MISSION REPORT

ASSESSMENT OF CHILD FRIENDLY CITY INITIATIVE (CFCI)

DEVELOPMENT IN THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

“The Child Friendly City Initiative is not a standalone intervention anymore, it is a part of the
City life…”

Jovidsho Juraev – International Consultant

1|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
assessment of Child Friendly City Initiative (CFCI) development in the Republic of Belarus
1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... 3
ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................. 5
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 5
2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 14
2.1. The Country Context................................................................................................14
2.2. The CFCI Context in Belarus. .................................................................................. 16
2.3. Overview of The Child Friendly Cities Initiative ........................................................ 18
3. sTUDY PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY ....................................... 21
3.1. Goal and Objective of the Assessment ........................................................................ 21
3.2. Methodology ............................................................................................................ 22
3.3. Sample Design .........................................................................................................24
3.4. Data Management and Analysis ................................................................................ 25
4. ethical considerations .......................................................................................................... 26
5. study findings ....................................................................................................................... 27
5.1. Relevance .................................................................................................................... 27
5.2. Effectiveness .............................................................................................................. 29
5.3. Efficiency ..................................................................................................................... 31
5.4. Sustainability............................................................................................................... 32
5.5 Findings by Specific Areas .............................................................................................. 33
6. RECOMMENDATIONs ..................................................................................................... 37
7. ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................ 41

2|Pa g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The evaluator wishes to thank all those who have contributed to this report. The mission would
not be successful without continuous support and collaboration with UNICEF national partners, in
particular the Ministry of Education and local authorities, who demonstrated a great interest,
flexibility and support over the course of the mission. The evaluator expresses his sincere gratitude
to Ms. Vasilchenko Nadejda, National Coordinator of Child Friendly Cities Initiative in the
Republic of Belarus and to the members of the National CFC Coordination Council for their
collaboration and sharing their views regarding the project’s performance and the future prospects.

The consultant acknowledges strong commitment, support and strategic guidance provided by Dr.
Rashed Mustafa Sarwar, UNICEF Representative in the Republic of Belarus over the course of
the study and special gratitude goes to Ms. Iryna Chutkova, Deputy Representative and Ms.
Victoria Lozuyk, the UNICEF Coordinator for Child Friendly Cities Initiative in Belarus for their
insightful feedback on the design and study findings as well as for technical and organizational
support provided throughout the study process.

The consultant is grateful to the representatives of Children’s/Youth Parliament members and

NGOs for their active engagement during the meetings and expressing their honest views.

Every effort has been made to ensure that the information in this report is correct. Any factual
error that may appear is unintended and is the responsibility of the consultant. This report
represents the views of the consultant only and does not necessarily represent the views of
UNICEF.

3|Pa g e
CFCI Child Friendly Cities Initiative
CSO Civil Society Organization
GNI Gross National Income
GDP Gross Domestic Product
FGD Focus Group Discussion
ICT Information Communication Technology
ILO International Labor Organization
KII Key Informant Interview
LA Local Authority
MDG Millennium Development Goals
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MoE Ministry of Education
MoH Ministry of Health
MDR-TB Multidrug-resistant TB
NCD Non-communicable disease
NSC National Statistical Committee
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
PPP Purchasing Power Parity
RB Republic of Belarus
RBM Result Based Management
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
ToR Terms of Reference
UKID Urban Child Development Index
UN United Nations
UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UN Women United Nations Women
WB World Bank

4|Page
 WHO World Health Organization
ACRONYMS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Based on the reported results National
Coordination Council on CFCI granted the
BACKGROUND Honourable Status of “Child Friendly City”
To address the CRC Concluding
Observations on the 2nd, combined 3rd and
4th Periodic Reports of the Republic of to Novopolotsk, Pinsk, Brest, Pruzhany,
Belarus, UNICEF and the Government Polotsk, Soligorsk and Zhodino.
agreed to introduce a Child Friendly City
Initiative (CFCI) as a framework to increase To assess the impact of CFCI on the creation
the effectiveness of local governance in the of the enabling environment for the
best interest of children and strengthen the realization of child rights, effectiveness of the
monitoring system of child rights realization. local governance and community initiatives
towards implementation of UN CRC at the
CFCI was launched in Belarus in 2007 and city level, meaningful children/youth
scaled up within the 2011-2015 programme participation in decision making and to
cycle to bring an explicit children’s focus into continue to promote the prioritization of
traditional adult-oriented governance system, children’s rights and interests now and within
create enabling environment for child the post-2015 development agenda, the
development, promote inter-sectoral Ministry of Education and UNICEF agreed to
collaboration and partnership to address child conduct an independent CFCI assessment to
issues, monitoring of child rights realization be facilitated by the international consultant
and meaningful children’s/youth contracted by UNICEF.
participation in decision making process. .
The assessment findings, results and
By 2016, 22 cities joined CFCI recommendations will be used as an evidence
implementation and with UNICEF support for policy advocacy and legislation
the normative and methodological improvement, strengthening partnership of
frameworks were developed and efforts governmental and civil society organizations,
dedicated on strengthening the capacity of promotion of meaningful youth participation
local authorities to effectively address local in all decisions concerning their life, growth
development problems in the best interest of and development and greater involvement of
children. community members in child rights
realization and monitoring and dissemination
In 2013-2015, seventeen cities calculated of best practices nationally and
CFC index and drew up the Reports “Status internationally.
of Children in the City” with the main
achievements, identified bottlenecks and The results of the assessment will be
future strategies of CFCI development. presented and discussed at the International

5|Pa g e
Conference of Child Friendly Cities to be Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with youth
held in Minsk in 2016 and used for attracting groups and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)
the international donors’ interest for greater with the CFCI coordinators in each visited
investment in the realization and monitoring location. In order to improve validity of
of the rights of children and young people findings, data were triangulated in terms of
focusing on the most vulnerable and source of information (participant cities, non
marginalized children in urban setting. participant and awarded cities, authorities,
youth groups and NGOs). In total, 10 cities
The study took place in December 2015 – from different oblasts were visited during the
February 2016 and aimed to assess study. The themes and questions for FGDs
effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of and KIIs were developed based on the study
CFCI development in the best interest of framework/matrix created to address the
children, especially the most disadvantaged study objectives (See Annex A).
in the Republic of Belarus. The study’s
objectives have specifically focused on Based on the global priorities and by taking
assessment of sustainability of the initiative into consideration the context of the country,
and examining the key components of the a Theory of Change/Result Framework of the
CFCI to identify the main barriers, CFCI was developed by the consultant as
bottlenecks and draw up recommendations well.
on corrective actions to overcome them. The
key components are identified as following: KEY FINDINGS
 CFCI coordination at the National The assessment applied OECD DAC
level; evaluation criteria to examine the relevance,
 CFCI implementation at the local effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of
level; the interventions.
 The work of Children’s/Youth
Relevance
Councils/Parliaments;
 The child rights monitoring and The study found that the priorities of CFCI
evaluation at the local level. are highly relevant to the country’s context.
The objectives are consistent with the
Methodology national priorities and the country’s
The assessment has non-experimental, international commitments towards
exploratory design and applied both, realization of child rights. More specifically,
quantitative and qualitative methods. The it is in line with the Law of the Republic of
quantitative part included the analysis of Belarus “On the Rights of the Child”, the
relevant and available administrative and Law of the Republic of Belarus “On the
secondary data obtained from public sources Fundamentals of the State Youth Policy”, the
and UNICEF, including monitoring and National Plan of Action on the Improvement
evaluation reports and the City reports of the Situation of Children and Protection of
developed over the course of the initiative. their Rights for 2012-2016, the National
Qualitative data were collected through Program of Demographic Security of the
Republic of Belarus for 2011-2015, the

6|Page
guidelines and recommendations of policy-making remain as a global issue.
international documents on the state of Development and implementation of data
children issued by the UN General Assembly collection and analysis tool at local level is
and the Committee on the Rights of the Child. among the key achievements of the CFCI.
The initiative corresponds with the SDG Introduced “Friendliness Index” is unique in
“Goal 11: Make cities inclusive, safe, terms of collecting data in relation to
resilient and sustainable” and is part of the participation of children in decision-making,
United Nations Development Assistance involvement of children in social life,
Framework (UNDAF) for the Republic of perspective of children on environment and
Belarus for 2016-2020, under the thematic other important indicators. While external
area “Inclusive, Responsive and Accountable validity of the Index, due to the sample size
Governance” as well. can be questioned, on the other hand it is the
only multi-dimensional measure that helps to
Participation of children and youth have a deeper insight into the situation of
Meaningful participation of children in children in urban setting and most
decision-making is one of the key principles importantly, from children’s perspective.
of the UN CRC. Participation has positive Effectiveness
impact on children’s comprehensive
development and on the other hand The study revealed that there is a progress
strengthens democratic values in against the objectives of the initiative. There
communities. Based on the review of were three objectives identified for the period
available reports and observations made of 2013-2015:
during the field visits, it can be stated that the
CFCI has reinforced creation of youth and I. Development and implementation of
children organizations and enhanced their monitoring system of the situation of
capabilities to promote own rights and children at the city level;
interests in different settings, while fostering II. Improving the governance system at
continuous dialogue among youth and the local level for the best interests of
local authorities. children;
III. Advancing methods and types of
participation of children and youth in
“THE PARLIAMENT BECAME LIKE
decision-making.
A BRIDGE BETWEEN YOUTH AND
THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES…”
Quote from FGD with Children’s/Youth
The observation suggests that CFCI was
Parliament
effective in development and implementation
of monitoring system of the situation of
children at city level. The “Friendliness Index”
Child rights monitoring. serves not only as an assessment tool, but also
as a mechanism to dedicate efforts of the
Lack of disaggregated data on the status of
municipality and other actors around specific
children in urban setting and evidence-based
themes concerning children at City level.

7|Pa g e
The tool has a complete guide, forms and a in participating cities are more active in
dashboard that allow seeing the result in the planning and implementation of city
corresponding webpage of the CFCI in the programs. There are a number of examples
Republic of Belarus (www.detivgorode.by). of how youth influenced the local policies in
According to data on the CFCI webpage, 18 Novopolotsk, Zhodino, Polotsk and other
cities across the country expressed interest, cities. As stated by one of the
were trained and implemented this tool. The Children’s/Youth Parliamentarians from
assessment tool is part of Certification Minsk Oblast:
mechanism as well. The Cities with higher
indices receive an honorable award of “Child “IT IS NOT A “CHILD PARLIAME NT”, IT IS A REAL WORK,
WHERE WE ARE GOING T O RE ALIZE OUR OWN ID EAS,
Friendly City”. By December 2015, seven WORK HARD TO PROMOTE OU R IDEAS TO MAKE OU R
cities were qualified as such in the Republic CITIES AND COUNTRY A BETTER PLACE”.
of Belarus. On the other hand, the tool needs At the same time, the initiative was lacking a
to be further improved and adopted to comprehensive strategic prospect for
become a simple, practical, affordable and development with clear goal and objectives
reliable source of information that provides as well as measures to address them (Theory
up to date data for decision-making. of Change).
The improvement of governance system at
Efficiency
local level for the best interest of children was
assessed by looking at budgetary allocations Data and the observations suggest that the
for social sector across the cities and by CFCI were highly efficient. According to
getting the impression of stakeholders UNICEF project documents, for the
regarding changes in the governance. The implementation of the CFCI in the Republic
findings suggest that the project contributed of Belarus, it was dedicated around
to the positive changes in the governance $171,700.00 for the period of 2013-2015,
system of participating cities. utilized in timely manner and delivery of
quality results.
Graph 1. Share of the budgetary
allocations for social sector per year
The efficiency of the interventions was
73,8% 75,3%
80% 67,5% ingrained in the nature of the CFCI; it focuses
65,8%
54,9% 58,1% 58,7%
60% 53,6% 52,7% on mobilization of available resources around
40%
child rights issues. Local authorities from
participating cities along with dedication of
20%
available financial, technical and
0% administrative resources for social protection
2013 2014 2015
Minsk Oblast Jodino Soligorsk
of children were successful in mobilizing
financial resources from other sources, such
Source: National Statistics Committee. as industrial companies and other supporters.
However, it should be noted that the level of
Finally, the project was successful in
mobilization of extra funds is also related to
addressing participation of children and
the economic context of the city – obviously
youth in decision-making. There is strong
that industrial zones might have a greater
evidence that Children’s/Youth Parliaments
8|Pa g e
chance to raise extra funds rather than cities However, if cities can afford and commit to
with agriculture oriented economies. apply it on annual basis, there is no need for
simplification.
Sustainability

