Resources search

This Labour Market Assessment for Bangladesh is a refresh of the initial assessments done in 2019 for the Inclusion Works programme. The assessment adopts a Markets for Poor (M4P) approach to mapping demand for and supply of labour, supporting functions and regulatory frameworks; recognising that labour markets conditions will have evolved since 2019, especially in light of COVID-19. The perspectives of jobseekers, employers, and organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) are also included in this analysis. The report provides insights into market changes and recommendations to enable Inclusion Works programming to adapt and be more effective in their interventions.

This Labour Market Assessment for Nigeria is a refresh of the initial assessments done in 2019 for the Inclusion Works programme. The assessment adopts a Markets for Poor (M4P) approach to mapping demand for and supply of labour, supporting functions and regulatory frameworks; recognising that labour markets conditions will have evolved since 2019, especially in light of COVID-19. The perspectives of jobseekers, employers, and organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) are also included in this analysis. The report provides insights into market changes and recommendations to enable Inclusion Works programming to adapt and be more effective in their interventions.

Disability Inclusion Helpdesk evidence digest highlights the latest evidence, guidance, and programme learning on inclusive education. Within it you’ll also find the latest evidence, guidance and policy news on a range of other disability inclusion topics including stigma, discrimination, and violence; poverty, social protection, and employment; inclusive health systems; and disability inclusion in humanitarian settings.

Joint submission on promoting and protecting the human rights of women and girls in conflict and post-conflict situations on the occasion of the twentieth anniversary of Security Council resolution 1325 by Humanity & Inclusion, Human Rights Watch, International Disability Alliance, Women Enabled International and the Women’s Refugee Commission.

This submission sets out information and recommendations on promoting and protecting the human rights of women and girls with disabilities in conflict and post-conflict situations. Women and girls with disabilities are disproportionately impacted by armed conflicts, yet remain underreported and excluded from peace and security processes. Women and girls with disabilities account for nearly one-fifth of all women and girls worldwide and face multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination based on their gender, as well as their disability. Sustainable peace, recovery and inclusive humanitarian action requires the full, equal and meaningful participation of diverse women, including women and girls with disabilities. The Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, in its report, should request member states, the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms, as well as other stakeholders to ensure that monitoring and reporting on the experiences of women and girls in conflicts includes the specific experiences of women and girls with disabilities, and ensure their meaningful participation in conflict prevention, response, peacekeeping and peacebuilding.

Persons with disabilities are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, both directly because of infection, and indirectly because of restrictions to reduce the spread of the virus. Persons with disabilities are a diverse group, and the risks, barriers and impacts faced by them will vary in different contexts according to, among other factors, their age, gender identity, type of disability, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and migration status.

This document presents considerations and actions for the following stakeholders to ensure equity in access to vaccination against COVID‑19 for persons with disabilities:

− Persons with disabilities and their support networks

− Governments

− Health service providers delivering vaccinations

− Organizations of persons with disabilities

− Disability service providers

− Residential institutions and long-term care facilities

− Community

Inclusive education offers a variety of potential academic and social benefits for all students; with as well as without disabilities. However, a common concern among the non-disabled population is the potential negative impacts the inclusion of students with disabilities might have on their non-disabled classmates.  These negative beliefs and attitudes by parents and teachers can translate into a lack of implementation of inclusive education. There is substantial evidence for the benefits of inclusion for students with disabilities, however, there is very little evidence on the impact it has on non-disabled students, particularly in LMICs compared to HICs. This evidence brief explores evidence-based recommendations on the benefits of inclusive education for children without disabilities and how this issue shapes inclusive education implementation in LMICs.

Health system strengthening refers to initiatives that improve one or more functions of health systems, leading to better health. There is a large body of evidence on what works to strengthen health systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), much of which is aligned to the World Health Organization (WHO) health system building blocks (service delivery; health workforce; information; medical products, vaccines and technologies; financing; and leadership/governance). Despite the fact that some people with disabilities have additional health needs, and many face additional barriers to accessing healthcare, inclusion of people with disabilities is largely missing from this evidence base. Separately, a smaller evidence base exists on increasing the effectiveness of specific health-related services targeting people with disabilities, such as health-related Community Based Rehabilitation (CBR), rehabilitation services more broadly, and mental health services. This second evidence base is less closely aligned to the building blocks. Reviewing these outputs in parallel goes some way towards identifying effective strategies for strengthening health systems for disability inclusive development.

Findings from this report show evidence that some persons with disabilities face multiple types of jeopardy during Covid-19: they are at an increased risk of violence and are suffering a dramatic loss in household earnings. They are also taking action: many plan to adapt their livelihood and are mobilising resources for their communities. Persons with disabilities ask government and NGOs to do more and to be more inclusive in their response to the crisis.

● Three of four respondents report increased risk of violence since the pandemic began. 77% of women and 80% of men report an increase in economic, physical, psychological and/or sexual violence after Covid-19.

● One in three women respondents report experiencing an increased risk of physical and/or sexual violence.

● Livelihood support could reduce violence risk. Three in four (76%) of respondents say livelihood support, such as start up capital for small business, would be very or extremely useful to them in order to reduce their risk of experiencing violence during Covid-19.

● Respondents report losing 64% of their monthly household income since the outbreak. After adjusting for purchase power parity, this is the equivalent of falling from 181 GBP to 65 GBP per month.

● Covid-19 support is unequal and insufficient for many. Where support has been distributed, one in two report that they do not receive the same protection support (ie PPE) as others; one in four report that they do not receive the same Covid-19 survival support (ie food); one in three report they do not receive the same Covid-19 information; and one in three say that support does not meet need.

● Most respondents will try something new. 59% indicate that they will start something new to make ends meet if the situation continues.

● OPDs are obtaining food support through lobbying, providing vital psychosocial support and information.

● Some OPDs are not able to respond because they are capacity-constrained.

● Government and NGOs can do more.


From these interviews and findings, some recommendations emerge for government and NGOs:

● Support livelihood to reduce violence risk and increase survival strategies.

● Increase access to capital.

● Meaningfully engage persons with disabilities and their respective organisations in response planning and implementation.

● Ensure distribution of support reaches persons with disabilities, more specifically the underrepresented groups.

● Change attitudes toward and increase knowledge about persons with disabilities.

There is growing evidence that COVID-19 is disproportionally impacting the lives of people with disabilities. This includes evidence of the increased risk of severe outcomes of contracting COVID-19 amongst people with existing health conditions, including many people with disabilities. It also includes a wide range of other potential impacts such as: reductions or disruptions in non-COVID-19 health or rehabilitation services, the effects of shielding on isolation and mental health, the implications of social distancing on people who require carer support, and the impact on poverty, participation and wellbeing due to disrupted disability-inclusive development programmes.

Measurement of disability in research has historically been contested and a number of different tools exist. Clear guidance is needed on how to determine which tool to use to understand the situation of people with disabilities in different settings, and plan responsive and inclusive COVID-19 programmes and policies to support their needs. Good quality, comparable data on disability is essential for tracking the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as prevention and mitigation interventions, amongst people with disabilities. Such evidence is also imperative for tracking progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals, and UNCRPD compliance.

This evidence brief synthesises findings from a scoping review of ICF-compatible tools to measure disability in population-based surveys with a focus on LMICs (2018), protocols and research outputs from seven population-based surveys of disability across Asia, Africa and the Pacific, secondary analyses of the South African Census, US National Health Interview Survey and three Demographic and Health Surveys, reflections from global stakeholders in disability measurement (including the UN Flagship Report on Disability), and evidence compiled for the upcoming Global Disability Research Massive Open Online Course at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine