UNICEF - Government of Nigeria Programme of Cooperation, Programme Strategy Note: Social Policy and Gender Equality Revised 4 April 2017

Transcription

1 UNICEF - Government of Nigeria Programme of Cooperation, Programme Strategy Note: Social Policy and Gender Equality Revised 4 April Introduction The work of UNICEF on social policy and gender equality is cross-cutting and encompasses support at federal and state levels for social protection, research and evidence generation on child poverty and equity, public investment in children, and contributing to inclusive sustainable development by addressing gender and other forms of discrimination. It is in line with SDGs 1, 5, and 10, and goal area 4 of the proposed UNICEF strategic plan, on equity and giving every child a fair chance in life. The main partners are the Ministry of Budget and National Planning, Federal Ministry of Women s Affairs and Social Development and Ministry of Labour. Within the United Nations system, UNICEF works closely with ILO, UN-Women, UNDP and the World Bank. An important focus of work in the next programme period will be the implementation and domestication at state level of the National Social Protection Policy (NSSP), which is expected to be approved by the Federal Executive Council early in The policy was developed with strong, cohesive support by the UNCT as part of Delivering as One, with UNICEF acting as lead agency. If the enactment of the policy is delayed, UNICEF will continue to lead the rest of the UN system to ensure its approval. Also, UNICEF will continue to monitor the situation in the North East and other areas of potential conflict to assist the Government in setting up preventive or humanitarian social protection interventions. Another key area will be to monitor implementation of the UNICEF Gender Action Plan and carry out sector-specific gender assessments across the entire country programme. Both axes will address the effects of multidimensional child poverty, interwoven with discriminatory gender roles, which disproportionately affect girls and women. UNICEF will also continue capacity support to the Federal Government on National Gender Policy and its Strategic Implementation Plan with regards to child wellbeing and elimination of harmful practices such as girl child marriage. UNICEF s key approach is to address root causes and gender gaps. These include: (a) a gendered hierarchy privileging male over female and boys over girls in families and communities; (b) boys and men have greater access to resources and greater personal freedom; (c) women are considered inferior and weak, with lesser abilities than men and therefore, socially, culturally and economically dependent on men. Gender imbalance is thus a paramount phenomenon constituting the underprivileged position of women and girls. With its recently adopted approach to gender integration, the country office will continue strengthening a gender focus in its programmatic approach. Through a participatory approach, UNICEF identifies priority gender gaps and builds upon relevant and sustainable interventions, including legislation, appropriate for each programme sector. Social protection falls under pillar 2 of the United Nations Development Assistance Partnership (UNDAP), equitable access to quality basic services, and human rights and gender equality fall under pillar 1, governance, human rights, peace and security. As the lead agency for social protection, UNICEF was deeply involved in the development of the UNDAP chapter on social protection and worked closely with government and United Nations partners throughout the process. 1

2 2. Prioritized issue and areas Despite some improvements and changes in the structure of the Nigerian economy, the economy remains characterized by high unemployment, poverty, and income inequality which affect millions of children and their families. According to the situation analysis of children and women carried out in 2016, most domestic and international estimates reveal that nearly one in four Nigerians are out of work 1 and indicators for poverty and inequality have failed to improve. More than three in five Nigerians continue to struggle below the poverty line today. 2 This figure has remained relatively unchanged since 1996, when nearly two thirds of Nigerians were recorded as monetary poor. 3 An analysis of the 2011 MICS data shows rates of multidimensional child poverty ranging from over 90 per cent, and even close to 100 per cent, in the North East, although rates in other regions are equally high. Even in Lagos State, which has the lowest rate, 43 per cent of children are poor. In terms of both monetary and multidimensional poverty, the poor are concentrated in rural areas among families where adults have little formal education. Gender inequality is observed in all dimensions since women seem to be more deprived than men. Gender gaps favour males/boys with less value for girls in household decision-making, education, health and personal autonomy. The poorer the household, the less likely women are to have decision-making power affecting children's well-being. The risks of economic shocks, natural disasters and conflict threaten to push people further into poverty. The recent precipitous fall in oil revenues, which has been the major source of foreign exchange earnings, 4 is having a negative impact on the country s growth prospect and macro-economic stability, characterized by worsening exchange rates, a general rise in price levels, loss of foreign exchange and government revenue, and the ongoing recession, with implications for spending on basic social services. There is a clear link between rainfall variability (and floods and social erosion) and increased poverty and inequality in Nigeria. In areas in the North East affected by conflict, loss of property, household assets, livelihoods and disrupted agriculture are pushing IDPs and poorer communities further into poverty. In addition, youth restiveness in the Niger Delta arising from unemployment, disruption of communities and environmental degradation due to oil and gas exploration and exploitation, and other factors such as poverty remain key concerns. Children are disproportionately affected by such risks. The map above illustrates the incidence of child poverty across the country. Current UNICEF estimates (compiled using national data sets), now being corroborated by the National Bureau of Statistics, are that 1 UNDP, 2015; NBS, 2012, cited in the Situation Analysis. 2 OSSAP-MDGs, 2015; UNDP, 2015, cited in the Situation Analysis. 3 NBS, 2010, cited in the Situation Analysis which also mentions the existence of other, lower, estimates which also show an insignificant decline. 4 Nigeria Common Country Analysis Report 2016, United Nations Country Team, 31 October