According to the study findings, the KEY CHALLENGES

sustainability of this initiative remains as its The following barriers and bottlenecks were
strongest part. There is a strong evidence of identified:
local ownership and commitment of the
stakeholders, in particular at local level to At national level:
continue this practice. As stated by one of the
a. The Coordination Council at central level
KII participant:
can play a greater role in provision of
“THE CHILD FRIENDLY CITY INITIATIVE IS N OT A
technical guidance and transfer of good
STANDALONE I NTERVENT ION ANYMORE, IT IS A PART practices among the cities. At the same
OF THE CITY LIFE…” time, there is a need to enhance and
It can be stated that the Children’s/Youth expand technical, financial nad human
Parliaments is the key achievement of the resources of the Coordination Council. ;
CFCI in Belarus. It serves as a platform for a b. Lack of visibility at the national level;
productive dialogue between children and c. Poor data on the status of children at the
youth and the municipalities. It promotes city level; some important information is
civic education and engagement and helps missing, , or available data are not
children to develop social skills. It has well- disaggregated by gender.
established participation mechanism at d. Lack of a comprehensive theory of
school, city and oblast level. There is an change of the CFCI;
institutionalized mechanism of children- e. The CFCI may also award the cities with
adults cooperation and most importantly the highest progress over time, not only
children were seemed very enthusiastic and with the highest Index in the time point;
proud of their work. f. Poor dedication of budget on the best
interest of children and insufficient
The monitoring mechanism (Friendliness mobilization of resources for realization
Index) is an important achievement of the of social policies in the best interest of
CFCI in Belarus as well. It is very children from sources other than public
comprehensive, well-designed and seems to g. Insufficient focus on equity agenda.
be a reliable tool for child rights monitoring.
On the other hand, it could be further
improved and simplified. Ideally, the tool At local level:
should be so simple that any city could apply
a. The understanding of stakeholders at
it without additional trainings or technical
local level about the importance of child
support. This may ensure sustainability of the
participation for forming civic
monitoring mechanism as well.
responsibility and promoting civic
engagement need to be further improved;

9|Page
b. Equity agenda could be better infused purpose. UNICEF’s promoted Multiple
into the program. Overlapping Deprivation Analysis
c. The relevance of the plan of action of the (MODA) tool (http://www.unicef-
cities needs to be maximized and further irc.org/MODA/ ) can serve a recourse
tailored to the findings of monitoring tool to further advance child rights
activities; monitoring practices at City level and
d. RBM approach needs to be wider applied probably national level.
by stakeholders; b. Children’s/Youth/ Parliaments can play a
e. Lack of technical capacity of greater role in addressing inequalities at
Children’s/Youth Parliament to City level. The members of
effectively address their mission; Children’s/Youth Parliaments need to be
f. Poor visibility of CFCI at local level; further trained and mentored to be more
g. Insufficient participation of non-state oriented on civic engagement
actors in planning and realization of the c. While the number of the Cities will
city plans concerning children; increase, the technical, financial,
h. Lack of inter-sectoral cooperation – the administrative capacities and human
CFCI is mainly implemented within resources of the CFCI Coordination
education sector; Council need to be further advanced to
i. Insufficient level of engagement of enable them effectively realize their
children and youth in the Coordination mission. In fact, the Coordination
Council’s work; Council can play a greater role in
j. Poor external validity of data generated promoting child sensitive budgeting,
by monitoring mechanism – some evidence based policy advocacy tackling
findings cannot be generalized to entire inequalities, targeted awareness raising,
population; strengthening public-private partnership
k. Insufficient frequency of data collection and other interventions at macro level that
for child rights monitoring. can contribute to the CFCI sustainability
and scaling up.
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS d. Development of a five year program plan
for the CFCI that applies RBM principles
1. CFCI scaling up, introduction of
with the specific focus on marginalized
innovations and adjustment to the
groups. The five year plan should be
needs of the most vulnerable and
further aligned with SDG and other
marginalized children
national strategic plan and priorities for
children and youth. The action plans at
a. Since the CFCI has proven to be as an
local level should be tailored to the CFCI
effective, efficient and sustainable
Five Year Plan and address the gaps
approach to promote child rights in urban
identified through monitoring
setting, it would be reasonable to further
mechanisms. The Result Framework
develop and scale it up. In order to have a
attached to this report can help for
greater focus on the most marginalized,
development of such plan.
as the first step, the monitoring tool needs
to be appropriately tailored for this

10 | P a g e
e. Technical staff (mentors and others) need possibly applied in the Republic of
to be oriented in specific approaches, Belarus.
such as strength-based approach and/or
empowering tradition of social work to 3. Advanced cooperation of state and
effectively address social and economic non-state actors, alliances for child’s
vulnerabilities of children. rights realization (promotion the
public dialogue, social contracting and
2. CFCs role in influencing the strengthening capacity of local
transformation of the social norms that authorities to utilize data for evidence-
stigmatized vulnerable groups of informed decisions)
children.
a. In some cities, there is a good model of
a. First of all, a mini-KAP survey focusing cooperation of state and non-state actors
on identification of vulnerability factors, (Novopolotsk for example). This practice,
including social norms affecting children along with other best practices needs to
and youth, needs to be conducted at City be assessed and promoted within the
level. Children’s/Youth Parliaments can framework of CFCI. The policy
be trained and mentored by professionals framework, including the Law “On the
to lead the process. Participatory action State Support for the Youth and Children
research methodology would be a proper Organizations in the Republic of
approach to improve participation of Belarus” 1 , promotes social contracting
children and tailor research with specific with youth organizations. This can be
actions. further promoted and might have multiple
b. Awareness raising activities at local level effect; promote cooperation between
need to be accompanied by KAP surveys state and non-state actors, enhance civic
(pre- post). engagement and decentralization and,
c. The evidence needs to be further used by enhance participation of children and
Children’s/Youth Parliament and CFC youth in decision making. At the same
Council at City and National level for time, the CFCI can pilot, facilitate and
evidence-based policy advocacy and advance capacity of youth organization to
planning. do so.
d. In some countries, the religious b. Setting up mechanisms of consultations
institutions/leaders play an important role between the state bodies and civil society
in transformation of social norms to organizations, and expanding the practice
reduce stigma and discriminations, of discussion of the draft local
mobilizing communities and resources development plans and programmes that
around various social programs. This affect people’s lives;
opportunity can be further assessed and c. Expanding practice of public social
contracts that allows to outsource CSOs

1
Article 9: Realization of the state contracts by youth Support for the Youth and Children Organizations in
and children organizations. Law “On the State the Republic of Belarus. 1999.

11 | P a g e
 for rendering social services and be piloted in three Cities and assessed in
implementing social contracts; terms of its reliability, validity and
d. Expansion of evidence based practice and efficiency. Attempt can be made to adopt
policy making requires capacity the UKID tool 2 , however the author
development and technical support. The believes that monitoring mechanism
Coordination Council can lead the should be better tailored to the context of
process, however their capacity need to the Republic of Belarus. One of the
be strengthened. important points is to ensure regularity of
e. Promoting Corporate Social data collection. it would be recommended
Responsibility practice among private to conduct monitoring in annual basis.
sector. b. UNICEF and Coordination Council can
f. It seems that Children’s/Youth further work with the National Statistical
Parliaments are lacking legal status. This Committee and ensure that data collected
opportunity needs to be further discussed via monitoring mechanism at city level
with local stakeholders and particular becomes part of the national statistics. A
with youth parliamentarians. kind of Yearbook on the “Socio-
economic situation in the Cities of the
4. Improvement of the developed child Republic of Belarus” would be a very
rights monitoring, analysis and helpful data source for knowledge
assessment tool (update with the new building, planning and analysis as well as
indicators such as social budget for policy advocacy as well.
allocation and spending in the best
interest of children, environmental
protections and others) 5. Future strategies of meaningful
children/youth participation
a. As discussed in Section 1, the child rights development (Children-Youth
monitoring tool can be further tailored to Councils/Parliaments development,
capture inequalities and also focus on the creation of the National Children-
child-sensitive budgeting and Children’s/Youth Parliament) in the
environmental protection. The indicators local decision making process
can be adopted from SDGs targets for concerning children and youth
sustainable cities and environmental matters;
protection and other targets as
appropriate. The UN Habitat tool (Urban a. The CFCI has already developed a good
Governance Index) and other tools can be practice for meaningful participation of
used for this purpose. On the other hand, children and youth in decision making. At
simplicity and practicality of monitoring the same time, as recommended in
mechanism need to be taken into previous sections, this need to be further
consideration. Updated mechanism can developed to have a greater focus on

2
http://www.cityindicators.org/Deliverables/UKID%2
0Overview%20and%20Preliminary%20Results_10-
2-2013-140975.pdf

12 | P a g e
 marginalized groups, so the themselves identify priorities and issues
representation of vulnerable groups in to be tackled. The quality and the level of
Parliament is highly recommended. participation of children is a dynamic
b. Children and youth during the FGDs issue, it changes over time. Appropriate
expressed their interests in learning training program and mentorship need to
research/monitoring skills. It is be arranged.
recommended to have a well-designed 7. Strategic partnership of UNICEF and
program component to introduce and the Government of Belarus within
expand “children as researchers” CFCI to ensure that child rights are
approach into the CFCI initiative. fulfilled, proper monitored and the
c. At the same time, the CFCI can also evidences are used for making
expand a wider participation of decisions concerning child growth and
youth/citizens in decision making. From development
the UNICEF Innovation lab, the UReport
tool that has been already expanded in 15 a. In fact, local ownership and leadership
countries can be adopted to the context of are the strong part of the CFCI in Belarus.
Belarus. Youth via UReport tool, It needs to be continued in the same mode
within moments, can share their opinions while focusing on the CFCI Coordination
on various topics they concern. This Council’s technical capacity,
information is instantly mapped and transformation or dissemination of best
analyzed, yielding vital information and practices among participating cities and
real-time insights about how young supporting in planning and piloting new
people see their world and what they initiatives such as U-Report and others.
think is most important3. b. As mentioned in the previous section,
data on the situation of children are not
6. Socially-oriented youth initiatives sufficiently disaggregated at city level.
development focusing on disability Child sensitive budgeting can be further
matters, environmental safety, healthy advocated at city and national levels.
life style. c. One of the recommendations of youth
and local authorities was focused on
a. In fact, the Children’s/Youth/ further opportunities for in-country and
Parliaments in their current activities cross-country exchange of experience.
have a greater focus on municipal While in-country exchange can be further
development and environmental promoted by Coordination Council,
activities. As the next stage, their plans `UNICEF can focus on regional
ideally need to tackle problems identified collaboration to facilitate exchange of
through child rights monitoring. So, the best practices among the countries.
efforts of all actors in society will be
contributing to a shared goal. The golden
standard is that children and youth

3
http://www.unicef.org/media/media_82583.html

13 | P a g e
2. INTRODUCTION
(71.3 years), with a gap of 10.6 years between
2.1. The Country Context male and female life expectancy.

Belarus is a socially-oriented country. The This is mostly due to high prevalence of

country made significant progress in NCDs.
improving its Human Development Index
between 2005 and 2015 – its growth was the As stated in the UNDAF Report, Belarus has
highest among countries in Central and achieved most of the Millennium
Eastern Europe, the Western Balkans and the Development Goals (MDGs). It has reduced
Commonwealth of Independent States. the proportion of the population with average
Belarus remains as an upper-middle income available resources per person below USD2
country and was ranked 50th among 187 and USD4 (PPP) per day, achieved universal
countries in the Human Development Report primary education, attained progress in
2015. According to the Human Development expanding women’s participation in
Report 2015 (UNDP), the Republic of decision-making and promoting gender
Belarus had a GNI per capita (2011 equality, and reduced the infant, under-five
Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) USD) of and maternal mortality rate. It has also
$16,671.1 in 20144. The Belarusian economy reduced the tuberculosis incidence rate and
generated impressive GDP growth rates in the prevalence of active forms of tuberculosis,
the period from 1996 until 2011. In particular, decreased carbon dioxide emissions,
the average yearly GDP growth rate in 2004- expanded the area of land protected to
2008 was 9.92%5. maintain biological diversity and forested
land, national parks and nature reserves, and
At the same time, Belarus has retained a high improved the availability and conditions of
level of income equality, which can be housing.
demonstrated by its Gini coefficient of 0.265
in 2014. According to the Human The same report highlights that several
Development Report 2015 (UNDP), Belarus important challenges remain with respect to
has high values of mean years of schooling the achievement of the MDGs, including an
(11.5) and one of the highest numbers of increasing gender pay gap and an increasing
expected years of schooling (15.7) among the prevalence of HIV and MDR-TB. Among
countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the other areas in which improvements are being
Western Balkans and the Commonwealth of sought are: the effectiveness of the health
Independent States6. system, with a focus on primary healthcare
and improving reproductive health and
However, according to the same report, family planning; the educational attainments
Belarus has a low life expectancy at birth and employment of vulnerable groups;
domestic violence and gender equality; and

4 6
2015 HDR Report. http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/BLR 2015 HDR Report. http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/BLR
5
UNDAF Report for the Republic of Belarus for 2016-2020

14 | P a g e
ensuring life safety and combatting stigmas, 12000 1079210179
discrimination and negative stereotypes in all 10000 8808
areas of life. 7807
7162 6712
8000 6275 5976
5621 5292
In recent years, Belarus has made significant 6000
progress in improving child wellbeing. 4000
According to preliminary statistics for 2015, 2000
around 97 per cent of children between ages 0
3-5 years old and 100 per cent of children five
years of age were enrolled in preschools in
2015. It should be noted, a positive
As of January 2014, there were 23,081
enrollment dynamic can be observed over the
orphans and children deprived of parental
last five years7.
care. Out of these, 4,902 children (21.2 per
Due to focused interventions, child disability cent) resided in public residential care
has decreased in the country. According to institutions, and 18,179 children (65.43 per
data, there were 25,141 registered disabled cent) were in substitute family care, including
children in the Republic of Belarus. Out of guardianship, foster families, and family-
11,538 children in residential care, children type children’s homes 9 . It should be noted
with disabilities represented around 46 per that the course of de-institutionalization in
cent of all children living in institutions in the country shows positive results, according
20138. In recent years, the trend has shifted to TRANSMONEE 2015, the rate of children
away from placing children with disabilities in residential care institutions shows a steady
in special boarding schools towards decline over the last ten years. the rate of
providing these children with integrated children in residential care (per 100000
education. Assistance provided to families of population aged 0-17) decreased from 1082,7
children with disabilities includes early in 2004 to 646.9 in 2013 10 . The country
intervention services, day-care centres, a demonstrates a better performance
network of correctional and recuperative comparing with Russia, Ukraine.
services, and rehabilitation and vocational Graph 3. Rate of children in residential care, per country
training programmes. between 2004-2013.

