Resources search

A yearly update providing data from 160 countries around the world on the state of leprosy. The data will be useful to policy-makers, planners and researchers. 

The main leprosy indicators are now all based on a denominator of 1 million population. The key indicators are the case detection rate, the disability rate and the case detection rate in children.

The sub-title, “Time to step-up prevention initiatives” is the main focus of the Editorial comment on the last 3 pages, emphasizing the Triple Zero targets

Weekly Epidemiological Record  4 SEPTEMBER 2020, 95th YEAR No 36, 2020, 95, 417–440

The global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) measures the complexities of poor people’s lives, individually and collectively, each year. This report focuses on how multidimensional poverty has declined. It provides a comprehensive picture of global trends in multidimensional poverty, covering 5 billion people. It probes patterns between and within countries and by indicator, showcasing different ways of making progress. Together with data on the $1.90 a day poverty rate, the trends monitor global poverty in different forms.

The COVID-19 pandemic unfolded in the midst of this analysis. While data are not yet available to measure the rise of global poverty after the pandemic, simulations based on different scenarios suggest that, if unaddressed, progress across 70 developing countries could be set back 3–10 years.

It is 10 years before 2030, the due date of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), whose first goal is to end poverty in all its forms everywhere. The MPI provides a comprehensive and in-depth picture of global poverty – in all its dimensions – and monitors progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 1 – to end poverty in all its forms. It also provides policymakers with the data to respond to the call of Target 1.2, which is to ‘reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women, and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definition'. By detailing the connections between the MPI and other poverty-related SDGs, the report highlights how the lives of multidimensionally poor people are precarious in ways that extend beyond the MPI’s 10 component indicators.

The data is not disaggregated by people with disabilities.

This briefing looks at the most recent trends in aid data (the OECD DAC’s (Development Aid Committee) release of provisional aid data for 2019) and considers what impacts the pandemic may have.

This guideline is intended to be a tool for Organisations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs) and their allies on how to advocate for the rights of persons with disabilities within the global development framework known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The thematic focus of this guideline is on an adequate standard of living and social protection.

The guideline has three main parts:

• Introduction and overview
• Assessment tool to evaluate where your country or sub-national region is in terms of implementation of CRPD Article 28
• Advocacy strategies to support implementation of CRPD Article 28 within the SDGs

The guideline also includes Annexes with further tools, resources and good practice case studies

This first accountability report, one year on from the Global Disability Summit 2018, presents independent analysis of the 171 sets of commitments made by governments and organisations at the Summit. It also sets out the results of a self-reporting survey completed by Summit participants, updating on progress made against their commitments so far.

The wider impact of the summit is discussed.

The results of the first GDS18 self-reporting survey demonstrate that significant progress has been made on implementation of the 968 Summit commitments. Work is reported to be underway on 74% of the commitments and 10% are reported as already completed, contributing towards an improved and increased visibility of disability inclusion within development and humanitarian action.

Appendix 2 gives country level case studies: Case study developed by Users and Survivors of Psychiatry Kenya; Case Study developed by the National Federation of the Disabled Nepal (NFDN); and Case Study developed by I Am a Human, Jordan

Humanity & Inclusion has created a learning toolkit to improve the collection of quality data on persons with disabilities and improve its use by humanitarian organisations.

Until now, existing guidance on the Washington Group Questions (WGQs) has been specific to national data collection efforts on persons with disabilities. To address the lack of guidance for humanitarian actors, Humanity & Inclusion (HI) is launching a learning toolkit on collecting data in humanitarian action, which includes an e-learning, a training pack for enumerators and various supporting resources that can all be found on the HI website.

Gathering evidence on the use of the WGQs in humanitarian action:

To respond to the need to collect, analyse and use data on persons with disabilities in humanitarian action, HI has been implementing a project, funded by the UK Department for International Development, to test and assess the use of the WGQs in humanitarian action. An action-research was carried out with over 30 humanitarian partners in Jordan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Philippines, with the evidence used to develop learning materials.

Development of a learning toolkit for humanitarian actors:

In addition to the findings of the action-research, HI gathered inputs from over 30 humanitarian organisations working in 22 countries to inform the design of the learning toolkit. Specific focus was given to the development of open source materials that would be accessible with screen readers, on mobile phones, and in hard to reach locations. The content was then informed by selected subject matter experts in inclusive humanitarian action and data collection.

What is included in the toolkit?

An e-learning on Collecting Data for the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action – The Application of the WGQs providing an entry point for humanitarian actors who would like to understand how to plan for and use the WGQs.

A Training Pack for enumerators giving guidance, session plans and activities to deliver training on using the WGQs (developed in collaboration with RedR UK).

Supporting resources providing practical guidance on the application of the WGQs in humanitarian contexts.

Who is this for?

The toolkit is tailored to a full range of humanitarian actors who would like to understand how to use the WGQs in their own work and organisations. The content has also been designed to provide technical guidance for programme and technical staff: with a practical focus on different topics relevant for the use of the WGQs –from the human rights based approach that underpins them, to their planning, use and the analysis of the data produced.

Where is the Toolkit available?

The e-learning is available now on disasterready.com and on Kayaconnect.org (accessible for mobile phones and tablets). Organisations interested in hosting the e-learning are welcome to contact the project team members. Toolkit resources and more information about the project are available for download in the project webpage.

The Washington Group Questions on Disability are rapidly emerging as the preferred data collection methodology by the global community for national data collection efforts on disability. However, more and more development and humanitarian actors are now using the methodology in their own data collection efforts. This is beyond the original purpose of the questions, which was to generate usable data for governments. Leonard Cheshire and Humanity & Inclusion, two international charities focussed on disability and inclusion, have worked together to share learnings of recent research studies. These studies aim to understand how the Washington Group Questions (WGQ) have been used by development and humanitarian actors and the impact of using the methodology. This summary report outlines the key findings, analysis and conclusions about the application of the Washington Group Questions in a range of contexts. The report concludes with a number of recommendations for different stakeholders.

In light of the importance of disability data collection and the disaggregation of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) outcome indicators by disability status, the Washington Group on Disability Statistics (WG) undertook an exercise to review, among WG member countries, the extent to which data on SDG indicators currently available can be disaggregated by disability status. Requests for disaggregated SDG data for 13 selected indicators were sent to 146 member countries. 48 countries responded and 39 provided data. Response data is tabulated and discussed.

The studies included in this Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) are taken from the Disability Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) prepared by the Campbell Collaboration for the UK Department for International Development (DFID) under the auspices of the Centre for Excellence for Development Impact and Learning (CEDIL). Eligible studies included systematic reviews and impact evaluations published in English from 2000 onwards that assessed the effectiveness of interventions for people with disabilities in LMICs. Qualitative studies, process evaluations, and non-impact evaluations (e.g. crosssectional surveys) were not eligible for inclusion. Quality grading was applied to the literature, so that assessment could be made of where there was strong evidence and where evidence was limited or missing. The studies were grouped by education sub-outcomes related to different stages in education across the life course; that is: early intervention, primary education, secondary education, non-formal education, and lifelong learning. 

There were 24 eligible individual studies, including studies conducted in the Middle East (10), Asia (7), and Africa (5), one from Latin America, as well as one multicountry study