Background & Rationale
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest among governments and international development partners in exploring ways to better utilize existing administrative data for monitoring and reporting. Making use of administrative data offers an important and effective complement to large-scale data collection efforts such as household surveys. Administrative data in many, but not all, countries are typically collected on a routine basis and are continuously updated. Such data can also be useful in exploring historical trends and often capture hard to reach populations that may not accessible via traditional survey methods. Administrative data will also help to inform general programme planning as it will demonstrate utilization of systems (in particular, health, justice and social welfare). Utilizing administrative data has the advantage of relieving respondent burden since the data are collected as part of routine administrative processes. However, there also are some important limitations with regards to administrative data. Administrative data typically reflect incidence (i.e., the number of cases in a given time period) and it is therefore difficult to calculate prevalence as denominators need to be estimated. Other challenges are differences in national or sub-national definitions and inconsistencies with international definitions, a lack of comparability across sources and/or countries given that there can be significant differences in definitions, coverage, samples and data collection methodologies, and potential duplication in recording of cases due to parallel monitoring systems. The likelihood of underreporting (particularly for some administrative sources such as police records) or over-reporting due to multiple service delivery points, high levels of missing or incomplete data, and inconsistent and/or limited data quality assurance processes are additional constraints.
Despite these challenges, in some areas of child protection where international standards and guidelines and solid data collection methodologies and tools are still lacking, administrative records might be the only (or best) source of data for producing prevalence estimates. Strengthening such records could therefore be an important and useful investment. Additionally, administrative records can be a good source of data in those countries with well-developed and functional administrative systems; such is often the case in upper middle income and high-income countries. In addition, by working more systematically with administrative data, the limitations that are specific to each country can be identified. This, in turn, can be used to inform efforts towards systems strengthening.
Purpose
The Data and Analytics section is seeking a consultant to undertake a desk review and an in-depth assessment of sources of administrative data on violence against children (VAC). This work will contribute to a larger project that also includes an in-depth review and assessment of civil registration and vital statistics for birth and marriage registration.
The assignment has two main objectives:
Conduct a desk review in order to provide a broad outline of the different types of administrative data available to monitor and report on violence against children in around 10 countries and;
Carry out an in-depth in-country review and assessment of different types of official administrative data sources and available data on VAC for a subset of around 3 countries.
Scope of Work
The consultant should aim to research and examine a wide variety of different types of official administrative data sources as well as draw on existing resources and guidance on using and improving administrative data in the field of child protection.[1] Some examples of the types of administrative data and sources to be explored include: police records, criminal justice system data, records from medical and/or social service agencies (including education and social welfare sectors) and child welfare/child protective service records. The review will have to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each type of administrative source of data on VAC. The consultant will also need to include an overview of how other sectors (such as health, HIV/AIDS and education) have used and/or strengthened the quality of administrative data (and the timeline involved with making such improvements). The review will also need to integrate data on VAC from available administrative sources for the selected countries to illustrate existing data availability.
The review and in-depth assessment will need to address the following five components and corresponding key questions (to be streamlined during the inception phase of the consultancy):
Existence of relevant indicators
What indicators are collected?
Are definitions of indicators used for data collection based on national laws and legislation?
Are existing indicators aligned with global indicators and/or laws, standards and guidance?
Do the indicators and resulting data allow for disaggregation; if so, by what stratifiers? (e.g., age, sex, geography, etc.)
Are data available at the individual level or aggregated to the population level? Are data aggregated at sub-national and national levels?
Do national level and standardized indicators exist for use by all partners – government and non-government?
Data collection and reporting processes and quality assurance
Do standard registers and/or reporting forms exist? If so, are these used by all partners (both government and non-government) in the country?
If standard registers/reporting forms do not exist, how are data recorded and in what format(s)?
Do the registers/reporting forms capture all the relevant indicators as outlined in the national guidelines or international standards?
What is the quality of the data (accuracy, completeness, timeliness and reliability)?
Are there formal data quality assurance processes in place to ensure that data are accurate, complete, timely, consistent and reliable? Does data quality assurance take place and if so, how often? How effective are these processes?
Are adequate data protection ethics, laws and/or policies in place to ensure confidentiality of data including proper handling and protection of individuals’ details?
Data flow and feedback
How are data reported form service delivery sites to the national level? Are data reported from service sites to district or regional/provincial level and then to national level?
Who/what sector is responsible for reporting at each level?
How often is reporting done at each level?
How is the system for gathering the data set up? How are data collated/integrated from different sources? What information sharing protocols are in place, and what information management platforms (if any) are being used?
Does a data quality control mechanism exist to ensure completeness, timeliness, accuracy and consistency of data collected and reported over time at each level of reporting?