Graph 2. Number of children with disabilities in public

residential care (all types), by year.

7 10
Retrieved from National Statistical Committee TRANSMONEE 2015. Rate of children in residential care (per
http://www.belstat.gov.by/ofitsialnaya-statistika/solialnaya- 100000 population aged 0-17), at the end of 2013
sfera/obrazovanie/operativnye-dannye_15/obrazovanie-v-
respublike-belarus-uchebnyy-god-2015-2016/
8
TRANSMONEE 2015. Number of registered disabled among 0-
17 year olds, at the end of 2013.
9
Child rights situation analysis report, 2014

15 | P a g e
1 600,0 Overall, analysis of available data shows that
1 400,0 Belarus made significant progress in
1 200,0 addressing rights and interest of vulnerable
1 000,0 children over the last ten years.
800,0
600,0 Belarus is a highly urbanized country. As of
400,0
January 1st 2015, more than 3/4 of the
200,0
population lived in the cities. From the
0,0
regional perspective, Mogilevskaya Oblast
has a highest share of urban population (79%),
Belarus Moldova
while in Minskaya Oblast, urban population
Russian Federation Ukraine represents only 56.9 % of the population.

Table 1. Urban and rural population in the Republic of Belarus, 2015

Location Total Urban % Rural %

Republic of Belarus 9480868 7324980 77.3 2155888 22.7
Oblasts and Minsk City
Brestskaya 1388931 963485 69.4 425446 30.6
Vitebskaya 1198515 915420 76.4 283095 23.6
Gomelskaya 1423964 1087105 76.3 336859 23.7
Grodnehnskaya 1052588 774616 73.6 277972 26.4
Minskaya 1407895 799771 56.8 608124 43.2
Mogilevskaya 1070695 846303 79.0 224392 21.0
Minsk City 1938280 1938280 100.0 0 0.0

Graph 4. Population structure: children and

adults, 2015
Data for the last ten years shows slight
increase in the share of urban population in 19%
the country. Since 2005 to 2015, the share of
urban population has increased from 71,3%
in 2005 to 22,7% in 2015. At the same time, 81%
data show that the share of female population
is slightly higher than male population in the
Children Adults
country. (Female population 53,5%).

Looking at age structure, it can be seen that

children (0-17) represent for around 19% and
youth (14-30) represent around 22,4% of 2.2. The CFCI Context in Belarus.
total population.
To address the CRC Concluding
Observations on the 2nd, combined 3rd and
4th Periodic Reports of the Republic of
16 | P a g e
Belarus, UNICEF and the Government local authorities; central state bodies; civil
agreed to introduce a Child Friendly City society organizations; national and
Initiative (CFCI) as a framework to increase international agencies; experts and academic
the effectiveness of local governance in the institutions; the business and the media; and,
best interest of children and strengthen the most importantly, children and youth groups,
monitoring system of child rights realization. to ensure the participatory and human rights
based approach in addressing child rights
CFCI was launched in Belarus in 2007 and realization at the city level.
scaled up within the current programme cycle
to bring an explicit children’s focus into One of the main objectives of the initiative is
traditional adult-oriented governance system, children’s/youth engagement, empowerment
create enabling environment for child and leadership skills development to ensure
development, promote inter-sectoral that their voices are heard and views are taken
collaboration and partnership to address child into account in all decision concerning their
issues, monitoring of child rights realization life and development. With UNICEF support
and meaningful children’s/youth the range of the national and local workshops,
participation in decision making process. round table discussions, national children’s
forums, regional and national consultations
In 2011 the National Coordination Body on education and Post 2015 development
(Coordination Council on CFCI) was agenda was conducted. Children-Youth
established under the auspices of the Councils/Parliaments were created in 22
National Commission on the Rights of the cities and children became active agents of
Child composing of the officials of the social life changes, developed and
implemented creative initiatives and
National Assembly, Ministries of Health, introduced innovations.
Education, Labour and Social Protection,
Internal Affairs, Foreign Affairs, To assess 22 cities’ progress in creating
representatives of NGOs, Local Authorities child-friendly environment and child rights
and UNICEF. realization UNICEF provided expert support
for the development of monitoring and
As of 2015, 22 cities joined CFCI evaluation (M&E) tool. The M&E tool is
implementation and with UNICEF support constituted of a set of objective (official
the normative and methodological statistics) and subjective (personal opinions
frameworks were developed and the capacity of children, parents and professionals on such
of local authorities to effectively address areas as youth participation, education, health,
local development problems in the best social protection, safety and living
interest of children was strengthened. The environment) indicators that allow to
Working Groups were established in 22 cities calculate the CFC index. The findings and
and Action Plans/Programmes on CFCI recommendations of monitoring and results
development were created and approved by of СFС index calculation provide evidence
the decisions of the Local Executive that is taken into account in preparing the
Committees. UNICEF contributed to the reports “Status of children in the city”.
mobilization of a wide range of partners:

17 | P a g e
The information and data are publicly and development and greater involvement of
available on the website community members in child rights
www.detivgorode.by ensuring transparency realization and monitoring and dissemination
and public awareness of the child rights of best practices nationally and
observance, increasing the accountability of internationally.
local leaders on the child oriented social
policy decision-making and allowing The results of the assessment will be
participating cities to exchange experience presented and discussed at the International
and best practices. Conference of Child Friendly Cities to be
held in Minsk in 2016 and will be used for
In 2013-2015 7 cities completed evaluation attracting the international donors’ interest
process, calculated CFC index and drew up for greater investment in the realization and
the Reports “Status of Children in the City” monitoring of the rights of children and
with the main achievements, identified young people focusing on the most
bottlenecks and future strategies of CFCI vulnerable and marginalized children.
development. Based on the reported results
National Coordination Council on CFCI
granted the Honourable Status of “Child
Friendly City” to Novopolotsk, Pinsk, Brest,
Pruzhany, Polotsk, Soligorsk and Zhodino.

To assess the impact of CFCI on the creation 2.3. Overview of The Child Friendly
of the enabling environment for the Cities Initiative
realization of child rights, effectiveness of the According to available information, more
local governance and community initiatives than 50% of the world’s population now live
in urban areas. In the last decades, the
towards implementation of UN CRC at the
urbanization process has accelerated and it is
city level, meaningful children/youth
estimated that 70 per cent of the world’s
participation in decision making and to population will live in cities by 2050. At the
continue to promote the prioritization of same time, the share of children living in
children’s rights and interests now and within urban areas is steadily increasing and todays,
the post-2015 development agenda the almost half of the world’s children – more
Ministry of Education and UNICEF agreed to than one billion children live in urban areas
conduct an independent CFCI assessment to
Graph 5. World Population, rural and urban
be facilitated by the international consultant
contracted by UNICEF.

The assessment findings, results and

recommendations will be used as an evidence
for policy advocacy and legislation
improvement, strengthening partnership of
governmental and civil society organizations,
promotion of meaningful youth participation
in all decisions concerning their life, growth

18 | P a g e
Source: State of the Word’s Children Report. UNICEF 2012 committed to fulfilling children’s rights. The
framework outlines nine “building blocks”
The Child Friendly Cities Initiative (CFCI) for a Child Friendly City - structures and
was launched by UNICEF in 1996 as a activities of government, which are necessary
response to the global challenges and trends, to engage children’s active involvement, to
such as rapid urbanization, the growing ensure a children’s rights perspective in all
responsibilities of local governments through relevant decision-making and equal rights of
decentralization processes and increased access to basic services. It should be noted
emphasis on the importance of inclusion of that the success of the initiative is strongly
cities in economic and political systems at a related to the level of commitment of local
national level. The Initiative aims to guide authorities, as stated in the document, “the
cities and other systems of local governance process of building a Child Friendly City
in the inclusion of children’s rights as a key demands political commitments – which are
component of their goals, policies, fundamental – as well as concerted action
programmes and structures (UNICEF, 2014). throughout government” (UNICEF, 2014).
The CFC Secretariat was created in 2000, to The Framework is developed in way to
serve as a focal point and provide a common facilitate the process of implementation of
reference for the CFC Initiative and the UN CRC, while applies holistic approach
movement worldwide, which has developed and the components complement each other.
a universal framework to guide the cities for
developing a local system of governance
Box 1. The Nine Building Blocks of the CFCI

1. Children’s participation: promoting children’s active involvement in issues that affect them;
listening to their views and taking them into consideration in decision-making processes
2. A child friendly legal framework: ensuring legislation, regulatory frameworks and
procedures which consistently promote and protect the rights of all children
3. A city-wide Children’s Rights Strategy: developing a detailed, comprehensive strategy or
agenda for building a Child Friendly City, based on the Convention
4. A Children’s Rights Unit or coordinating mechanism: developing permanent structures in
local government to ensure priority consideration of children’s perspective
5. Child impact assessment and evaluation: ensuring that there is a systematic process to assess
the impact of law, policy and practice on children – in advance, during and after
implementation
6. A children’s budget: ensuring adequate resource commitment and budget analysis for
children
7. A regular State of the City’s Children Report: ensuring sufficient monitoring and data
collection on the state of children and their rights
8. Making children’s rights known: ensuring awareness of children’s rights among adults and
children
9. Independent advocacy for children: supporting non-governmental organizations and
developing independent human rights institutions – children’s ombudsperson or
commissioners for children – to promote children’s rights.

19 | P a g e
 2.3.1. The UKID Index creating a child-friendly environment, the
UKID Index is developed under the guidance
Data collection and analysis is one of the of UNICEF’s Child Friendly Cities Initiative
important components of the CFCI. As stated and embodies the Convention on the Rights
above, there are various tools for data of the Child at the local level (UNICEF,
collection accessible in the CFCI website 2013).
(www.childfriendlycities.org), collected As described by authors, the UKID Index is
from different countries, and organizations composed of standardized disaggregated data
from a number of indicators that assess the
following four key categories for children:
1. A good start to life;
2. Protection from harm;
to support practitioners and cities’ 3. Education and knowledge; and
administrations, as well interested 4. Standard of living
organizations, communities and individuals,
in the process of building, strengthening and Box2. The UKID Index Framework
assessing child friendly cities and For more information please visit the
communities. webpage: http://www.cityindicators.org/
The UKID Index of Urban Child The application of UKID Index in the
Development is a joint collaboration between Republic of Belarus is further discussed in
UNICEF and the Global City Indicators Section IV.
Facility (GCIF), created to address the
complex challenges for children and young
people in a rapidly urbanizing world. As a
metric for evaluating cities’ progress in

Source: http://www.cityindicators.org

20 | P a g e
3. STUDY PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY
working groups, annual work plans
3.1. Goal and Objective of the Assessment development and implementation);
 the compliance of CFCI work plans with
The goal of the assignment is to assess the needs and demands of the most
effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of vulnerable and marginalized children and
CFCI development in the best interest of adolescents;
children, especially the most disadvantaged,  inter-sectoral cooperation and
in the Republic of Belarus. networking on child rights realization at
the city level;
Objectives:
 state and non-state actors collaboration
Based on MORES determinant framework and involvement of civil society
(enabling environment, supply, demand and organizations and community members
quality) to assess the main components of in planning, implementation and
CFCI development, to identify the main monitoring of CFCI;
barriers, bottlenecks and draw up  the sustainability and visibility of CFCI
recommendation on corrective actions to at the local level.
overcome them.
The work of Children’s-Youth
To assess: Councils/Parliaments

