Disability and Social Inclusion Workshop · REPORT OF THE DISABILITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION WORKSHOP...

REPORT OF THE DISABILITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION WORKSHOP

16 -17 of October and 23 - 24 of October 2015

REPORT OF THE DISABILITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION WORKSHOP 16 -17 of October and 23 - 24 of October 2015

2

Table of Contents

1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 4

2. Aim and Objectives………………………………………………………………….. 4

3. Venue and Participants……………………………………………………………. 5

4. Methodology……………………………………………………………………………. 6

5. Content and Proceedings…………………………………………………………. 5.1 Session #1 What is Disability? …………………………………………… 5.2 Session #2 Theory and Practices on Disability Inclusion…….. 5.3 Session #3 Theory and Practices Continued………………………. 5.4 Session #4 How to Deal with Persons with Disability…………. 5.5 Session #5 Disability Inclusive Development……………………… 5.6 Session #6 Disability related Human Rights and Gender……. 5.7 Session #7 Disability and health…………………………………………. 5.8 Session #8 Disability and health Continued………………………..

6 8 8 8

10 11 13 14 14

6. Pre-test and Post-test………………………………………………………………. 17

7. Participant Evaluations…………………………………………………………….. 19

8. Key Findings and Recommendations……………………………………….. 20

9. Annexes……………………………………………………………………………………. 9.1 Annexes #1 Workshop Agenda………………………………………….. 9.2 Annexes #2 Pre-test and Post-test Format…………………………

22 22 24

Reported by the Association of Myanmar Disabled Women Affairs


3

List of Acronyms 3MDG Three Millions Development Goal Fund AEI Accountability, Equity, Inclusion AEI&CS Accountability, Equity, Inclusion and Conflict Sensitivity AMDWA Association of Myanmar Disabled Women Affairs DID Disability Inclusive Development DPOs Disabled People Organization ICF International Classification of Functioning ICIDH International Classification of Impairment, Disability and Handicap IPs Implementing Partners PWDs Persons with Disabilities SHG Self-Help Group SL Sign Language UNCRPD United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities UNOPS United Nations Office for Project Services WHO World Health Organization

4

1. Introduction The 3MDG Fund accelerates progress towards the health Millennium Development Goals and Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in Myanmar. In partnership with the Ministry of Health (MoH), development and implementing partners, and community-based organizations, 3MDG will strengthen health systems at all levels and improve access to quality health services for poor and vulnerable populations. In particular, 3MDG work focuses on improving maternal and newborn child health, combating HIV and AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, and strengthening the health system using a rights-based approach. Through strategic investments, the Fund supports the country in achieving UHC by 2030 and ensures that every citizen shall have the right to essential health care. 3MDG contributes to better health for all through a responsible, fair and inclusive health sector in Myanmar. The Fund makes sure people in communities, including women, ethnic groups and people with disabilities will be provided with information to help them access health services. At the same time, health service organizations including 3MDG implementing partners will be supported to listen

to people’s voices and respond to them. The purpose is to improve health outcomes by addressing the social factors limiting access to health services. “Social Inclusion” is one of the “Health for All” principles to ensure the voices of all people are considered in health planning and decision-making, to understand diverse experiences and needs, to foster mutual respect, tolerance and make all people feel valued – including women, ethnic groups, the poor, and people with disabilities and finally, to engage communities to plan and deliver quality health services. In order to support its Health for All work and develop capacity of 3MDG implementing partners (IPs) to apply the principle of ‘Inclusion’, 3MDG requested the Association of Myanmar Disabled Women Affairs (AMDWA) to provide training on the integration of disability inclusion into their health programs. Background of Association of Myanmar Disabled Women Affairs The Association of Myanmar Disabled Women Affairs (AMDWA) is implementing activities for the improvement of in the lives of people with disabilities and to enhance their confidence by encouraging them and by creating job opportunities for them. To assure this, AMDWA organizes trainings, forums and workshops. AMDWA also conducts some vocational training in order for people with disabilities to get employed. AMDWA is a non-governmental organization which is registered and recognized by the government.