Is feedback provided at different levels of reporting – service delivery site, district, regional, national?
M&E structures and coordination mechanisms
Are there dedicated staff (if so, how many) for monitoring at each level?
Is there an agreed upon coordination and supervision structure, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities and standard operating procedures (SOPs)?
Does an M&E technical working group exist that meets regularly?
Is there a supervision tool for service sites that includes monitoring components?
Is there a dedicated M&E budget at national, regional and district levels?
Data dissemination and use
How are the different types of administrative data currently being analysed and used by service providers, governments and/or national partners to inform policy and programming at sub-national and national levels? Are data from different sources integrated for use in decision-making and strategic planning?
Are there mechanisms/platforms for sharing data and best practices across partners in the country? If so, how often are data shared?
Are periodic progress reports with baselines, targets and actual outputs produced?
Are regular programme reviews conducted that are evidence-based and informed by data?
The countries will be identified in consultation with UNICEF headquarters (HQ) as well as UNICEF Regional and Country offices.[2] The selected countries will need to reflect geographical diversity, various contexts (e.g. low capacity, middle income/upper middle income and fragile contexts) and will also need to represent varying levels of data quality.
Expected results:
The consultant is expected to develop and prepare, in consultation with UNICEF headquarters and Regional Offices, an inception report for the desk review and in-depth country assessment. The report will need to include specified criteria for the selection of countries as well as describe any tools and/or checklists that will be used to undertake the review. It will also include the plan of analysis. This inception report will be reviewed and approved by UNICEF HQ and Regional Offices before implementation.
The consultant is also expected to summarize the results of both the desk review and in-depth country assessment in a written report. The paper has to include a detailed assessment of the strengths and limitations of the available data and information systems, as well as a description of how the available sources can be used or improved (with analysis of how adequate data protection policies are) and how the data should be interpreted. It will have to include a review of how other sectors (such as health, HIV/AIDS and education) have used available administrative sources and suggest ways to strengthen the availability and quality of administrative data, including an assessment of the process and resources needed. It should also include an overview of the investments, including both human, technological and financial, that will be needed to strengthen administrative data, drawing on examples of previous investments to improve administrative sources undertaken in Child Protection and in other sectors.
A final list of deliverables will be defined in detail and mutually agreed between the consultant and supervisor once the inception report is finalized.
Duty Station
Remotely-based, the consultant can work from his/her own home office.
Travel
The consultant will be expected to undertake travel to the three selected countries but the details of this will be determined at a later stage in consultation with the supervisor. Expenses related to the trips will be paid for by UNICEF according to its rules and regulations.
Timeframe
Start date: 1 September 2016 End date: 1 March 2017
Deliverables
Prepare an inception report for the desk review and in-depth country assessment. This will include identification and selection of the three countries to be included in the in-depth country assessment, in consultation with UNICEF headquarters, Regional and Country Offices
Conduct desk review of sources of administrative data on violence against children
Conduct field visits to selected three countries
First draft of written report
Revised second draft of written report based on feedback and consultations
Revised final draft of written report based on feedback and consultations
Copyright
UNICEF will retain all copyrights of any materials produced by the consultant under this contract.
Remuneration
Payments will be made upon the satisfactory and timely submission and approval of the deliverables and not actual number of days worked.
Payment is expected to be made in three lump sum instalments:
20% to be paid upon submission and approval of the inception report
30% to be paid upon submission and approval of the first draft written report
50% to be paid upon submission and approval of the final draft written report
Key competences, technical background, and experience required
1) An advanced university degree in demography, statistics, public health or other social science field is required
2) A minimum of eight years of progressively responsible and relevant professional work experience in conducting international research and/or monitoring is required preferably in the area of public health, child protection, child rights or child welfare
3) Familiarity with data from administrative systems is required and knowledge of child protection topics, specifically violence against children, is highly desirable
4) Prior experience with conducting systematic reviews, particularly on topics related to child protection, is required
5) Prior experience with conducting internet and database searches is required6) Proven experience in report writing and data compilation is required
7) Excellent command of English is required. Proficiency in Spanish, French or Arabic is an asset.
8) Analytical, methodical and precise style of writing
9) Demonstrated communication skills, both written and oral10) Previous experience working with UNICEF, other UN agencies or relevant national government ministries is highly desirable
[1] This will include the 2014 World Health Organization Toolkit on Mapping Legal, Health and Social Services Responses to Child Maltreatment available here: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/155237/1/9789241549073_eng.pdf
[2] The determination of countries to be selected for field visits will need to take into account country sensitivities regarding access and use of national administrative data.
EmoticonEmoticon