P1

UK AID MATCH CONCEPT NOTE FORM

This concept note form is designed to allow you to provide the information that DFID needs to assess how well your proposed appeal and project/programme fits the UK Aid Match criteria. Your concept note should set out the underlying idea of the proposal and what your appeal and project/programme will deliver.

Please read the UK Aid Match Guidance Notes (G1) before you start working on your concept note to ensure you understand and take into account the UK Aid Match funding criteria.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ON COMPLETING THE CONCEPT NOTE FORM

  • The concept note form must be completed using Arial font size 12.
  • Section 3 of the concept note form must not exceed a total of 4 A4 pages.
  • Please do not alter the formatting of the form and guidance notes.

We do not accept hard copies.

Concept notes received after thedeadline will not be considered.

You may submit only one concept note in each UK Aid Match funding round. You will only be eligible for match funding for one appeal per year.

If you have a written agreement from your communications partner, please send this with your concept note.

UK AID MATCH
CONCEPT NOTE FORM
Application reference number (added by DFID):
SECTION 1: INFORMATION ABOUT THE ORGANISATION APPLYING FOR FUNDS
1.1 / Organisation name / Hope and Homes for Children
1.2 / Registration or charity number (If applicable) / 1089490
1.3 / Office address / East Clyffe
Salisbury
Wilts
SP34LZ
1.4 / Website address /
1.5 / Main contact person details / Name:Rebecca Allenby
Position: Head of Grants
Email:
Tel: 01722790111
1.6 / What is the name of your appeal ? / Unlocking Futures for Children
1.7 / What is the name of your communications partner(s)? / Mumsnet, Grazia, Eastern Daily Press, Riviera Travel, Bear Grylls, Nick Hewer, Natalie Pinkham, Olga Kurylenko, Socialfuel, Clarion Communications, Salisbury Journal,
1.8 / Do you have a written agreement from your communications partner ? / Yes
1.9 / Is your organisation a UK-based not-for-profit organisation? / Yes
1.10 / What was your organisation's income in each of the last 3 years(In GB pounds. This figure should be taken from your most recent audited or approved accounts).
Please also provide the average income for this period.
From(dd/mm/yyyy) / To(dd/mm/yyyy) / Annual Income
01/01/2013 / 31/12/2013 / £6,083,357
01/01/2012 / 31/12/2012 / £6,185,941
01/01/2011 / 31/12/2011 / £8,117,633
Average Income for the 3 year period / £6,795,643
1.11 / If you are applying as a formal consortium, please list all of the member organisations in the consortium (note that all members of a consortium must be UK-based not-for-profit organisations.)
N/A
1.12 / Implementation Partner(s) List all implementation partners i.e. those that will be managing project funds, putting the main partner first. This list must include all offices of the applicant that have a role in the project.
HHC Rwanda, Kigali, Gasabo District, Nyarutarama Road corner
SECTION 2: BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT
2.1 / Project title - must be 1 concise sentence (maximum 200 characters including spaces), which includes 3 pieces of information:
i) what change the project will make
ii) who will benefit from the project
iii) the country(ies) in which the project will take place
Reducing poverty and family breakdown among the most vulnerable children and families in Rwanda and East Africa by supporting the transition from institutional care to family and community based care
2.2 / Where will the project be implemented?
(List the country(ies). Please check that all named countries are eligible for UK Aid Match funding) / Rwanda and East Africa Region
2.3 / Locality(ies)/Region(s) within country(ies) / The project will be implemented nationally
2.4 / Planned start date / 01/04/2015
2.5 / Planned end date / 01/04/2018
2.6 / Estimated project duration
(Maximum 36 months) / 36 months
2.7 / What is the likely total cost of the project? (In GBP sterling) / £906,600
2.8 / How much of the total project cost (In GBP sterling )would you expect to be funded by a UK Aid Match grant, and what percentage does this represent? / i)£680,000
ii)75%
SECTION 3: FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT
(Maximum 4 pages for the whole of Section 3)
3.1 / Whichof the Millennium Development Goals will your project aim to address?
(Please identify up to three MDGs in order of priority. Insert '1' for primary MDG focus area; '2' for secondary MDG focus area and; '3' for tertiary MDG focus area). / 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger / 1
2. Achieve universal primary education
3. Promote gender equality and empower women
4. Reduce child mortality
5. Improve maternal health
6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
7. Ensure environmental sustainability
8. Develop a global partnership for development
3.2 / What is the evidence thatthis project is needed at this time, in this location?
Globally, an estimated eight million children are growing up in institutional care (UNICEF 2009). For every child in institutional care there are thousands on the brink of separation from their families. Evidence from as early as the 1890’s demonstrates the profoundly negative impact of institutional care on children’s physical, emotional and behavioural development (Chapin 1890, Bowlby 1940, Browne 2009). Institutional care infringes upon a child’s right to a family life as set out in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). Institutional care is both a symptom and a cause of poverty. The majority (94 – 98%) of children placed in institutions have at least one living parent (Browne et al, 2005; 2006; Carter, 2005; Tobis, 2000). Studies consistently show that poverty is a driving force behind children’s placement into institutions. For example, a study in Sri Lanka, Bulgaria and Moldova found that “poverty is a major underlying cause of children being received into institutional care and that such reception into care is a costly, inappropriate