2. Aim and Objectives of Workshop In October 2015, AMDWA organized a two-day workshop on Disability and Social Inclusion for all 3MDG’s IPs. This report summarizes the outcomes of this workshop. The overall workshop objectives are the following; At the end of the workshop, participants will gain knowledge and understanding on: 1. Disability issues in Myanmar, and challenges in accessing health services for persons with

disabilities 2. Strengthening existing organization/workplaces to become disability inclusive or disability aware


5

3. Strengthening existing health programs/projects to be more disability sensitive and inclusive to ensure increased access to health services for people with disabilities

4. Equipping organizations to use and apply tools and resources that help them strengthen their approaches to disability inclusion

3. Venue and Participants

Two workshops were conducted in Yangon: one on 16 -17 of October 2015 and one on 23-24 October 2015. In total, 62 participants (29 women and 33 men) coming from 23 IPs attended the training. Participants were composed of AEI Focal Points as well as program and M&E staff. Details are included in the tables located on the next page.

Social Inclusion on Disability Workshop #1: October 16-17 2015

Number of participant Profile of participants

Total - 31 Participants (Female -14), (Male – 17)

Program managers, field staff, HR staff, Finance staff, admin staff and AEI focal points

Substance Abuse Research Association (SARA) Community Agency for Rural Development (CAD) Charity Oriented Myanmar (COM) Community Partnership International (CPI) Myanmar Health Assistant Association (MHAA) Myanmar Medical Association (MMA)

International Organization of Migration (IOM) Marie Stopes International (MSI) Save the Children International (SCI) International Rescue Committee (IRC) World Concern Myanmar (WCM) Médecins du Monde (MdM)

Social Inclusion on Disability Workshop #2: October 23-24 2015

Number of participants Profile of participants

Total – 31 Participants (Female – 15), (Male – 16)

Program managers, field staff, M&E staff, and AEI focal points

Bright Future (BF) Pan Tee Eain (PTE) Burnet Institute Myanmar (BIMM) Save The Children International (SCI) Pyi Gyi Khin (PGK) Arr Yone Oo (AYO) World Concern (WC) The Union

Myanmar Red Cross (MRCS)/Danish Red Cross (DRC) Community Driven Development & Capacity Building Enhancement Team (CDDCET) Relief International (RI) Myanmar Medical Association (MMA)

Cooperazione e Sviluppo (CESVI)

Myanmar Anti-Narcotic Drug Association (MANA)

The Workshops were held at Mandalay Meeting Room, 3MDG office, Yangon.

http://www.cesvi.eu/


6

4. Methodology In the two day workshop, facilitators used a participatory approach and popular education methods. Documentary video clips, participatory games and sensitization exercises were used as workshop tools. The workshops were conducted in Myanmar language.

5. Content and Proceedings

Welcome and Introductions Workshop pre-testing questionnaires were distributed to participants at the beginning of the workshop to evaluate the effectiveness of the workshop. (Please see Annex #2)

Firstly, 3MDG welcomed the participants, gave the welcome remarks and explained the objectives of the Disability and Social Inclusion Workshop. Then, 3MDG explained why disability inclusive development is important and the workshop was arranged for its IPs. After the 3MDG’s welcome remark, AMDWA explained about its organization and expressed their gratitude to 3MDG and participants for taking part in this workshop. After that, participants were asked to introduce themselves to each and their expectations on the workshop through a short game.

5.1 Session 1: What is “Disability”?

Aim: To improve understanding of disability

After the introductions, the participants were divided into two groups in order to play the ice breaking game with the leading of facilitator. After that, What is Disability?, the first session of the workshop was started with a question that is “What is disability?” and participants answered “ disability means someone who cannot do the normal activities” “ disability is a person who has not some organs” “who can’t participate in social activities” . The facilitator asked them on their opinion on the when do people recognize there are PWDs in the society. Participants answered disability as inability, a curse, as a result of previous life sinful actions and the punishment of god. The facilitator explained about that concept of disability from the social model; disability occurs when our impairments interact with barriers, and then explained about the impairment and 4 types of barriers. After that, participants asked the questions and made clarifications on some facts. Then, participants were divided into 4 groups and were assigned to discuss and write down on the flip charts about the barriers for PWDs that they were used to seeing in their environment. After this exercise, each group presented what they found on their specific types of barriers in the plenary. The discussion points of the each group are provided in the following table.

Group Number

Assigned Topic Discussion points


7

Group.1 Institutional barriers Workshop #1

Though there are rules, laws, policy and regulation (eg. Building Code) there is no rule of law, enforcement and implementation.

There is no disability awareness and knowledge between public and state.

Also public don’t know the rights and laws that protect the welfare and betterment of PWDs.