CFCI coordination at the National level  the models of establishment and

functioning including strengths,
 the effectiveness, relevance and weaknesses, best practices and
sustainability of the National CFC sustainability of work;
Coordination Council work;  the participation of the most vulnerable
 the commitment of the National decision and marginalized children and young
makers for prioritization of child issues people in the work of Children-Youth
and CFCI scaling up; Councils/Parliaments;
 the sustainability and visibility of CFCI at  the engagement of Children-Youth
the national level. Councils/Parliaments (the role and
CFCI implementation at the local level influence) in decision making process
concerning children and youth social life,
 the effectiveness of the local governance growth and development;
in the best interest of the child (CFCI
21 | P a g e
 the implemented creative initiative (its  Advanced cooperation of state and non-
results, added-value); state actors, alliances for child’s rights
 the networking of Children-Youth realization (promotion the public
Councils/Parliaments in Belarus and dialogue, social contracting and
outside; strengthening capacity of local
authorities to utilize data for evidence-
The child rights monitoring and informed decisions).
evaluation at the local level  improvement of the developed child
 The effectiveness, appropriateness and rights monitoring, analysis and
usefulness of the developed child rights assessment tool (update with the new
monitoring and assessment tool for child indicators such as social budget
rights monitoring and evaluation at the allocation and spending in the best
city level in middle income countries; interest of children, environmental
protections, etc.);
 The relevance and sustainability of the
introduced mechanism of CFC City  future strategies of meaningful
Status award; children/youth participation development
(Children-Youth Councils/Parliaments
 The involvement of community members,
development, the creation of the National
civil society organizations, children and
Children-Children’s/Youth Parliament)
youth in child rights monitoring.
in the local decision making process
The sustainability of CFCI development concerning children and youth matters;
 socially-oriented youth initiatives
 the national ownership; development focusing on disability
 community engagement (CSOs, children matters, environmental safety, healthy
and youth mobilization); life style;
 availability of financial resources for the  strategic partnership of UNICEF and the
social sector programmes in best interest Government of Belarus within CFCI to
of children; ensure that child rights are fulfilled,
 accountability of the local authorities; proper monitored and the evidences are
 child rights monitoring for informed used for making decisions concerning
decision making; child growth and development;
 CFC initiative components sustainability.  horizontal cooperation (experience
exchange/ dissemination of best
To draw up recommendations on:
practices) development.
 CFCI scaling up, introduction of
innovations and adjustment to the needs 3.2. Methodology
of the most vulnerable and marginalized The assessment has non-experimental,
children; exploratory design and applied both,
 CFCs role in influencing the quantitative and qualitative methods. The
transformation of the social norms that quantitative part included the analysis of
stigmatized vulnerable groups of relevant and available administrative and
children;
22 | P a g e
secondary data obtained from public sources updated information on the key socio-
and UNICEF, including monitoring and economic indicators at national and regional
evaluation reports and the City reports over levels.
the course of the initiative. Qualitative data
were collected through Focus Group There is a user-friendly website for CFCI in
Discussions with youth groups and Key Belarus (www.detivgorode.by) that contains
Informant Interviews with the CFCI information about the initiative and most
coordinators in each visited location. In order importantly, the reports of the Cities engaged.
to improve validity of findings, data were The website has also the page that shows the
triangulated in terms of source of information progress of each city according to the pre-
(participant cities, non participant and identified indicators and there is a possibility
awarded cities, authorities, youth groups and to get numerical data and graphs for each
NGOs). In total, 10 cities from different indicator and cities, although some
provinces were covered during the study. The information need updates.
themes and questions for FGDs and KIIs The experience of other countries with CFCI,
were developed based on the study in particular in Eastern Europe and CIS, was
framework/matrix created in response to the analyzed and taken into consideration for
study objectives (Annex A). developing recommendations. Other sources
Based on the global priorities and by taking of information were used as per
into consideration the context of the country, recommendation of UNICEF team as well.
a Theory of Change of the CFCI was 3.2.2. Primary Data
developed by consultant as well.
Along with analysis of secondary data, the
3.2.1. Secondary data primary information was collected through
Secondary data were used to determine the Focus Group Discussions and the Key
overall situation in the country and Informant Interviews.
specifically in the cities in relation to child 3.2.2.1. Focus Group Discussions with
rights and for development of Youth/Child groups
recommendations. Information about the
situation of children in the country will be
The FGD methodology is a participatory
obtained from the latest SitAn Belarus Report
method that remains appropriate for use with
(2015) provided by UNICEF. The UNDAF
children groups. It is a purposeful, facilitated
Report 2015-2020, the National Strategy for
discussion between a group of respondents
Sustainable Development for the period of
with similar characteristics, within a fixed
2020 and other relevant sectoral strategy
timeframe, focusing on a limited number of
documents were used to draw the
topics. The discussions, with the permission
recommendations in line with the long-term
of participants, were audio-recorded to
national priorities.
further synthesis, the research ethics with
The National Statistical Committee of the children were applied.
Republic of Belarus maintains a user-friendly
Based on the consultation with the UNICEF
website (www.belstat.gov.by) that contains
team, it has been decided to conduct FGDs
23 | P a g e
with children/youth group who are the details on the subject of concern. The KII, as
members of the Children’s/Youth the FGDs were audio recorded, transcribed
Parliaments. The Parliament members in and analyzed. See Annex III. KII Guide for
each locality were informed by local further details.
coordinators about the content, location and
time of FGD and interested members (up to
6-8 of both genders) were invited to The KIIs have specific focus on the
participate. However, in some location there following areas:
were a bigger number of participants willing
to participate in the FGD, so in those 1. The effectiveness, relevance and
locations the time allocated for FGDs could sustainability of the National CFC
not be respected. Coordination Council work;
2. The commitment of the National
Two types of FGD guides were developed – decision makers for prioritization of
for children and youth from CFCI- child issues and CFCI scaling up;
participated cities and for children groups 3. The sustainability and visibility of
from non-participants cities. CFCI at the national/local levels;
4. The effectiveness of the local
The FGD Guides consist of two sections: the governance in the best interest of the
introductory section and the section with the child (CFCI working groups, annual
key questions for discussions. The discussion work plans development and
implementation);
starts with a broader theme and flows to more
5. The areas related to Monitoring of
specific questions and ends with question to Child Rights;
get any recommendation from children group 6. Local Ownership;
on how to further advance CFCI in their City. 7. Availability of resources, and
See Annex II. FGD Protocol for more details. 8. Involvement of community members
in CFCI.
3.2.2.2. Key Informant Interviews
Semi-structured interviews are particularly 3.3. Sample Design
useful for collecting information on people’s
ideas, opinions, or experiences. They are The study applied non-probability sampling
design. Purposive sampling method allows
often used during needs assessment, program
recruiting the subject with the most suitable
design or evaluation. It has been agreed with
characteristics corresponding with the study
UNICEF team to conduct KII interviews with aim. In order to address the sampling
the local authorities representatives limitations and improve validity,
responsible for the CFCI in their locations triangulation of data sources was applied.
and the representatives of NGOs. As for the Taking into account the specific focus of the
FGDs the KIIs designed in a way to cover study/CFCI in Belarus on the role of
corresponding themes described in the Annex Children/Youth Councils and the time
A. constraints, it has been decided to limit the
FGDs with the above mentioned groups.
The KIIs consist of 8 to 10 open-ended
questions and have a flexible flow to get more

24 | P a g e
  Children ages 13-17 both genders and In coordination with UNICEF team, the
the members of the following cities were identified for
Councils/Parliament conducting FGDs and the KIIs.

Box 2. Selected localities and schedule of visit

Location Date Target group Activity

Minsk 14 Dec 2015 CFCI Coordinator. KII
Meeting with NCC
members
Jhodino 14 Dec 2015 CFCI Coordinator KII
YC (mixed group) FGD
Brest oblast 15 Dec 2015 Participation at the Meeting of the National
Committee on the Rights of the Child
Soligorsk 15 Dec 2015 CFCI Coordinator KII
YC (mixed group) FGD
Cherven 16 Dec 2015 CFCI Coordinator KII
YC (mixed group) FGD
Berezino 16 Dec 2015 CFCI Coordinator KII
YC (mixed group) FGD
Polotsk CFCI Coordinator KII
17 Dec 2015
YC (mixed group) FGD
Novopolotsk CFCI Coordinator KII
17 Dec 2015
YC (mixed group) FGD
Borisov CFCI Coordinator KII
18 Dec 2015
YC (mixed group) FGD
Minsk NGO Representatives FGD
18 Dec 2015
Slutsk CFCI Coordinator KII
19 Dec 2015
YC (mixed group) FGD
Lida (Skype call) CFCI Coordinator KII
29 Jan 2016
YC (mixed group) FGD

It should be noted that in Minsk and each

locality, there were meetings with local 3.4. Data Management and Analysis
authorities as well as the parliamentarians As mentioned in previous section, the FGDs
and the Ministry of Education representatives and the KII were audio recorded. The audio
and other officials, which let to get a general files were transcribed and then analyzed.
feedback on CFCI and the overall perception The Framework approach were applied for
of the program by authorities. data analysis11

11
The method was developed by the National Center
for Social Research (NatCen) UK

25 | P a g e
As the first step, the key ideas were identified
from the transcribed information, then the
key concepts and themes were clarified and
the description provided. The relevant quotes
are used in the current report.
The numerical information from secondary
sources were analyzed, summarized and
presented in the form of tables, graphs and
charts. A cross sectional comparison among
the Cities qualified as “Child Friendly” and
other cities were conducted.
4. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

All ethical consideration for conducting

studies with children, including child
protection policy was ensured by the
researcher. Consent forms were developed
and signed prior to session (Annex IV) and
all study participants were clearly informed
about the purpose and the implication of this
activity. Confidentiality were ensured, all
audio files will be destroyed after submission
of final report, names or other identifier for
children are not used in the report.

26 | P a g e
5. STUDY FINDINGS

strengthens democratic values in

5.1. Relevance communities. As Roger Hart states
The study found that the priorities of CFCI “Participation is the process of sharing
are highly relevant to the context. The decisions which affect one’s life and the life
objectives are consistent with the national of the community in which one lives. It is the
priorities and the country’s international means by which democracy is built and it is a
commitments towards realization of child standard against which democracies should
rights. More specifically, it is in line with the be measured”.
Law of the Republic of Belarus “On the
The CFCI is in line with the:
Rights of the Child”, the Law of the Republic
of Belarus “On the State Youth Policy”, the Article 19 Facilitation of Young People’s
National Action Plan on Improving the State Right to Form Associations;
of Children and Protection of their Rights for
2012-2016, the National Program of Article 20 Fostering Development and
Demographic Security of the Republic of Implementation of Socially Significant Youth
Belarus for 2011-2015, the guidelines and Initiatives, and
recommendations of international documents
Article 25 Youth Participation in Building
on the state of children issued by the UN
and Implementation of State Youth Policy
General Assembly and the Committee on the
Rights of the Child. The initiative of the Law of the Republic of Belarus “On the
corresponds with the SDG “Goal 11: Make State Youth Policy”. The CFCI is also in line
cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” and contributes to realization of the Law of
and is part of the United Nations the Republic of Belarus “On the State
Development Assistance Framework Support to the Children and Youth Public
(UNDAF) strategy for the Republic of Organizations in the Republic of Belarus”
Belarus for 2016-2020 under the thematic that guarantees state support for children and
area “Inclusive, Responsive and Accountable youth organizations in realization of social
Governance” as well. programs (Article 5) and their right to
participation in planning and discussion of
Participation of children and youth
policies affecting children and youth in
Meaningful participation of children in Belarus (Article 6).
decision making is one of the key principles
Based on the review of available reports and
of the UN CRC. Participation has positive
observations made during the field visits, it
impact on children’s comprehensive
can be stated that the CFCI has reinforced
development and on the other hand
27 | P a g e
creation of youth and children organizations among the key achievements of the CFCI,
and enhanced their capabilities to promote however this important development needs to
own rights and interests in different settings, be further improved and adopted to become a
while fostering continuous dialogue among simple, practical, affordable and reliable
youth and the local authorities. source of information that provides up to date
data for decision making. The “Friendliness
“THE PARLIAMENT BECA ME LIKE A BRIDGE Index” is unique in terms of collecting data in
BETWEEN YOUTH A ND TH E LOCAL relation to participation of children in
AUTHORITIES…”
decision making. While external validity of
Quote from FGD with Children’s/Youth these indicators is due to sample size, on the
Parliament other hand it is the only indicator that helps
to better understand perception of children
about their role in local governance.