3 75 per cent of all Nigerian children live in multidimensional poverty As no other UN agency is addressing child poverty and given the magnitude of its incidence, UNICEF has a clear role to play. The lack of information on public investment in children is a significant bottleneck, in particular at the state level, where there is major responsibility for delivery of basic social services. Thus, in 2015, UNICEF and the Ministry of Budget and Planning undertook a review of the social expenditures and investment in children by 12 states (Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Cross River, Ebonyi, Enugu, Imo, Kaduna, Lagos, Nassarawa, Niger, Osun, Oyo). The process involved the secretaries to the state governments, accountants general and state auditors to ensure access to current and historical data on actual expenditures by sectors (which are not accessible to the public). The review captured and included all expenditures on children and their families (e.g., pre-primary, primary and secondary education, basic health care, child protection systems, etc.). The review filled an important vacuum in terms of data availability for leveraging public resources on behalf of children. As in the case for child poverty, this is an area in which UNICEF has taken the lead and consequently has a comparative advantage in advocating investment in children. Leveraging these public resources is crucial, as no significant progress will be possible in any of the social sectors without them. The preliminary results of the review show that on average, states allocated 15 to 20 per cent of their budgets to invest in children, primarily for education (about 50 per cent of the total) followed by health (15 per cent) and water and sanitation (15 per cent). Investments in nutrition, housing, child protection systems, sports and leisure, social protection and special programmes for children with disabilities were either very small (less than 5 per cent of total investment in children) or not properly recorded in the budgets. It is clear that given the small allocations in most sectors, a major project, initiative or construction in a given year can produce major fluctuations in investments for children. In some cases, the actual expenditures in the social services in per capita terms stayed roughly constant but the total state government expenditures fluctuated (due to expansions or contractions of the total budget), impacting the shares invested in children. The studies also showed that the percentage of total state budgets invested in children has declined continuously since 2011 and in 2014 represented just over 11 per cent of the states budgets. By 2014, housing, health, social protection and nutrition interventions for children formed a minute portion of the 3