No benefit package for PWDs.

The last thing is even in our organization, there is no disability friendly policies, environment and (mechanizing).

Workshop #2 Polling stations are not universal types.

There are no job opportunities for PWDs.

No rights to attend mainstream schools.

There is no Committee on Disability issue in Parliament.

There are only two National Rehabilitation Hospitals and should extend the National Rehabilitation Unit.

More budget allocation for PWDs.

Government should implement the national building code and should improve the binding of national building code on business.

Group.2 Communication Barriers Workshop #1

For persons with hearing impairments: 1) They have difficulty to communicate through technical

gadgets. 2) Diverse sign language and there is no standardized version

of sign language. 3) Can’t explain their health problems.

For persons with visual impairments, 1) There is no Jaw Software in local context. 2) Limitation of using braille.

Common problems for PWDs: 1) Lack of implementation IE. 2) There is no universal design in information sharing; PWDs

have difficulties to access the information about disasters, health awareness and emergency release.

Workshop #2 IEC materials are not accessible for persons with visual impairments (e.g. in TB project, there are difficulties to share the information on treatment and investigation)

The health awareness programs and materials are not accessible for PWDs.

Need to provide the sign language in mass meeting, networking and cooperation.

Language barriers (there is no standardized Sign Language)

The less or no self-confidence and inferiority of PWDs.

Unconscious discrimination, stereotype, phobia, traditional norms and belief.


8

Group.3 Attitudinal barriers Workshop #1

Myths

Religious teachings

Folks and traditional views on PWDs

Victim blaming

Workshop #2 Discrimination towards PWDs

Traditional beliefs and myths

Less of self-confidence of PWDs

Don’t have the chance to participate in decision making and lack of opportunity to participate in community

Non PWDs don’t recognize the PWDs as abled persons.

Lack of opportunity to education and employment.

Group.4 Physical and Environmental barriers Workshop #1

Transportation (e.g. buses, trains and ships are not accessible for wheel chair users)

Building (e.g. most of the buildings don’t have the wheel chair rents for persons with visual impairments)

School (e.g. teaching support martials are not accessible and no teaching methods for PWDs)

Health Care Centers

Workshop #2 For deaf persons, they still have a lot of difficulty to ask for help in the emergency cases.

Shopping malls and public toilets are not accessible.

Transportation systems are still difficult to access for PWDs.

There are only few vocational trainings for PWDs.

5.2 Session 2: Theory and Practices on Disability Inclusion

The facilitator started Session 2 with a question “Do you know the percentage of the world’s population that are PWDs?” and the facilitator answered the question. After that, the facilitator explained about the 3 models of viewing disability: (i) Traditional model (ii) Medicine Model (iii) Social Model. The facilitator explained about each type and the pros and cons of each model; the first two types of models were just focused on the bodies of PWDs and society tried to ‘fix’ their bodies. After that, the facilitator presented the comparison between the definition of the World Health Organisation (WHO) 1980 on impairment, disability and handicap, the WHO’s 2001 definition, the International Classification of Impairment, Disability and Handicap (ICIDH), and the International Classification of Functioning (ICF). Then, the facilitator explained and demonstrated how to calculate the ICF and usage of ICF in various development sectors. The facilitator explained the usage of ICF in various sectors and the usage in 8 key sectors.

5.3 Session 3: Theory and Practices on Disability Inclusion Continued Session 4 started with an interactive discussion with a panel. The participants and trainer had a good interactive discussion and Q&A session on the different types of perspectives of disability and to


9

explore in more detail the three types of models of understanding disability, (i) traditional model, (ii) medical model, (iii) social model. After that, participants were divided into four groups and the trainer gave the sample cases to each group to practice the how to classify using the ICF. The sample cases and the discussed facts are in the following:

Sample Case: 1 Phoe Maung, a 6 year old boy, got a visual impairment when he was 3. The household arrangement and home decoration style is not accessible for him, he cannot go to the toilet and dining room himself. He has to ask the help from his siblings for dressing and going outside. Other children tease him because of his disability. The society also doesn’t think about that issue because he didn’t get a chance for education too.