The majority of study participants was

“THANKS TO PARLIAME NT OUR VO ICES ARE
positive about the tool and claim reliability of
HEARD…A DULTS MAY NOT SEE THE PROBLEMS data.
THAT WE FACE WITH AN D THESE P ROBLEM S
M AY AFFECT ALL SOCIET Y, BUT WE CA N SEE “WE WERE VERY ENTHUSI ASTIC TO COLLE CT
THESE ISSUES A ND CAN ADDRESS THEM AND DATA AND SEE WHAT WOULD BE THE
MAKE OUR CITY AND TH E COUNTRY BETTER.” “FRIENDLINESS INDE X” F OR OUR CITY. ”
Quote from FGD with Children’s/Youth Parliament. Quote from KII Interview

Child rights monitoring Among the key concerns of monitoring

mechanism are its frequency (3 years interval
Accountable and effective local governance
seems to be too long), its cost, which is
sensitive to children issues can be hardly
relatively high due to survey part and its
archived without appropriate data collection
difference from the global index – the UKID
and knowledge management systems. Focus
tool developed and promoted by UNICEF.
on development and implementation of child
However, the comparison of these tools
rights monitoring system at local level is
shows that “Friendliness Index” may provide
well-justified as lack of information about the
a deeper insight, is relevant to the context and
status of children in urban setting is a global
locally accepted. A deeper insight and
issue.
specific recommendations and thoughts are
The CFCI in Belarus made significant highlighted in Section VI.
progress in development and implementation
Another observation is that the CFCI
of such tool. According to data on the CFCI
priorities could be better linked and reflected
webpage (www.detivgorode.by ), 18 cities
in the local development plans and strategic
across the country expressed interest, were
documents. It has been found that some
trained and implemented this tool.
participated in the program cities in their
Development and implementation of data local development plans have poorly
collection and analysis tool at local level is

28 | P a g e
reflected the CFCI priorities, while in reality Belarus. An interactive page allows selecting
they have a greater commitment to CFCI. specific parameters and creating table and
graphs, comparing specific indicators or a set
It should be mentioned that the focus on the of them among the Cities. The assessment
most vulnerable and marginalized groups of tool is part of Certification mechanism as
children and equity agenda of UNICEF could well. The Cities with higher indices receive a
be better addressed over the course of the honorable award of “Child Friendly City”.
program in the Republic of Belarus. Voices By December 2015, seven cities were
and choices of vulnerable children could be qualified as such in the Republic of Belarus.
more effectively addressed through applying It should be noted that Certification
empowering and strength based approaches mechanism and award became a prestigious
in addressing social and economic status for the Cities and as stated by study
vulnerabilities of children. participants “stimulated competition among
the cities” to get this award.

As mentioned in previous section, the only

5.2. Effectiveness
concern is the frequency of data collection.
The study revealed that there is a progress According to information provided by study
against objectives of the intervention. There participants, it is intended to collect data ones
were three objectives identified for the period in three years, which seems to be too long for
of 2013-2015: timely decision-making.

1. Development and implementation of Based on the interviews with authorities and

monitoring system of the situation of children group in different locations, the
children at the city level. changes in participation of children and
2. Improving the governance system at local youth in decision making processes can be
level for the best interests of children realized. The improvement of governance
3. Advancing methods and types of system at local level for the best interest of
participation of children and youth in children was assessed by looking at
decision making. budgetary allocations for social sector across
the cities and by getting the impression of
Based on analysis of quantitative and stakeholders regarding changes in the
qualitative data, it can be stated the project governance. The findings suggest that the
has developed and implemented a project contributed to the positive changes in
comprehensive tool for data collection. The the governance system in participating cities.
“Friendliness Index” serves not only as an
assessment tool, but also as a mechanism to
dedicate efforts of the municipality and other
actors around specific themes concerning
children at City level. The tool has a
complete guide, forms and a dashboard that
allow seeing the result in the corresponding
webpage of the CFCI in the Republic of

29 | P a g e
 Graph. 6. Share of the budgetary evidence that Children’s/Youth Parliaments
allocations for social sector per year
in participating cities are more active in
73,8% 75,3%
80% 65,8% 67,5% planning and implementation of city
54,9% 58,1% 58,7%
60% 53,6% 52,7% programs. There are a number of examples
40%
of how youth influenced the local policies in
Novopolock, Jodino, Polock and other cities.
20%
As stated by one of the Children’s/Youth
0% Parliamentarians from Minsk Oblast.
2013 2014 2015
Minsk Oblast Jodino Soligorsk
“IT IS NOT A “CHILD PA RLIAMENT”, IT IS A
REAL WORK , WHERE WE ARE GOING TO
As can be seen in the Graph 2. in Jodino and REALIZE OUR OWN IDE A S, WORK HARD TO
Soligorsk the budgetary allocations for social PROMOTE OUR IDEAS TO MAKE OUR CITIES
AND COUNTRY A BETTER PLACE”.
sector are higher than in Minsk Oblast.
The Parliaments are functional in all
The positive implication of the CFCI on participating cities, the members and the
governance systems were also supported local authorities have regular meetings,
individual opinion of the representatives of however the frequency varies by city, in
local authorities and children groups. awarded cities it is more frequent. All
parliaments are functioning in accordance to
“THE MOST IMPORTANT ACHIEVEMENT OF
the Children’s/Youth Parliament Charter that
THIS INITIATIVE IS T HAT PEOPLE NOW
UNDER STAND THAT ISSUES RELATED TO
outlines the mission, functions, election
CHILDREN ARE NOT ONL Y THE PROBLEM process and eligibility.
WITHIN EDUCATION SYS TEM, THE PROBLEM
OF CHILDRE N CONCERNS ALL AROUND AND One of the concerns that raised by
REQUIRES ACTIVE ENGAGEME NT OF LOCAL Parliamentarians during the FGDs was the
ADMINISTRATION, BUSINESSE S,
fact of age limit for participating in the work
COMMUNITY MEMBERS A N D CHILDREN
THEMSELVES”
of the Children’s/Youth Parliaments. The
opinion of children varies in relation to
Quote from KII participant
removal of the “aged based eligibility
It should be noted that the Cities with a criteria”, however the majority believe that it
greater Friendliness Index show a better should be an “open space” for all children.
performance in relation to mobilization of
additional financial resources for social “…PARLIAMENT SHOULD BE OPEN FOR A LL
CHILDREN, NOT ONLY FOR THOSE O VER THE
sector, which show positive dynamic over the
AGE OF 13”.
last three years. The local authorities
associate it with the CFCI as the contributors Another observation is that the members of
know about initiative and willing to support the Children’s/Youth Parliaments are usually
programs oriented for children in the City. the most active and successful school
children from upper grades, which is quite
Finally, the project achieved its priority in logical, however the CFCI initiative could do
addressing participation of children and more to create a space and empower the most
youth in decision making. There is strong disadvantage groups through this platform.

30 | P a g e
Few Parliaments engaged vulnerable further discussed, improved and validated by
children in their activities and the interactions local actors, in particular children and youth
are usually project based or charity oriented groups (See Annex B).
(in the case of children with disabilities). It
should be noted that Parliamentarians 5.3. Efficiency
acknowledge this fact and committed to Data and the observations suggest that the
address it in future. CFCI were highly efficient. According to
project documents, for the implementation of
Lack of a SMART, country specific Result the CFCI in the Republic of Belarus, it
framework / Theory of Change for the CFCI
is among the challenges that may reduce the was dedicated around $171,700 for the period
effectiveness of the interventions. An of 2013-2015. The following outputs
indicative result framework is developed produced over the mentioned period:
within the scope of this study that can be
Box3. Summary of deliverables per specific objective for 2013-2015
Goal: Promoting a full realization of child rights, as per the # of participants # of produced
criteria of CFCI in Trainings, publications
Meetings &
Conferences
SO1: Development and implementation of monitoring 547 1250
system of the situation of children at the City level
SO2: Improving the governance system at local level for 158 -
the best interests of children
SO3: Advancing methods and types of participation of 1064 330
children and youth in decision making.
Total 1,769 1,580

The high efficiency of the interventions were might have a greater chance to raise extra
also related to the nature of the CFCI, which funds rather than the municipalities in
focuses on mobilization of available agricultural setting.
resources around child rights issues. Local
authorities from participating cities along Along with quantitative outputs, there are
with dedication of available financial, reported qualitative results as well.
technical and administrative resources for According to the project reports and
social protection of children, were successful
in mobilizing financial resources from other
local counterparts. However, it should be
noted that the level of mobilization of extra
funds is also related to the economic context meetings with children and local authorities,
of the city – obviously that industrial zones the knowledge and attitude of policy makers

31 | P a g e
and other stakeholders are changing. Local, “NEXT YEAR WE ARE GO ING TO CONDUCT THE
authorities, teachers, community members ASSESSMENT AND FOR U S IT WILL BE VERY
CHALLENGING AS OUR I NDEX WA S HIGH LAST
and children themselves are more positive
TIME. WE NEED TO WOR K HARD NOT TO FAIL
about the role of children in decision making. DOWN…”

Children’s/Youth Parliaments are reside in

“THE MONITORING SHOWED THE STR ONG
the building of the Centers for Children’s and AND WEAK SI DES OF OU R PERF ORMANCE,
Youth Arts, their Mentors are staff of the NOW WE ARE WORKI NG T O ADDRESS THE
Centers that make the initiative highly GAPS AND BELIEVE THA T NEXT TIME CAN GET
AWARDED…”
efficient.
Quotes from KII Interviews
According to Children’s/Youth Parliaments,
the City and other supporters of their There is an interest from Cities that were not
activities are usually willing to support. part of the initiative as well. The Cities have
very positive impression about Youth
“DURING TWO YEARS OF OUR Committees and their collaboration with
COLLAB ORATION, WE HA V E NEVER HEARD “NO” local authorities in their Cities. Periodic
FROM O UR MUNI CIPALITY…THEY MAY SAID meeting and conferences organized within
“LET’S DO IT LATER O N” OR FIND A COST
and beyond the program helped to expand
EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIV E TO OUR REQUESTS
AND IDEAS FOR THE CI TY” the idea and the messages of the CFCI in the
Republic of Belarus.
Quote from FGD with Children’s/Youth Parliament
It can be actually claimed that the CFCI is
5.4. Sustainability nationally owned. Strong commitment of the
According to the study findings, the central Government was observed during the
sustainability of this initiative remains as its meeting of the National Commission on the
strongest part. There is a strong evidence of Rights of the Child, where was a separate
local ownership and commitment of the session about the CFCI.
stakeholders, in particular at local level to
It can be stated that the Children’s/Youth
continue this practice. As stated by one of the
Parliaments is the key achievement of the
KII participants:
CFCI in Belarus. It serves as a platform for a
productive dialogue between children and
“THE CHILD FRIENDLY CITY INITIATIVE IS
NOT A STANDALONE INT ERVENTION
youth and the municipalities. It promotes
ANYMORE, IT IS A PAR T OF THE CITY LIFE…” civic education and helps children to develop
social skills. It has well-established
It also seems that awarding/certification
participation mechanism at school, city and
mechanism contributes to sustainability of
province level. There is a favorable policy
CFCI in Belarus. Awarded Cities are
environment to support this initiative and
interested in conducting another round of
most importantly children were seemed very
monitoring and see to what extent the
enthusiastic and proud of their work.
situation is changed in their cities after the
years of joint efforts. The monitoring mechanism (Friendliness
Index) is an important achievement of the

32 | P a g e
CFCI in Belarus. It is very comprehensive, On the other hand, the Council needs
well-designed and seem to be a reliable tool technical and financial support to further
for child rights monitoring. On the other expand or at least provide ongoing support to
hand, it could be further improved and the Cities.
simplified. Ideally, the tool should be so
simple that any City could apply it without According to the Councils at local level and
additional trainings or technical support. local coordinators of the CFCI, the National
Council provided ongoing technical support
However, If cities can afford and commit to and guidance, training and national
apply it in annual basis, there is no need for leadership over the course of the program.
simplification.
As Ms Vasilchenko stated the Cities and
According to observations and comments of Children’s/Youth Parliament received a
study participants, the CFCI Coordination series of tailor made trainings, starting from
Council is a crucial element of the CFCI in Strategic planning to data collection and
Belarus. In fact, the council played an analysis. The Council developed guiding
important role in addressing CFCI priorities tools and other regulatory or guiding
in the country, however need further financial documents to systematize the processes and
and technical support to further promote, procedures. So, the CFCI got a stronger
expand and sustain CFCI in Belarus. institutional framework.

5.5 Findings by Specific Areas The National Coordination Council also

maintains the CFCI webpage. However, they
CFCI coordination at the National level need further assistance to maintain the site.
As stated in the previous section, the role of
“WE MA DE SIGNIFICA NT PROGRESS AND
the Coordination Council was crucial in REALIZED ALL THE OBJ ECTIVE OF OUR
advocating CFCI priorities at national level. PROJECT, HOWEVER IT IS STILL A HALF WAY
The leadership of the National Centre of AND THE CITIES STILL NEED SUPP ORT,
Children and Youth Art is justified and well WHILE THERE IS A GRE AT DEMAND TO
EXPAND THE INITIATIV E IN OTHER
thought as this institution has institutional
COUNTRIES... .”
experience on promoting child rights and
technical capacity to support the initiative at States the National Coordinator, Ms
local level. The role of the secretariat was Vasilchenko.
played by the Centre staff.
There is an impression that the visibility of
According to the National Coordinator of the program at national level is limited
CFCI in Belarus Ms. Vasilchenko, the among the civil servants and those who part
Council role is very important for overall of the initiative. There were periodic TV
coordination of CFCI and for policy programs and articles and other media
advocacy. The feedback from monitoring and activities at national level, but as stated by
the CFCI experience may have been further one of the KII Interviewers “Everyone knows
advocated by Council members as well. about Hospice in Belarus, but few about
CFCI...”