and often harmful response to adverse economic circumstances.” (Williamson and Greenberg 2010). Children growing up in institutions have dramatically reduced opportunities; their ability to develop their potential is severely undermined (K Browne 2009, Carter 2005, Tobis 2000). Young people leaving care struggle to adapt to independent living and often resort to institutional care when they become parents (Csáky, 2009). Institutional care leads to intergenerational transmission of poverty. Resources can be more effectively used to combat poverty if reallocated from institutions to community-based support (Bilson and Cox, 2007). A study in East and Central Africa found residential care to be 10 times more expensive than community-based care (Swales, 2006). Supporting the transition from institutional to family-based child protection provides an opportunity to break the cycle of poverty. Hope and Homes for Children (HHC) is the leading organisation focusing on Deinstitutionalisation (DI) globally; the process of reforming child protection systems from institutional to community and family-based care. DI is increasingly recognised as a driver of poverty reduction, with wide reaching development dividends including significantly improved educational and health outcomes for children and family resilience. 45% of Rwanda’s population are poor and 24% extremely poor (DFID operational plan for Rwanda 2011 – 2015). Over 50% of the population are under 18 (UNICEF 2012) and we estimate that over 470,000 children are living in families at risk of breakdown. Across East and Central Africa governmental responses to the growing numbers of children in need of protection are weak; there is an over-reliance on institutional care (Swales, 2006). Rwanda is one of the most advanced countries in the region with regards to allocating resources to strengthening families and preventing their separation. The Constitution of Rwanda (2003) stresses the role of parents in protecting and promoting children’s rights. Since 2001 HHC has been strengthening vulnerable families in Rwanda. In 2012 we led in coordination with key partners the first institutionclosure. We developed prevention services to stop the flow of children into the institution (supporting over 500 vulnerable families) and provided family based/family like care for all 51 children living in the institution. We were subsequently asked by the Government to support them in conducting a national survey of institutions. This revealed that over 3,200 children were living in 33 institutions in December 2011. The survey results and the success of the pilot project catalysed the development of Rwanda’s Strategy for National Child Care Reform. The Strategy recognises that the transformation of institutions is an entry point to building sustainable child protection. The momentum in Rwanda must now be continued. Furthermore, our success at country level presents a unique opportunity to catalyse reform in East Africa and for the first time to clearly demonstrate the development dividends that DI brings. This project entails three interrelated work streams: 1) Coordinating the national transition from institutional to family based care in Rwanda by focusing on three areas of work: policy development, building the capacity of the social workforce and direct work at community level to support children and families. 2)Delivering a regional campaign for child protection reform, capitalizing on the increasing movement in Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia towards ensuring vulnerable families are supported to care for their children and reforming child protection systems. 3) Pooling the evidence from 1) and 2) to publish a study which captures the learning of national and regional reform, evidencing the linkages between reforming child protection in reducing poverty, specifically in an East African context, and providing the basis for scaling reform at the pan African level.
3.3 / What specific change to improve the lives of poor people is this initiative intended to achieve?
In Rwanda:Through national reform in Rwanda over470,000 children living within themost vulnerable families in the poorest communities will be supported through the community services created as a result of DI. Their families will be supportedto reduce their vulnerability, create a sustainable path out of poverty and develop the resilience required to stay together and care for their children. Over 3,200 children currently living in institutional care will have the opportunity to grow up in family based care, with significantly improved health, education and wellbeing outcomes. Rwandan children will no longer be placed in institutional care. The pace of this project over the next three years will be determined by the level of funding available.
In the East Africa Region:Children growing up in institutions and families at on the brink of breakdown in target countries will benefit from increased political commitment to child protection reform, a transfer of funding from institutional care to community based support and increased technical knowhow among NGOs involved in driving the transition.The number of children and families to benefit will be confirmed as part of the scoping exercise outlined in 3.3.
Globally: Vulnerable children and families will benefit from an increased understanding among key actors in child protection reform of the development dividends engendered by child protection, and aresulting acceleration inthe implementation of the UN guidelines on alternative care.
3.4 / How will the change be achieved? Describe briefly the main activities which the project will undertake and how these will lead to the anticipated change.
This project is easily scalable by a) adjusting the pace of capacity building activity in Rwanda b) reducing/increasing the number of target countries included through the regional work.
In Rwanda we will reduce poverty, vulnerability and family breakdown by:
