Resources search

The 2020 GEM Report assesses progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4) on education and its ten targets, as well as other related education targets in the SDG agenda. The Report also addresses inclusion in education, drawing attention to all those excluded from education, because of background or ability. The Report is motivated by the explicit reference to inclusion in the 2015 Incheon Declaration, and the call to ensure an inclusive and equitable quality education in the formulation of SDG 4, the global goal for education. It reminds us that, no matter what argument may be built to the contrary, we have a moral imperative to ensure every child has a right to an appropriate education of high quality.

The Report also explores the challenges holding us back from achieving this vision and demonstrates concrete policy examples from countries managing to tackle them with success. These include differing understandings of the word inclusion, lack of teacher support, absence of data on those excluded from education, inappropriate infrastructure, persistence of parallel systems and special schools, lack of political will and community support, untargeted finance, uncoordinated governance, multiple but inconsistent laws, and policies that are not being followed through.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation in relation to formal sector employment for persons with disabilities in Kenya?”. It has been prepared for the Inclusion Works programme (which works on disability inclusive formal employment in Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda), to better understand the current context and available evidence in Kenya, and will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion, especially in relation to employment, in Kenya. It focuses on persons with disabilities, employers, policy, the disability movement, and partnerships. This SITAN has been briefly updated from the June 2019 SITAN.

The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the UK government or members of the Inclusion Works consortium.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation in relation to formal sector employment for persons with disabilities in Nigeria?”. It has been prepared for the Inclusion Works programme (which works on disability inclusive formal employment in Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda), to better understand the current context and available evidence in Nigeria, and will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion, especially in relation to employment. It focuses on persons with disabilities, employers, policy, the disability movement, and partnerships.

The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the UK government or members of the Inclusion Works consortium.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation for persons with disabilities in Nepal?”. 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 Nepal. It will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion in Nepal, especially in relation to stigma, employment, education, health, and humanitarian issues. This SITAN has been briefly updated from the April 2019 SITAN.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation for persons with disabilities in Bangladesh?”. 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 Bangladesh. It will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion in Bangladesh, especially in relation to stigma, employment, education, health, and humanitarian issues.

This guidance aims to give humanitarian actors a guidance for developing their accountability mechanisms in the context of mixed migration, with a focus on complaints and feedback mechanisms. Excellent guidance already exists on how to implement feedback and complaint mechanisms in humanitarian contexts, and this is not intended to replace or duplicate those. It should be read as a supplement, to provide additional reflection for humanitarian actors working in migration contexts.

The development of this guidance was based on a review of existing literature, including research studies, guidelines and training materials. More than 30 interviews were conducted with representatives of more than 20 organisations working in Africa, the Americas, the Middle East and Europe. Particular support was received from Start Network’s MERF member organisations.

This Campbell systematic review and meta-analysis examines the impact of multifaceted interventions on community participation outcomes for adults with disabilities, and aims to find effective components of the interventions. The review summarizes the findings from 15 reports of multifaceted interventions in five countries (USA, China, Germany, Italy, Australia) with the majority from USA (10).

Included studies employ at least two interventions designed to address two or more participant characteristics (e.g., skill enhancement, behavior/attitude change) and/or environmental characteristics (e.g., participant interactions with people, places, or things) resulting in outcomes that provide direct access to the community (e.g., competitive employment, adult learning, housing) or are a dimension of community participation (e.g., self-determination, quality of life, social networking).

A total of 15 studies using a multifaceted intervention were included in this review. Of these, nine were randomized and six were quasi-experimental. Study participants were adults, 18 years or older, with a disability, who had exited secondary school services. Participants identified as having the following disabilities: intellectual disability, mental illness, traumatic brain injury, aging-related disabilities (e.g., dementia, Alzheimer’s, reduction in activities of daily living), or combinations of two or more classifications.

Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2020;16:e1092.

https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1092

Summaries on the findings from the following queries:

Is there evidence that suggests children with disabilities are more/less vulnerable to child marriage than children without disabilities? If yes, what are the driving factors for this?

What are some of the evidence-based interventions we could think about to ensure that children with disabilities affected by child marriage are not left behind? How can we better mainstream disability inclusion in the programme? 

The principal aim of this COVID-19 Blog series is to inspire and support the international community to identify, prioritise and respond to the needs of the most vulnerable individuals and nations as part of both the immediate humanitarian response and long-term recovery planning

Blogs include:

• Recommendations for a disability-inclusive response to COVID-19 (Print and Audio)
• Why people with disabilities are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 (Print and Audio)