Resources search

Ce Livret de Formation sur « l’approche personnalisée - centrée sur la personne » à destination des professionnel-le-s des services sociaux est le produit d’une formation réalisée par Humanité & Inclusion (nouveau nom de Handicap International - HI) en Algérie, dans le cadre du projet « L’éducation des enfants en situation de handicap au cœur des dynamiques de développement territorial au Maghreb ». Cette formation avait pour objectif de renforcer les capacités du personnel de la Direction de l’Action Sociale de la Solidarité de la ville d’Oran à accueillir et accompagner les personnes handicapées. Ce livret propose de questionner les postures et la qualité de la relation entre un professionnel de service social et un usager, et ce dans un objectif d’autonomisation de la personne accompagnée. Elle permet aussi une introduction au processus d’accompagnement social personnalisé. Il se compose d’une fiche pédagogique, d’un agenda détaillé et son contenu qualitatif, avec des propositions d’animations et des outils nécessaires à l’animation de cette formation.

The Pacific Disability Forum (PDF), in partnership with the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Task Team on Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action and the International Disability Alliance (co-chair of the Task Team), held a regional multi-stakeholder consultation for the Pacific in Nadi, Fiji from 24 – 25 January 2018.

The workshop was the first in a series of regional consultations which will support the development of the IASC Guidelines on Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action (“the Guidelines”). 

The Guidelines will assist humanitarian actors, governments, affected communities and organizations of persons with disabilities to coordinate, plan, implement, monitor and evaluate essential actions that foster the effectiveness, appropriateness and efficiency of humanitarian action, resulting in the full and effective participation and inclusion of persons with disabilities and changing practice across all sectors and in all phases of humanitarian action. 

Background: People with disabilities are at increased risk of poverty, particularly in low-and middle-income countries. However, recent evidence suggests that this association is more nuanced than previously anticipated and that we need better data to understand the opportunity and out-of-pocket costs that diverse groups of people with disabilities may experience.

Objective: This paper discusses if disability is associated with opportunity cost and loss of income both on the individual and household level in South Africa, and if these costs differ depending on disability type and severity.

Methods: For this purpose, the paper analyses General Household Survey 2011 data (people between 15 and 59) using descriptive statistics disaggregated via disability type and severity. The paper also assesses if social grants counteract these costs and reduce economic vulnerability.

Results: The analysis of the data reveals that people with disabilities are affected by issues relating to multidimensional poverty such as lower educational attainment and fewer employment opportunities. In addition, households of people with disabilities (with the exception of milder visual problems) earn significantly less than households without people with disabilities, and this particularly applies to households with people with severe disabilities. This vulnerability also varies by disability type. The country’s social protection mechanisms, in terms of social grants, counteract economic vulnerability to some extent but do not consider the nuanced economic impact of diverse conditions nor the increased out-of-pocket costs related to disability.

Conclusions: This calls for more equitable social protection mechanisms that include accessible services, livelihood programmes and disability benefits.

Contemporary debates in international development discourse are concerned with the non‐tokenistic inclusion and participation of marginalized groups in the policy‐making process in developing countries. This is directly relevant to disabled people in Africa, which is the focus of this article. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities delineates the principles of inclusion in society. Furthermore, the African Union (AU) plays a key role in advising its Member States about disability issues, and this advice should be reflected in disability‐inclusive policies. This article analyses nine policy or strategy documents produced by the AU, covering the policy domains of education, health, employment and social protection that are crucial to the inclusion of disabled people in international development. These were analysed according to seven discrete elements (rights, accessibility, inclusivity, implementation plans, budgetary allocations, enforcement mechanisms or disaggregated management information systems) using a rating scale of one to four, with four being the highest level of inclusion. The process (for example, level of consultation), the context (for example, the Sustainable Development Goals) and actors involved in the policy development were reviewed as far as was possible from the documents.