Structure/Function Activities Participation Environmental Factors

Personal factors

Workshop #1

Eyes Visual impairment

Cannot go toilet and dining room himself, has to ask the help from his siblings for dressing and going outside

Natural environment and human-made changes to environment, Support and relationships

6 years old

Workshop #2

Eyes

Blind

Cannot play with friend and cannot learn

Products and technology

6 years old

Sample Case: 2 Chaw Chaw had an accident and got injuries in her nervous system last month. She has difficulty with her memory. She has difficulty to do daily activities by herself like having food, teeth brushing and difficulty in mobility. Before she had the accident, her career is cooking and support to the family. Now, she can’t work and support the family.


Personal factors

Workshop #1

Nervous system Difficulty with mobility

Stop her career Family Being a girl

Workshop #2

Nervous system Difficulty with mobility, memorization

Learning and applying knowledge, General tasks and demands, Communication

Products and technology Natural environment and human-made changes to

Being a girl


10

environment Support and relationships

Sample Case: 3 Ma Pyone has had Cerebral Palsy since her birth and is 12 year old girl. She can’t walk and can’t do the things that have to be done by hand because of muscular problems. Though she can use a wheelchair, she can’t go outside alone because of the inaccessible environment (e.g. stations, parks, cinemas and other public places). Thus, she has to live at home with a babysitter. Hanging out with friends and going to cinema are her desires.


Personal factors

Workshop #1

Cerebral Palsy Difficult in mobility

Can’t participate in spiritual, cultural and social events

Inaccessible environment

Being a girl, 12 years old

Workshop #2

Cerebral Palsy Can’t work Can’t do daily activities

Park, station, and publics areas

Being a girl, 12 years old

Sample Case: 4 Ko Than Chaung, a 45 year old man, has suffered from depression but has recovered. His friends excluded him when he suffered from depression and he feels lonely. He is trying to get back into society. His wife also encourages him. Though he has a strong desire to work he is also afraid of discrimination from his employer and fellow employees.


Personal factors

Workshop #1

Nil Nil Interpersonal interactions and relationships Community, social and civic life

Employee, friends

Depression, 45 age

Workshop #2

Nil Nil Career, participation in social activities

Attitudes Lack of self-confident, 45 age

5.4 Session 4: How to Deal with Persons with Disability

Aim: To know the correct ways to communicate with PWDs and become a disability sensitized environment.


11

Session 4 started with a disability sensitization activity. The facilitator asked 10 volunteers to do the disability sensitization exercise. Then they were asked to find their partner to help them and make couples. The facilitator asked for each couple that one play as blind and one to be the helper. Then, the facilitator asked the blind ones to walk the whole room with the help of his/her partner. After the exercise, the facilitator asked to the volunteers who played the blind role “how did they feel? And did they feel secure?” Then, the facilitator asked to the partners “how did they help them?” Lastly the facilitator presented and explained how to help various types of people with disabilities and the best terminology to use when communicating with PWDs. Day 2 started with a warp up session, the facilitator asked the participants to make a cycle to refresh the lesson that they learnt yesterday and to examine what they remembered. After that, the facilitator threw the paper ball to the participant and asked what she or he remembers from yesterday’s lesson. Then, that participant threw the ball to another and asked another and then another.

5.5 Session 5: Disability Inclusive Development Aim: To understand the link between Disability and Development Session 5 stared with an interactive discussion on the participants’ perspectives on development, inclusive development and disability inclusive development. And the facilitator explained the concept of disability inclusive development; PWDs have to receive the benefits from development and also a chance to contribute in development processes. The facilitator presented about disability mainstreaming and why it is the best way to approach disability inclusive development. The key points to consider in the disability mainstreaming process were also discussed in the session. Then participants were divided into four groups and discussed the pros and cons of mainstreaming and side streaming. The following table shows the discussion points of each group.

Group No.

Topics Discussion Points

#2 Pros of Mainstreaming Workshop #1

Less discrimination

More inclusion in society(Equity & Equality)

Reduce barriers

Human resources will be more developed

Poverty rate will be reduced

Motivation for Non PWDs

Workshop #2 Reduce Poverty

Reduce waste of human resources

Lead to the disability inclusive development (DID)

Lead to inclusive development agenda

Increase the awareness on PWDs

Increase capacity and productivity

Increase job opportunity and confidence, and decrease family burden


12

#1 Cons of Mainstreaming Workshop #1

Difficult to advocate to the policy maker level and other stakeholders

It will take time to build the capacity and awareness of staff

Have to improve the infrastructure (i.e. have to make accessible all the public buildings)

