Institutional/Corporate Contract to Review and Restructuring of the System for Financing Children in Care in Trinidad and Tobago

Reviewing and Restructuring of the System for Financing Children in Care in Trinidad and Tobago.

Institutional/Corporate Contract 

Terms of Reference (TOR)

Summary: 

Background:

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) was ratified by the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (GoRTT) in 1991. In so doing, the GoRTT committed to promote, protect and advance the rights of children. In line with the principles of the Convention, several pieces of legislation were developed and proclaimed as well as national policies that focused on child rights and development. Within this newly proclaimed suite of legislation and policies included the GoRTT’s commitment to provide support, financial and otherwise, to children placed by the State for care and protection at Children’s Homes.

One such policy which aims to address the needs of children at Community Residences is the Payment per Child Policy. When this policy development process was initiated, the problems that it intended to address included the increasing number of reported cases of child abuse that required children to be removed from their homes as well as the unstandardized allocation of subventions paid by the GoRTT to Children’s Homes throughout the country. Further, even before these challenges had become apparent and urgent, the Children’s Authority of Trinidad and Tobago (CATT) had conducted a Gap Analysis which revealed “significant variations” in administration, the physical premises and the quality of care at Children’s Homes. As a consequence, on February 26, 2015, the GoRTT agreed to the provision of financial assistance for the upkeep and maintenance of children at Community Residences, both state-funded and private. 

In an attempt to establish an efficient and equitable system of financial assistance for the provision of care and protection to Wards of the State, the drafting of the Payment per Child was initiated by the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) who had been given the remit for child affairs. The OPM began the drafting process by undertaking a study which aimed to provide a stronger premise for the cost per child proposal. In this regard, the methodology was a three-pronged approach—including gathering financial data from the Community Residences themselves, interrogating data used to create eligibility criteria for other national social support mechanisms as well as national reports related to the policy being proposed. Subsequent to the data collection and analysis, the OPM proposed in 2016 that the payment per child to cover direct costs to upkeep a child should follow the structure outlined in the table below: 

After consultations with key stakeholders, the main concern that was expressed was the inadequacy of the allocation for babies. As a result, the OPM proposed a $100 increase for children 1-3, which was then approved by the Cabinet. 

Thus, in November 2016, the PPC policy was approved by Cabinet to take effect from December 1, 2016, for the upkeep and maintenance of children assigned to a private Community Residence. An agreement was also made to provide a grant to these residences to cover electricity and water rates. 

Three months after implementation of the PPC, as well as one year after, the system was evaluated. The Evaluation highlighted that the PPC system “met the primary identified policy need” in providing coverage of children’s basic/direct needs. However, it highlighted that the policy failed to accurately identify the relative quantum and importance of indirect costs, namely staffing and access to immediate psychosocial/health assessments. 

The main recommendation emanating from the report was the need for an increase in funding to contribute specifically to attracting, recruiting and retaining additional qualified staff to increase the accessible capacity of Children’s Homes, support the ability to acquire licensing, and improve their quality of service. 

Based on these requirements (including the Children’s Authority’s approved caregiver to child ratios) and the financial shortfall faced by Children’s Homes, the OPM proposed that the indirect costs within the payment structure should be adjusted. The OPM conducted research to determine the average salary rate for a Caregiver. This rate was obtained by using the average salary for Caregivers at the four large state-owned Homes. The average salary was $5625.00. Using this salary as well as the ratios, the initial contribution to indirect cost was replaced by a full salary payment for Caregivers. The rate is outlined in the table below: 

In December 2018 approval was granted for the revised PPC System with effect from January 2019. The payment structure agreed upon, inclusive of direct and indirect costs was as follows:

In addition to the standard figures identified above, the government also agreed to the following:

• That an additional $2000.00 per child be used to cover the medical diagnostic and other medical treatment needs that cannot be met in a timely manner by the Public Health Care System, subject to the approval of the child’s need for the services by the CATT; and
• That 50% of the cost of the bills associated with water and electricity at community residences be met by Government and that such payment be made via a refund on submission of the paid bills with effect from January 2019.

 Payment Per Child Policy Review

In March 2021, a review of the PPC was requested by the government to determine the efficacy and appropriateness of the value of the payment structure of the system. Considering the socioeconomic context within which these payments operate, the Minister of State requested careful consideration and expert review before any adjustments to these payments were made. Moreover, if the programme must be adjusted, a delicate balance should be struck between Government’s obligation to the care and protection of children who are Wards of the State, and the economic and financial constraints currently experienced by those who provide care for these children. 

To conduct this review, a committee was established and given the responsibility to conduct a review of the policy. The committee was tasked with the following:

1.   to assess the efficacy of the financial assistance payments made to Children’s Homes; 

2.   to determine whether the payments require amendments; and

3.   to identify strategies that can improve the payment. 

