Integrated Social Safety Net Systems

Transcription

1 Ayala Consulting Group May

2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ii Social Safety Nets, a Fundamental Part of Social Protection 1 Social Protection 1 Social Safety Nets 2 Situational Analysis 3 6 Implementation Strategy 8 Institutional Framework 8 Single Household Registry and Management Information System SHR Management Information System SHR MIS Design SHR MIS Best Practice 15 Harmonisation Supply Capacity Targeting Enrolment Co-Responsibility Compliance Transfers Case Management Internal Monitoring Data Sharing 20 Households at the Centre 21 Conclusion 22 i Bibliography 23

3 Executive Summary While social protection policies and programmes have been key components in poverty reduction agendas of many countries in past decades, recent developments and visible results are increasing their relevance and political momentum (Bank, 2012). Although the concept of social protection gives the idea of interconnected programmes achieving interrelated functions, the reality in most cases is that of an amalgam of programmes operating with little or no coordination (Robalino, et al., 2012). Fragmentation of programmes results in overlaps and gaps in coverage, some of the poor receiving benefits from multiple programmes and some receiving none. These inefficiencies are commonly a result of: Inefficient internal operations: project cycles, use of human resources, monitoring and evaluation mechanisms; Limited coordination: duplication of procedures and tasks at the local and central levels, overlaps and gaps in coverage; Manual management of information: leads to inefficiency and error and limits the communication between programmes; and Insufficient tools: information management, technology, technical operations manuals. These challenges translate to high operational costs and inefficient use of resources, as well as provide a strong need for an integrated system of SSNs, to better evenly distribute benefits of economic growth, reduce costs, improve efficiency, and most importantly to break the cycle of poverty. Donors such as UNICEF and the World Bank together with Governmental and Non-Governmental Organizations are attempting to make shift to an ISSNS, where all SSNs share information and processes can be performed simultaneously (Baldeon & Arribas-Baños, 2008). A key gap exists in guiding practitioners through the tools that facilitate the transformation of fragmented programmes into integrated systems this document focuses on identification of instruments for the efficient implementation of an ISSNS. The instruments proposed in this document to transform fragmented SSNs into an integrated system are as follows: Institutional Arrangements: the establishment of a social protection strategy as well as a central body with policy oversight and expenditure planning authority over all transfer programmes is essential for an ISSNS. Single Household Registry and Management Information System: a database of households ii

4 and the management tool with modules for each process provides a single tool to store and update data for all social protection programmes. Harmonised Programmes and Processes: Processes which can be partially integrated as supply capacity, targeting and enrolment. Processes that can function simultaneously for all programmes include transfer, data sharing, monitoring and case management. The process that cannot be integrated is coresponsibility compliance in the case of CCTs. Households at the Centre: an updated report summarizing the most important characteristics of each HH as well as its historical evolution during the time it has been in the registry allows SSN programmes to be tailored to the needs of each HH leading to efficient targeting of interventions and efficiently moving of HHs out from levels of extreme poverty. The above-mentioned tools have been identified as clear mechanisms to assist public and private entities on how to move towards an ISSNS. Donors and governments struggle to accurately define what external support is required and fail to prepare succinct terms of reference for external consultants to assist in the design and implementation of an ISSNS. With this document, it is expected that stakeholders have a clearer understanding of the complexity that a transformation of fragmented social protection programmes towards an integrated system entails, in addition to the tools necessary to go about it. An ISSNS provides an equitable harmonised system to maximise resources and help households move out of poverty, yet it remains for public and private stakeholders to make the necessary decisions to effectively implement this type of system. iii

5 ACRONYMS CCT CT HH ISSNS MIS MoE MoH MoSD MoU OM PMT SP SSN Conditional Cash Transfer Cash Transfer Household Integrated Social Safety Net System Management Information System Ministry of Education Ministry of Health Ministry of Social Development Memorandum of Understanding Operational Manual Proxy Means Test Social Protection Social Safety Net iv

6 TABLES TABLE 1: Country Case Studies of Fragmented SP Programmes 6 TABLE 2: Tools for Implementation 7 TABLE 3: ISSNS Best Practice Case Studies 15 FIGURES FIGURE 1: Cross-Sectoral Approach 1 FIGURE 2: History of SP 2 FIGURE 3: Safety Nets in Development Policy 2 FIGURE 4: Institutional Arrangements 9 FIGURE 5: Merge Multiple Databases into SHR 12 FIGURE 6: Process Cycle 16 FIGURE 7: Targeting Process 17 FIGURE 8: Enrolment Process 17 FIGURE 9: Transfer Process 18 FIGURE 10: Case Management Process 19 FIGURE 11: Spot Checks Flow 20 FIGURE 12: Data Sharing Process 20 FIGURE 13: Moving Households Out of Poverty 21 v

