HANDICAP INTERNATIONAL CHRISTOFFEL-BLINDENMISSION MAKING PRSP INCLUSIVE JANUARY 2006 Imprint This study was financed by the Government of Germany and facilitated by the World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judge- ment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly. For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete in- formation to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA, telephone 978-750-8400, fax 978-750-4470, www.copyright.com. All other queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to the Office of the Publisher, The World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA, fax 202-522-2422, e-mail pubrights@worldbank.org. Contacts Editor Handicap International e.V. Handicap International, Munich, Germany Stefanie Ziegler Proof-Reading Ganghoferstr. 19 Simon Scott-Kemball D-80339 München GERMANY Layout Tel.: ++ 49 (0) 89-54 76 06-0 Doris Rasevic Fax: ++ 49 (0) 89-54 76 06-20 Printing E-Mail: info@handicap-international.de Projekt Print (Integrative Project), www.handicap-international.de Munich, Germany Christoffel-Blindenmission Deutschland e.V. Cover Photos Andreas Pruisken Angola, Football with crutches: Nibelungenstr. 124 © Handicap International, Brussels, Belgium D-64625 Bensheim Bangladesh: GERMANY © L. Duvillier pour Handicap International Tel.: ++49 (0) 6251-131-155 Somaliland: International Disability Day Fax: ++49 (0) 6251-131-189 © V. Rousselle / Handicap International E-Mail: Andreas.Pruisken@cbm-i.org Mali: Disability Week www.christoffel-blindenmission.de © N. Moindrot / Handicap International Authors Ursula Miller, Stefanie Ziegler I Acknowledgement This handbook and the whole project would not have been possible without the contribution, advice and support of many persons. We are grateful to Judy Heumann (World Bank, Disability Advisor) and René Bonnel for the initial idea for this project, as well as for their ongoing support and advice during the development of the handbook. Furthermore, we greatly appreciate the work of Judith van der Veen (CBM co-worker at the CCBRT Programme in Tanzania), who organised the Tanzanian workshop that formed an essential part of this project. The views and remarks of all participants during the Tanzanian workshop – and especially of the members of the planning committee – represented a valuable contribution to this document. Thanks to Anne-Laure Pignard-Rhein for the evaluation of the workshop and the information provided on the Bangladesh case study. We want to express our gratitude to Gabi Weigt (VENRO), Ronald Wiman (STAKES), Dinah Radtke, Kagenzi Rutachwamagyo (ICD), Rene Bonnel, Judith van der Veen and Philippe Chervin (Handicap International), who reviewed drafts of the handbook and gave helpful advice. The case studies would not have been possible without the open information exchange with Blandine Le Bourgeois (Handicap International Bangladesh), Dr. Nafeesur Rahman (NFOWD, Bangladesh), Thierry Gontier (on Honduras), Lucile Papon (on Sierra Leone), Judith van der Veen, Gideon Mandes (DOLASED) and Henry Wimilie (ICD) (on Tanzania). II Contents Making PRSP Inclusive Imprint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I I Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V I I 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Why Is This Handbook Necessary? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 For Whom? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.3 How to Get the Most out of This Handbook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.4 The Structure of This Handbook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1 What is PRSP? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2 Who is Responsible for the PRSP? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3 What Is the PRSP about? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.4 How Does the PRSP Process Work? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.5 Who Finances the PRSP? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.6 Why Is It Important to Include Disability in the PRSP? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.7 How Can a DPO Participate in the PRSP? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3 How to Initiate a PRSP and Disability Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.1 Important Steps and Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 3.1.1 Orientation Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 3.1.2 Meeting of Possible Allies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 3.1.3 Identification of Possible Entry Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 3.1.4 Development and Implementation of a Joint Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3.2 Experiences in Tanzania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 4 Entry Points for the Civil Society in the PRSP Process . . . . . .1 4 4.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 4 4.2 Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 4 4.2.1 Steps and Stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 4 4.2.2 Poverty Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 5 4.3 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 7 4.3.1 Entry Points Offered by Specific Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 7 4.3.2 Entry Points Offered by Budgets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 8 III Contents 4.3.3 Related Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.4 Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.4.1 Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.4.2 Annual Progress Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.4.3 Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 5A Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 A.1 Case Study 1: Honduras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.1.1 PRSP in Honduras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 A.1.2 Disability in Honduras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.1.3 Disability and PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.1.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A.1.5 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 A.1.6 Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 A.2 Case Study 2: Bangladesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 A.2.1 PRSP in Bangladesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 A.2.2 Disability in Bangladesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 A.2.3 Disability and PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 A.2.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 A.2.5 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 A.2.6 Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 A.3 Case Study 3: Sierra Leone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 A.3.1 PRSP in Sierra Leone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 A.3.2 Disability in Sierra Leone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 A.3.3 Disability and PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 A.3.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 A.3.5 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 A.3.6 Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 A.4 Case Study 4:Tanzania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 A.4.1 PRSP in Tanzania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.4.2 Disability in Tanzania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.4.3 Disability and PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A.4.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 A.4.5 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 A.4.6 Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 A.5 Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 A.5.1 The Role of INGOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 A.5.2 Lack of Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 A.5.3 Exclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 A.5.4 Strategies for Inclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 A.5.5 Inclusions in all Stages of the PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 A.5.6 Side-effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 IV Contents 5B PRSP and Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 B.1 Introduction – Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 B.2 PRSP – Origin and Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 B.2.1 Background: From Neoliberalism to Poverty Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 B.2.2 Basic Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 B.2.3 Developement and Structure of the Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 B.3 Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 B.3.1 The Global Role of the IMF and the World Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 B.3.2 PRSP-related Instruments of the IFIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 B.3.3 Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 B.3.4 Civil Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 B.3.5 Other Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 B.4 Interpretation of the Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 B.4.1 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 B.4.2 Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 B.5 PRSP and Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 5C Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 C.1 What is Disability? