This document provides a “Guidance Note” on the framework for Social Registries, anchoring the definition of these systems in their functions along the Delivery Chain and their social policy role as inclusion systems. It illustrates diverse typologies and trajectories of country experiences with Social Registries and develops a basic “Assessment Tool” covering the core building blocks of Social Registries using a “checklist” style of questions. Some key take-away messages include: (a) the importance of recognizing both the role of the “front lines” for outreach, intake and registration and the “back office” functions; (b) the potential power of Social Registries as integrated and dynamic gateways for inclusion; (c) the recognition that Social Registries are generally part of end-to-end systems; and (d) there is significant diversity in the typology and trajectories.
Key Insights
Social Registries Defined
Social Registries are information systems that support outreach, intake, registration, and determination of potential eligibility for one or more social programs. They have both a social policy role, as inclusion systems, and an operational role, as information systems. Their role in social policy is to provide a “gateway” for potential inclusion of intended populations into social programs.
Key Steps in Delivery Chain
Social Registries support the phases of outreach, intake & registration, and assessment of needs and conditions to determine potential eligibility for inclusion in selected social programs(s). These functions require structures and processes for citizen interface, for example via mobile teams, at local offices, or via digital service windows.
Role as Inclusion Systems
Social Registries provide a “gateway” for people (individuals, families) to register and be considered for potential inclusion in one or more social programs based on an assessment of their needs and conditions. That assessment usually takes into account measures of socio-economic status, categorical factors or a combination of both, which are often factors used by programs in prioritizing eligibility for benefits and services.
Institutional Arrangements
Institutional arrangements for managing and operating Social Registries at the central level vary significantly across countries. Several models are observed: (a) Social Registry hosted, managed, and operated by a “central social agency,” such as a social ministry; (b) Social Registry hosted and managed by central social agency, but implemented by separate “operating agency”; (c) Social Registry managed and operated by other central agency; and (d) Social Registry managed and operated by a specific social program, but serving other agencies
Dynamic Inclusion
Social Registries support dynamic inclusion, meaning that anyone can register into a Social Registry at any time. In other words, dynamic inclusion means that access to registration is open and continuous – usually with an on-demand application window for citizen interface – so that people can register for consideration of potential eligibility for social programs when in need, or update their information if their situations change.
Key Requirements
Key ingredients for Integrated Social Registries include inter-institutional coordination arrangements, common eligibility concepts and a shared intake questionnaire, and capabilities for information sharing and data exchange.
Architecture of Social Registries
The basic architecture of a Social Registry includes four elements: (a) information & data; (b) software applications, including the visual interface and business logic; (c) database management, and (d) ICT infrastructure.
Key Statistics & Data
- By 2012, over 22 million families had registered into Brazil’s Cadúnico (about 40% of the population).
- Brazil’s “Busca Activa” initiative registered more than one million additional extreme poor families into the Cadúnico over the span of a year.
- In the Philippines, Listahanan registration is carried out using en masse data collection efforts once every few years.
- In 2005, Turkey decreed that the administrative burden for collecting 17 different documents to apply for assistance would shift from the citizen to the government.
Methodology
This Working Paper was prepared by a team at the World Bank. The work is supported by a grant from the Rapid Social Response Fund (RSR; Task ID P154851). The paper also draws on experience in other countries (Kenya, Rwanda, Nigeria, Egypt, Jordan, Vietnam, India, Estonia, Belgium, the US, Canada, Australia, and others) to illustrate specific points. The study focuses primarily on the Social Registries in 20 countries, including: Azerbaijan, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Djibouti, Georgia, Indonesia, Macedonia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Montenegro, Pakistan, the Philippines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Turkey, and Yemen
Implications and Conclusions
The typology of Social Registries varies significantly across countries – and these systems are all evolving over time along diverse trajectories. The “starting points matter” and no single model would fit every country’s context, structures, capacities, and needs. Nonetheless, there are basic building blocks that are common across most Social Registries, and these can be assessed using a “checklist” style Assessment Tool found at the end of this paper. In the future, research could examine how the design of eligibility criteria could be influenced by improvements in capacities and technology used in Social Registries.
Key Points
- Social Registries are information systems supporting outreach, intake, registration, and determining potential eligibility for social programs.
- These registries function both as inclusion systems (social policy role) and operational information systems, offering a 'gateway' for the intended populations' potential inclusion.
- Integrated Social Registries serve as platforms supporting broad access to various benefits and services, beyond social assistance.
- Dynamic Social Registries ensure open and continuous access for registration, crucial for protecting the poor and vulnerable. Not all countries have this.
- Data, software, database management, and ICT infrastructure form the Social Registry architecture.
- The typology of Social Registries varies substantially, making a 'checklist' Assessment Tool essential for analyzing basic building blocks.
- Success relies on well-defined functions in the delivery chain and clear social policy roles for inclusion systems, information systems interoperability, and whole-of-government approaches.