Ending Child Institutionalization

The detrimental effects of institutionalization on a child’s well-being are widely documented. Family based care alternatives such as kinship or foster care, are much more effective in providing care and protection for a child, and are sustainable options until family reunification can take place. The use of residential care should be strictly limited to specific cases where it may be necessary to provide temporary, specialized, quality care in a small group setting organized around the rights and needs of the child in a setting as close as possible to a family, and for the shortest possible period of time. The objective of such placement should be to contribute actively to the child’s reintegration with his/her family or, where this is not possible or in the best interests of the child, to secure his/her safe, stable, and nurturing care in an alternative family setting or supported independent living as young people transition to adulthood. 

Displaying 611 - 620 of 665

Rabi Bhawan,

Reports on the status of children living in residential facilities in Nepal. Includes detailed survey instruments in appendicies.

Richard Carter - EveryChild,

A report discussing the advent and perpetuation of institutional care in Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union prior to and since the end of the communist regime. It also provides examples of family-based care as models of care to substitute institutional care and offers recommendations to donors, NGOs and governments for child care reform based on their experience in CEE and FSU.

Save the Children Sri Lanka and Save the Children Canada,

A situation analysis of children in institutional care that includes policy implications and key recommendations.

Bragi Gudbrandsson, Working Group on Children at Risk in Care, Council of Europe,

A comparative analysis of protection and care systems across Europe, focusing on the use of institutions, alternative forms of care placements, family support services, and the role of social workers in the process of child placement.

Claudia Cabral,

This paper presents a set of global policy guidelines for the protection of children without parental care. It recommends the need for a global understanding of best practices within the legal framework of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.

G. Powell, T. Chinake, D. Mudzinge, W. Maambira, and S. Mukutiri,

Analyzes the state of institutional care in Zimbabwe against the national child protection policy. Focuses on the role of donors in the proliferation of institutional care and strategies to better regulate the development and provision of child protection services.

Devi Dee,

An informal evaluation of an NGO residential institution in Zimbabwe, based on the opinions of the child residents. Includes recommendations for the improvement of residential care.

Bragi Gudbrandsson,

This report contains an overview of alternative care in Europe, the effects of institutions on children, statistical information and the different approaches of child protection systems within Europe. It includes reforming institutional care, foster care, post-care support, and the role of the social worker.

UNAIDS, UNICEF and USAID,

This report examines the current state of orphans and vulnerable children. It provides a regional overview, highlights trends, urges support for alternatives to institutional care and child participation, and presents a framework of protection and care of orphans and vulnerable children. Includes comprehensive data appendices.

UNICEF and International Social Service,

Outlines problems and issues in providing appropriate out-of-home care solutions. Advocates for development of more comprehensive international standards for out-of-home care.