33 | P a g e
The same concerns about the visibility were children without parental care, children with
raised by representatives of NGOs during the deviant behaviour (in conflict with the law)
meeting and Children’s/Youth Parliaments. and children from vulnerable families
(substance abuse etc). The level of awareness
CFCI implementation at the local level of local authorities, the City Mayor’s and/or
The interest, enthusiasm and commitment of the Deputies in Awarded Cities was very high.
local authorities from visited cities remain as The Mayor of Jodino even recalled by name
a fact and discussed in previous section, all vulnerable children who got support from
however the practices vary among the cities. the City over the year and were aware about
Awarded Cities were seemed more organized their current situation.
for the realization of CFCI priorities. The The Cities also claim that the CFCI was very
city level Coordination Councils were instrumental in improving inter-agency
established in each city engaged into CFCI cooperation at local level in response to
and each City develope ita program for children issues.
realization of CFCI. At the same time, the
Cities applies different approaches to reflect Overall, there are few NGOs working for
the CFCI priorities in their City level children at national level. According to SitAn
development plans. There is a need to further Report 2015, only 18 youth and children
explore this issue and identify the most organization have been registered and have
effective way for program planning (having a national status. Among them, UNESCO
separate plan or to incorporate CFCI clubs seem very active. These clubs closely
priorities into other development plans). it collaborate with Children’s/Youth
should be noted that UNICEF experience Parliaments and actually they are members of
from other countries and recommended the Parliaments.
methodological approach for realization of
CFCI, suggest development of a There are agencies working with children in
comprehensive Children’s Rights Strategy or Belarus. In the Councils the CSOs are usually
agenda for building a Child Friendly City. represented by BRSM (youth movement) and
All Cities claim about the positive impact of few NGOs working mainly with disability
the CFCI on the situation of children in their related issues.
cities, specific examples were given during As stated by NGO representative during the
the interviews and the reports of the Cities. FGD
Among the key achievements is the level of
participation of children in decision making “THERE ARE FEW NGOS I N THE SMALLER
and realization of various activities initiated CITIES, THEY CAN BE FOUND IN MINKS OR
and implemented by children groups with the OTHER BIGGER CITIES, IN GENERAL CIVIL
support of the City administration or other SOCIETY IS WEAK IN B EL ARUS”

local stakeholders. On the other hand, According to SitAn report,

in recent years, there is significant growth in
According to information provided by local
the number of children and youth
actors, the main vulnerable groups of
organization across the country, this is partly
children are children with disabilities,

34 | P a g e
associated with realization of CFCI in 22 Eligibility of children to become a member of
cities as well. the Parliament is the main concern of
children. They want to expand it, include
Visibility remains as an issue at local level younger children and university students as
too. The majority of children stated that not well. Another observation is that children
all children aware about the CFCI, however from boarding schools and other residential
in awarded cities the situation is better. care facilities are not represented in the
According to children, tradition ways of Parliament.
awareness raising are not effective, mass
media and TV is not popular among children Among the key interventions, it has been
and youth these days. Social media and ICT found that “environmental” activities are the
could be better used to raise awareness and most common. Somehow children are
engage people into the program, believe interested in municipal improvement and
children and NGO representatives. environmental activities. Children also do
some charity-oriented activities to support
Another issue that has been realized is the children with disabilities, only in one City it
lack of information about the city budget and has been found that the Parliament actively
their plans in the City websites. Few cities interact with children in conflict with the
have a separate webpage on CFCI. law/deviant behavior by engaging them into
The key socio-economic data are amiable in their regular activities.
the Belstat website, however it is not On the other hand, there are a lot of examples
sufficiently disaggregated and not possible to when children influenced the local
get information about the state of children in government in prioritization of projects. In
all cities. particular, in Awarded Cities the stronger
“Lobby” of Children’s/Youth Parliament was
supported by evidence. Development of
Work of Children’s-Youth bikeways, pools, children coffee and other
Councils/Parliaments leisure and sport related projects were
advocated by children and received support.
As stated above, the work of
Children’s/Youth Parliaments is the strongest Children groups were active during the
part of the CFCI in Belarus. Children and monitoring of child rights as well. They
youth are trained and being mentored to received orientation and conducted survey
effectively realize their ideas on how to among their peers. Children are presented in
improve the City. The members are mainly the meetings and conferences, where the City
secondary school children. They usually Mayors presented the results of monitoring.
meet once a month, have their plans and
minutes of their meetings. There is one The existence of UNICESCO Clubs and
representative from each school/educational Parliaments in one school seem to be
facility who is elected by students in the reinforcing each other performance.
school. There are councils at provincial level As stated by Ms Vasilchenko:
as well.

35 | P a g e
“THE CHILDREN’ S/YOUTH PARLIAMENT S addition, data were collected by children and
BECOME A SELF SUFFIC IENT INSTITUTION S, it is not clear whether all ethical
WE SET IT UP AND IT MOVES FORWA RD BY
considerations and methodological
ITSELF”
requirements were applied.
She has also found the high mobility of
children within and outside of the country. Finally, the most important gap is the
There is frequent meeting with other frequency of data collection. Three years
Parliaments, in particular with neighbouring period is too long for the tool, which is
cities. However, a more structured meetings intended for regular monitoring of child
and information exchange among the cities rights at city level.
and within the region (EU/CIS) were
The “Friendly City”Award is based on the
recommended by children.
results of the monitoring. According to
Child rights monitoring and evaluation at information on the CFCI webpage
the local level (www.detivgorode.by) 18 cities out of 22
participating cities were collected data and
It should be stated that the monitoring tool seven reports are available on the website.
developed within CFCI Initiative is a great
tool, tailored to the context and covering a On the other hand, from the presented data. it
range of important indicators. The launch seems that some “non-awarded” cities have a
and expansion of UKID Index create some greater Friendliness Index comparing to
important questions and dilemmas: Use a some awarded cities. For instance, the City
global and simple tool that allows Dobrush has the highest Index (8.9), but
comparability across the countries or keep probably did not submitted the report and not
using tailored but more complex tool that can awarded. One of the key principles of
help to get a deeper insight into the status of awarding mechanism is the high interest of
children? municipality.

This issue need to be further discussed with In general, if compare the medians of Indices
local actors. among awarded and non-awarded cities, the
Awarded cities have a greater value, but not
If compare the tools, it can be seen that the significant. See the graph below.
UKID Index is lacking “Participation”
Graph 7. The Comparison of awarded and non-awarded City Indices
dimension which is very important one.

Among the key concerns related to 10

“Friendliness Index” is it cost and complexity. 8 6,7 6,4
It seems without comprehensive training and 6
ongoing support, it can hardly be replicated 4
by other cities. 2
0
Another concern is external validity and
Awarded Non-Awarded
reliability of subjective indicators. The
sample size (200 subjects) is too small to CF Index 2012
generalize finding to entire population. In
36 | P a g e
So, the selection criteria need to be further
improved. It is also important to remember
that the awarding mechanism need to
consider not only the results, but also the
efforts of the City to realize the right of the
child in their municipalities.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS
mission. In fact, the Coordination
Council can play a greater role in
1. CFCI scaling up, introduction of
promoting child sensitive budgeting,
innovations and adjustment to the
evidence based policy advocacy tackling
needs of the most vulnerable and
inequalities, targeted awareness raising,
marginalized children
d.
a. Since the CFCI has proven to be as an
strengthening public-private partnership
effective, efficient and sustainable
and other interventions at macro level
approach to promote child rights in urban
setting, it would be reasonable to further
that can contribute to the CFCI
develop and scale it up. In order to have a
sustainability and scaling up.
greater focus on the most marginalized,
e. Development of a five year program plan
as the first step, the monitoring tool needs
for the CFCI that applies RBM principles
to be appropriately tailored for this
with the specific focus on marginalized
purpose. UNICEF’s promoted Multiple
groups. The five year plan should be
Overlapping Deprivation Analysis
further aligned with SDG and other
(MODA) tool (http://www.unicef-
national strategic plan and priorities for
irc.org/MODA/ ) can serve a recourse
children and youth. The action plans at
tool to further advance child rights
local level should be tailored to the CFCI
monitoring practices at City level and
Five Year Plan and address the gaps
probably national level.
identified through monitoring
b. Children’s/Youth/ Parliaments can play a
mechanisms. The Result Framework
greater role in addressing inequalities at
attached to this report can help for
City level. The members of
development of such plan.
Children’s/Youth Parliaments need to be
f. Technical staff (mentors and others) need
further trained and mentored to be more
to be oriented in specific approaches,
oriented on civic engagement
such as strength-based approach and/or
c. While the number of the Cities will
empowering tradition of social work to
increase, the technical, financial,
effectively address social and economic
administrative capacities and human
vulnerabilities of children.
resources of the CFCI Coordination
Council need to be further advanced to
enable them effectively realize their 2. CFCs role in influencing the
transformation of the social norms that

37 | P a g e
 stigmatized vulnerable groups of
children. a. In some cities, there is a good model of
cooperation of state and non-state actors
a. First of all, a mini-KAP survey focusing (Novopolotsk for example). This practice,
on identification of vulnerability factors, along with other best practices needs to
including social norms affecting children be assessed and promoted within the
and youth, needs to be conducted at City framework of CFCI. The policy
level. Children’s/Youth Parliaments can framework, including the Law “On the
be trained and mentored by professionals State Support for the Youth and Children
to lead the process. Participatory action Organizations in the Republic of
research methodology would be a proper Belarus” 12 , promotes social contracting
approach to improve participation of with youth organizations. This can be
children and tailor research with specific further promoted and might have multiple
actions. effect; promote cooperation between
b. Awareness raising activities at local level state and non-state actors, enhance civic
need to be accompanied by KAP surveys engagement and decentralization and,
(pre- post). enhance participation of children and
c. The evidence needs to be further used by youth in decision making. At the same
Children’s/Youth Parliament and CFC time, the CFCI can pilot, facilitate and
Council at City and National level for advance capacity of youth organization to
evidence-based policy advocacy and do so.
planning. b. Setting up mechanisms of consultations
d. In some countries, the religious between the government and civil society
institutions/leaders play an important role organizations, and expanding the practice
in transformation of social norms to of discussion of the draft local
reduce stigma and discriminations, development plans and programmes that
mobilizing communities and resources affect people’s lives;
around various social programs. This c. Expanding practice of public social
opportunity can be further assessed and contracts that allows to outsource CSOs
possibly applied in the Republic of for rendering social services and
Belarus. implementing social contracts;
d. Expansion of evidence based practice and
3. Advanced cooperation of state and policy making requires capacity
non-state actors, alliances for child’s development and technical support. The
rights realization (promotion the Coordination Council can lead the
public dialogue, social contracting and process, however their capacity need to
strengthening capacity of local be strengthened.
authorities to utilize data for evidence-
informed decisions)

12
Article 9: Realization of the state contracts by Support for the Youth and Children Organizations in
youth and children organizations. Law “On the State the Republic of Belarus. 1999.

38 | P a g e
e. Promoting Corporate Social data collection. it would be recommended
Responsibility practice among private to conduct monitoring in annual basis.
sector. b. Development of a Yearbook on the
f. It seems that Children’s/Youth “Socio-economic situation in the Cities of
Parliaments are lacking legal status. This the Republic of Belarus” would be a very
opportunity needs to be further discussed helpful data source for knowledge
with local stakeholders and particular building, planning and analysis as well as
with youth parliamentarians. for policy advocacy as well.

4. Improvement of the developed child

rights monitoring, analysis and 5. Future strategies of meaningful
assessment tool (update with the new children/youth participation
indicators such as social budget development (Children-Youth
allocation and spending in the best Councils/Parliaments development,
interest of children, environmental the creation of the National Children-
protections, etc.) Children’s/Youth Parliament) in the
local decision making process
a. As discussed in Section 1, the child rights concerning children and youth
monitoring tool can be further tailored to matters;
capture inequalities and also focus on
child-sensitive budgeting and a. The CFCI has already developed a good
environmental protection. The indicators practice for meaningful participation of
can be adopted from SDGs targets for children and youth in decision making. At
sustainable cities and environmental the same time, as recommended in
protection and other targets as previous sections, this need to be further
appropriate. The UN Habitat tool (Urban developed to have a greater focus on
Governance Index) and other tools can be marginalized groups, so the
used for this purpose. On the other hand, representation of vulnerable groups in
simplicity and practicality of monitoring Parliament is highly recommended.
mechanism need to be taken into b. Children and youth during the FGDs
consideration. Updated mechanism can expressed their interests in learning
be piloted in three Cities and assessed in research/monitoring skills. It is
terms of its reliability, validity and recommended to have a well-designed
efficiency. Attempt can be made to adopt program component to introduce and
the UKID tool 13 , however the author expand “children as researchers”
believes that monitoring mechanism approach into the CFCI initiative.
should be better tailored to the context of c. At the same time, the CFCI can also
the Republic of Belarus. One of the expand a wider participation of
important points is to ensure regularity of youth/citizens in decision making. From

13
http://www.cityindicators.org/Deliverables/UKID%
20Overview%20and%20Preliminary%20Results_10-
2-2013-140975.pdf

39 | P a g e
 the UNICEF Innovation lab, the UReport decisions concerning child growth and
tool that has been already expanded in 15 development
countries can be adopted to the context of
Belarus. Youth via UReport tool, a. In fact, local ownership and leadership
within moments, can share their opinions are the strong part of the CFCI in Belarus.
on various topics they concern. This It needs to be continued in the same mode
information is instantly mapped and while focusing on the CFCI Coordination
analyzed, yielding vital information and Council’s technical capacity,
real-time insights about how young transformation or dissemination of best
people see their world and what they practices among participating cities and
think is most important14. supporting in planning and piloting new
initiatives such as U-Report and others.
6. Socially-oriented youth initiatives b. As mentioned in the previous section,
development focusing on disability data on the situation of children are not
matters, environmental safety, healthy sufficiently disaggregated at city level.
life style. Child sensitive budgeting can be further
advocated at city and national levels.
a. In fact, the Children’s/Youth/ c. One of the recommendations of youth
Parliaments in their current activities and local authorities was focused on
have a greater focus on municipal further opportunities for in-country and
development and environmental cross-country exchange of experience.
activities. As the next stage, their plans While in-country exchange can be further
ideally need to tackle problems identified promoted by Coordination Council,
through child rights monitoring. So, the `UNICEF can focus on regional
efforts of all actors in society will be collaboration to facilitate exchange of
contributing to a shared goal. The golden best practices among the countries.
standard is that children and youth
themselves identify priorities and issues
to be tackled. The quality and the level of
participation of children is a dynamic
issue, it changes over time. Appropriate
training program and mentorship need to
be arranged.

