Resources search

I am EmployAble walks the reader through the process of vocational training – from enrolment to training to employment – and provides tips based on experience, anecdotes and tools to inspire and support those working with and for disability inclusive technical and vocational training institutes.

The specific aim of this programme was to contribute to quality vocational training for young people with disabilities in Kenya, Rwanda and Ethiopia and create lasting linkages between technical and vocational training institutes and the labour market, thus facilitating decent and sustainable wage or selfemployment for young people with disabilities. This meant not just targeting the young people with disabilities themselves but also local training institutes and private sector actors, in order to work for systemic change.

The 2030 Agenda pledges to foster shared responsibility, recognizes all as crucial enablers of sustainable development, and calls for the mobilization of all available resources. It also commits to multi-stakeholder partnerships and pledges to be open, inclusive, participatory and transparent in its follow-up and review. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) equitably involves community members, organizational representatives and researchers, enabling them to share power and resources through drawing on the unique strengths that each partner brings. It aims to integrate any increased knowledge and understanding into action, policy and social change to improve the health and quality of life of community members. CBPR involves recruiting community or peer researchers, involving them in planning and offering them training to undertake interviews and observations in their context. They are also part of the analysis and dissemination process, and continue to work with local partners on advocacy plans and events after projects and research have finished. People with disabilities are actively part of the research process throughout. Drawing on relevant literature and current CBPR disability research in East and West Africa, this paper puts forward CBPR as a methodology that can enable community members to identify key barriers to achieving the SDGs, and inform how policy and programmes can be altered to best meet the needs of people with disabilities. It demonstrates CBPR in practice and discusses the successes and complexities of implementing this approach in relation to the SDGs. The paper also highlights findings such as the high level of support needed for community research teams as they collect data and formally disseminate it, the honest raw data from peer to peer interaction, a deep level of local ownership at advocacy level, emerging issues surrounding meaningfully involving community researchers in analysis, and power differentials. A key conclusion is that to join partners with diverse expertise requires much planning, diplomacy, and critical, reflexive thought, while emphasising the necessity of generating local ownership of findings and the translation of knowledge into a catalyst for disability-related policy change.

Disability & the Global South (DGS), 2017, Vol. 4 No. 1

Purpose: This paper describes a three-year research project leading to the development of the CBR Monitoring Manual and Menu (MM&M). The MM&M is a practical toolkit that meets the needs of CBR managers and stakeholders, and is consistent with the philosophy of CBR and community- based disability-inclusive development. It is designed to produce meaningful and locally useful information and data, based on international data standards where possible, to enable aggregation at regional, national and international levels.

Methods: Five complementary workstreams of research were carried out from 2011 to 2014: 1) literature review and analysis; 2) participatory action research with CBR stakeholders; 3) analysis and refinement of validity of concepts andstructures; 4) consultation and review; and 5) synthesis of results. This article documents the method and key results of each of the five workstreams, and the lessons learned along the way.

Results: The MM&M is now freely available on-line at thttp://sydney.edu. au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/cbr-monitoring.shtml. Collaboration among members of the development team continues, chiefly via an on-line group to which new members have been welcomed.

Conclusion and Implications: At the time of writing, the MM&M is the only international monitoring product, known to the authors, that consciously sets out to reflect both a ‘bottom- up’ and ‘top-down’ perspective of monitoring information and data.To achieve this for a complex programme such as CBR, and to align with its principles, it was essential to use a multi-component and multi-stage strategy for tool development, involving a diverse multidisciplinary team including collaboration with CBR stakeholders.

A compendium of papers from various stakeholders setting out “established and maintained effective coordination mechanisms” for the high-level discussions on sustainable development and the post-2015 development agenda

High-level political forum on sustainable development, Convened under the auspices of the Economic and Social Council, 26 June-8 July 2015

E/HLPF/2015/2

Purpose: To study the role of traditional leaders (Sarakuna) who provide a form of social welfare for persons with disabilities in the Hausa society of Northern Nigeria. From the results of this study, lessons are derived for cooperation with Sarakuna in (emerging) Community Based Rehabilitation programmes.

