Implications of Child Justice Act on the Department of Social Development

1. Implications of Child Justice Act on the Department of Social Development (Policy frame work for diversion services in SA ) Ms Conny Nxumalo 26 May 2010

2. Presentation outline • Introduction • Purpose • Objectives • Scope of the policy • Eligibility criteria for accreditation • Mechanism for implementation • Functions of accreditation committee • Functions of Quality Assurance Panel • Functions of Site-Verification team • Accreditation process • Complaints mechanism • Resource Implications • Recommendation

3. INTRODUCTION In terms of Section 56(2)(a) ofCJA, the Cabinet member responsible for social development, in consultation with the Cabinet members responsible for the administration of justice, education, correctional services, safety and security and health must— • create a policy framework to develop the capacity within all levels of Government and the non-governmental sector to establish, maintain and develop programmes for diversion; (ii) establish and maintain a system for accreditation, as prescribed, of programmes for diversion and diversion service providers; and (iii) ensure the availability of resources to implement diversion programmes, as prescribed. • Section 56(2)(g) of the Act also provides for quality assurance, monitoring and evaluation of programmes and service providers.

4. PURPOSE OF THE POLICY • Serve and protect the needs of children and youth at risk and in conflict with the law; • Ensure diversion service providers and programmes comply with minimum norms & standards; • Provision of support through capacity building, the development and implementation of evidence based practice in the field of criminal justice work; • Enable and facilitate sustained quality service delivery; • facilitate continuous quality improvement of diversion programmes.

5. OBJECTIVES OF POLICY To ensure that: • All service providers, DSD employees and relevant stake holders are aware of and support the DSD’s approach to quality service; • An appropriate accreditation and quality assurance system is in place for services to children at risk and in conflict with the law; • Accreditation systems established are well coordinated and are characterized by minimum bureaucracyand maximum effectiveness.

6. SCOPE OF THE POLICY The policy has four tiers of application, which informs and influences the accreditation and quality assurance processes and activities of the other tiers: • The child at risk/in conflict with the law; • The organizational and programme level; • The criminal justice and social services sector; • The regulatory and policy environment .

7. Eligibility Criteria for accrediting organisations Any organization to qualify for accreditation must meet the following criteria: • Authority and competence (legal structure and experience in working with children offending and difficult behavior) • Governing body and/or management • Financial systems and management • Administrative capacity • Staff compliments • The organization is authorized to operate (registered as an NPO with the department) as a welfare organization and to provide social services • The organization has at least six months experience in working with children with offending/difficult behaviour, and/ or has a qualified personnel, with 2-3 years of relevant experience in the field

8. Eligibility Criteria for accrediting programmes Every Diversion programme to be accredited should amongst others meet the criteria such as the following: • Pre-intervention and post intervention assessment to measure changes in behavior • Reasonable geographical accessibility to the client. • Appropriate to child ‘s age, physical and cognitive ability, • Based on research evidence of what works in reducing criminal behavior, • Clearly articulated objectives and outcomes, • Programme design and activities must have factors that are likely to reduce re-offending, • Must have a system of monitoring the quality of programme delivery, • Programme must have an indication of less intensive and most intensive services, • All programmes should be exposed to regular supervision by senior staff member. • Programmes to be managed and supervised by professionals

9. STRUCTURE ( mechanism for implementation) National Structure: Dedicated capacity to manage, monitor and coordinate the implementation process and maintenance of the national register.( 2 officials and the Head of Social Crime Prevention will be based at National office)The team will ensure: • Capacity building of service providers at all levels of government and non-governmental sector; • Support provincial teams • Monitoring of the implementation of the policy framework and accreditation system • Keep the data-base of accredited and removed service providers and diversion programmes. Provincial Structure: Will have three structures namely: (i) Accrediting Committee (ii) Quality Assurance Panel (iii) and Site Verification Team; (i) Accrediting Committee: • Composed of 4-8 members which must include civil society members/ academics and experts in the field; • Can form a quorum if they are 4+1; • Process to be led by a Provincial Coordinator/Head of Social Crime;

10. STRUCTURE Cont…. Quality Assurance Panel: ( as outlined in section 32 of CJA Regulations) • Composed of not less than 3 and not more than 7 members & civil society members/ academics; • Members of the panel must have knowledge and experience relating to diversion programmes and children’s issues; • An official employed in the State may be appointed as a member of the panel… (iii) Site Verification Team: • To be composed of 2-5 officials from government including civil society members/ academics; NB: Dedicated Provincial Personnel to have accreditation tasks in their job description & work plans;