4 state budgets and accounted for less than 2 per cent of total state funding. Although spending on education declined, it remained the largest portion of investment in children, at 8.3 per cent. Even in fairly well-funded sectors such as education, the largest share of expenditure goes to capital expenditure and salaries, underfunding essential elements for service delivery like learning materials. In some states, the benefit incidence of public investment in primary education was analysed. It showed a mildly progressive expenditure, with the wealthiest groups capturing less than their population share of the public spending on primary education. However, as in many other countries, this result is partly driven by the richest families sending their children to private schools. As a follow-up to the studies, the Executive Council of Kaduna set up an interministerial committee to monitor investment in children, with UNICEF as an invited participant. Another set of 12 states is being selected for the next round of the study. Since 2010, UNICEF has been working on social protection as follow-up to a series of studies carried out to understand the impact of the 2008 fuel, food prices and financial crises on children. It was found that less than 10 per cent of the population enjoys any type of social protection coverage as there is no legal framework, nor proper financing, for the few haphazard and uncoordinated schemes. In addition, and partly as a result of this, there are low numbers of civil servants dedicated to social protection and widespread lack of knowledge among stakeholders about the right to social protection (although it is mentioned in the Constitution). In line with the provisions in the national strategy document 'Vision 20:2020', the Government developed an age-appropriate, gender-sensitive and welfare-inclusive National Social Protection Policy (NSPP). The Ministry of Budget and National Planning (formerly the National Planning Commission) took leadership and ownership of the process. The Nigerian Institute for Social and Economic Research, which is part of the Ministry, was central in drafting the NSPP. The draft policy underwent three rounds of validation workshops in each of the six geopolitical zones of the country. This participatory approach included consultations with academics, NGOs/CSOs and delegates of both state and federal level ministries, departments and agencies (MDA)s as well as other stakeholders and international development partners. The text of the NSPP was finalized in It addresses gender imbalances and contains specific elements and interventions important to women. Among other interventions, the NSPP includes setting up programmes to be activated in cases of human-made or natural disasters. Elements within the policy have been costed (e.g., a universal child grant similar to the one in South Africa) to ascertain the financial burden that will have to be confronted for proper implementation. Counterparts were trained on costing social protection measures in collaboration with ILO. UNICEF will continue to support integration of gender-responsive approaches into social protection interventions. After the latest round of validation meetings, the text is ready to be presented to the Federal Executive Council. This is expected to happen early in 2017, after which activities ranging from implementation measures by various federal MDAs and domestication at the state level should ensue in In other words, once the institutional framework is set up at the federal level, similar frameworks at the state level need to be in place for proper implementation given the federal nature of the Constitution. Given the presence of UNICEF throughout the country (nine field offices), UNICEF is very well positioned to provide the technical advice and other support to the states domesticating the NSSP. UNICEF also has a capacity and a proven record in strengthening capacity at the state level on social protection in order to address the personnel shortcomings mentioned above. Thus, UNICEF activities address the identified barriers and bottlenecks for implementation of social protection by the federal and state governments. 4

5 These activities are being discussed and planned as part of the UNDAP, with UNICEF the lead agency in this area. The current Government has designated a Special Advisor to the President on Social Investment, who sits in the Office of the Vice-President, to deal with social protection issues. UNICEF has actively engaged with the Special Advisor. In addition, the Federal Government has started a $500 million social intervention programme with funding from the World Bank, covering all the 35 states and the Federal Capital Territory. The programme includes interventions such as school feeding for primary schools grades 1 to 3, cash transfers, microcredit for women and an employment scheme for graduate youth. Although this is a donor-funded programme, it presents opportunities for expanding coverage of social protection in Nigeria. UNICEF has been asked to provide technical support to the implementation of the programme at national and state levels. As a result of high-level advocacy, the governments of Anambra, Benue, Cross Rivers, Lagos, Ondo and Osun States have begun formulating their own state-level social protection policies. UNICEF supported these processes with technical advice, documentation efforts and capacity-building, e.g., on the design and costing of social protection interventions and integrated systems. Given the progress made with these activities in the current country programme, this work will continue and expand in the new country programme. With support from DFID, in Niger and Sokoto States UNICEF is implementing unconditional cash transfers for girls enrolment, attendance and retention in basic primary school. Capacity assessment, enrolment, payment and case management manuals have been developed. About 22,000 girls aged 7-15 years received cash transfers at the beginning of the school year. Both states have indicated their desire to continue the programme but are facing financial difficulties. This is a major success of a model initiated by UNICEF and then being continued and expanded by government. Funding expected for the education sector will include Sokoto and other states where UNICEF will continue to support and expand the cash transfer programme. Providing cash to families is a way to address poverty, one of the root causes of child marriage (besides gender discrimination). Monetary support helps to retain girls in primary and secondary education, postponing marriage to later age. Similarly, in Adamawa and Kebbi, with financial assistance from the EU, a cash transfer programme is being set up to help poor women in rural areas access primary health care. The cash transfers were launched October In addition to the lessons learned from these initiatives, UNICEF employed capacity-building and South- South cooperation to strengthen social protection. The lack of baselines for the capacities of government officials and capacity gap analyses on social protection is a major constraint. UNICEF has worked with the Ministry of Budget and National Planning and state governments to generate necessary information on the number of staff that have been trained or need training on social protection. Another lesson learned during the current country programme is that absent a properly trained workforce, all implementation efforts will fail. It was also learned, and often pointed out by government partners, that a major constraint for effective capacity strengthening activities that actually make a significant contribution to results is the lack of medium-term strategy for training and capacity development based on a proper assessment of capacity gaps and needs. Efforts were made at federal and state levels to organize capacity gap assessments in order to prepare capacity development strategies that are needed to prevent the proliferation of training workshops that have no follow-up activities or substantive results for children. A few states (e.g., 5

