Analytical Bulletin of the Federation Council # 201 I7ti). p. 35-36.

Collection of the Russian Federation laws. I «•«***. «L 't>. p. 3177.

Ml
• Social rehabilitation centers for minors - 13

• Centers for psychological and pedagogical assistance - 10

• (-enters providing integrated social services to the- population - 15

• Centers for assistance to orphans and parentless children — 5

• Telephone hotlines —.36

Consultancies — I 17

• Juvenile services — 2

• Public reception offices for children — 25".

The document's inconsistency is revealed by the fact that il simultaneously

reports an increased number of boarding schools and juvenile

services. It's obvious that if juvenile services are a sign of the

times, boarding schools are a clear anachronism.

1.5 The prospective program "Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency

and Neglect in the Mytischi district for 2001-2007" drafted by the

municipal authorities of the Mytischi district (Moscow region)

(http://www.mytyshi.ru/socio/committce/programme.php) reveals

that the municipality is poorly prepared for program implementation.

The document declares the following expected outputs from the

program implementation:

"Implementing the measures provided lor in the program will:

• Hnhance the effectiveness of social rehabilitation work with children

and teenagers finding themselves in difficult situations or

conflicting with the law;

Improve interaction between various bodies within the system for

the prevention of juvenile delinquency and children neglect;

• Create conditions for further reduction of offences and crime committed

by minors;

Reduce the number of homeless and neglected children and

teenagers;

It's obvious that all the above outputs with the exception of the last

one. can not be reliably measured or quantified.

1.6 Iл en when the authorities are ready to absorb innovative ideas

and research (as demonstrated by the interdepartmental program

"Prevention of Children Neglect and Juvenile Delinquency for 2004-

2006" adopted in the city of Magadan (blip: vvvv vv.cityadm.maga-

60 Ml ISl I 'W S К VII VV W STATU >N CHILDREN

"WORKING WITH VOUTII AT RISK" series. Issue H I

dan.ru/programm/beznadzornosl.php), that takes into account the

ideas implemented in the course of the ARO program

(http://www.aro.ru/), the document does not ensure a program

approach. For example, efficiency is to be assessed by the executing

party itself which can hardly assist in the actual (not the declared) efficiency.

It is fair to say that the program also provides for active NGO

participation in its implementation.

1.7 In 2005, the Presidential Administration prepared a draft

Presidential Decree 'The Principles of Government Social Policy for

the Protection of Children until 2010" (the National Action Plan for

the protection of children)1.

Public hearings held at the Presidential Council for the promotion

of civil institutions and human rights have demonstrated that Russia's

civic institutions are ready for fruitful and constructive cooperation

with the government authorities responsible for formulation and

implementation of government policies aiming to protect children's

interests, including the activities to combat children iieglecl and

homelessiiess-. However, as ol today the Russian Federation government

and competent authorities haven't even responded to the comments

made by a group of civic society experts'. The work on the final

version of the Plan has not been started and no clear interaction procedures

have been proposed to the NGOs that, acting in the children's

interests, had submitted their proposals on amendments to the

National Action Plan. The interaction is to be organized by newlyestablished

coordination bodies. I lowever, in reality this is not always

the case. For example, the Coordination Council for prevention of children

neglect and homelessiiess set up at the Russian Federation

Health Care and Social Development Ministry refused to perform

coordinating functions in the finalizing of the National Action Plan for

11Ю protection of children until 201 0 despite the authority delegated to

it by a ministerial decree1.