7. Strategic partnership of UNICEF and

the Government of Belarus within
CFCI to ensure that child rights are
fulfilled, proper monitored and the
.
evidences are used for making

14
http://www.unicef.org/media/media_82583.html

40 | P a g e
7. ANNEXES

Annex 1: TERMS of REFERENCE

for the International Individual Consultant for the assessment of the Child Friendly City
Initiative (CFCI) development in the Republic of Belarus

Background:

To address the CRC Concluding Observations on the 2nd[1], combined 3rd and 4th[2]
Periodic Reports of the Republic of Belarus, UNICEF and the Government agreed to
introduce a Child Friendly City Initiative (CFCI) as a framework to increase the effectiveness
of local governance in the best interest of children and strengthen the monitoring system of
child rights realization.

CFCI was launched in Belarus in 2007 and scaled up within the current programme cycle to
bring an explicit children’s focus into traditional adult-oriented governance system, create
enabling environment for child development, promote inter-sectoral collaboration and
partnership to address child issues, monitoring of child rights realization and meaningful
children’s/youth participation in decision making process.

In 2011 the National Coordination Body (Coordination Council on CFCI) was established
under the auspices of the National Commission on the Rights of the Child composing of the
officials of the National Assembly, Ministries of Health, Education, Labour and Social
Protection, Internal Affairs, Foreign Affairs, representatives of NGOs, Local Authorities and
UNICEF.

As of the beginning 2015, 22 cities joined CFCI implementation and with UNICEF support
the normative and methodological frameworks were developed and the capacity of local
authorities to effectively address local development problems in the best interest of children

41 | P a g e
was strengthened. The Working Groups were established in 22 cities and Action
Plans/Programmes on CFCI development were created and approved by the decisions of the
Local Executive Committees. UNICEF contributed to the mobilization of a wide range of
partners: local authorities; central government bodies; civil society organizations; national
and international agencies; experts and academic institutions; the business and the media;
and, most importantly, children and youth groups, to ensure the participatory and human
rights based approach in addressing child rights realization at the city level.

One of the main objectives of the initiative is children’s/youth engagement, empowerment

and leadership skills development to ensure that their voices are heard and views are taken
into account in all decision concerning their life and development. With UNICEF support the
range of the national and local workshops, round table discussions, national children’s
forums, regional and national consultations on education and Post 2015 development agenda
was conducted. Children-Youth Councils/Parliaments were created in 22 cities and children
became active agents of social life changes, developed and implemented creative initiatives
and introduced innovations.

To assess 22 cities’ progress in creating child-friendly environment and child rights

realization UNICEF provided expert support for the development of monitoring and
evaluation (M&E) tool. The M&E tool is constituted of a set of objective (official statistics)
and subjective (personal opinions of children, parents and professionals on such areas as
youth participation, education, health, social protection, safety and living environment)
indicators that allow to calculate the CFC index. The findings and recommendations of
monitoring and results of СFС index calculation provide evidence that is taken into account
in preparing the reports “Status of children in the city”.

The information and data are publicly available on the website www.detivgorode.by ensuring
transparency and public awareness of the child rights observance, increasing the
accountability of local leaders on the child oriented social policy decision-making and
allowing participating cities to exchange experience and best practices.

In 2013-2015 7 cities completed evaluation process, calculated CFC index and drew up the
Reports “Status of Children in the City” with the main achievements, identified bottlenecks
and future strategies of CFCI development. Based on the reported results National
Coordination Council on CFCI granted the Honourable Status of “Child Friendly City” to
Novopolotsk, Pinsk, Brest, Pruzhany, Polotsk, Soligorsk and Zhodino.

To assess the impact of CFCI on the creation of the enabling environment for the realization
of child rights, effectiveness of the local governance and community initiatives towards
implementation of UN CRC at the city level, meaningful children/youth participation in
decision making and to continue to promote the prioritization of children’s rights and interests
now and within the post-2015 development agenda the Ministry of Education and UNICEF
agreed to conduct an independent CFCI assessment to be facilitated by the international
consultant contracted by UNICEF.

42 | P a g e
The assessment findings, results and recommendations will be used as an evidence for policy
advocacy and legislation improvement, strengthening partnership of governmental and civil
society organizations, promotion of meaningful youth participation in all decisions
concerning their life, growth and development and greater involvement of community
members in child rights realization and monitoring and dissemination of best practices
nationally and internationally.

The results of the assessment will be presented and discussed at the International Conference
of Child Friendly Cities to be held in Minsk in 2016 and will be used for attracting the
international donors’ interest for greater investment in the realization and monitoring of the
rights of children and young people focusing on the most vulnerable and marginalized
children.

Goal of the assessment:

The goal of the assignment is to assess effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of CFCI
development in the best interest of children, especially the most disadvantaged, in the
Republic of Belarus.

Objectives:

Based on MORES determinant framework (enabling environment, supply, demand and

quality)[3] to assess the main components of CFCI development, to identify the main barriers,
bottlenecks and draw up recommendation on corrective actions to overcome them.

To assess:

CFCI coordination at the National level

the effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of the National CFC Coordination Council
work;

 the commitment of the National decision makers for prioritization of child issues and CFCI
scaling up;

 the sustainability and visibility of CFCI at the national level.

CFCI implementation at the local level

 the effectiveness of the local governance in the best interest of the child (CFCI working
groups, annual work plans development and implementation);

43 | P a g e
  the compliance of CFCI work plans with the needs and demands of the most vulnerable
and marginalized children and adolescents;

 inter-sectoral cooperation and networking on child rights realization at the city level;

 state and non-state actors collaboration and involvement of civil society organizations and
community members in planning, implementation and monitoring of CFCI;

 the sustainability and visibility of CFCI at the local level.

 The work of Children’s-Youth Councils/Parliaments

 the models of establishment and functioning including strengths, weaknesses, best

practices and sustainability of work;

the participation of the most vulnerable and marginalized children and young people in the
work of Children-Youth Councils/Parliaments;

 the engagement of Children-Youth Councils/Parliaments (the role and influence) in

decision making process concerning children and youth social life, growth and development;

 the implemented creative initiative (its results, added-value);

 the networking of Children-Youth Councils/Parliaments in Belarus and outside;

The child rights monitoring and evaluation at the local level

 the effectiveness, appropriateness and usefulness of the developed child rights

monitoring and assessment tool for child rights monitoring and evaluation at the
city level in middle income countries;
 the relevance and sustainability of the introduced mechanism of CFC City Status
award;
 the involvement of community members, civil society organizations, children and
youth in child rights monitoring.

The sustainability of CFCI development

 the national ownership;

 community engagement (CSOs, children and youth mobilization);

 availability of financial resources for the social sector programmes in best interest of
children;

 accountability of the local authorities;

44 | P a g e
  child rights monitoring for informed decision making;

 CFC initiative components sustainability.

To draw up recommendations on:

 CFCI scaling up, introduction of innovations and adjustment to the needs of the most
vulnerable and marginalized children;

 CFCs role in influencing the transformation of the social norms that stigmatized vulnerable
groups of children;

 advanced cooperation of state and non-state actors, alliances for child’s rights realization
(promotion the public dialogue, social contracting and strengthening capacity of local
authorities to utilize data for evidence-informed decisions).

 improvement of the developed child rights monitoring, analysis and assessment tool
(update with the new indicators such as social budget allocation and spending in the best
interest of children, environmental protections, etc.);

 future strategies of meaningful children/youth participation development (Children-Youth

Councils/Parliaments development, the creation of the National Children-Youth Parliament)
in the local decision making process concerning children and youth matters;

 socially-oriented youth initiatives development focusing on disability matters,

environmental safety, healthy life style;

 strategic partnership of UNICEF and the Government of Belarus within CFCI to ensure
that child rights are fulfilled, proper monitored and the evidences are used for making
decisions concerning child growth and development;

 horizontal cooperation (experience exchange/ dissemination of best practices)

development.

Target audience:

 National CFC Coordination Council;

 Local authorities in CFC and cities joined CFCI;

 Children’s/Youth Councils/Parliaments and vulnerable groups of children and young

people in CFC and cities joined CFCI;

 NGOs and community members.

Methodology of the assessment [4] :

45 | P a g e
  Desk review and analysis of the documents, data and information on CFCI development
(2007 – 2015) (orders, regulations, guided documents, reports, monitoring tool);

Interviews with the representatives of the National CFC Coordination Council, Ministry of
Education;

 Interviews with the representatives of the local authorities, NGOs, specialists working with
children in CFC and cities joined CFCI;

 Focus groups with the members of the Children’s/Youth Councils/Parliaments, children

(paying special attention to the vulnerable groups of children and young people) and
community members in CFC and cities joined CFCI.

Deliverables:

1. Concept note of the assessment and the assessment tools;

2. Interim report after desk review phase;

3. Draft and final versions of the narrative report in English;

4. Executive Summary of the report in English;

5. Summary of the goal, objectives, methodology, findings, conclusions and

recommendations in PowerPoint (PPP);

6. Primary documentation (interviews reports, focus groups minutes, etc.)

All deliverables should be submitted to UNICEF in electronic version. All reports of

interviews and focus groups discussions to be submitted in hard copies to UNICEF.

Quality requirements for the report:

 The Report should give answers to all ToR requirements and should recommend solutions
to the determined gaps and bottlenecks;

 The Report should be brief, concise and systemic as much as possible;

 The Report should be well-grounded i.e. it should contain sufficient facts and evidence
(presented in the form of graphs, tables and diagrams);

 The report language should be appropriate without unknown terminology complicated the
perception of the information;

46 | P a g e
  Conclusions and recommendations should be well-grounded and applicable to the National
context;

Interim reports and data obtained in the process of assessment should be discussed with the
UNICEF supervisor.

The final report should have the following structure:

 Executive summary;

 Trends in changing situation of children in the last five years in Belarus;

 Overview of the CFCI development and best practices in the European region;

 Description of the CFCI development in Belarus;

 Description of the assessment goal, objectives, strategies and methodology;

 Description of the main findings in relation to the assessment objectives and structured in
accordance with the determinant framework;

 Conclusions, recommendations, and lessons learned;

 Annexes (assessment tool, focus groups and interview results, etc.).

The duration of the assignment:The assignment is performed in August-October 2015

including 7-10 day field-visit to Belarus [5]**.**

Supervision:

The consultant will perform the assignment under the direct supervision of Victoria Lozuyk,
CYPHD and HIV/AIDS Specialist.

Qualifications/knowledge and experience required from the consultant:

 University degree in the field of Social Science, Political Science, International

Relations, Public Relations, Statistics, Sociology or other relevant disciplines;
 Not less than 8 years of experience in the qualitative and operational research, monitoring
and evaluation;
 Previous work experience in conducting international assessments and evaluations;
 Knowledge and skills in the child rights monitoring and evaluation is an asset;
 Previous work experience in conducting monitoring and evaluations for UN agencies is
an asset;
 Excellent report writing and presentation skills;

47 | P a g e
  Strong communication skills (written and verbal);
 Ability to meet deadline and work in the limited timeframe;
 Fluency in English (knowledge of Russian is an asset).

Remuneration:

The consultant’s fee will be paid through the wire transfer to the consultant’s account within
10 days after the submission and approval of the final report by UNICEF Belarus. The DSA
to the consultant during his field visit to Belarus will be paid in accordance with UNICEF
rules.

How to apply:

Qualified international individual consultants are requested to send their applications

to [email protected] or by post at 220030, Belarus, Minsk, Krasnoarmeiskaya str., 22A, 6
floor, office 77-78, with the subject line: “Tender proposal for N. Lukina” by 17 August,
2015, 17:00 Minsk time. Applications submitted after the deadline will not be considered.

Only short-listed candidates will be contacted. Candidates under serious consideration for
selection will be subject to a reference-checking process to verify the information provided
in the application.

Candidates should provide:

 A cover letter;
 A maximum 3-page CV;
 A signed P11 form (http://www.unicef.org/about/employ/files/P11.doc);
 Fee proposal (expected honorarium including taxes and other charges). Proposals with 100%
prepayment will not be taken into consideration. The maximum allowable sum of the
advance payment is 30% of the fee.

