1 / 26

An Overview: Linda Richter Global Partners Forum, Dublin, 2 October 2008

An Overview: Linda Richter Global Partners Forum, Dublin, 2 October 2008. What is JLICA?. Diverse, independent, multidisciplinary, time-limited 4 Learning Groups (Framework) 40+ authoritative research outputs – all externally reviewed Thousands of inputs

prisca
Télécharger la présentation

An Overview: Linda Richter Global Partners Forum, Dublin, 2 October 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Overview: Linda Richter Global Partners Forum, Dublin, 2 October 2008

  2. What is JLICA? Diverse, independent, multidisciplinary, time-limited 4 Learning Groups (Framework) 40+ authoritative research outputs – all externally reviewed Thousands of inputs Providing solid evidence for bold action

  3. Presentation The global response to date: Accepting our failures Reframing the response New directions for policy and action

  4. Accepting Failures - 2007 17% of new infections – failures of vertical prevention 2.1m children living with HIV globally – 90% in SSA <10% of eligible children receive early diagnosis of HIV at 6 weeks co-trimoxasole or ARV treatment Increasing parental deaths  Only 15% children/families receive external help 

  5. Children living with HIV globally 1990-2007 Global SSA

  6. Orphaned children in SSA

  7. Orphan misunderstandings AIDS orphans ±37% of orphaning – 18.2m orphans! 80% of “AIDS orphans” have a surviving parent “Orphan” - confusing, miscomm- unicated, distorting the response Orphans are not the only or necessarily the most needy 

  8. Problems with data Lack of data – gaps (5-14 years) Not consolidated - age inconsistencies, across agencies Poor data – 71% of 273 studies don’t define orphan Proliferation of non peer-reviewed grey literature Available good data not well used or disseminated 

  9. Child-headed households <1% in 40 SSA surveys Very small, if any, in DSS sites in SSA 0% in Karonga (Malawi) and Kisesa (Tanzania) <2% in Africa Centre (SA) Only data errors in Agincourt (SA) <1% across 5 cross-sectional HH surveys (1995-2005) (SA) 

  10. Percentage of children living in different household types in South Africa (1995-2005) Source: Richter and Desmond 2008

  11. Roots of our failure 1.It is not only orphaned children who are affected 2. Critical gaps in essential services 3. Families, many in extreme poverty, support children without assistance 4. Family poverty & gender inequality undermine children’s outcomes

  12. 1. It is not only “AIDS orphans” … • Parental mortality in general • JLICA reviewed 383 “orphan” studies • 75 empirical • Consistent detrimental effects • Neither poverty nor HIV controlled • Effects adversity and/or ill-health? • Education is a vulnerable area, but gap narrowing (data 15 countries) • Stigmatising effects of targeting

  13. 2. Implementation failures and gaps • PMTCT, infant testing, prophylaxis, treatment • Children much less likely to receive treatment than adults in the same settings • Integration of HIV/AIDS services • Universal primary health care • Universal primary education

  14. 3. Families support children • HIV and AIDS cluster in families • >95% of affected children live in families • Only 15% receive external help • Families absorb ±90% of cost of impact on children • Families are a critical network to expand prevention, treatment & care

  15. 4. Undermining child outcomes • Family poverty • + 60% of children in SSA live in poverty • By very low poverty lines • Kagera survey RIATT: $3.5/month average family of 3 • HIV/AIDS impoverish families – 25%pm • Consumption drops – food, education, care • Child labour increases • May limit expansion of prevention and treatment • Gender inequalities • Drive infections

  16. Reframing the response Five key lines of action: • Support children through families • Build social protection to protect the weak and vulnerable • Expand income transfers to poor families • Implement comprehensive & integrated family-centred services • Address powerlessness of women & girls

  17. 1. Support children through families • Optimal care arrangement for children • Most children are in family care • Families have responded – at cost • Preferable to orphanage/ group residential care  • Families are a critical entry point for prevention, treatment & care • Strengthen the capacity of families

  18. Strong arguments against orphanages • Cater overwhelmingly for poor rather than orphaned children • Well-established negative effects on brain, language, cognitive, emotional & social behaviour • Cost up to 10 times family care • Opportunity cost of not investing in families • De-institutionalisation is very costly to children & society

  19. Strengthen families • Family-centered PMTCT & other HIV/AIDS interventions • Keep families intact through treatment • Support extended family fostering • Provide home health visiting & ECD • Support community organizations that backstop families • Build social protection 

  20. 2. Build social protection • Individual, family & social impoverishment makes it harder to prevent HIV & mitigate AIDS • Responds to children’s needs – cut consumption, schooling, care and increase labour & mobility • On developmental agenda & responds to popular concerns • HIV/AIDS adds impetus to human rights arguments

  21. 3. Expand income transfers • Provide relief, avert borrowing, sale of assets • Demonstrated effectiveness in poor countries • Can take variable forms • Affordable eg Mozambique, Lesotho • Reduces intermediaries, overheads • Enables uptake of essential services • The entry point for improved social • protection

  22. Transfers increase spending on children’s basic needs Source: Adato and Bassett, 2008 JLICA

  23. 4. Integrated family-centred services Income transfers increase use of services. JLICA review of successful programmes: • Partnerships under government leadership • Community-based care system linking medical & social support services • HIV/AIDS services integrated with poverty reduction (income transfers, job creation) • Community health workers • Funding commitments (least 5 years)

  24. 4. Structural changes for girls • Empower women through increased social protection & income transfers • Keep girls in school – secondary education • Increase physical safety of girls • Address men’s values, roles and prospects – work

  25. Directions – way forward • National social protection, starting with income transfers, is critical to improve children’s outcomes • Target programmes based on need, not HIV or orphan status • Adopt family-centered models in social policy & service delivery • Prioritize structural prevention measures to address gender inequalities

  26. The Joint Learning Initiative on Children and HIV/AIDS www.jlica.org

More Related