| Popis: |
The social welfare reform recognizes the further development and expansion of daycare center services as an important precondition for deinstitutionalization as one of the key objectives of the reform. Decreasing the number of children and adults in residential institutions, their return to their natural families and preventing institutionalization depend primarily on the support provided at local level to the family for taking care of their family members. Today in Serbia there are 49 daycare centers with 1400 children and persons with disability as beneficiaries. Between 2000 and 2007, thirty seven new daycare centers were established, the total number of beneficiaries more than tripled and the NGO sector became equal with the government sector in service provision. Yet, daycare center services are still not sufficiently developed. In 123 municipalities there are no daycare center services at all and overall these services are significantly less accessible than residential services. Daycare center services consist of both well established and sustainable daycare with significant capacity and also of small, project-based daycare centers that provide services for a few hours and have an uncertain future. The second group consists mostly of daycare centers organized by the NGO sector. The monthly costs of daycare center services per beneficiary in 2007 amounted to 13.750 diners on average. According to the survey findings, for example, the annual costs for running a daycare center service for 20 beneficiaries are between 2 and 6 million dinars depending on the complexity of the provided services and programs. The costs of residential placement are on average higher than the costs in daycare centers. Further development of daycare center services in Serbia requires additional and focused efforts at central level in terms of formulating special financial incentives for underdeveloped municipalities, developing professional capacity at local level, educating local governments, conceptualizing and establishing regulatory mechanisms, exchanging good practice examples, etc. Still, placing non-residential services at the heart of the social welfare system can be expected only after undertaking more profound legislative changes. . |