The major recommendations of the committee included the following:

• The data used to determine the cost for the “food basket” that has been determined as sufficient to cover the caloric requirements of children needs to be updated using current prices. Moreover, the data used was from the Household Budget Survey (HBS,2009) and is now outdated. Inflation as well as the increased in the costs of basic needs due to the COVID-19 pandemic prove that these prices are extremely inadequate. Consequently, a new payment structure should be submitted once the impending report of the HBS 2019-2020 is approved.
• The payment structure should also cover the new and current statutory taxes that these Homes are expected to pay.

There were also recommendations and strategies suggested for the improvement of the system.

In response, the Government requested that the committee state the actual adjustments to the system that are required to ensure efficacy of the programme. In this regard, the Office of the Prime Minister has requested technical support to identify the adjustments needed within the payment system to ensure that children in care of the State receive adequate and high-quality care services and protection.

The three (3) large, state-run Community Residences were allocated subventions of $43,648,678.00 and $33,967,844.00 in fiscal 2020/2021 and fiscal 2021/2022 respectively. For fiscal 2020/2021, the average cost of maintaining a resident at St. Dominic’s Children’s Home was $23,195.58 per month. At St. Jude’s Home for Girls and St. Mary’s Children’s Home, average payments of $27,360.69 and $22,110.54 respectively were made per child for the month during the same fiscal period.

In comparison, under the Payment per Child system, twenty-nine (29) private Community Residences, which housed in total an average of 382 children per month, received an allocation of $10,902,602.88 in fiscal 2020/2021. This equated to an average of $2,382.04 paid per child, per month. In fiscal 2021/2022, a sum of $10,077,143.00 was disbursed to twenty-seven (27) private Community Residences housing an average of 358 children per month which represented monthly payments of $2,345.70 made per child across all private Community Residences.

The disparities in payments made to large Community Residences and private-owned Community Residences cannot be overlooked as it may attract criticisms on the system. In this regard, an assessment of the entire system for financing children in state care may be required to create a standardized, equitable payment system.

Foster Care Payments

In this regard, an assessment of foster care payments should also be undertaken. Foster care payments range from $2000 per month to $5000 per month based on the age and specific needs of the child. Children 1-12 years receive $2000 on a monthly basis, whilst children 13-17 years receive $3000.  Children with a disability or acute physical ailments receive higher payments ranging from $3500 to $5000. At present, there are eighty-six children in foster care. Over the last five years, approvals for children entering foster care ranged between 7 and 18 on a yearly basis. Funding toward foster care has been close to two million dollars in 2019 and past the two million mark in 2020 and 2021. In 2023 the allocation is approximately 1.1 million with an additional $768,000 allocated for kinship care. Given the focus on deinstitutionalization a review of the payments for children in foster care would be imperative.

Specific Tasks:

Goal and Objective:

The purpose of the review is to ensure that Gender and Child Affairs has an effective, cohesive, transparent and fair system for the provision of payments to children in care, providing care and protection for at risk and vulnerable children placed by the State. Other key objectives are as follows: 

• To review the methodology for making payments for children in care in Trinidad and Tobago;
• To review the processes for payment in the context of international good practices; and
• To propose a new payment structure and methodology for payment based on the review referred to above. 

The objectives of this study include:

This study aims to achieve the following objectives:

• To identify a robust and sound methodology for the determination of an adequate cost for the upkeep and maintenance of children at community residences and similar facilities in Trinidad and Tobago and an efficient process for payment.
• To provide recommendations for the adjustment of the system of payment for children in care in Trinidad and Tobago.

Link to the Annual Work Plan: This project relates to Activity 3.1 of the AWP which is-

Social protection institutions are strengthened to design and deliver inclusive and effective programmes and systems. As well as activity 3.1.9 regarding the production of evidence on public finance for children (PF4C).

Activities and Tasks: The firm will complete the following:

• A detailed project plan to execute all identified tasks.
• Consult key stakeholders (Including but not limited to staff responsible for implementing the PPC policy, payments of subventions to children’s homes, Managers and other staff at Community Residences, officials at the Children’s Authority of Trinidad and Tobago, key Government social sector stakeholders), via consultations and/or key informant interviews
• A review of existing systems and methodologies (local and international) used for providing payments for children in care and for determining the cost to provide adequate care services for children residing at Community Residences/Children’s Homes or similar facilities.
• Present findings and recommendations of proposed changes emanating from the review exercise before finalizing a new payment structure and process.
• A final methodology for making payments to Community Residences.
• An analysis of data towards identifying a payment structure that adequately meets the needs of children residing Children’s Homes and similar facilities.

Methodology:

Therefore, in carrying out the identified tasks, the following methods are required:

       I.         Desk Review: A rapid review of secondary and primary data sources both national and international should be conducted to understand the current Payment per Child Structure and payment process.

