Definition of the street child

There are many interrelated causes to the street children phenomenon. Some of them include poverty, unemployment, rural-urban migration, family break ups, weakening extended families, disadvantaged women, lack of financial accountability of fathers, school drop outs etc.

Majorities of these children are aged between 10 and 15 years with a larger proportion of boys as compared to girls. Research also indicates that they are normally from single mother headed families and only a few may be orphans, contrary to what most of them profess.

This phenomenon is also prevalent in the urban areas, especially the slum areas with the children coming from the slums. They are on the streets in search of means to survive and in the event become beggars, child labourers, drug abusers, and victims of crime, parental abuse coupled with negative public attitudes.

Findings reveal that street children include both homeless children and youth who sleep on the streets (full - timers) and those who live and work there but go home to sleep (part- timer). In Nairobi, it is estimated that 50% of the street children are full-timers.

About 15% have never been to school and statistics show that by the time of rescue, most of the children have already been on the streets for 2 years.

A government estimate of street children in Nairobi alone is close to 60,000 and perhaps 150,000 in Kenya.

With various assumptions from the available data, then we could estimate that of all Nairobi children in the age group 10-14, 25% are on the streets. In Kenya, we can say that one in every 20 children of the 4 million are street children.

The indications however are that , there has been a sharp increase on the number of street children over the last few years. In Nairobi alone, between 1995 and 1995 there has been a 150% increase. The escalation is however eminent in the entire nation.

Various approaches have been applied as interventions; both curative and preventive in nature.

Different players are involved in addressing the existent /emerging needs at different levels. Major categories of groups involved are the Government, donors, networks, NGOs, CBOs and communities themselves.

CHALLENGES AND INSIGHTS IN THE WORK OF STREET CHILDREN.

Between 1990 and 1999 there was an increase in the number of NGOs working for children in need. In 1990, there were approximately 110 organisation in Kenya, but now from the latest Children's Data Exchange statistics, there are 287 documented organisations and any others not documented. It is estimated that there could be over 300.

However there has not been much realisation from the interventions given the increasing number of organisations working for children in need. There is a mismatch between the input and outcome from the interventions. It cannot be ascertained how much contribution has been so far, to the overall alleviation of the street children problem. Many of the programmes seem to address the symptoms rather than the core problems. How wholistic are the needs addressed?

Childlife was established in 1995 to assist organisations dealing directly with street children and needy children, who are vulnerable or potential street goers. When this work began, there were only a few of them. The demands of these institutions continue to grow, with not a single one able to sustain themselves in their operations.

One major challenge we face is the elimination of dependency and thus being able to elevate them to an independent level. Clearly from discussions and contact with the centres, most do not seem to have long term plans for the children who are taken on. Due to inadequate necessary facilities, projects begin to collapse, the situation of the children becomes even more desperate in terms of health, nutrition-wise and generally socially.

Monitoring and evaluation of programmes is inconsistent or non-existent in many cases, that is seems hard to even know the impact of the work being undertaken by these organisations. What may be lacking are project plans that incorporate good monitoring and evaluation systems. This is important for reviewing strategies yet, for some reason, it is overlooked. Most interventions are poorly researched and the point of entry therefore not clearly defined

Most of the actors/players are not ready to share their information with others. This makes it difficult to obtain any useful lessons or experiences that may act as basis of co-ordinating concerted efforts and resources, to avoid duplication or realise more positive results in the work for street children.

Despite the fact that many of these initiatives are well intended, those spearheading the projects are not equipped with the necessary expertise to manage. It is a broad problem in the country given the few training institutions specialising in the various aspects of social work. For instance, we may find that a social worker is good at case follow-ups but not in a good position to counsel on drugs, HIV/AIDS or to even detect psychological misnomers.

There isn't a national policy that can act as a guide to a common direction in the work involving the rehabilitation and prevention of street children phenomenon in Kenya. The poor policy frameworks therefore stifle the work at most, if not at all levels. As these children grow, they need reintegration back into society. Unless proper channels to facilitate this process are created, the children, at this time termed as youth, ready to 'graduate' from the institutions cannot leave but instead remain reliant on the centres, curtailing the entry of others that need rehabilitation or necessary assistance offered.

To be able to alleviate the street children problem, or otherwise eliminate it, there needs to be concerted efforts from all sides of society. Besides the responsibility of parents and guardians, the government, NGOs, private and public sector must be involved, as all are stakeholders. The public is unseemingly insensitive to the menace; this may be explained by the lack of awareness and insights into the issues that are related to the street children problem either as causative or consequences of it. This is work that needs more support from the both local and international donors, not only in monetary terms but in other ways like provision of jobs for the youth who have completed training etc.

Currently we have more churches than businesses actually involved. We need to see active participation not only from the religious but also secular sector.

More innovative approaches need to be established for the sake of uprooting the situations that perpetuate the problem. For instance, many of the families which these children come from are headed by single mothers. If these mothers can be included in the programmes to have some income generating projects initiated to empower them economically, then we shall be able to move further on towards a rewarding end.

Without a Law that protects the children in this country, we really are not headed far. Alongside the enactment of the children's bill, there ought to be intensive education of children's rights both to the children and adults. This will prevent further abuse and a voice of the children will be recognised.

Other shortcomings

• Gender specific and prevention approaches to alleviation approaches to the alleviation of the street children problems are not yet adequately appreciated and promoted.
• Some networks exist but members and target groups of some of them have not yet realised the benefits.
• Co-ordination of actors/players on the street children is too weak and has left out some key players.

Recommendations on the way forward

• Consistent research to help evaluate the progress of the work for street children.
• Combination of intervention strategies
• More efforts into effective networking
• Trial of new approaches/measures
• Capacity building of people and organisations involved in the work.

CHILDLIFE TRUST'S INTERVENTION

Our mission is to support children in need at an institutional level by strengthening the capacity of these institutions to make them more effective, while mobilising and creating opportunity for public involvement.

This year, 2000, we specifically seek to address the question of dependency, poor management of programmes, lack of awareness amongst the public and disparate nature of efforts in the work of children in need.