6 Anambra and Ondo) have prepared a capacity gap analysis. Nevertheless, the tool may be refined for utilization in other states and a proper strategy should be designed. In terms of the South-South strategy for social protection, high-level government functionaries from Anambra, Niger, Sokoto and Ogun States were sent to the Economic Policy Research Institute in South Africa to be trained on social protection. Officials from Adamawa and Kebbi States (Commissioners, Permanent Secretaries and Directors from the Ministries of Planning and Budget, Health, Women s Affairs and Finance), the Ministry of Budget and National Planning and the Office of the Vice President participated in a study tour to South Africa. In addition, 20 government officials from Adamawa and Kebbi visited Ondo State ( internal South-South ) where a safe motherhood programme is considered a good practice to be replicated and adapted in other states and countries. The purpose of the visit was to share lessons learned about what worked and did not work in the development and implementation of the social protection component of the safe motherhood programme. 3. Theory of change The proposed outcome, which mirrors the UNDAP outcome, is that the NSPP is implemented and adequately financed at federal and state levels. Its overall aim or vision is to set up and implement a system that prevents and reduces poverty throughout the life cycle by promoting a life of dignity and without discrimination to all Nigerians. Gender equality will be pursued by addressing root causes and gender gaps. From 2010 to 2016, the UN system, including the World Bank and with UNICEF as lead agency, supported the Government in drafting, designing and setting up the NSPP, including estimating the cost of its major provisions and training federal and state-level civil servants on costing social protection. Once the policy is endorsed by the Federal Executive Council, UNICEF and the rest of the UN system will focus on ensuring that the different federal MDAs responsible for the various programmes and interventions (the policy consists of 16 specific policy measures) actually implement them. The second track involves domesticating the policy throughout the 36 states, including support to policy implementation (not in terms of funding but assisting with design, selection of beneficiaries and monitoring and evaluation). The programme has four outputs, all anchored around the NSPP and increasing social inclusion. Output 1. At federal and state levels, UNICEF contributes, with technical advice and by strengthening the capacity of MDAs, to implement the National Social Protection Policy across sectors, with particular emphasis on meeting the needs of the poorest children and families The NSPP comprises 16 specific policy measures and explicitly recognizes the need to realize them progressively. It would probably take years to fully implement all the provisions. Thus, in terms of milestone targets and indicators, only about a quarter of the objectives of the NSPP could be reasonably expected to be attained by However, this could occur by achieving 100 per cent in just a quarter of the provisions or just one quarter of the intended coverage for each of the policy measures, or other combinations. The target then, while specified as one quarter of intended coverage, is to be interpreted as to be obtained in combinations which have not been established by government yet (in part because the NSPP has not been approved yet). Thus, part of the role of the UN system, with UNICEF in the lead, will 6