     II.         Quantitative and Qualitative Data Analysis: Data collection and analysis related to the payment structure and process and overarching PPC policy so as to support the determination of the way forward.

Quantitative analysis should be supported by qualitative data obtained through the stakeholder engagement and supplemented through additional Key Informant Interviews, where necessary.

Expected Deliverables:

1. 1.     Outputs/Deliverables:  

The following deliverables will be developed as the outputs of the study:

• Inception report: This report will be informed by an in-depth desk review of relevant secondary and primary data related to the system, both national and international. The inception report will also include methodology and workplan.
• Inception workshop (Remote): This activity will aim to engage key social sector stakeholders for their feedback via a consultative process (the consultant team, will join virtually). Additional key information interviews can also be considered and facilitated. A Report will include the key findings from these exercises.

• Recommendation Report: This report will include the findings and recommendations for the payment structure and methodology and process.
• Final Draft Report: This document should focus on the revised payment structure and methodology and process;
• Final Report: This document should focus on the revised payment structure and methodology and process, including comments made
• PowerPoint Presentation: A summary of the findings and recommendations will be presented to the ministry as well as the UNICEF.

DELIVERABLESOVERVIEW:

Key Activities/Tasks (*): Desk Review, Review Methodology and Workplan

Deliverables/Outputs (*): Inception Report

Duration (Est.  Working Days: 10

Due Date: 15/06/2023

Percentage (%): 20%

Key Activities/Tasks (*): Inception Workshop

Deliverables/Outputs (*): Workshop Report

Duration (Est.  Working Days: 10

Due Date: 26/06/2023

Percentage (%): 10%

Key Activities/Tasks (*): Preliminary Findings and PPC Methodology

Deliverables/Outputs (*): Draft Report

Duration (Est.  Working Days: 15

Due Date: 12/07/2023

Percentage (%): 25%

Key Activities/Tasks (*): Finalized Results and Identification of Recommendations

Deliverables/Outputs (*): Final Report

Duration (Est.  Working Days: 15

Due Date: 03/08/2023

Percentage (%): 30%

Key Activities/Tasks (*): Presentation of Findings and Recommendations

Deliverables/Outputs (*): Presentation

Duration (Est.  Working Days: 10

Due Date: 31/08/2023

Percentage (%): 15%

Key Activities/Tasks (*): Premium Insurance

Deliverables/Outputs (*): N/A

Duration (Est.  Working Days: N/A

Due Date: N/A

Percentage (%): N/A

Reporting:

The firm will report directly to UNICEF, the Social Policy Officer (contract manager).

Within the Government, the Permanent Secretary will serve as the Ministry’s Focal Point, and technical guidance will be provided by the Ministry’s consultant supporting the implementation of the Ministry’s care reform Work Plan. The Ministry will assist in coordinating arrangements for interviews/meetings/discussions with key officials and providing administrative and logistical support as needed. 

Work relationships and reporting: 

The consultancy will be managed by UNICEF-ECA. In this regard, the firm will report to the Social Policy Officer, UNICEF-ECA (contract manager).

For seamless coordination of activities that are required for the successful achievement of the outcomes of this project, the Child Affairs Division or an appointed representative will be identified as the focal point for this project and will support the consultant in conducting the review. The main role of the Social Policy Officer and the OPM focal point will include but will not be limited to:

-          Support sourcing of data, research and resources related to the socio-economic situation, the child protection system and its programmes;

-          Connecting the consultant to relevant personnel or beneficiaries if and/or when required; and

-          Reviewing deliverables and providing feedback to the consultant.

Expected background and Experience:

Payment of professional fees will be based on submission of agreed deliverables which receive satisfactory quality review. 

MINIMUM EXPERIENCE / QUALIFICATIONS (From Team Members) (*):

Education: ☐ Bachelors  ☒ Masters   ☐ PhD   ☐ Other 

Enter Disciplines:

Social Science, Economics (with quantitative analysis and behavioural economic experience), Development Studies, or any related technical field

Knowledge/Expertise/Skills required:

• Knowledge and/or experience working in the Caribbean context
• Experience conducting costings for social development projects/ programmes
• Experience conducting econometric analyses
• Experience conducting quantitative and qualitative research
• Strong communications skills 
• Excellent analytical skills
• Excellent report writing skills

Years of Experience: 5 years conducting socio-economic analysis and research.

Language(s) needed if any: English

Evaluation Criteria:

The technical evaluation will be considered in accordance with the following information:

Technical Proposal: 70 points 

1) Overall Response (10 points):

a) Understanding of, and responsiveness to UNICEF requirements;

b) Understanding of scope, objectives and completeness of response;

c) Overall concord between UNICEF requirements and the proposal. 