7 Social Safety Nets, a Fundamental Part of Social Protection Growing interest in Social Protection (SP) in developing countries over the last decade has spurred a rapid evolution of the field and innovations in policies. While policies to promote broad-based economic growth are fundamental to overall social development, the benefits of growth do not automatically reach the poorest and most marginalized families; which is why direct interventions are still required to reach the socially and economically deprived. This paper will provide an introduction to this field as well as highlight consistent challenges countries face. Additionally, the concept of Integrated Social Safety Net Systems (ISSNSs) will be explored including how and why governments worldwide are attempting to move in this direction yet consistently fail to meet policies and strategies. Finally, clear guidelines will be established to provide step by step instructions on how to move towards and ISSNS. 1 Social Protection SP can be seen as a set of public and private policies and programmes aimed at reducing and eliminating economic and social vulnerabilities to poverty and deprivation. It is a crucial policy tool for supporting equity and social justice (UNICEF & Bank, 2013), and being cross-sectoral, it is part of broader development policy as shown in Figure 1 below. Both, economic efficiency and human rights based approaches imply that SP is justified on the basis of economic growth, social development and justice. In combination, they suggest a strategy to achieve economic growth, enable the realisation of rights and empower the poor to participate in and contribute to growth and development (World Bank, 2001). Similar SP programmes are often observed: cash or in kind transfers; mandatory social insurance programmes; regulations that protect workers; and programmes that aim to help individuals improve their earning opportunities. These programmes usually fall under the purview of the Ministries of Labour, Social Affairs, FIGURE 1: Cross-Sectoral Approach (Fajth, 2009) Education and/or Health and are delivered through public or private providers, including social assistance and insurance institutions, employment service offices, training centres, or private insurance companies (Robalino, et al., 2012).

8 Social Safety Nets Over the last two decades, there have been massive developments and innovations in SP across the developing world, with new approaches, techniques and paradigms. While in the beginning, SP programmes were mainly oriented to improve the supply side, it has thenceforth been recognized that promoting the demand side is also key towards the success of such programmes. The need to respond to situations of growing impoverishment and socioeconomic risk as well as the aim to achieve more impact with fewer resources has required the identification of alternative approaches. The integration of fragmented programmesis increasingly being implemented in order to improve efficiency and effectiveness. The subsequent timeline illustrates how countries have been refining SP approaches, maximising the use of resources and focusing on HHs needs. FIGURE 2: History of SP 2 Based on the above developments, Social Safety Nets (SSNs), as part FIGURE 3: Safety Nets in Development Policy of SP systems, have expanded in recent years across the developing world. SSNs fit into the wider array of policies involved in promoting equity, poverty reduction, social risk management, and SP. SSNs are part, but not the whole of each, and poverty reduction and risk management strategies overlap substantially but not entirely. SSNs are not the only or even the principal tool for (Grosh, et al., 2010) achieving any of the ends they serve, yet they can make a significant contribution. When situations are dire, they can help save lives. When situations are less dire and programmes are especially good they also can save or help build livelihoods (Grosh, et al., 2010). SSNs are ideally integrated systems of several programmes that complement each other as well as other public or social policies. As expressed by Gentilini and Omamo (2009) in Unveiling Safety Nets, the objectives of SSNs are to: Help ultra-poor HHs meet their basic needs and cope with poverty; Assist poor HHs in managing risk or shocks without resorting to harmful coping strategies such as selling productive assets, withdrawing children from school to work, reducing expenditure in health and education; Redistribute resources to those who do not benefit from economic growth;

9 Work towards breaking intergenerational cycles of poverty by facilitating investment in human capital development in poor HHs; and Provide concrete options with immediate impact for governments to address particularly and persistently poor social welfare indicators. If used correctly, SSNs can be highly useful in responding to specific problems of vulnerable groups. Specifically, Grosh et al. (2010) in The Case for Social Safety Nets identify four effects of SSNs: Have an immediate impact on inequality and extreme poverty; Enable HHs to make better investments in their future; Help HHs manage risk; and Help governments make beneficial reforms. For these reasons, in recent years, SSNs have become increasingly popular for poverty reduction the world over. Many SSNs in developing countries are geared towards improving the poorest HHs ability to access basic services by boosting their income and incentivising positive behaviour and therefore investing in human capital development. These demand-side interventions are seen as important complements to supply-side investments (such as improving physical infrastructure and quality of services), especially in health and education. 3 SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS While SP policies and programmes have been key components in poverty reduction agendas of many countries in past decades, recent developments and visible results are increasing their relevance and political momentum (Bank, 2012). Although the concept of a SSN gives the idea of interconnected programmes achieving interrelated functions, the reality in most cases is that of an amalgam of programmes operating with little or no coordination (Robalino, et al., 2012). Even though the benefits of Cash Transfer (CT) programmes have been established, realising their potential requires careful planning. Decisions about whom to target and how to identify beneficiaries according to poverty, vulnerability and/or food security levels, just to name a few, strongly affect outcomes. Other risks of SSNs are that they can create a form of welfare-style dependency, result in negative incentives, and pay insufficient attention to supply or quality issues (IEG, 2011). The drawbacks are exacerbated when multiple SSNs run simultaneously without harmonisation. When this is the case, SSNs often fail to reach the intended target group, fail to generate a sustained decrease in poverty, lead to overlaps and gaps in coverage, high expenditures and/or an inefficient use of resources (Rawlings & Murthy, 2013). Lack of coordination results in overlaps and gaps in coverage, some of the poor receiving benefits from multiple programmes and some receiving none. Additionally, overlaps and gaps are difficult to document because programmes communicate very little with each other, which is exacerbated when a SingleHousehold Registry (SHR) database and a Management Information System (MIS) are not in place. Programme effectiveness is restricted by limited understanding of the most appropriate options to operationalize systems, especially where SSNs have been established for long periods of time. Many programmes use manual rather than systematised operations, lack sophisticated information management, and use limited technology. Additionally, weak monitoring at central and local levels and weak horizontal coordination among multiple actors involved in managing (and financing) a wide range of policies and programmes create