Methods: A literature study was done using different (non-)electronic sources. In addition, 26 semi-structured interviews were conducted with different stakeholders (e.g., non-governmental organisations, disabled people’s organisations), and 8 focus group discussions were held with (leaders of) persons with a disability. Question-led analysis was utilised by considering 4 dimensions: rehabilitation outcomes, rehabilitation services, involvement of beneficiaries, and social acceptability.

Results: Not much literature is available on the role of traditional leadership in rehabilitation programmes and social welfare. Nevertheless, this study found indications that traditional leadership is still present in contemporary NorthernNigeria. Some Sarakuna improve the socio-economic position of persons with disabilities by functioning as mediators and by their ability to provide social insurance. Their cooperation with multiple stakeholders enables them to distribute food and clothes. Also, since they possess essential information, NGOs are helped to access the community of persons with disabilities. Sarakuna are in a position to promote the inclusion and rehabilitation of persons with disabilities, but often lack necessary skills and training; yet, Community Based Rehabilitation programmes often ignore them.

Conclusions and Implications: Community Based Rehabilitation programmes should take better note of social contexts and therefore should also work in the specific context of traditional leadership. In this way, rehabilitation programmes are more likely to meet the expectations of persons with disability.

An easy read introduction to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)​ which were adopted in September 2015 at the United Nations General Assembly

Purpose: This article examines community mobilisation in a model administrative division of the national community-based rehabilitation (CBR) programme in Sri Lanka.

Method: After comprehensively analysing local human resources related to the CBR programme at the study site, the focus of the study was on volunteers (n = 17), youth club members (n = 7), and local government officers from multiplesectors (n = 33). A semi-structured interview, focus group discussion and case information provided data, which was collected through social work practice in line with a previously developed one-year action plan. Narrative data was analysed using a qualitative procedure.

Results: The findings suggest that the local supporters, including people with disability, made a positive contribution to the CBR programme, and felt satisfied with the activities. Although the local resources and opportunities for people with disability are limited, the analysis points to the importance of coordination, attitudes, and mutual support rituals by villagers, in promoting community mobilisation.

Conclusions: Although it is an exploratory study with a limited sample of stakeholders at one study site in Sri Lanka, the study contributes to a growing body of literature that suggests the significance of community mobilisation in CBR. Future studies could explore some of the issues identified here, such as promotion of community-based inclusive development (CBID). However, since a limited sample of stakeholders was involved, findings can be generalised only to a similar context and setting.

Purpose: There is limited guidance available on the best ways to evaluate community-based rehabilitation (CBR) programmes. In this paper, we share lessons learned on suitable evaluation strategies for CBR through a South African programme evaluation.

Method: An empowerment evaluation of an early childhood development programme was conducted in April 2012. At the end of the field visit, parents, staff members and managers provided feedback anonymously about what they liked and disliked about the evaluation, and offered their suggestions. The principal investigator documented the evaluation process in a journal, recording the barriers and facilitators encountered, the participation of the 3 groups and the effectiveness of the different strategies used. The data analysis followed the principles of grounded theory.

Results: The main lessons learned about CBR programme evaluation are associated with strategies to: 1) foster active participation, 2) collect accurate and credible information, 3) build local capacity, and 4) foster sustainable partnerships. Time spent to promote a positive learning spirit and the use of participatory tools with all groups appeared critical to active engagement in evaluation activities. Sharing tools and experiences in context built more local capacity than was achieved through a formal workshop. The findings also highlight that a flexible model, multiple data collection methods, and involvement of all relevant stakeholders maximise the information gathered. Sensitivity to the impact of culture and to the reactions generated by the evaluation, along with ongoing clarifications with local partners, emerged as core components of sustainable partnerships.

Conclusion: CBR evaluators must use a variety of strategies to facilitate active engagement and build local capacity through the evaluation process. Many of the strategies identified relate to the way in which evaluators interact with local stakeholders to gain their trust, understand their perspectives, facilitate their contribution, and transfer knowledge. Further research is needed on how toconduct empowering CBR programme evaluations.