This report from Inclusion International analyzes data available through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC)’s Creditor Reporting System (CRS), which reveals that mainstream development projects fail to include people with intellectual disabilities, and in many cases use project methodologies that promote segregation and other human rights violations.
Analysis of ODA data from 2014 to 2018 found that 99.98% of ODA funding did not include people with intellectual disabilities, that 36% of the ODA projects that did include people with intellectual disabilities were not CRPD-compliant, and that only 2% of aid relevant to people with intellectual disabilities and their families was delivered through OPDs.
This report urges action from donors to ensure that the commitment to disability-inclusive development under Article 32 of the CRPD is also fulfilled for people with intellectual disabilities, and sets out recommendations for funders to ensure CRPD-compliance and inclusion in the projects they support.
This two-page summary resource compiles key data on the CRPD-compliance of Official Development Assistance (ODA)-funded programmes. This analysis was originally published in Inclusion International's 2020 report, Excluded from the Excluded, which revealed that 36% of projects that included people with intellectual disabilities in 2018 used methodologies that promoted segregation.
This summary resource profiles key data on the CRPD compliance of ODA-funded programme methodologies by thematic area - including livelihoods, education, emergency response, and service provision programmes. The summary resource also shares key recommendations for organizations implementing programmes to ensure CRPD-compliance.
This one-page factsheet presents key data from Inclusion International's 2020 report "Excluded from the Excluded," which revealed that people with intellectual disabilities are excluded from 99.98% of Official Development Assistance (ODA)-funded programmes. The factsheet also shares key recommendations for funders to ensure that no one is left behind by ODA funding.
This study explored how participation constitutes and is constituted by practices of power in group homes for people with intellectual disability. The study used disciplinary power as theoretical perspective and was based on 50 h of observation in two group homes with a total of 15 residents. The analysis identifies practices of power and their relationship to individual agency and participation. The results show that institutional structures construct practices of power that define codes of conduct for the group home residents and their possibility for participation. This study offers implications for the daily lives of residents in group homes for people with intellectual disability.
This paper discusses a case study of a Dutch work-integration social enterprise (WISE) to add to the debate on the contribution of employment to the citizenship of intellectually disabled people and those experiencing mental health conditions. In current welfare state policies, the value of labour market participation is narrowed down to regular employment, as workplace support and care provisions are seen as stigmatising and segregating. We argue that a more nuanced understanding is needed of the intersection of support arrangements with the benefits of employment. Building on ‘recognition theory’ by the German philosopher Honneth, our findings show that the work-integration social enterprise under study is successfully balancing the contrasting demands of logics of care and work, leading to experiences of ‘recognition.’ However, this balance is fragile and does not undo the misrecognition of disabled people as unable to live up to the productivity norms of a capitalist labour market.
This paper draws on feminist and queer philosophers? discussions of precarity and employment, too often absent from disability studies, to explore the working lives of people with learning disabilities in England in a time of austerity. Recent policy shifts from welfare to work welcome more disabled people into the job market. The reality is that disabled people remain under-represented in labour statistics and are conspicuously absent in cultures of work. We live in neoliberal- able times where we all find ourselves precarious. But, people with learning disabilities experience high levels of uncertainty in every aspect of their lives, including work, relationships and community living. Our research reveals an important analytical finding: that when people with learning disabilities are supported in imaginative and novel ways they are able to work effectively and cohesively participate in their local communities (even in a time of cuts to welfare). We conclude by acknowledging that we are witnessing a global politics of precarity and austerity. Our urgent task is to redress the unequal spread of precaritization across our society that risks leaving people with learning disabilities experiencing disproportionately perilous lives. One of our key recommendations is that it makes no economic sense (never mind moral sense) to pull funding from organisations that support people with intellectual disabilities to work.