10 confusion between lines of responsibility as well as a lack of accountability at central and local levels. Weak horizontal coordination is exemplified by each programme operating in isolation despite working in the same areas. Albeit having similar processes (transfers, targeting, and enrolment), programmes carry out each process separately and in very different ways, without a thorough examination of how to pool resources. At the policy level, particularly relevant in a financially constrained context, uncoordinated programmes usually result in overlapping objectives, or parallel structures serving a similar purpose. Initiatives not integrated into national structures and/or strategies result in limited capacity to benefit from economies of scale, and are unlikely to be financially and politically sustainable in the long term as total spending on programmes is high, while only a small portion of the poor is being reached (Cook, 2009). At the programme and administrative levels, fragmentation and un-coordination have implications in terms of limited and scattered coverage, and increase the likelihood of inclusion and exclusion errors, weak referral systems and limited awareness among staff about other programmes and benefits which become key obstacles to children s, families and communities access to essential benefits and services (Barrett, et al., 2008).Challenges faced by fragmented SSN programmes can be grouped as follows: Inefficient internal operations: project cycles, use of human resources, monitoring and evaluation mechanisms; Limited coordination: duplication of procedures and tasks at the local and central levels, overlaps and gaps in coverage; Manual management of information: leads to inefficiency and error and limits the communication between programmes; and Insufficient tools: information management, technology, technical operations manuals. These challenges translate to high operational costs and inefficient use of resources, as well as provide a strong need for an integrated system of SSNs, to better evenly distribute benefits of economic growth, reduce costs, improve efficiency, and most importantly to break the cycle of poverty. The following table includes country case studies of inefficient and/or ineffective SP programmes. 4

11 TABLE 1: Country Case Studies of Fragmented SP Programmes Country Madagascar (Monchuk, 2014) Peru (Weigand & Grosh, 2008) Vietnam (Robalino, et al., 2012) Kenya (Fingler, 2012) Pakistan (Gedeso, 2013) Characteristics of SP Programmes More than five different public works programmes exist Operated by various donor organizations and ministries Safety net system is incapable of taking a strategic approach to reducing poverty and vulnerability The main safety net programmes fall under half a dozen ministries and three different levels of government This is the case even though Peru only had about 20 major safety net programmes, many fewer than commonly found elsewhere. Several CT schemes developed largely on an ad-hoc basis Social assistance is hampered due to weak institutional capacity Inefficient targeting, with duplicates, inclusion and exclusion errors Linkages with social assistance, social insurance systems and the private sector are limited as well as inadequate M&E tools. Projects are limited in coverage Systems and structures are not robust to enable a rapid expansion Dominated by expensive food-aid responses to drought Five CTs fragmented at the institutional level and overlapping at the beneficiary level Multiple visits to programme office by beneficiaries to complete the process (updates, bringing back verified admission forms) Gaps in beneficiary data used (eg. migration, deaths) Lack of coordination and communication among stakeholders The above indicates why donors such as UNICEF and the World Bank together with Governmental and Non-Governmental Organizations are attempting to make shift to an ISSNS, where all SSNs share information and processes can be performed simultaneously. The next section delves into what an ISSNS entails (Baldeon & Arribas-Baños, 2008). 5

12 The potential aggregate increase in social welfare that programmes could generate working as a system is higher than what can be achieved by summing the contributions of each programme working independently. In an integrated system, potential beneficiaries are less likely to fall through the cracks and lack coverage for a given risk or fail to benefit from assistance if extreme poor or vulnerable. Programmes can complement each other as individual components working together can share resources leading to more efficient management, administrative, and financing arrangements. The obvious example is the sharing of administrative and IT systems. Despite high initial costs, once in place, processes such as targeting, enrolment, and transferring benefits can serve many programmes simultaneously at a reduced marginal cost. The same is true for governance arrangements to manage programmes and deliver services, and of monitoring systems. Finally, programmes that harmonize financing can eliminate distortions such as differences in contributions for similar beneficiaries (Robalino, et al., 2012). Potential costs and risks of an integrated system require extremely well designed and implemented administrative tools to manage coordination across many independent agencies. Moving towards a systems approach therefore requires a careful assessment of benefits and costs tailored to country specific contexts. In general, a systems vision calls on political leadership, clear policies, and functional institutions to guide both adjustments to individual programs and improvements to the governance, management, administrative and IT structures applied across programs. Policymakers need to define context specific transition paths in order to consider implementation of an ISSNS(Robalino, et al., 2012). 6 The fragmentation of SSNs has limited their potential efficiency, synergy, impact on poverty, inequality and exclusion. Governments should strive for integration (where possible) of activation principles and instruments into the design of programmes and the work of line ministries, especially investment, agricultural development, transportation, health, education, environment, employment and youth, and water and sanitation (Alderman & Yemtsov, 2012). In order to address these issues, an ISSNS characterized by synchronization, equity, transparency, and accountability should include the following components: Institutional arrangements, clear assignment of responsibilities, and common administrative tools used across programmes in order to provide channels for effective cross-programme management; A set of interventions that address both social and economic vulnerabilities; A set of established policies and programmes that can provide both short-term interventions to address temporary shocks and longer-term approaches to address structural vulnerabilities and chronic poverty; and Multi-sector approaches and coordination, in order to address multiple and compounding risks and vulnerabilities across the life-cycle of individuals.