Dilution effect to quality control and assessment

Over burden for both able and disabled

Difficult to change the mindset

Other predisposing factors on Social, Economic and Education sector

#1 Workshop #2 Delay in implementation

Annoying for Non PWDs

Double costing

Increase conflict in the work place because of PWDs

Public perception on projects

Inactive participation of PWDs in workplace

#4 Pros of Side streaming Workshop #1

Increasing performance and confidence by encouraging each other and learning from peers

Appropriate facilities for daily life, learning and working

Donors will be satisfied since they can support individual specific needs

Institutional development

Advancement of technology

More easy intervention than mainstreaming

#4 Workshop #2 Smooth and better communication among PWDs

Less discrimination

More confidence

Good environment

More sympathy and understanding between PWDs

Initiation of development 1) Inclusiveness, 2) Leadership role, 3) Participation and decision making

Increased consideration of job opportunities

Reduce Poverty

More inclusiveness in all sectors (e.g. education, Social)

#3 Cons of Side streaming Workshop #1

There is no inclusiveness and PWDs will be isolated

Citizens will consider the PWDs as a burden for the country

Non PWDs will have no knowledge on disability

PWDs will lose their basic human rights

Isolation will lead to more dependency

Poverty cycle and its consequences will be bigger

#3 Workshop #2 Extra budget

Waste of human resources and time

No inclusiveness

Emotionally more affected for PWDs

Additional workload


13

It’s more alike with a charity approach and there is no sustainability.

After the group work, each groups presented in panel. Then trainer added more points on their presentations and presented the some research findings on recommendations on disability mainstreaming.

5.6 Session 6: Disability related Human Rights and Gender Aim: To understand the UNCRPD and rights of PWDs and to understand the situation of Women and girls with disabilities in Myanmar

The facilitator asked the 4 volunteers (two women and two men) to help him by participating in a demonstration for the disability related human rights and gender session. The facilitator asked the four people to stand side-by-side, with the other participants seated around the edges of the room, facing towards the volunteers and assigned the following groups. • Girls with disabilities • Boys with disabilities • Boys without disabilities • Girls without disabilities

Then the facilitator explained to the volunteers about their role. And the trainer played the move step forward game.

After the game, trainer asked to the participants in the panel: • Who is in the best position now? Who is in the worst place? • Volunteers, how does this make you feel? • Does any of this surprise anyone? • Is it helpful as a tool for reminding us that disability and social exclusion seriously affects people’s

abilities to avoid poverty? • The non-disabled man at the front of the exercise is regarded as living in poverty – what does this

imply for people with disabilities?

Important lesson to draw out of the activity: Why does inclusion of people with disability mean good development practice?

Then the facilitator explained that people with disabilities have enormous potential to provide a significant contribution to their community through education, work, art, politics, sport, spiritual development and social activities and the needs of people with disability are rarely considered in the formulation of development agendas. The facilitator explained and presented about United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), international tools and conventions that protect and promote the rights of PWDs and uplift the life of PWDs. After that, the facilitator gave a presentation on the law on the rights of persons with disabilities that was released on the 5th of June this year and had the


14

interactive discussion and Q&A session between participants and facilitator. The facilitator explained about the situation of girls/women with disabilities in Myanmar and showed the videos on social inclusion and women with disabilities. Finally, Session 6 was concluded with Q&A on the two videos.

5.7 Session 7: Disability and health

Aim: To improve access to health care and services for PWDs

The facilitator discussed Community Based Rehabilitation (CBR) and the history of forming CBR in a panel. The facilitator explained the differences between habilitation and rehabilitation and the first world’s pilot CBR project in Myanmar. The three different approaches to developing lives and rehabilitation for PWDs, (i) Institutional-based rehabilitation, (ii) Outreach program, and (iii) CBR were explained. The facilitator explained why rehabilitation is important and why parents should focus on rehabilitation instead of curing by sharing his experience as a person with a visual impairment. The facilitator discussed the old and new methods to CBR in a panel. The facilitator explained about the CBR matrix and its 5 main ingredients, (i) Health, (ii) Education, (iii) Livelihoods, (vi) Social, (v) Empowerment. He explained about each with photos and the linkages within CBR matrix. Then the trainer explained the links between empowerment and five kinds of personal development.