Contact person on the content, goals and objectives of the assessment is Victoria Lozuyk, tel.
(+375 17) 210-26-50, 210-55-89, email:[email protected]

Contact person on the issues of submission procedure is Nadzeya Lukina, Programme

Assistant tel. (+375 17) 210-26-50, 210-55-89, email:[email protected]

48 | P a g e
Annex II. Focus Group Discussion Protocol

Focus Group Discussion Protocol (Children’s Youth/Parliament)

Name of moderator:

City:

Neighborhood

Date of the FGD:

Total number of participants

Introduction

1. Welcome and Facilitator Introduction

"Good morning/afternoon/evening and welcome to our discussion. Thanks for taking the
time to join us to talk about the Child Friendly City Initiative in your City. My name is
Jovid and I am a research consultant…

2. Background
As you may know, the Child Friendly Cities Initiative, is being implemented in 22 Cities
in Belarus and UNICEF supports this initiative. The CFCI aims to guide cities and other
stakeholders in the inclusion of children’s rights as a key component of their goals, policies,
programmes and structures. Participation of children in the life of the their cities is one the
key component of this initiative too. If you never heard about CFCI initiative or want to
know more, you can get information from the website/ this leaflet and/or contact the
manager/project coordinator of SFCI in your City. While this initiative has brought many
positive changes in the cities, it is important time by to look what works well and what
doesn’t, to talk to various people and in particular with children and youth to get their
opinion about the initiative. So, I am here for that purpose, together with you to explore
more about its impact on the life of children in your City. Your opinion is very important,

49 | P a g e
 as at the end of this study we will develop a set of recommendations on how to further
improve the program.

Our focus group discussion is going to last about an hour and half. Focus groups are
different from workshops or classes at school. Once we get started, I am going to ask you
questions and you are going to share your thoughts and opinions. You will do most of the
talking. I will be doing a lot of listening. Remember we want to learn from you. We are not
going to necessarily "teach" you anything today."

3. Appreciation (it can be coffee break)

To show our appreciation for your time and attention, we have small gifts (hygiene set,
stationary, etc) for you that will be shared at the end of the session.

How Today's Focus Group will Work

1. No "Right" or "Wrong" Answers and Participation

"I'll be asking you several questions and I want you to know that there are no "right" or
"wrong" answers, and it's okay to have a different opinion from other people in the group.
It's really important for us to hear all the different points of view in the room. I want you
to share your point of view, even if it is different from what others are saying, and I want
you all to respect each others' opinions. Please don't make fun of what other people say or
argue with them. Agreed?

I also don't want you to feel like you have to respond to me all the time. Feel free to talk to
each other when discussing my questions. If you want to respond to something someone
said, or if you want to agree or disagree, or give an example, you can do that, just be
respectful. We want all people to have a chance to share ideas. We may need to interrupt
or call on people to make sure this happens. Please do not feel offended if we do this.

2. Tape Recording and Confidentiality

"Before we get started, I want to remind you that we will be audio recording the session,
because we don't want to miss any of your comments. People often say things in these
sessions, and we can't write fast enough to write them all down.

"Although will use each other's first names today, we will not use any names in our report.
You can be assured of complete confidentiality. No one will be able to link your name back
to what you said and only project staff like myself and …will listen this record. I am also
going to ask all of you to keep what is said here confidential, so that everybody feels
comfortable talking and knows what they say will not be repeated. Can you all do that?"
(eye contact with each person in the group and wait for him/her to nod affirmatively.)

50 | P a g e
 And also, you do not have to answer any question that makes you feel uncomfortable.

Icebreaker

(5 minutes)

1. Let's begin. We have asked you to wear a name tag to help us remember each others' names.
Let's go around the room and introduce ourselves. Please give us your first name and age,
explain who lives with you in your home, and just for fun, tell us where have you been
except your City. I'll start …

Focus Group Questions

Introduction Question

1. Since we are going to talk about CFCI, can you tell me please what do you know about this
initiative?

Main questions

1. You are members of YC, can you tell me please how it has been established, your main
activities? What is the goal?

2. It seems very interesting what you do, how many member your Council has? And how to
become a member?

- Probes who cannot become a member? Why?

3. So, you have active members and you do ,,,,,, how do you identify priorities? How do you
decide what to do?
- Who participate in the process of planning?
- Who participate in implementation?

4. Thank you for sharing it, very interesting. It seems you have gained a solid experience
already and probably have some experience that other Councils can learn from you, can
you give some examples of experience that you would like to share with others?

- Do you have a practice documenting things you did?

51 | P a g e
 5. Thank you for sharing it. What you have mentioned is decently your strong sides, but
nothing ideal in this world, can you please tell me about the weaknesses of your Council…
by the way, knowing the weakness is already a plus…

6. Thank you, so you have some plans, members, activities and you did a good job, from the
given example. One question comes to my mind, all these things require some resources,
whether financial, administrative or technological and others. How you manage all these?

- Probes: what about your future activities, how you are going to address the costs?
- Who providing support? What are you going to do when support will finish?

7. Lets talk about participation a little bit more. What kind of impact had your engagement in
Council activities, on your personal life? Positive? Negative? Or nothing changed?
-what about your life in school, community, Society?
- can you give some examples where you or the Council have influenced a decision made
by local authorities or any other authority body in your city?
- What about participation in CFCI activities? what type of activities are you engaged in?

8. Thanks, what are key factors that prevent you/ Council to be more active in decision
making processes?
- What should be done to address them?
- What about those who are vulnerable? How to engage them?
9. As far as I know, there are a number of such Councils in the country, are you in touch with
them? If yes, can you describe your relationships?
-what about other countries?

10. What do you think, what are the key achievements of the CFCI and what you would change
in this program in the future?

Thank you very much for your participation, I also what to let you know that when the study will
be completed, you will definitely receive a copy of the report.

So now your turn, if you have any question please ask if not, I appreciate your active engagement
and wish you all the best,

(Coffee break can be served)

52 | P a g e
End of Interview

Annex III. Key Informant Interview Guide

Key Informant Interview Guide (LA)

Name of Interviewer:

City:

Date of the Interview:

Introduction

4. Facilitator Introduction
Good morning/afternoon/evening and thank you very much for accepting our request for the
interview. My name is Jovid and I am a research consultant…

5. Background
As you now, the Child Friendly Cities Initiative was launched in Belarus in 2007 to bring an
explicit children’s focus into governance system, create enabling environment for child
development, promote inter-sectoral collaboration and partnership to address child issues,
monitoring of child rights realization and meaningful children’s/youth participation in decision
making process. Since 2007, there are 22 Cities engaged this initiative and seven of them have
been recognized as “Child Friendly”. There is definitely some progress to be captured and
shared with other and probably some gaps to be revealed and taken into consideration in the
future interventions. So, I am here for that purpose, together with you to explore more about
its impact on the life of children in your City and help with your support to draw outline some
practical recommendation to further expand the impact of the program.

Your opinion is very important, therefore if you don’t mind I will record our conversation, so
any of your comments will not be missed. Our conversation will be kept confidential and in
the report will not make any references to individuals or we will ask your permission to put
your name under your messages.

If you have any question, feel free to ask and we can start…

Introduction Question

53 | P a g e
2. Could you please introduce yourself and tell about your role in this initiative?

- What make this program different from other joint initiatives in your City/this
Country;

Main questions

3. So, you are engaged in the CFC for xx years, how you would describe the role of CFC CC in
this initiative.

4. Thank you, could you please describe the key achievements of the CFCI initiative in the
country?
- What was the role of CFC CC in the mentioned achievements?

5. Thank you, it seems the CFC CC plays an important role, could you let me know how the
national priorities for CFCI were identified?
- Who/which agencies/groups were engaged into the process?
- What about the city level priorities?

6. Thank you, very interesting. What are the strength and weaknesses of the CFC CC?
- What would you change in the roles and responsibilities of the CFC CC?
- How to make sure long term sustainability of the CFC CC?
- Do you think there is a need for improving technical capacity of CFC CC, if yes, what
kind of technical support is needed.

7. Thank you, from your observation, is there any changes in the budgeting for purposes related
to children? If yes Can you give some examples?
- What are the plans for the future in relation to child centered budgeting?
- What are the main obstacles to make it happen?

8. What about city level strategies to address children right?

- Which agencies are involved into the process?
- Is there a council, special commission or body that broadly debates and creates, or
advises, on policies that concern children?

54 | P a g e
9. Thank you, it is well known that social issues are very complex, in particular when it comes to
children. So can you please share youth thought about the coordination and cooperation among
state bodies at national level?

- What about local level? How it evolves over time? -

What about the role of private sector and SCO?

- is there any official body that facilitates coordination among agencies working for
children at local level?

10. What about data collection on child right? How often and which agency conduct it?
- What about the level disaggregation of the data? Is it possible to compare
neighborhoods?
- Is there any periodic report accessible for public?
- How data used for planning?

11. Thank you, what about resource availability?

- How the initiative will be financed in the coming three years

12. What about availability and accessibility of services for children at local level? What kind of
services are still not availably?
- Which group of children and youth have limited access to services?
- What about referral mechanisms?
- Is there sufficient number of trained social work workforce at local level?

13. Is there any systematic training/professional development opportunity for LA staff dealing
with children?

14. Thanks, Can you tell me please about how people get information about this initiative?
- What would you recommend to improve the visibility of this initiative?
-

15. How would you describe the role of children organizations in this initiative ?
- What about vulnerable children? Who are they and how to engage them?

55 | P a g e
16. Thank you very much, the last question. What would you recommend to improve
effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of this initiative?

Many thanks, if you have any question I would be happy to answer it.

End of interview

Annex IV. Consent Forms

Consent Form for children

I have been told that this session is concerning Child Friendly Cities Initiative, that my
participation in this session means that I will be asked to share my own views. I have been told
that I will not be forced to share my opinion and that if I refuse to participate in this session, it
will not in any manner negatively affect me. I have also been told that if I agree to participate, I
will not be forced during the session to share something that I feel uncomfortable discussing. I
also know that I have the absolute right to walk out of this session for whatever reason at any
point of time, without having to seek permission or provide an explanation. I understand that the
information I reveal in this session will be kept highly confidential by those conducting this
session. I hereby agree to participate in this session of my own will and interest. I submit that I
have not been coerced or forced (emotionally or physically) to take part in this session, and that
my consent to this is wholly my decision.

_____________________ ______________________
(Name of the child) (Signature)

We hereby state that we have explained to this child the details about this session and the terms
of his/her participation. We have in a language understood by this child, explained that consent
to participate in this session is totally voluntary and that he/she can resign or withdraw consent at
any point of time or opt out of the session without need for an approval or an explanation. We
have made it clear that the child is free to reveal or share as much information as he/she is
comfortable with and that there will be no pressure or force for him/her to share or reveal more
than he/she wants to. We hereby understand that whatever is revealed by the child during the
session has to be handled with utmost confidentiality and cannot at any cost be revealed to any
other person (adult/ child), except with the consent of the child, and we promise to honour this
requirement.

_____________________ ______________________
(Name of the Facilitator) (Signature of the Facilitator)

56 | P a g e
_____________________ ______________________
(Name of the Note Taker) (Signature of the Note Taker)

Consent Form for parents

I/we have been told that this session is concerning Child Friendly Cities Initiative, that my
son/daughter/ ward/s or children is/are interested in participating in this session. I/we have been
told that his/her/their participation means that he/she/they will be asked to share his/her/their own
opinion. I/we have been told that he/she/they will not be forced to share his/her/their opinion and
that if he/she/they refuse to participate in this session, it will not in any manner negatively affect
him/her/them. I/we have also been told that if he/she/they agree to participate, he/she/they will
not be forced during the session to share something that he/she/they feel uncomfortable discussing.
I/we also know that he/she/they have the absolute right to walk out of this session for whatever
reason at any point of time, without having to seek permission or provide an explanation. I/we
understand that the information he/she/they reveal in this session will be kept highly confidential
by those conducting this session. I/we hereby agree to allow my/our son/daughter/children to
participate in this session subject to his/her/their own will and interest. I/we submit that I/we have
not been coerced or forced (emotionally or physically) to provide this consent for our
child/children to take part in this session, and that my/our consent to this is wholly my/our decision.

_____________________ ______________________
(Name of the mother) (Signature)

_____________________ ______________________
(Name of the father) (Signature)

We hereby state that the parents have read and understood and in case of their inability to do so,
we have explained to them the details about this session and the terms of the child/children’s
participation. We have made it clear to the parent in a language understood by him/her that consent
to participate in this session is totally voluntary and that the child/ children can resign or withdraw
consent at any point of time or opt out of the session without need for an approval or an
explanation. We have made it clear that the child is free to reveal or share as much information as
he/she is comfortable with and that there will be no pressure or force for him/her to share or reveal
more than he/she wants to. We hereby understand that whatever is revealed by the child during
the session has to be handled with utmost confidentiality and cannot at any cost be revealed to
any other person (adult/ child), except with the consent of the child, and we promise to honour
this requirement.
_____________________ ______________________

57 | P a g e
(Name of the Facilitator) (Signature of the Facilitator)

_____________________ ______________________
(Name of the Note Taker) (Signature of the Note Taker)

58 | P a g e