13 Despite there being plentiful strategies and policies by national governments and development partners alike, challenges continue due to the lack of clear implementation tools. The need for a clear and simple implementation strategy is apparent and urgent which includes: Identifying instruments for implementation; Ascertaining the reach of each instrument; Developing a clear logistical plan; Implementing instruments appropriate to country contexts; and Ensuring donors and government stakeholders are in agreement and on board at all times TABLE 2: Tools for Implementation This paper will touch on all of the tools listed above but will focus in particular on point one, identification of instruments for the efficient implementation of an ISSNS. It has been identified that the other components have considerable literature, but a key gap exists in guiding practitioners through the tools that facilitate the transformation of fragmented programmes into integrated systems. The instruments proposed in this document to transform fragmented SSNs into an integrated system are of equal importance and are interconnected as shown in Figure 3. Each of the tools will be explained in detail, and therefore this document can serve as a guide on the tools to move to an ISSNS. 7

14 Implementation Strategy This section will provide a detailed account for public and private agencies on the tools to move towards an ISSNS. This section will begin with how to transform an Institutional Framework appropriate for and ISSNS and will continue with SHR and MIS, Harmonisation of programmes and processes as well as focusing on Households at the Centre. 8 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK An appropriate institutional framework provides strategic direction, mechanisms to ensure appropriate administration of systems, and clear horizontal and vertical linkages (Blank & Handa, 2008). The institutional arrangements needed to establish a strong ISSNS are two-fold. First, the government needs to develop a comprehensive strategy and policy that clearly defines and delineates the country s approach to SP in general and to SSNs in particular. The strategy should include broad poverty reduction objectives, target groups, coverage, and programme choices. To address the needs of diverse vulnerable groups, the relevant ministries must develop policies, legislation, strategies and operational modalities that ensure coordination and sensitivity to beneficiary needs. These concepts need a strong commitment and interrelationship from all participating ministries in order to materialise. For implementation, the appropriate Ministry should first consider the following steps: Mobilise all relevant stakeholders (government officials, donor agencies, intended beneficiaries, other SP actors) during the design stage, in order to obtain feedback on the suitability and potential risks of the proposed design. Following the discussions and agreements during this stage, the Ministry of Social Development should lead to signing of Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) between the participatory ministries, delineating clear functions and responsibilities. Appoint a SSN Operations Coordinator at the Central Level and Operations Officer(s) at the central Level to conduct operations along with existing operations staff from the participatory ministries. Delineate clear responsibilities at central and district levels. Most operations will be handled at the District level, allowing the District to build its capacity and strengthen service delivery. Second, it is essential that the government identify the most appropriate structure(s) to provide strategic guidance and oversee implementation. In this direction, the World Bank (2013) suggests the establishment of a central body with policy oversight and expenditure planning authority over all transfer programmes. The lack of such an agency (as seen in the country case studies previously presented) has led to problems of overlap and gaps in coverage. The operationalization of a fully ISSNS requires the government to establish a National Steering Committee for SP to oversee the policies and have expenditures planning authority. Further, a well-coordinated SSN Unit composed of representatives of appropriate line ministries of government agencies is needed to manage

15 and coordinate SSN programmes as well as provide representation, communication and linkages to their corresponding offices. At the National Level, the ISSN Unit is responsible for day-to-day operations of the ISSN system. Among other tasks, the ISSN unit should: Make the financial arrangements for each project; Be responsible for coordination of the processes; Prepare quarterly financial reports; Ensure quality of service delivery; Monitor the progress of the project; Assist in the selection of external partners; Use the MIS to produce lists whenever necessary; Request cash benefit information from payment agencies and approve payments to beneficiary HHs; Organise trainings; and Authorise and manage development and distribution of communication materials. FIGURE 4: Institutional Arrangements 9

16 At the Sub-National Level, it is necessary to establish SP Teams and Community Council Social Service Committees. At the District level, in order to support and focus on improving service delivery and responsiveness to local needs, it is recommended that tasks focus on front line contact with beneficiaries, responding to complaints and appeals, promoting HH knowledge of the programmes, and strengthening linkages between demand for services and quality of delivery. Information should be collected at the local level to enable the monitoring of basic beneficiary information, and be monitored at the central level to allow for aggregation and collective monitoring.the main duties of the District will be to: Lead the community mobilization strategy; Carry out targeting, enrolment, and case management; Receive forms related case management from the villages for data entry in the MIS; Print and distribute all forms using the MIS; Act as an effective communication link between village level and central level for smooth functioning of pilot; and Assist in transfers. Regarding the ISSNS institutional framework proposed above, it is important to understand the current structures in place for the SSN programmes involved and what integration this implies from the country context. Given that all programmes processes will be thought, supervised, coordinated and implemented by an integrated institutional framework, the involved parties and ministries will have to discuss and agree upon the exact responsibilities and reporting lines of appointed staff. In addition to the aforementioned requirements, it is also important to place emphasis on strengthening the capacity of the relevant supporting ministries (such as Social Development and Finance), as they are ultimately responsible for the overall SP strategy and a wide range of social welfare services. Further, effective interagency coordination should be achieved through creating effective linkages at both national and sub-national levels, creating quality oversight, promoting synergies with other dimensions of SP, and ensuring that the SHR supports targeting decisions. Single Household Registry and Management Information System A SHR and MIS will encourage and facilitate the cohesion of SSNs around standardized government policies and priorities for social assistance. 10 SHR Instead of having numerous databases for each program, it is essential to set up a Single Registry as a central database. Addressing fragmentation and increasing the overall efficiency of SP programmes hence becomes possible in order to achieve an ISSNS. A SHR maintains HH profiles, providing and managing information on HHs needs, benefits, and enrolment information in one place. As a result, HH information can be cross-referenced by programmes and easily referred to by complimentary programmes, or updated, if HH characteristics change (e.g. the HH head dies or becomes disabled). In addition, a single registry facilitates the harmonization of SSNs across sector mandates/ministries; induces coordination, reduces waste and duplication as a result of sharing the same registries of beneficiaries; and helps ensure that a package of SP services is provided to the vulnerable population (Blank & Handa, 2008).