- supporting the national roll out of ‘Community Development Networks’ (CDNs) across Rwanda, mobilising key community actors to identify families in extreme poverty and at risk of separation, provide apackage of support (e.g. income generation, counselling and referrals to other services), seek alternative care where separation cannot be prevented, and monitor children at risk in the community including those reintegrated with families from institutions.
- Setting up community development committees to provide on-going support and advice to families, helping them understand the harmful effects of institutional care, identify strategies to address poverty and risk of separation and increase awareness of the support available to them.
-Developing training materials on the development of CDNs to be included in the training curricula for the national social workforce which is being developed in partnership with Tulane University and delivered by HHC in partnership with the National Childcare Commission and UNICEF
-Identifying and supporting NGOs working with children and families to share promising practices and gain skills to address the inappropriate use of institutional care to address poverty
-Developing a guide in partnership with the Government of Rwanda to show how the resources from institutional care can be reallocated to community development with a focus on children.
-Developing training materials for NGOs and the national social workforce to build their capacity to support children and families in communities and transition children out of institutional care
-Conduct a mid-term evaluation of the project against objectives
At regional level in East Africa we will:
-Map the national situation of children in institutional care and those at risk of separation in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, including government policies, existing child protection provision and NGOs working with children and families
-Identify up to two countries where the preconditions for change are in place and where our intervention will yield the highest impact.
-In the target countries identify NGOs working with children and families in communities and those in institutional care and build their capacity to address reliance on institutional care and provide family and community based support
-Develop a regional guide for governments on how to better utilise the resources currently invested in institutional care in community initiatives supporting families at risk of separation and children returning from institutional care
-Develop a ‘how to’ guide for private donors to make the transfer of resources from institutional care to communities and families.
3.5 / What evidence exists from past experience (yours, your partners, or other organisations) to indicate that this approach is likely to be successful?
For the past 15 years, HHC has transformed child protection systems through direct interventions in 15 countries. More widely HHC has assembled alliances with over 20 national NGO partners across a further 12 countries and is recognised as the leading organisation in whole-scale high quality DI, with its model of change recognised as best practice by the WHO and UNICEF.
In Rwanda HHC has led the first successful closure of an institution for children in the country. Our internal project evaluation showed significant improvements in the outcomes of children across all wellbeing domains including, physical and psychosocial, motor and educational performances. This pilot enabled HHC to work in partnership with the Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion (MIGEPROF) to obtain an accurate overview of the current institutional system and inform policy reform on childcare. The combined impact of this was the creation of a government approved National Strategy for Child Protection Reform. It is vital that we capitalise on this momentum through direct implementation, technical assistance and capacity building to ensure the reform is high quality. Our proposed regional focus is also based on previous successful experience. Our programme in Romania has acted as a catalyst for the promotion of child protection reform across Europe in countries with similar social and economic circumstances. Over the past 15years the numbers of children in institutional care in Romania have decreased from 110,000 to below 9,000. HHC has driven through new legislation which makes it illegal for children under two to be placed in institutions and secured the funding that has put them on track to complete the reform of child care in Romania. Building on this success we have facilitated exchange visits, provided technical assistance and created demonstration projects piloting child protection system reform in strategically targeted areas across Central and Eastern Europe. This has given us the credibility and evidence to support governments in their reform, bring together civil society actors in a co-ordinated manner, for example through a pan European campaign Opening Doors, and advocate for political and financial support. In 2013 HHC played a critical role in negotiating DI as one of the EU’s priorities for its €325 billion budget over the next seven years. We now have an opportunity to translate our experience from Romania to Rwanda, capitalise on our early successes in Rwanda and build the momentum for the emerging trend for DI and child protection system reform in the East Africa region. This project will allow us to capture the learning and evidence to further support the development dividends created through child protection reform.
3.6 / Who has been involved in the design process so far?
HHC Rwanda, in consultation with children, families, local authorities, other NGOs, the Rwandan Government and social workforce, UNICEF, USAID, DECOF and The Better Care Network who have just opened a regional office in Kigali. This is extremely timely as it will draw attention and support for the issue of child protection and provide a focal point for organisations involved in child protection to share practice and coordinate actions