iii) Inadequate sensitization and capacity building of allied systems including police, judiciary, health care professions, etc; iv) Lack of proactive involvement of the voluntary sectors in child protection service delivery by the State UT Administrations; v) Large number of vacancies in existing child protection institutions. Serious service gaps i. Improper use of institution in contravention to government guidelines; ii. Lack of support services to families at risk making children vulnerable; iii. Overbearing focus on institutional (residential care) with (i.e. non-residential) services neglected; iv. Inter-state and Intra-state transfer of children especially for their restoration to families not provided for in the existing schemes. v. Lack of standards of care (accommodation, sanitation, leisure, food etc.) in all institutions due to lower funding; vi. Lack of supervision and commitment to implement and monitor standards of care in institutions; vii. Most 24-hourshelters do not provide all the basic facilities required, especially availability of shelter, food and mainstream education; viii. Not all programmes address issues of drug abuse, HIV/AIDS and sexual abuse related vulnerabilities of children; ix. None of the existing schemes address the needs of child beggars or children used for begging; x. Minimal use of non-institutional care options like adoption, foster care and sponsorship to children without home and family ties. xi. No mechanism for child protection at community level or involvement of communities and local bodies in programmes and services; xii. Serious services and infrastructure gaps leading to few adoptions;
iii) Inadequate sensitization and capacity building of allied systems including police, judiciary, health care professions, etc; iv) Lack of proactive involvement of the voluntary sectors in child protection service delivery by the State UT Administrations; v) Large number of vacancies in existing child protection institutions. Serious service gaps i. Improper use of institution in contravention to government guidelines; ii. Lack of support services to families at risk making children vulnerable; iii. Overbearing focus on institutional (residential care) with (i.e. non-residential) services neglected; iv. Inter-state and Intra-state transfer of children especially for their restoration to families not provided for in the existing schemes. v. Lack of standards of care (accommodation, sanitation, leisure, food etc.) in all institutions due to lower funding; vi. Lack of supervision and commitment to implement and monitor standards of care in institutions; vii. Most 24-hourshelters do not provide all the basic facilities required, especially availability of shelter, food and mainstream education; viii. Not all programmes address issues of drug abuse, HIV/AIDS and sexual abuse related vulnerabilities of children; ix. None of the existing schemes address the needs of child beggars or children used for begging; x. Minimal use of non-institutional care options like adoption, foster care and sponsorship to children without home and family ties. xi. No mechanism for child protection at community level or involvement of communities and local bodies in programmes and services; xii. Serious services and infrastructure gaps leading to few adoptions;
W.P.%20%28C%29%20No.%2082%20of%202009.docx