17 The real-time availability of these profiles facilitates the rapid and cost-effective targeting of emergency or other temporary programs as well as program graduation. Therefore, the SHR functions as a common tool for existing or future SSN programs. The government may allow different programs to access the registry information as it sees fit, for instance for targeting purposes, or for informational research purposes. An SHR provides the government with a platform of HH information, which can potentially be used by any safety net, protection or relief programme. It is a system that aids the government with all aspects of administering, monitoring and supervising SP transfers but also for effective management and allocation of resources, establishment of a communication network, monitoring of trends and efficient delivery of services. The following list summarizes the benefits of a SHR. Improved Targeting: Introducing poverty targeting and increasing transparency of targeting. Reduction or Elimination of Duplication in coverage of various Safety Net Programmes: Allowing feedback between programmes. Increased Coordination: Enabling centralised oversight of policy and budget planning through effective management and allocation of resources, establishment of a communication network, monitoring of trends and efficient delivery of services. More comprehensive Social Assistance: Improving coordination between existing, isolated programmes. Reduction of Redundancies and Duplication in Labour and Resources for Targeting and Beneficiary Updates: Harmonising targeting mechanisms and allowing information updates in one place. Development Countries with fragmented programmes will normally have a wide range of individual databases for each SP programme they have. Each single database will contain different variables based on the needs of the specific programme. Also, some databases might contain information on individuals while other databases might use the HH as a unit for information storage. Developing a Single Household Registry consists in unifying multiple separate databases in order to create a new automated database that contains all information needed for the purposes of the ISSNS. To this end, a variety of databases of different programmes are first collected and merged to a single database. Second, this database is adapted to the needs of the ISSNS through (i) deleting unnecessary variables and redundant data fields and (ii) adding new variables and adapting units to HHs in order to obtain an integrated database based on the HH unit. The final database has to include ALL necessary data so as to meet all information needs of all programmes integrated in the ISSNS. Third, duplicates and information discrepancies are identified. Missing information is collected through the visit of beneficiaries to update desks or through household visits. Also, the programme must verify accuracy of information and to delete inconsistent data if necessary. Once cleaning of the database has occurred, it is then uploaded in an automated SHR database. The figure below illustrates this process: 11

18 FIGURE 5: Merge Multiple Databases into SHR It is important to note that the set-up of a SHR can serve as an entry point for more strategic structural changes, including those related to the harmonization or integration of similar programmes or the coordination of programmes within and across SP functions. A potential entry point for integration can be the linkage between the SHR and the civil registry system and ministry of health databases. Integrate programmes of complementary nature (CTs); Merging processes such as payments, case management and monitoring to improve efficiency; Unify communication strategies and messages; Achieve institutional coordination; and Develop, refine and implement streamlined, systematic tools and procedures where existing and future SSNs operate jointly improving efficiency and effectiveness. Functions The SHR is managed via a central database and absorbs existing HH and individual information of current beneficiaries of CTs and similar programs. This database contains detailed and comprehensive demographic and socioeconomic information which it then classifies households into poverty categories as extreme poor, poor and non-poor HHs. Being stored in a systematized way this consequently helps to better serve the informational needs of the social assistance sector. The participating social assistance programmes return key information about beneficiaries (current and otherwise, where possible), updates, transfer reconciliation, monitoring information, etc. All programmes, participating entities, stakeholders and government agencies can thus access dynamic and more complete information about HHs benefiting from social assistance in the country. Management Information System The SHR relies on a Management Information System (MIS) as the technological tool that facilitates management of all processes within programs comprised by the Integrated SSN. This is the tool that all too often is developed by IT companies who have little coordination with operational teams, which results in a product that poorly responds to the needs of implementing officers in the field. 12

19 Definition and Purpose As Alderman and Yemstov (2012) describe, [i]mproved IT facilitates the delivery of cash, monitoring results [and] also facilitates the linkage of safety nets with financial services. This entails one tool with integrated modules for administration, registration, enrolment, transfers, case management, monitoring indicators and thus systematizes program management of all processes. Further, it provides a mechanism to automate transfer calculations, lists and reconciliation, generate forms and identify errors. For each process, a unique MIS module is established. As such and when needed, information of each module can be easily updated, stored, edited, viewed and manipulated. At the same time, the modules are interrelated so as to ensure linkages and feedback mechanisms between each process. The main objective of the MIS is to produce proper monitoring for every process, and to ensure that each function is carried out correctly, reducing human error, increasing transparency and determining access levels to information. The latter avoids an overload of information and facilitates each actor to concentrate on his/her tasks. The introduction of spot checks of random samples has been an innovative tool to monitor targeting efficiency. An adequately implemented and managed MIS can strengthen the control and accountability mechanisms of SSN programs as well as mitigate operational and control risks (Baldeon & Arribas-Baños, 2008). As a result, the MIS is an ideal tool to monitor every process throughout the ISSNS and allows quick decisions and actions in case the Program is failing.the following list summarizes the functions of an MIS: Control and aggregate the information; Produce value-added reports and statistics regarding beneficiaries or operations (e.g. number of HHs receiving benefits, number of payments not received on time, etc.), for monitoring purposes; Generate forms/letters and lists according to each process; Make benefit calculations and reconciliation; and Identify errors and triggering follow-ups. Development The MIS is developed using a prototype model. Based on this methodology, the product will respond to the following objectives: (i) ensure that the SHR implementation is in tandem with the design parameters and that the implementation process is adequately supported by necessary and sufficient human resources; and (ii) provide technical assistance, advice, guidance and overall support to the local implementing team for quality assurance and control during the entire cycle of the implementation phase. A comprehensive team of IT Consultants and Operations Consultants completes these activities. The Operations Consultants are responsible for the preparation of the Operational Manual (OM), which guides the management of the SHR in all its processes and procedures. Additionally, they are responsible for preparing the Technical Annexes and operational guidelines including for individual processes. The IT Consultants work closely with the Operations Consultants to ensure that the resulting software modules meet the specific needs of the SHR processes. 13