5.8 Session 8: Disability and Health Continued

The participations were divided into four groups to brainstorm in a World Café style on the topic of “how to integrate the disability concept into respective project implementation”

Topic Discussion Point

Barriers Ways to overcome

Health Promotion (Awareness Raising)

Lack of accessibility in transportation system to come to SH education sessions

Behavior of service providers

Health care providers’ ignorance

Lack of communication channel

Limited budget, resource persons

Well trained health services providers

Explore more communication channels

Report it at stakeholder meetings

More awareness trainings and workshops

Cannot access to health education session because of language barriers and not providing SL interpreter for persons with hearing impairment.

Lack of policy and procedure for disability inclusion in health education

Discrimination within family and

Door to door health education session for PWDs

Distribution of pamphlets with local languages and braille

Forming SHG

Peer health education sessions for PWDs

Using disability friendly IECs


15

community

Cultural restriction to come to health education session

Limitation in resources – human, technology, materials

Access to Health Services

Difficulty to understand Health Education

Lack of accessibility of IEC materials

Discrimination against disability community

Limited service providers

Lack of social support by family

Specific technology materials (e.g. IEC in braille)

Awareness raising sessions to community to accept the role of PWDs

Technical assistance to health service providers

Cannot afford transportation to reach to health services

Cannot access information about health services

Disability awareness and advocacy to Ministry of Health

Door to door or home based services for PWDs

Rehabilitation There are only 2 hospitals in Yangon and Mandalay, it’s won’t cover the whole country

Human resources (Physiotherapist) are not enough

Lack of implementation of policies

Information gaps

Budget

Limitation of technology assistant

Policy advocacy to local authorities and awareness raising to public

Developing IEC and aids

Arranging Training

Taking action on policy with the voices of community

Increasing the budget for rehabilitation

Lack of job opportunities

Lack of policy development

Lack of resource, technology and budget

Referral

Contact with DPOs

Peer to peer education between PWDs

Vocational training

Participation in Project Circle

Accessibility difficulty

Communication difficulty

Inferior complexity of PWDs

Gap of secondary data

Lack of situational analysis

Capacity building

Information sharing and networking among DPOs and NGOs

Conducting assessment

Appropriate planning activities for PWDs

Lack of policy and procedure within organization

No specific budget and funding for disability inclusion

Cultural acceptance and belief of the staff

Discrimination against PWDs within organization

Awareness raising trainings for organization staff

Disability mainstreaming within organization

Reserving fund for disability inclusion

Effective AEI implementation in project


16

Lack of poor communities’ participation in project cycle

Advocacy and awareness to the project heads

Capacity building and technical adjustment within organization

Disability integration on organization’s policy and project designs


17

6. Pre-test and post-test Workshop #1 Workshop #1 Pre-test

Question No. No. of person who took the test No. of person who answered correctly

Q.5, No.1 31 15, 48%

Q.5, No.2 31 22, 71%

Q.5, No.3 31 14, 45%

Q.5, No.4 31 17, 55%

Q.5, No.5 31 15, 48%

Q.5, No.6 31 15, 48%

Q.5, No.7 31 18, 58%

Workshop #1 Post-test


Q.5, No.1 31 18, 58%

Q.5, No.2 31 27, 87%

Q.5, No.3 31 16, 51%

Q.5, No.4 31 22, 71%

Q.5, No.5 31 28, 90%

Q.5, No.6 31 28, 90%

Q.5, No.7 31 25, 80%

In the pre-test, there were a total of 31 test takers.

For question #1 (What is Disability?) 24 persons responded and just 2 persons answered correctly.

For question #2 (What is the difference between being sick and having disability?) only 24 persons responded and just 14 persons answered correctly.

For question #3 (What are the important factors that allow a person to differentiate between having and not having disability?) only 21 persons responded and just 4 persons answered correctly.

For question #4 (What are the social and cultural factors that can influence the concept and definition of disability?) only 18 persons responded and just 5 persons answered correctly.

In the post-test, there were a total of 31 test takers.

For question #1 (What is Disability?), only 30 persons responded and 26 persons answered correctly.

For question #2 (What is the difference between being sick and having disability?), only 25 persons responded and 23 persons answered correctly.

For question #3 (What are the important factors that allow a person to differentiate between having and not having disability?), only 21 persons responded and 19 persons answered correctly.


18

For question #4 (What are the social and cultural factors that can influence the concept and definition of disability?), only 23 persons responded and 19 persons answered correctly.