7 be to collaborate with the Government of Nigeria in ensuring equity and that the most marginalized and poorest groups and individuals are addressed first. As it is the case at the federal level, states have wide latitude and flexibility to implement and prioritize programmes and interventions to progressively realize the provisions of the NSPP. However, in addition to the description of the intention and activities of UN support to Nigeria at the federal level, there is a need for further assistance, advocacy (including media campaigns), and technical advice to domesticate the NSPP in each state. While conceivably some states may have domesticated the policy before 2018, it is safer to assume that part of the period will be devoted to ensuring domestication by all states. For those states that do domesticate, similar objectives and activities in terms of assisting in design and implementation as at the federal level would be needed. The specific UNICEF contributions will include mapping and assessing capacities to deliver social protection interventions at the federal and state levels. This would result in a clear and explicit capacitystrengthening strategy at a scale that would ensure that sufficient human resources have the skills to deliver 25 per cent of the elements/coverage of the NSPP, thus addressing a critical barrier/bottleneck, as mentioned above. Besides strengthening capacity, UNICEF will contribute technical assistance in costing, designing, monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the policy at federal and state levels. As has been the case in recent years, UNICEF will not replace the government authorities who have to carry out these tasks but will accompany them all along the way to ensure that issues of good quality, international standards, practical and realistic goals and targets, and equity considerations are part of the policy discussions. In some specific (particularly focused) cases and in collaboration with other sectors (mainly education, health, and emergency response), UNICEF will engage in actual delivery of some types of social protection interventions, as a model for the government to show how social protection interventions can be set up, implemented and monitored/evaluated. These will be small in number (subject to funding). The main purpose of these interventions is to lead the way and provide examples for government in geographic areas where needs are very high and/or government capacity is very limited to reach the poorest groups. Besides being an example for government, these interventions would provide much needed support for the poorest families and children, and would contribute to building capacities of the federal and state governments to eventually pick up these interventions and expand them (in terms of coverage and continuity over time). Output 2. The Federal Government routinely measures the impact of the social protection policy on reducing child poverty. The ultimate aim of social protection is to provide a life of dignity for all Nigerian families and children. Clearly, other policy measures are needed to achieve this goal. Nevertheless, in so far as social protection makes a contribution, it could and should be assessed in terms of the impact of the specific interventions and the overall impact on poverty (both monetary and multidimensional). Thus, UNICEF will contribute by collaborating with the government (in particular at the federal level) and academics to periodically measure the evolution of multidimensional child poverty, relying on the government schedule of household surveys (MICS, DHS, GHS, NLSS). Besides government institutions like the National Bureau of Statistics, National Population Commission and the Ministry of Budget and National Planning, UNICEF will collaborate with the World Bank and UNDP to support the periodic production of reports on poverty and in particular on child poverty. 7

8 Output 3. At federal and state levels, costing and fiscal space analyses are available with specific guidance for governments to allocate and invest sufficient resources for children equitably and efficiently in line with the social protection policy and the provision of quality basic social services. As lofty as the goals of the NSPP are, they will come to nothing if the policy is not implemented. The same applies to all basic social services (as outlined in the UNDAP pillar on equitable quality basic services) affecting children. However, implementation cannot happen in the absence of specific, welldesigned and properly costed plans. Thus UNICEF will provide technical advice to the federal and state governments to be able to cost social protection interventions (in collaboration with ILO and UNDP) and other investments in children and families (in collaboration with UN-Women). These costs will be assessed against the public resources actually invested in children. This analysis entails exploring the budgeted, allocated and expended resources. By matching these three levels of allocations with the needs of families and children, it is expected that government resources will be leveraged so additional investments in social protection and children take place. However, these investments should be efficient and equitable. Thus, building on the currently established baselines in each state provided by the work spearheaded by UNICEF (in collaboration with the Ministry of Budget and National Planning) in the current country programme, capacity-building for state and nonstate (mainly in academia) actors to carry out this type of costing and analysis will continue along with technical advice provided to decision makers with tools to improve the costing in terms of the amount, efficiency and equity. Output 4. A broader agenda for social inclusion within the context of the Government's sustainable development agenda is supported by analysis, evidence, and technical advice. The NSPP includes several provisions dealing explicitly with the disabled, the poorest and other marginalized groups. UNICEF will contribute to the implementation of these provisions (as per output 1). Moreover, as another important contribution, UNICEF will use its knowledge management capacity and convening power to build on these provisions to ensure that the rest of the development agenda (of the federal and state governments), and in particular the efforts geared to achieving the SDGs are inclusive and expand the implementation of international human rights standards and conventions (such as the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women). In support of the Sendai Framework, the SDGs, the Paris Agreement and the outcome of the World Humanitarian Summit (Habitat III), UNICEF will collaborate with UNDP, UN-Habitat and WFP to contribute technical expertise to government efforts to address environmental issues, climate change and urbanization in order to ensure that children are taken into account in the design of projects, policies, and plans addressing these issues. Climate change impacts are projected to slow economic growth, which may likely add strain on public social protection systems while counteracting progress already made in this area, as well as to increase the need for public services such as health care, social welfare and disaster response by increasing the prevalence of diseases, malnutrition, natural disasters and extreme weather events. Children are particularly affected by climate change due to their physiology; their respiratory and immune systems are not fully developed. Therefore, the bulk of diseases projected to increase with climate change such as respiratory diseases, malaria and dengue fever affect children disproportionately. Climate change can also interrupt children s education through extreme weather conditions that can destroy infrastructure and lead 8