20 SHR MIS Design In the process of implementing a SHR and its corresponding MIS, the Government should first formulate a clear vision for the system, then plan a roadmap for its expansion, and finally ensure adequate capacity to maintain and manage the database. For this, the following are recommended (Bank, 2013): Put in place a core team (department) for operating and expanding the SHR. Develop the OM and Technical Annexes. Initiate and actively develop cooperation between SHR staff and that of other government agencies (ex. health, education). Interagency technical groups should be formed to ensure that technical requirement of incorporating data from other agencies into the NHR are adequately understood. Explore and pursue linkages with the civil registry and ministry of health systems as early integration will enhance the capacity of the SHR to track benefits at the HH and individual level by providing a unique and universal personal identification numbers. Increase human resources dedicated to the implementation of the SHR at the district level to ensure efficient implementation, monitoring and supervision; at the same time, explore a sustainable way of hiring data collection enumerators in order to undertake a national census. Ensure the services of a reliable third-party phone operator in a sustainable manner. This should take into consideration both the services needed (software, streamlined communications, proximity, customer support) and the fiscal sustainability. Consider implementation of a proxy-means test (PMT) formula and community validation. The implementation of the SHR MIS has two parts: design and implementation. The following are the main steps to be taken: Design proposal is developed and submitted; Discussions and decisions during the implementation of the institutional arrangements stage, will involve relevant stakeholders and signing of MoUs); MIS modules, operations manuals, and technical annexes are developed for each programme. The annexes will be developed once the decisions take place and decisions are made: they will elaborate on processes and will act as a guideline for the pilot programme. At the same time, they will provide the basis for the development of the respective MIS modules needed for implementation. Experience with this type of integrated database and information management system is relatively novel, yet cases demonstrate the potential success of a well designed and implemented system. 14

21 SHR MIS Best Practice Examples of countries where a single registry of beneficiaries have been implemented are described in the following table. TABLE 3: ISSNS Best Practice Case Studies Colombia Pakistan Mexico Chile The System for Selecting Beneficiaries of Social Spending (SISBEN), a proxymeans testing instrument, based on assessment of living conditions of individual families has been extensively used to target subsidies for health insurance, scholarships, conditional cash transfers, public works, youth training, subsidies for elderly poor, and other subsidies by national and local governments. By 2002, 27 million people (60 percent of national population) were registered in SISBEN databases, of whom about 13 million received benefits, at a cost of about US$940 million dollars (1.1 percent of GDP), annually (Milazzo & Grosh, 2007). The Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) household poverty survey has been completed nationwide, providing a credible poverty database. The Government or indeed any of the Provincial Governments, use the poverty scorecard database in BISP to target programs including those linked to health, education or employment services to the poorest segments of the population. Indeed, BISP has already shared the database with several partners in order to improve the designs of such complementary programs. (Guerrero, et al., 2013) The MIS for Mexico s Oportunidades program uses interconnected modules organized around the program management cycle: planning, implementation, supervision, and evaluation. The MIS automatically generates indicators, which are critical to identifying areas for improvement and improving accountability. The health and education sectors participate in defining the expansion of the programme as they are responsible for ensuring their capacity to provide services to new beneficiaries. The beneficiary identification module is an intersectoral module used by Oportunidades and the health and education sectors. (Villalobos, et al., 2010) The Integrated System of Social Information (SIIS) was designed along with the implementation of the CCT, Chile Solidario, but it includes information on the country s entire social protection system. The SIIS is made up of 4 interconnected modules, which support: (a) access to the social protection system, (b) services and benefits for beneficiaries, (c) the management of these services and benefits, (d) a unique beneficiary registry, and (e) online information and consultation for citizens. Given the importance of decentralized management of social protection at the municipal level in Chile, the SIIS has functionality at the regional and local level. (Villalobos, et al., 2010)) Yet, having the SHR MIS technological tools is insufficient. A prominent challenge faced when government attempt the move towards an integrated system is how processes of different programmes can be harmonised to function simultaneously. The following section describes which programme processes can be integrated and how this can be accomplished. 15