11. FUNCTIONS OF ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE • Accredit qualifying service providers and evidence based programmes; • Analyze activities of the whole system of accreditation of diversion service providers and programmes; and • Take part in development and realization of policy and strategy in the sphere of accreditation of diversion service providers and programmes; • Cyclical accreditation decision-making and maintenance of accreditation reviews ( twice a year and within three months after receiving the application); • Make recommendations to Quality Assurance Panel

12. FUNCTIONS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE PANEL • Prepare documentation and reports (preliminary and final) reflecting findings and recommendations of quality assurance activities undertaken; • Allowing and considering organizational and programme responses to the preliminary reports; • Monitor and evaluate realization of policy goals and objectives for diversion processes; • Conduct organizational and programmatic site visits, which include reviews of relevant documentation and interviewing of clients (children in programmes, parents and other stakeholders where relevant); • Contribute towards development of capacity and programme content of diversion practice. • Facilitate the development of an organization development plan ( ODP) and assign a mentor for the organization

13. FUNCTIONS OF SITE VERIFICATION TEAM • Coordinate and conduct verification & quality assurance site visits and provide written reports thereof; • Conduct preliminary assessment and screening of received applications; • Make recommendations regarding accreditation or removal of programmes and/or service providers; • Keep data base of service providers and programmes; • Assist in capacity building of emerging and existing service providers.

14. NOMINATED MEMBERS TO SERVE ON TWO COMMITTEES/TEAMS APPOINTMENT OF PROVINCIAL STRUCTURES The Department of Social Development is primarily responsible for ensuring implementation of this Policy and for the reporting and accounting thereof. • The three structures will be identified and appointed by the province considering all requirements; • National representative will be an ex-officio member of accreditation committee; • The Provincial Head of Department must appoint members of the three structures; approve/ disapprove those from government departments, civil society organizations and representatives from academic institutions, preferably on recommendation of Accreditation Coordinator; • Members should have knowledge and understanding of cultural diversity and knowledge of the services within the broader Child Justice System; • The above members should include representatives from non-governmental organizations, governmental departments, experts in the field and academic institutions;

15. ACCREDITATION PROCESS Phase 1: • Application process open to all service providers expressing a need to be accredited. • Application to be done in person or on-line. • A self-assessment material will be issued upon receipt of intent. • Submission of self-assessment material to be received prior to a pre-determined closing date. Phase 2: • Desk assessment; • Verification site visits & report; • Consideration of recommendations made by verification site visit team; • Candidacy status; • Recommendation (to accredit or not); Phase 3: • Accreditation decision making (candidacy status awarded / accreditation awarded); • Accreditation denied (service provider referred to Site Verification Team for assistance); • Service provider informed of decision taken; • Service provider receives certificate for accreditation; • Service provider placed in the Quality Assurance cycle.

16. Register Intent to Accredit Accreditation Process Flow Receive Self assessment application pack PHASE 1 APPLICATION Undertake Self-assessment Organization ready Inform Organization Submit completed application No Yes Application checked R E F E R T O Q A C O M M I T T E E Information Adequate Desk Assessment for Candidacy compliance PHASE 2 CANDIDANCY No Yes Request more Info No Yes Candidacy Compliance Receive Candidacy status (2years) Site Visit Report submitted to committee PHASE 3 ACCREDITATION No Yes Accreditation Accredited Move into Quality Assurance Cycle

17. COMPLAINT AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION MECHANISM PROCESSES • The HOD’s to handle complaints from aggrieved service providers • Service providers to lodge complaint in writing within seven days of receipt of response from the accreditation team • Province ( HOD) to investigate and respond to the complaint within 30calendar days of receipt of the complaint • Final outcome of the complaint be sent to national office of DSD for recording purposes ( keeping of database) • Matters of conduct and conflict from committees may be handled by respective Coordinators ( Director level), only upon failure to resolve can it be referred to the HOD.

18. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROVINCIAL STRUCTURES • Envisaged that nominated members and/or subject specialists must be identified and recruited from other government departments, academic institutions and civil society- as part of accrediting, verifying and quality assurance structures; • Provinces requested to avail existing personnel and tools to assist with processes of the teams (accreditation, verification & quality assurance). • Continuous capacity building of service providers at all levels of government and non-governmental sector; • National department of Social Development to provide implementation support using existing resources

19. Recommendation It is recommended that the committee: 1. note progress thus far and make inputs on the proposed policy framework; 2. Note and support that the draft policy framework and accreditation system for diversion services be tabled in Parliament on the 31st of May 2010 as per requirement of the Child Justice Act,2008.

20. Ndza Khensa