 30: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

30

Conclusions

• The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program is a criticalcomponent of the Philippine long-term development agenda.

• The Modified Conditional Cash Transfer for the Homelessenhances the capacity of Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Programto provide social protection to the poor who are counted amongthe most socioeconomically vulnerable.

• The surveys have to be improved and implemented properly inorder to ascertain the specific vulnerabilities and motivations ofthe homeless.

Page 31: Including Homeless Families and Children in the Social

31

Questions• Developing better survey instruments for the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program

and the Modified Conditional Cash Transfer for Homeless Street Families is crucial to answering the following questions:

– Who among the homeless are the most vulnerable? What kind of interventions do the homeless street families want? Are these interventions within the ambit of the social protection agenda?

– Are homeless street families open or receptive to specific kinds of interventions such as returning to their respective home provinces?

– How do the beneficiaries respond to being given conditional cash transfers? Do they find the imposition of conditions demeaning?

– Upon determination of the best interventions and the most needy, it is also important to ask: Can the government afford to provide these interventions to most, if not all, the homeless? If not, would it be better to provide adequate relief to as many than to provide meager relief to all?