22 HARMONISATION A key objective of the integrated SSN is to bring together common processes and implement them simultaneously to make use of economies of scale. In other words, although each programme has distinct design parameters, their project cycles are similar and they will be carried out together utilising streamlined tools and processes. The proposed scheme for the implementation process includes supply capacity, targeting, enrolment, coresponsibility compliance (in the case of CCTs), transfers, monitoring, data sharing, and case management. The programme process is shown in Figure 7, here it is possible to see process which can be partially integrated as supply capacity, targeting and enrolment. Processes that can function simultaneously for all programmes include transfer, data sharing, monitoring and case management. Finally the processes which cannot be integrated is coresponsibility compliance in the case of CCTs. A detailed account of each process, how and when integration can occur is described in the following sections. Supply Capacity FIGURE 6: Process Cycle Supply side assessment of available infrastructure, coverage and accessibility can be performed consecutively for all programmes when determining viable agencies and mechanisms for transfer of benefits. In an ISSNS, beneficiaries receive transfers for multiple programmes via one mechanism, this process is harmonised for all programmes, therefore supply capacity is an essential assessment to ensure that the mechanism for transfers chosen, can fully absorb an increase in demand as well as provide sufficient and equitable accessibility for beneficiaries. In the case of CCTs, supply side analysis of availability, accessibility coverage and infrastructure of facilities where compliance monitoring must be undertakenindependently for each programme, as supply assessments of health centres, schools or skills training venues may be required. 16 Targeting A Single Registry establishes a common entry point for beneficiaries (Rawlings et al, 2013) as it identifies potential beneficiaries of social spending based on the same categorization (non-poor, near poor, poor, ultra poor) for all programmes, which increases fairness and transparency. Based on this identical method and categorization, every program decides on the eligibility criteria for their concrete purpose. A fundamental first step in the process cycle is ensuring that the SHR has robust population data. This requires not only rigorous data collection and input but also, wherever possible,cross-checking complementary databases (civil registry, ministry of health) with records and beneficiary lists of each programme. After all HHs are included in the SHR, they must pass through a beneficiary selection process according to the steps identified by the ISSNS unit, which may be as follows:

23 Application of PMT formula; Internal verification of eligibility; Validation of HHs either through community validation or comparing beneficiaries identified as eligible in the system to existing beneficiaries of each programme; and Selection of beneficiaries identified as eligible both by the MIS and validation. This approach minimizes inclusion/ exclusion errors, reduces time and resources spent, increases transparency, and allows for community knowledge to be used. FIGURE 7: Targeting Process FIGURE 1: TARGETING PROCESS 17 Enrolment After beneficiary selection, selected HHs must undergo the enrolment process to officially enter the appropriate programme. Each beneficiary HH must be aware of every programme it is beneficiary of, knowing the rules of co-responsibility (in the case of CCTs) and the amounts he/she will get for each programme. The enrolment process is partially integrated. The main objectives of the enrolment process are to: Update, register, verify and complete basic data of the HHs; Identify the payee(s); Train the beneficiary about the programme features, rules, responsibilities, transfer levels, transfer frequencies, case management and all main information; Engage the beneficiary and have him/her sign the programme agreement. FIGURE 8: Enrolment Process At the enrolment event, households go to a single screening desk notwithstanding the programme and the screening officer, after checking their identity and eligibility information shows them to the appropriate training room. The training rooms are programme specific and there, beneficiary receive information specific to the programme they are eligible for. If one household is a beneficiary for more than one programme, they must to participate in each training workshop. Finally, once training has concluded, beneficiaries go to enrolment desks which are the same for all programmes where they receive identity cards and sign programme agreements.

24 Co-Responsibility Compliance Compliance with co-responsibilities must occur independently for each programme. Data must be gathered and input into the MIS regarding beneficiary adherence to conditions as established by eligibility criteria of the CCT in question. For example for a CCT which collects data from schools this information would have to be collected and analysed independently than another programme that requires conditions to be met at health centres. This information must then be integrated in the Transfers module of the SHR MIS in order to be able to transfer benefits to households who are beneficiaries of CCT. Transfers The payment process is divided into three parts (see Figure 9 for details): Preparatory activities in which transfer lists are prepared and funds are disbursed according to transfer agency; Transfers are delivered to beneficiaries; and Activities subsequent to payments occur such as reconciliation and case management. Transferring benefits every two months rather than monthly decreases the travel burden on beneficiaries and decreases costs of transfer. Before the scheduled transfer, the MIS calculates the transfer amount, per household (according to the programmes each household is a beneficiary of), and generates a transfer list per transfer agency. After review and approval, the transfer is authorized and funds are disbursed. Each transfer process is followed by reconciliation, which ensures all paid and unpaid amounts are accounted for. After CT has been successfully carried out, the case management process will handle any claims, or complaints from beneficiaries. FIGURE 9: Transfers Process 18 Case Management A case management system serves the purpose of handling and monitoring changes taking place in beneficiary HHs, as well as addressing beneficiary concerns and needs. A great benefit of a comprehensive SSN system is the sharing of information and ability to manage cases at the macro-level, especially in terms of referrals and links to other programmes. In general, the different types of cases are defined below: Alerts: there are certain alarms activated in the MIS, based on the needs of the programs, which highlight items that need attention (i.e. Beneficiary missed 2 consecutive payments, beneficiary close to graduation, case not resolved).