9 to displacement. Children, especially girls who contribute to household income/chores, are often used to compensate climate change impacts. Therefore, in the context of the NSPP and the broader Nigerian development agenda, UNICEF in collaboration with other UN agencies will provide technical support at state and federal levels by generating evidence and undertaking advocacy to invest in measures to reduce air pollution and environmental degradation. In 2015, with the support and collaboration from headquarters and the Regional Office, the Nigeria country office undertook a gender review that used and tested the latest methodology and guidance in line with the global Gender Action Plan. The recommendations included: To increase capacity and deliver girl-friendly, gender-sensitive WASH services in schools funded under the DFID Girls Education Project Phase 3; To increase capacity and deliver girl-friendly, gender-sensitive WASH services in selected schools in emergency-affected states; To introduce girl- and gender-friendly WASH and menstrual hygiene management in schools. All of these initiatives apply a convergence approach. In addition, there was an assessment of primary education P1 and P4 curricula and text books for gender stereotyping (within the Child-Friendly Schools review). One of the lessons learned from the current and previous country programmes and from international experience is that gender mainstreaming (i.e. converting programmes into advocates to empower women beyond their domain of expertise and trying to use service delivery as entry points for societywide changes that usually take a very long time) is not particularly successful. Thus, since 2015, a different approach, fully aligned with the Gender Action Plan, has been applied in Nigeria. It consists of assessing the gender barriers and gaps affecting programme delivery in order to find ways to surmount them by modifying the programmes. Thus, taking gender discrimination and dynamics into account in the design and implementation of programmes leads to better, more efficient, and sustainable impact. They are also short-term contributions to the longer-term goal of empowering women by solving their most immediate concerns and needs. Consequently, the work on gender equality is focused on assisting the programmes to carry out these gender assessments, adapt their design and implementation and monitor and document the success of this innovative approach. For the next country programme, education, WASH and health are the areas of concentration for these endeavours. Thus, no specific gender target is needed. However, it is expected that the work on gender-based violence and child marriage will be anchored on gender discrimination and poverty as the main drivers, in a convergence approach Risks and assumptions The UNCT will continue to Deliver as One in supporting the federal and state governments in implementing the NSSP. The main assumptions of the UNCT approach are that the NSPP will be approved by the Federal Executive Council in 2017 and that there will be continued and strengthened coordination among UN agencies and donors, particularly in terms of social protection in a humanitarian context. Other key assumptions are that humanitarian crises will not overwhelm capacities, the economic downturn will not deteriorate further, and state budgets and the overall political environment remain stable. The main risks are that an unstable and deteriorating national macroeconomic and fiscal outlook 9

10 will constrain social protection expenditures, that humanitarian crisis will escalate in northern and southern Nigeria and there could be potential delays in domesticating the NSPP. If the NSPP is not passed by the Federal Executive Council in the first quarter of 2017, all UN partners and the World Bank have already discussed increasing efforts to support the Government to succeed in passing the policy. Additional efforts would be needed in 2018, and it should be the main focus of the new country programme if the NSPP were still not approved by the end of A deteriorating macroeconomic situation would require a two-pronged risk mitigation strategy: (1) efforts to document (based on the study of the impact of the recession on children and families to be carried out in 2017) the plight of families and request donors and international financial institutions to help relieve the Government's budgetary constraints; and (2) even in the absence of the NSPP, short-term social support programmes could be set up to assist families. These could build upon or expand the Government's current cash transfer programme, which is a way to start implementing the NSPP. If the situations in the north and south escalate, a larger, an office-wide approach would be needed. Social protection interventions would be part of the response, building on the provisions in the NSPP to be activated in cases of human-made or natural disasters. 4. Results structure and framework Reference attached Annex. 5. Aligning results, strategies and required resources The first and foremost strategy is technical advice. Social policy is a staff-intensive and "supplies-light" type of work, where the main UNICEF inputs to government plans are ideas. Thus as part of the reorganization carried out during the current country programme period, more posts were created in field offices for social policy officers (including the chiefs of the field offices in the south) to allow closer and more periodic interaction with government counterparts than in the past. This interaction, combined with the work on costing and analysis of investment in children, leads to a strategy to leverage public resources for children, or in other words, articulating a vision and providing concrete, specific advice of what to do, how to do it, where to invest, how much to invest, and how to ensure the investment is equitable. As described above, lack of an institutional framework and lack of financial resources are two of the most important barriers and impediments to implementing social protection and ensuring a life of dignity to all Nigerians. That is why these two strategies have been chosen. Moreover, as mentioned above, lack of sufficient personnel is also a constraint. Thus, efforts will focus on capacity strengthening (after dutifully carrying out capacity gap assessments and design capacity strengthening plans). Another important strategy that has been successful in the current country programme is to engage in models to demonstrate how programmes can work. These, however, will be limited (partially due to availability of funds). As these projects are taken up by the government, UNICEF will refocus its efforts on strengthening systems to accompany the government in implementation, monitoring and evaluation of social protection interventions. 10