Dev Policy Rev. July 2017
https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12323

This publication intends to draw lessons learned from the set-up of a Social Work (SW) unit in the PRC in Kampong Cham province of Cambodia using the Personalized Social Support (PSS) process and provide an example of person-centered approach in rehabilitation service delivery, to be considered by PWDF and other rehabilitation I/NGOs and promoted within other PRCs in Cambodia. The specific objectives of this publication are: 

• To identify recruitment strategies and clinical activities conducted by the SW unit 
• To consider the capacity development of SW staff along the development of a SW unit
• To outline how SW and PSS are linked to the Cambodian Ministry of Social Affairs Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation Guidelines on Physical Rehabilitation in Cambodia4 (also known as the Standard Working Procedures -SWP) with reference to its application.
• To consider how SW interventions and PSS contributes to service users’ social participation and rights.

Capturing best practices through a ‘’lessons learnt’’ process can be utilized to advocate for the adoption and replication of such a model within wider rehabilitation services in Cambodia.

This publication was developed by a mixed methods approach on the basis of various sources and tools, including:

• Desk review including collection of documents and tools used by the SW unit, and field visit reports
• Workshops/meetings with the PRC Manager, PRC Unit heads and Focal Clients (FC) to gain reflections on the process and map a reverse pathway of change
• Key Informant interviews: Interviews with members of the project team and local authorities.
• Case study frames were designed and used as well as some questions from SCOPEO5 Quality of life linked to social and personal relationships during the interview. 
• Interviews with 15 beneficiaries (SW Clients at the PRC) to assess the impact of SW input over a 13 month period from June 2015 to July 2016

Employment rates amongst disabled people reveal one of the most significant inequalities in the UK today: less than half (48%) of disabled people are in employment compared to 80% of the non-disabled population. Despite a record-breaking labour market, 4.6 million disabled people and people with long-term health conditions are out of work leaving individuals, and some large parts of communities, disconnected from the benefits that work brings. People who are unemployed have higher rates of mortality and a lower quality of life. This green paper sets out the nature of the problem and why change is needed by employers, the welfare system, health and care providers, and all of us. Proposed solutions are set out  and views requested. (Consultation now closed)

04101608 10/16 

This note introduces the BRAC graduation model to address the needs of the poorest of the poor and  reflects on how this model can be used by HI in its present and future livelihood projects. 

There are an estimated one billion people with disabilities globally, corresponding to about 15 per cent of the world’s population (WHO 2011). Among them, 80 per cent of people with disabilities live in low- and middle-income countries. People with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments, which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others (UN 2008; WHO 2011). People with disabilities are often excluded from education, health, employment and other aspects of daily life, and are generally poorer. It is therefore widely argued that the Millennium Development Goals and the post-2015 targets cannot be achieved without integrating disability issues into the agenda. We conducted a systematic search for evidence on the effects of community-based rehabilitation (CBR) on health, education, livelihoods, social and empowerment outcomes. 

Community-based rehabilitation for people with disabilities, 3ie Systematic Review Summary 4, is a summary of the full review, Community-based rehabilitation for people with disabilities in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review, which is available with all of its appendixes on the 3ie website. 

The roads to inclusion tool has been developed by ENABLEMENT (the Netherlands) and LIGHT FOR THE WORLD on the basis of an action research programme carried out in Burkina Faso, Ethiopia and North East India. Communities in two sites of each country were asked to define what inclusion meant to them and those definitions were used as a basis for developing this tool. LIGHT FOR THE WORLD and ENABLEMENT hope this tool will support CBR teams in assessing communities’ progress in becoming more inclusive of persons with disabilities and planning activities to further the inclusion process. It promotes reflection on changes related to inclusion rather than judging projects on the impact of their work, and is thus not a tool for impact evaluation or comparing inclusion between different countries and cultures. The tool can be used in a variety of contexts. We recommend adjusting it to fit your organisation’s needs and seeing it as an inspiration on how it could be done, not as a prescription on how it should be done