Resources search

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 briefing note provides guidance on how to incorporate disability inclusion within economic and governance reform projects. It is intended to inform the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s (FCDO) Good Governance Fund (GGF). This Note provides basic, introductory guidance on disability inclusion to FCDO advisers and managers engaging with economic and governance reform and sets out opportunities for the FCDO’s programmes and policy dialogue to deliver positive impacts for people with disabilities. The Note addresses three key questions: 2 1. What is the broad status of the rights of people with disabilities in GGF countries and are there any significant differences between the countries? 2. What are the recommended entry points for incorporating disability inclusion within economic and governance reform projects within the five GGF thematic areas? 3. How should the GGF incorporate disability inclusion into the next business case?

An annex provides short notes on several factors for each country. The factors are: the legal framework; disability prevalence; economic inclusion; social inclusion; institutionialisation; access to justice; receptions and representation in the media.

Ireland has a distinct and complex history regarding the education of persons with special educational needs (SEN) and in its approach to inclusion. Special and general education largely developed in parallel and separately. As recently as the 1990s, legal actions by parents seeking educational rights for children with severe disabilities prompted appropriate provision for these students and a shift towards inclusive schools. The Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs (EPSEN) Act set out important changes – although not all implemented – followed by a series of changes in resource allocation, culminating in the removal of the requirement for students to be diagnosed in order to access supports. International evidence suggests that resource allocation based on learners’ profile and SEN diagnosis have been linked to the overidentification of SEN students. Ability to pay for private assessments has also been shown to exacerbate inequality in Ireland and beyond. We examine how Ireland's policy changes are impacting on schools and students, drawing on emerging evidence. We consider concerns over the adequacy of teacher professional development, the intended and potentially unintended consequences from a process of ‘domestication’ at the school level and ultimately whether the changes are accompanied by sufficient and appropriate accountability measures.

This report presents research that was undertaken as part of Development Initiatives’ work on data to support disability inclusion. It provides analysis of government budget allocations to disability inclusion programmes in Kenya over the period of financial year 2016/17 (FY2016/17) to financial year 2020/21 (FY2020/21). The analysis focuses on disability-relevant ministries, departments and agencies at the national level, including those led by the State Department for Social Protection, the Office of the President, the State Department for Early Learning and Basic Education, and the State Department for Vocational and Technical Training. Due to limitations in the available data, the analysis looks primarily at the education and social protection sectors.

This report has been funded with UK aid from the UK government, and was developed with the support of the Inclusive Futures consortium. The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the UK government or other members of the Inclusive Futures consortium.

Background: The manner in which disability is understood influences how individuals within a society, its institutions, policies and structures are able to accommodate and support people with disabilities (PWD) (Kaplan 2000). Understanding how students with disabilities (SWD) within a higher education context perceive and experience disability as well as how key players, namely, lecturers and disability unit (DU) staff, who influence that experience, is important in further shaping policy and providing a truly inclusive environment for all within HEIs.

Objectives: The study aimed to examine the narratives of disability among SWD, lecturers and the DU within a tertiary institution, with a view to better understand their experiences and required initiatives to address the challenges of disability within a higher tertiary institution.

Method: The study drew on three theoretical frameworks: social constructionism, feminist disability theory and the Foucauldian perspective. Data for the study were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 12 SWD, seven members of staff from the institution’s DU and five lecturers from within the School of Applied Human Sciences. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: The findings suggested that in spite of both facilitating and positive representations of disability, the dominant representation of disability was perceived as challenging and as a result, disempowering. Students with disabilities were found to adapt, and consequently modify their behaviour by disassociating from their disability in order to fit in.

Conclusion: The study highlights the need for creating spaces and engagement within an HEI context that both challenge negative discourses of disability, and at the same time, promote positive representations of disability.

African Journal of Disability, Vol 9, 2020

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation for persons with disabilities in Nigeria?”. It has been prepared for the Disability Inclusive Development programme (which works on access to education, jobs, healthcare, and reduced stigma and discrimination for persons with disabilities in Bangladesh, Jordan, Kenya, Nepal, Nigeria, and Tanzania), to better understand the current context, including COVID-19, and available evidence in Nigeria. It will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion in Nigeria, especially in relation to stigma, employment, education, health, and humanitarian issues.

Purpose: 

The aim of this study was to identify factors that influence the perceived stigma of two assistive devices for visual impairment, namely the white cane and smart glasses.

Method: 

Face-to-face semi-structured interviews with eight European students were conducted to probe their experiences and knowledge related to disability, assistive technology, visual impairment, as well as handheld and wearable devices.

Results: 

Close relationships with disabled people seems to have a positive influence on participants perceptions about stigma, disability, and assistive technology. Academic background seems to not have any influence. The aesthetics of assistive devices was observed as an important factor that influences the adoption or abandonment of the device.

Conclusion: 

Device without negative symbolism but with modern aesthetics (smart glasses) were positively accepted by the participants than the device with traditional aesthetics and symbolisms of visual impairment (white cane). Designers should, therefore, consider aesthetics in addition to functionality in order to avoid the perceived stigma, thereby reducing the chances of device abandonment.

Diversity is a current buzzword in politics, but in the EU, people with disabilities are not achieving the gains made by women and ethnic minorities. This research examined barriers and facilitating factors through a literature review and interviews with politicians and political activists in five European countries. Six categories of barriers and facilitating factors were found: networks, recruitment and mentoring, resources (money, time and energy), the “hierarchy of impairments,” accessibility of political spaces and activities, and laws and policies. Key recommendations include removing access barriers to political participation, from voting to holding office, including physical and procedural barriers in political spaces; ensuring that equalities legislation covers politicians; eliminating barriers imposed by benefits systems; promoting direct support for political activists, candidates and office-holders with disabilities, including access to necessary services and supports; encouraging parties to recruit and mentor disabled people with leadership potential; and considering quotas and job-sharing.

• Not many disabled people are active in politics. In the EU, about 15% of people have an impairment, but only around 1% of politicians do.
• Inclusion at school and in social groups makes it easier to get into political jobs or to try to get elected.
• Some disabled political activists, volunteers, candidates and office-holders don’t get the support they need.
• Political parties can help by finding disabled people, supporting them, and helping them get involved in politics.
• Our article provides several ideas about how to make it easier for disabled people to run for office and work in politics.

The COVID pandemic continues to escalate across the world, this document has been prepared to;

• Provide some top-line advocacy messages that can be used for advocacy and communications,
• Give a few questions example that you can ask yourself/or other stakeholders to check how people with disabilities are being included,
• Provide key resources for further reading. We recognise the importance of safe, evidence-based messages, and stand by the advice of the World Health Organisation on health-related issues, of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee on international coordination, and of the International Disability Alliance on inclusion of people with disabilities in the COVID-19 response.