In Workshop 1, before the training only 26 percent of the participants had awareness and knowledge on disability, but after the training participants’ awareness and knowledge on disability reached 87 percent.

Workshop #2 Workshop #2, Pre-test


Q.5, No.1 27 18, 67%

Q.5, No.2 27 13, 48%

Q.5, No.3 27 14, 52%

Q.5, No.4 27 15, 56%

Q.5, No.5 27 13, 48%

Q.5, No.6 27 14, 52%

Q.5, No.7 27 21, 78%

Workshop #2, Post-test


Q.5, No.1 27 21, 78%

Q.5, No.2 27 18, 67%

Q.5, No.3 27 16, 59%

Q.5, No.4 27 17, 63%

Q.5, No.5 27 17, 63%

Q.5, No.6 27 19, 70%

Q.5, No.7 27 24, 89%

In the pre-test, there were a total of test takers.

For question #1 (What is Disability?) only 26 persons responded and just 2 persons answered correctly.

For question #2 (What is the difference between being sick and having disability?) only 25 persons responded and just 9 persons answered correctly.

For question #3 (What are the important factors that allow a person to differentiate between having and not having disability?) only 15 persons responded and just 4 persons answered correctly.

For question #4 (What are the social and cultural factors that can influence the concept and definition of disability?) only 18 persons responded and just 7 persons answered correctly.

In the post-test, there were a total of 27 test takers.

For question #1 (What is Disability), everyone responded the question and 25 persons answered correctly.


19

For question #2 (What is the difference between being sick and having disability?), everyone responded the question and 23 persons answered correctly.

For question #3 (What are the important factors that allow a person to differentiate between having and not having disability?), only 23 responded the question and 21 persons answered correctly.

For question #4 (What are the social and cultural factors that can influence the concept and definition of disability?), only 20 responded and 17 persons answered correctly.

In Workshop #2, before the training only 19 percent of the participants had awareness and knowledge on disability, but after the training, participants’ awareness and knowledge on disability rose to 89 percent.

7. Participant evaluation on the workshop

An evaluation form was circulated to participants at the end of the workshop to provide feedback and suggestions on specific aspects of the training which included the overall experience, organization of the event, facilitators, the content and length of the sessions, training materials, handouts, venue, facilities and food. Overall, participants were either very satisfied (19% in Workshop #1, 11% in Workshop #2) or satisfied (61% in Workshop #1, 69% in Workshop #2) with the Workshop. Detailed evaluation results are included in the charts below. Workshop #1, Workshop Evaluation 26 people responded to the evaluation

Content Very Satisfied

Satisfied Moderate Unsatisfied Very Unsatisfied

Understanding on disability after training

3 19 4 _ _

Score on the facilitation

5 16 4 _ _

Length of time for training 1 13 12 _ _

The usefulness of training 3 15 7 1 _

Method using in training _ 19 7 _ _

Food, venue and logistic 6 14 5 1 _

Quality of training materials 4 15 7 _ _

Overall training 5 16 5 _ _

Workshop #2, Training Evaluation 28 people responded to the evaluation.


20

Content Very Satisfied

Satisfied Moderate Unsatisfied Very Unsatisfied

Understanding on disability after training

2 17 9 _ _

Score on the facilitation of trainers 3 20 5 _ _

Length of time for training 3 6 18 1 _

The usefulness of training 4 15 9 _ _

Method using in training 2 16 9 1 _

Food, venue and logistic 3 18 7 _ _

Quality of training materials 2 15 11 _ _

Overall training 3 19 6 _ _

The following chart is the participants’ interest in the workshop sessions.

Topic Most Applicable Topics

Easiest to Understand

Most Difficult to Understand

The Most Interesting Topic

What is disability 7 20 1 16

Theory and practices on disability inclusion

4 13 7 18

How to deal with PWDs 18 4 _ 9

Disability inclusive Development

13 _ 6 13

Disability related human rights and gender

1 3 4 _

Disability and health 5 2 7 1

8. Keys Findings and Recommendations

Key findings from the workshop are: o Even though the project implementers are willing to implement disability friendly and disability

inclusive programs, there is no specific funding and technical support. o Donor agencies are more looking for the cost effective projects than the inclusive and

qualitative projects and this is a difficulty for IPs. o Lack of proper training for disability leads to disability exclusion in project implementation. o Workshop preparation time was too short and there wasn’t have enough time to prepare the

PowerPoint presentations. So, sometimes presentations reduced time for the inputs. o Workshop related PPT presentations and materials were distributed through CD-ROM to

participants for further learning and sharing to their organizations. o Length of workshops and the inputs are not balanced and don't get enough time for group work

and participants' presentation.