2) Company and key personnel (20 points):

a) Team leader: Relevant experience, qualifications, and position with firm;

b) Team members - Relevant experience, skills andcompetencies;

c) Organization of the team and roles & responsibilities;

d) Professional expertise, knowledge and experience with similar projects, contracts, clients and consulting assignments;

e) Financial status. 

3) Proposed Methodology, Approach and System (40 points):

a) Quality of the proposed approach and methodology;

b) Quality of proposed implementation plan, i.e how the bidder will undertake each task, and time-schedules;

c) Risk assessment - recognition of the risks/peripheral problems and methods to prevent and manage risks/peripheral problems. 

Note: The Financial Proposals will be opened only to the companies considered technically approved (range between 49 to 70 points). 

Financial Proposal (30 points) 

The Financial Proposal will be opened and tabulated within the Technical Proposal and the final range will be provided. 

Resource: 

UNICEF reserves the right to withhold all or a portion of payment if performance is unsatisfactory, if work/outputs is incomplete, not delivered or for failure to meet deadlines. Performance indicators against which the satisfactory conclusion of this contract will be assessed include timeliness/quality of submission and responsiveness to UNICEF and counterpart feedback. 

Property Rights:

UNICEF shall hold all property rights, such as copyright, patents and registered trademarks, on matter directly related to, or derived from, the work carried out through this contract with UNICEF. The bidder must submit all documentation and source code where necessary to the UNICEF upon successful launch. 

Administrative Matters:

• Institutional contractor will not be provided lodging and/or meals.
• Institutional contractor will work from remote location.
• The institutional contract doesn’t have any travel.[1]
• Institutional contractor should provide his/her own materials, i.e., computer, office supplies, etc.
• Final payment is dependent on the completion of deliverables as well as hand-over notes and submission of an institutional contractor PER. Note: Institutional contractor in practice are external and therefore do not have a direct right to access UNICEF resources.
• Travel/Flight costs will not be covered. 

How to Apply: 

The application package should include the following:

a. A cover letter (no more than 1 page)

b. Technical Proposal

c.  Financial Proposal (Detailed budget stipulating all-inclusive fees) 

Prospective institutional or corporate contractors should apply to the mail address above no later than June 23, 2023, on or before 11:59 hrs (GMT-4.00 Eastern Time). Kindly ensure the subject line is denoted with the heading “Review and Restructuring of the System for Financing Children in Care”. 

Appendix 1: Selected References 

Cantwell, N.; Davidson, J.; Elsley, S.; Milligan, I.; Quinn, N. (2012). (tech.). Moving Forward: Implementing the ‘Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children.’ United Kingdom: Centre for Excellence for Looked After Children in Scotland.   

Children's Authority of Trinidad and Tobago. (n.d.). (rep.). Annual Report 2019-2020.  

Children's Authority of Trinidad and Tobago. (n.d.). (rep.). Annual Report 2017-2018.   

Children's Authority of Trinidad and Tobago. (n.d.). (rep.). Annual Report 2016.   

International Save the Children Alliance. (n.d.). (rep.). A Last Resort: The Growing Concern About Children Living in Residential Care. London: International Save the Children Alliance.   

Ministry of Social Development and Family Services. (2018). (rep.). Implementation of a Standard Means Test (SMT) for selected Social Safety Net initiatives under the purview of the Ministry of Social Development and Family Services. Port of Spain: Ministry of Social Development and Family Services.  

Ministry of Social Development and Family Services. (2017). (rep.). Policy Development Guidelines for the Social Sector. Port of Spain: Ministry of Social Development and Family Services.   

Office of the Prime Minister. (2020). National Child Policy. Port of Spain: Office of the Prime Minister.  

Office of the Prime Minister. (2016). Provision of Financial Assistance for the Upkeep and Maintenance of Children at Community Residences (Payment Per Child Policy). Port of Spain: Office of the Prime Minister. 

The Children Act. 2018. (T&T) 

The Children’s Authority Act. 2000. (T&T)  

The Children’s Community Residences, Foster Care and Nursery Act of 2000 (Act No. 65 of 2000). 2000. (T&T)  

The Children’s Community Residences (Children’s Homes) Regulations, 2018, 2018. (T&T) 

UN convention on the rights of the child. Save the Children UK. (n.d.). https://www.savethechildren.org.uk/what-we-do/childrens-rights/united-nations-convention-of-the-rights-of-the-child.   

UNDP. (n.d.). (rep.). Leaving No One Behind; A Social Protection Primer for Practitioners. New York.   

UNICEF. (2021). (rep.). UNICEF CHILD PROTECTION STRATEGY (2021-2030) Draft for Consultation (2nd November 2020).   

UNICEF. (n.d.). (rep.). Beyond Institutional Care: A Roadmap for Child Protection and Care System Reform for Governments in Latin America and the Caribbean. UNICEF.  

United Nations. (2010). (rep.). 64/142. Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children. Geneva.