Realising Children’s Rights through Social Policy in Europe and Central Asia Action Area 1 A Compendium of UNICEF’s Contributions (2014-2020) 40 NORTH MACEDONIA // Reforming the Social Protection System through the Introduction of a new Child Benefits System and Integrated Case Management Approach © UNICEF/UNI200268/Nybo Realising Children’s Rights through Social Policy in Europe and Central Asia 41 A Compendium of UNICEF’s Contributions (2014-2020) North Macedonia Issue North Macedonia has recently made moderate gains in other social care services, which generated duplications in economic growth development. However, this progress coverage and money, and wasted time. Widespread lack has not been evenly distributed. The at-risk-of-poverty of (disaggregated) data and analysis of the impact of social rate and the combined risk of poverty or social exclusion protection on children made implementation and impact rate among children are very high: 28.6% and 46.1% monitoring difficult. respectively.86 A 2018 Gini coefficient of 31.987 implies high inequality in wealth distribution. Moreover, it is the only North Macedonia has a long history of providing social Western Balkan country that has shown a growth in infant services for families. The two main providers are the mortality between 2013 and 2017. It also experiences high Centres for Social Work (CSWs) and the Employment rates of family violence, low pre-school enrolment, and Service Agencies (ESAs). The 30 CSWs are the country’s poor primary and secondary school outcomes.88 Those key main social protection hubs, administering all cash benefits aspects of the social protection system capable of reducing and delivering social support and care services, including these challenges – the cash benefit and social care system – psycho-social support. CSWs are also responsible for the required much-needed reform. administration of foster care. Before the 2019 reform, the EU stated89 that the social However, since independence, CSWs have been protection system did not cover many of those who were over-stretched and work with obsolete methods. The at risk of poverty or social exclusion, and its cash benefits administration of cash benefits has consumed much had almost no impact on alleviating poverty. The system of their time, at the expense of delivering other critical did not provide an adequate living standard for children and social services. Frequent personnel and management often failed to reach the most marginalised children. Cash changes, as well as the complexity of many programmes, benefits for children were too low to reduce child poverty. have contributed to a perception that the Centres themselves For example, the monthly child allowance provided 740 MKD act as bottlenecks. Administering benefits compromises the (USD13) per child up to age 15 and 1,175 MKD (USD21) for Centres’ other responsibilities, and social workers cannot children aged 15-18, with a maximum limit of 1,870 MKD pursue preventive social work. The use of highly qualified (USD33) in total. The 1,870 MKD benefit cap often worked personnel in the routine administration of cash benefits is against large families, which tend to be poorer in general, profligate. Moreover, before the reform, CSW staff operated and they were worse off as a result compared to other poor with outdated procedures and were overburdened with households with fewer dependent children. On the other administrative demands which allowed for very limited hand, they were more likely to qualify given the per capita outreach work. Mechanisms for monitoring the quality of threshold approach, which did not take into account the social services for children remain weak, therefore leaving economies of size. vulnerable children at risk of poverty and deprivation. Moreover, CSWs are undermined by insufficiently qualified The pre-reform child benefits system faced both design employees to cover the population’s needs. Social workers and implementation challenges that undermined its have been assessed as feeling unmotivated and unhappy, performance. These design issues limited the targeting which in turn affects performance.91 While employee efficiency and contributed to issues with both the child numbers increased from 739 in 2006 to 1,057 in 2013, benefit and the parental allowance (a non-means tested 78% of the 318 newly employed staff members were programme aimed at promoting demographic growth), administrative/non-professional and did not qualify for social rendering the latter very expensive. The legislation regulating outreach work. child benefits is very complex, tending to create duplications and inconsistencies. The child allowance had an unusual Given these challenges, in November 2017, the targeting methodology for an income-based programme. Only government amended three laws which contributed 20% of the beneficiaries were among the poorest decile, a to social protection system reform. This reform was percentage that doubles for the second decile. Thus, the child initiated through the simultaneous adoption of a package of allowance had substantially better targeting of families in the amended laws: the 2019 law on social protection; the 2019 second decile than in the first one, thereby defeating poverty amendments to the child protection law; and the 2019 law reduction efforts. Moreover, estimates showed that almost on social security for senior citizens. The amendments were 14,000 households with children who were in the poorest intended to focus benefits on households in the lower- decile were eligible for Social Financial Assistance, but not for income quintiles, adhere to principles of unconditionality child allowance.90 Low benefit take-up also occurred because and improve the integration of a series of social services, of a lack of entitlement awareness and discrimination. reconfigure the child allowance, and introduce an education Invariably, social protection benefits were not linked with allowance and a transformed parental allowance. Realising Children’s Rights through Social Policy in Europe and Central Asia Action Area 1 A Compendium of UNICEF’s Contributions (2014-2020) 42 Actions UNICEF worked closely with the Ministry of Labour and Furthermore, in 2018, UNICEF, the MLSP, and UNDP Social Policy (MLSP), the World Bank, and UNDP on commissioned Columbia University (CU) experts from the comprehensive social protection system reform. its School of Social Work to develop a detailed ICM UNICEF’s reform engagement was two-fold comprising: handbook.94 This introduced a customised ICM system 1) the reconfiguration of the child benefits system and 2) and was intended to improve the case management the introduction of an integrated case management (ICM) capacity of CSW and ESA staff. The handbook was approach into social work. Given that these two policy developed on local specifics and circumstances, but areas are closely connected, UNICEF’s engagement was based upon international standards and best practices. therefore mutually reinforcing in terms of generating positive It guides staff on practical ways to promote an effective outcomes for children. To support the full operationalisation ICM system; providing clarification on the monitoring of the new social protection system, UNICEF collaborated tools to be used to ensure implementation of proposed with the Government to develop and adopt protocols for measures for improvement. Moreover, systematisation the implementation of cash benefits for children and to documents for the CSWs were updated to include ICM implement ICM in the CSWs. principles. The objective was to enable social workers to better coordinate multiple services and facilitate The 2019 child benefit reform partially transpired from children’s or family members’ increased functioning earlier UNICEF efforts to generate evidence and advocacy and well-being. in 2013. UNICEF’s 2013 study on ‘Strengthening the System of Social Protection for Children’,92 carried out with the MLSP, In 2018, UNICEF worked with the Government and was crucial in generating information on weaknesses in civil society to ensure that all CSW staff were trained the system of social protection for children, particularly for and equipped to effectively manage cases involving vulnerable children. This was the first step towards a more children at risk. Based on the ICM model developed comprehensive social protection reform. It showed that by CU experts, UNICEF helped create a pool of local only a fifth of the poorest children benefited from the child ICM experts who were tasked with imparting the model allowance and that the amount was insufficient to ensure to other professionals. In 2018, these experts trained adequate living standards. The findings were leveraged by all the CSW professionals and 30% of ESA staff on UNICEF to partner with the World Bank in supporting the the basics of ICM through a series of five-day training Government’s overall social protection reforms.93 events implemented countrywide. © UNICEF/UN049079/Georgiev Realising Children’s Rights through Social Policy in Europe and Central Asia 43 A Compendium of UNICEF’s Contributions (2014-2020) North Macedonia In 2019, UNICEF partnered with the National Association assessment by a private firm - Behavioural Insights Team of Social Workers and jointly developed a comprehensive (BIT) - to identify solutions for improving staff motivation package of protocols and step-by-step guidance on ICM. and performance using behavioural insights. The These were disseminated to all CSW professionals