21

o Too many words in presentations and need to add more pictures and diagrams instead of words.

o Ground rules should be regarded since the first day of the workshops. o Participants' dedication and participation in group work made the workshops become more

productive. o Commitments and action plans are great outcomes of the workshops. o After brainstorming the action plans, each organization should bring into the panel. If so,

facilitators can give inputs. o If time is enough, before the presentations, case study should come first. o Technical terms are needed to be explained in detail. o Saturday and Sunday should be avoided in future trainings and it decreased the participants’

interest on topics. o IT equipment should be ready in workshop days and it also makes the participants’ interest

reduced. o In both workshops, some organizations assigned the different participants for each day and it

was just a waste of time and they couldn’t catch the concepts. So, it was the biggest challenge for the facilitators and another thing is too many inputs and sessions made burden for both participants and facilitator.

o While disability inclusion workshops were conducted, the workshop venue is not easily accessible for disabled persons. The appropriate venue with the workshop title will encourage them to practice in reality and it will be helpful in workshop as a tangible asset of the donor organization and an inspiration for them.

o Participating PWDs itself helpful as an inspiration and field assets in workshop. In future training, participation of the persons from the target group should be considered.


22

9. Annexes

9.1 Annex #1 Workshop Agenda - Day 1

Time Topic Remark

9:00 – 9:15 Welcoming Workshop Pretesting

9:15 – 9:30 Ice breaker and Participant introduction Introduction AMDWA

9:30 – 10:45 What is “Disability”? Introduction to Disability

10:45 – 11:00 Tea break

11:00 – 12:30 Theories and Particles on Disability Inclusion Pratical ways towards inclusion of PWDs

1) ICIDH (International Classification of Impairment, Disability and Handicap) and ICF (International Classification of Functioning)

2) Approaches and Models 3) Assistive Devices

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch

13:30 – 15:15 Theories and practices on Disability Inclusion Session Continued

15:15 – 15:30 Tea Break

15:30 – 17:00 How to deal with PWDs? Communication + Stimulation


23

Workshop Agenda - Day 2

9:00 – 9:15 Day 1 Recap

9:15 – 10:30 DID (Disability Inclusive Development) Link between Disability and Development

10:30 – 10:45 Tea Break

10:45 – 12:30 Disability related Human Rights and Gender

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch

13:30 – 15:30 Disability and Health (Health Promotion) - Community based Rehabilitation (Physical,

Psychosocial Rehabilitation) - How to improve access to health care?

(Participation in project cycle, health promotion, service delivery and rehabilitation)

15:30 – 15:45 Tea Break

15:45 – 16:30 Disability and Health Continued Organizational Plan for Disability Inclusion in their respective projects/programs

16:30 – 17:00 End of the Workshop Workshop Post-testing and Evaluation


24

9.2 Annex #2 Pre-test and Post-test Formats Q 1: What is disability?

Q 2: What is the difference between being sick and having disability?

Q 3: What are the important factors that allow a person to differentiate between having and not having disability?

Q 4: What are the social and cultural factors that can influence the concept and definition of disability?

Q 5: True or False: please circle the correct answer

1. Using a wheelchair restricts the ability of someone to have a full life.

2. Talking slowly is the sign of low mental performance.

3. When you are being introduced to someone who has a prosthetic arm you should not extended your hand to say hello to them.

4. Being blind means that the person is living in a complete state of darkness.

5. Deaf people can have excellent communication abilities.

6. People paralyzed from the waist down cannot have babies.

7. People who use crutches or wheelchairs have problems with learning.

Q 6: Decide “Who has Disability?”

1. Someone who is an amputee with prosthesis, and is working and earning money in order to live and support his/her family.

2. Someone who is an amputee without prosthesis, and is working and earning money in order to live and support his/her family.

3. Someone who is an amputee with prosthesis, without work and unable to support his/her family.

4. Someone who is an amputee without prosthesis, and has no family to help him/her.

Disability and Social Inclusion Workshop · REPORT OF THE DISABILITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION WORKSHOP...

Documents

Transcript of Disability and Social Inclusion Workshop · REPORT OF THE DISABILITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION WORKSHOP...