11 Additionally, and to a lesser degree, knowledge management including South-South and horizontal cooperation, and partnerships will be used. It is estimated that $4.5 million per year will be needed. This covers the cost of the recently expanded social policy and gender equality team which, besides the Chief (P5) includes three P4s, two NOCs, three NOBs and a GS4 (which given the expanded team and additional responsibilities should be upgraded to a GS6). Salary costs have been estimated on the 2017 budget and a small increase of 5 per year is proposed. It is estimated this would absorb about 55 per cent of the resources (although a slightly higher proportion of RR, as social policy work in staff-intensive). As a way to mitigate the risk of not securing all the desired OR, the RR has been distributed equally among all four outcomes to ensure all main deliverables are achieved. As a result the activities related to environmental and urban issues will rely proportionally more on OR. In order to support the strategies described above and to model social protection interventions at the state level, the remaining resources (assumed to increase at the same rate as salaries in order to maintain balance among costs.) would be allocated for: Consultancies (25 per cent); Training (including South-South and horizontal cooperation) (15 per cent); Support for specific (particularly focused) social protection interventions (5 per cent). In order to mobilize resources, as it was done in the current country programme, the section will cooperate with the other sectors. This will foster complementarity and convergence (as is now the case with the cash transfers for girls education and for facilitating access to antenatal care) across sectors. In addition, funds will be sought for modelling links between humanitarian and developmental social protection in the North East. This will be done in collaboration with the Emergency Section and the Regional Office. 6. Monitoring achievement of outputs and UNICEF's contribution to outcomes Progress towards the outcome will be assessed through indicators specified in the results framework, all of which are to be carried out in close collaboration with government in order to strengthen government capacities to engage in this type of analysis without UNICEF support in the medium term. All the activities below contribute directly to the outputs and are included in the IMEP. Although the Social Policy and Gender Equality section does not deal directly with the National Bureau of Statistics or the M&E department of the Ministry of Budget and National Planning, it will work closely with them and the country office M&E staff in the surveys described below: At least 12 states have a monitoring system linked to the single registry to follow up on beneficiaries of social protection, which would allow for high-frequency monitoring. Based on current work supporting the federal government cash transfer programme and design of statelevel social protection policies, this would strengthen national capacities and systems. One evaluation will address the impact, efficiency, and equity of social protection interventions per state based on this data and combined with qualitative assessments; Two child poverty reports based on the availability of household surveys. At least one DHS and a Nigerian Household survey are expected within the country programme cycle; 36 state-level studies of investment in children, to follow up the current studies. They should be done in collaboration with the government with greater participation on its part than in the current round; 11

12 UNICEF has a good baseline on child poverty and investment in children and is already collaborating in several states on implementation of state-level cash transfers and social protection. In line with the harmonized approach to cash transfers (HACT), the section will continue to undertake programme monitoring visits and on the advice of the programme staff, the section chief or chief of field office will notify the HACT manager of any issues or risks identified that could lead to a spot check, or special audit and appropriate follow-up. The section's programme monitoring visits will focus on answering the following questions: (1) Has implementation been in line with the agreed work plan details?; (2) Have the activities taken place as planned, in terms of quantity and quality?; (3) Are there any deviations which pose a risk to achievement of expected results?; (4) Are there any bottlenecks or barriers noticed in the implementation of activities?; (5) Is the implementing partner providing its own contribution in cash and/or in kind as agreed in the workplan?; and (6) Is the pace of implementation as per the agreed workplan? 12

13 Financial Resources: RR, OR, Staff, and non-staff cost (in rounded US$ millions) Total RR OR Total RR OR Total RR OR Total RR OR Total RR OR Total RR OR Total Total Of which: Staff Non-Staff Output Output Output Output

14 14