25 Appeals;households that feel they have been mistakenly or unfairly excluded as potential beneficiaries and believe they meet the eligibility criteria can submit an appeal. Referrals: used to refer beneficiaries to other services in the area that they may need. Claims: refer to incorrect/incomplete transfer amounts. Complaints:beneficiaries may submit complaints about the quality of services / service providers during program implementation. Complaints can also be made regarding blackmailing or fraud by officials of the program. Updates: refer to changes in household status, which may affect the transfer of benefits or eligibility. The most important factor of an integrated case management process is that beneficiaries must go only to one place and person in order to lodge any type of case or update regarding any programme. As in the figure below, Social workers and or community committees are responsible for case management of multiple programmes. This means that they must transmit cases to be opened into the MIS as well as communicate the resolution of these to beneficiaries. FIGURE 10: Case Management Process A challenge of case management has been that often beneficiaries or potential beneficiaries open cases but these are never followed up, many are not resolved and the biggest challenge is that HHs do not receive communication regarding a response of their case. An integrated system facilitates this process by providing demand side alerts for certain processes as well as providing the indicators in internal monitoring of where processes are not functioning well. It is then easy to identify particular cases that are not resolved or geographic regions where the work of the social workers is weak. 19 Internal Monitoring It is essential that regular monitoring of programme processes and payment of benefits take place, under both the management of the ISSNS as a whole and each individual programme. Monitoring allows pinpointing weaknesses and therefore adjustments can be made to processes during implementation in order to increase efficiency of the programmes and to facilitate the better planning and use of resources. Internal Monitoring begins at the onset of the programmes and continues throughout the implementation of the programmes, and consists of the following basic components: Monitoring Indicators: Regular evaluation of indicators from the MIS to ensure that inputs and outputs are being delivered, procedures are complied with, and that the programmes are being carried out as intended for each and every process. Process evaluation: Evaluation of whether field operations are taking place according to the OM and programme design, and explain discrepancies if they exist. This work is to be carried

26 out via detailed observation.beneficiary assessment: Measurement of beneficiary satisfaction with the programme via specific questionnaires and focus group discussions. Spot checks: Unannounced visits in the field to ensure that the programme is functioning properly. FIGURE 11: Spot Checks Flow Data Sharing It is usually considered that the lifecycle of a SHR is five years, yet countries with resources have been heard to carry out massive censuses up to every two years as is the case in Brazil. Countries without the resources to do so, sometimes take up to ten years to undertake a census and create a new registry. Due to the implications of having outdated data in the SHR it is crucial to make links with external sources as civil registry or ministry of health. These organizations can help lengthen the lifecycle of the SHR by updating and verifying data to promote quality of information provided in the registry. The data stored in the SHR can be shared with outside organizations, institutions or individuals for the execution of SP programmes or for sharing basic indicators for research purposes. In turn, data-retrieving organizations as well as other institutional partners provide updates of data, particularly demographic data such as births and deaths, and experiences gained by using the information offered. In this manner the SHR maintains updated and dynamic information. Different access levels are awarded to requesting parties based on the level of information requested and confidence. Data can be disaggregated at different levels, for example by regional data, local village or town data, or individual HH data (highest security level). Participating agencies, both those requesting information as well as those supplying it, must sign Memorandums of Understanding (MoU) to establish the parameters of their participation and ensure minimum protocols, especially in regard to confidential beneficiary information. These MoUs can be temporary, for access during a limited period of time, or long-term arrangements. All too often political decisions are made without having concrete data which reflects the realities of the poorest households. The information available by the SHR can provide stakeholders with the statistical information needed to make important policy decisions regarding social protection in the country. Figure 12: Data Sharing Process 20

27 Harmonisation of programme processes not only results in optimising resources, minimising gaps and overlaps and increasing efficiency but forces communication between programmes. A tool that pushes the concept of integration further, in order to tailor activities specifically to help households move out of poverty, is the household card. 21 Households at the Centre Fragmented programmes consider beneficiaries independently and therefore, HHs are seen through a programme specific looking glass.the HH card provides a new vision in terms of SP, away from the needs or characteristics of programmes and towards those of HHs. HHs do not adjust themselves according to programmes nor has it been possible to have a complete picture of the relationship between programmes including who, how and when HHs participate in different programmes. Instead of knowing which HHs are part of certain programmes we define which programmes one HH is part of, when and why. This concept is essential to maximise the benefit of SP programmes. Ideally, the poorest HHs would be able to take advantage of multiple SP programmes according to their specific needs and as time goes on they should be able to graduate from some programmes and build enough capacity and assets to move away from extreme poverty.as can be seen in the figure below, an extreme poor HH may benefit from multiple SSN programmes. For example an education CCT benefits children of school going age, a health CCT benefits the pregnant mother, both parents are involved in a cash for work programme, and a CT benefits an elderly grandparent. FIGURE 13: Moving Households Out of Poverty CCT graduation criteria can be clear due to age or other circumstances such as pregnancy coming to an end. Yet, graduation of other safety net programmes require monitoring of HHs wealth in order to consider graduation, for example cash for work programmes. Furthermore, certain vulnerable groups as the elderly or people with chronic lifelong diseases should be considered as permanent beneficiaries of a CT programme. In an SHR, periodical recertification of HH s poverty levels should occur every 3-5 years, in addition to the constant updates of births and deaths. Updated information allows SSN programmes to be tailored to the needs of each HH. In an event such as death of the HH head or an external disaster, the programme can target interventions specifically to those needs. Additionally, should the HHs begin to move out of extreme poverty it is possible to offer complementary services such as capacity building, credit and savings opportunities to further build capacity and assets. This leads to efficient targeting of interventions and efficiently moving of HHs out from levels of extreme poverty. Therefore, the household card provides a report summarizing the most important characteristics of each HH as for example its geographical location, family composition, poverty category, if the HH is a beneficiary of any SP programme, and if it has presented any appeals, updates or requests for reclassification.this report shows the historical evolution of the HH during the time it has been in the registry.