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 C.1.1 The Charity Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 C.1.2 The Medical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 C.1.3 The Social Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 C.1.4 The WHO Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 C.2 Disability and Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 C.2.1 The UN Standard Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 C.2.2 The UN Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 C.2.3 Other International and Regional Commitments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 C.3 Disability in Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 C.3.1 Inclusive Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 C.3.2 The Right-based Approached . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 C.3.3 Twin-track Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 C.4 Why Disability Must be Included in PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 C.4.1 The Vicious Circle of Poverty and Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 C.5 Sectors in PRSPs Relevant for Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 C.5.1 Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 C.5.2 Rehabilitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 C.5.3 Social Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 C.5.4 Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 C.5.5 Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 C.5.6 Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 C.5.7 Other Sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 V Contents 5D Process and Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 D.1 Networks and Alliances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8 D.1.1 Organisational Self-Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9 D.1.2 The Identity of the National Disability Movement and the PRSP Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 0 D.2 Important Elements of Process Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 D.2.1 Vision, Objectives and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 D.2.2 Developement of a Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 D.2.3 Action Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 D.2.4 Organising Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 D.2.5 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 D.3 Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 D.3.1 Basics: Act, Observe, Decide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 D.3.2 Project Cycles of the World Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 E.1 Advocacy, Lobbying and Campaigning – A Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 E.2 Basic Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 E.2.1 Gathering Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 E.2.2 Convincing and Strategic Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 E.2.3 Working with Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 6 Toolbox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 VI Abbreviations ADD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Action on Disability and Development APR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Annual Progress Report CAS ................... Country Assistance Strategy CBM .................. Christoffel-Blindenmission CBO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Community Based Organisation CCBRT . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Comprehensive Community Based Rehabilitation in Tanzania CDF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Comprehensive Development Framework CIARH . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Coordinadora de Instituciones y Associaciones de Rehabilitacion de Honduras CS ...................... Civil Society CSO ................... Civil Society Organisation DFID ................. Department for International Development (Great Britain) DOLASED . . . . . . . .Disabled Organization for Legal Affairs and Social Economic Development (Tanzania) DPO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Disabled People’s Organisation EU ..................... European Union FENOPDIH . . . . . . .Federación Nacional de Organismos de Personas con Discapacidad de Honduras G 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Group of Seven G 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Group of Eight GDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Gross Domestic Product GTZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Deutsche Gesellschaft für technische Zusammenarbeit (German technical development Co-operation) HDI ................... Human Development Index HIPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Highly Indebted Poor Countries ICD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Information Centre on Disability (Tanzania) ICF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health ICIDH ............... International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps IFI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .International Financial Institution ILO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .International Labour Organisation IMF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .International Monetary Fund INGO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .International Non-Governmental Organisation I-PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy JSA .................... Joint Staff Assessment JSAN ................. Joint Staff Assessment Note MDG ................. Millennium Development Goal MTEF ................ Medium Term Expenditure Framework NFOWD ............ National Forum of Organisations working for the Disabled (Bangladesh) NGO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Non-Governmental Organisation PA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Parent’s Association PET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .People’s Empowerment Trust (Bangladesh) PPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Participatory Poverty Analysis PRGF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility PRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Poverty Reduction Strategy PRSC ................. Poverty Reduction Support Credit PRSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper PSIA .................. Poverty Social Impact Analysis SAP ................... Structural Adjustment Program UN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .United Nations UNDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .United Nations Development Program UNICEF ............ United Nations Children’s Fund USAID .............. United States Agency for International Development WB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .World Bank WHO ................. World Health Organisation VII 1 Introduction 1.1 Why Is This Handbook Necessary? This handbook is part of the “Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper and Disability” project initiated by Judy Heumann, Disability Advisor of the World Bank, and fund- ed by a German trust fund. The Christoffel-Blindenmission (CBM) and Handicap International implemented the project in 2005 in cooperation with German and Tanzanian disabled peoples organisations (DPOs) and other organisations working in the field of disability. The project consisted of two parts: the production of materi- als on Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and disability (through Handicap International), and the implementation of a PRSP workshop in Tanzania (through CBM). The reason for initiating this project was the observation that DPOs and people with participation of people disabilities rarely participate in any PRSP process, even though one of the main with disabilities principles of such a process is the active involvement of the civil society in the for- mulation, implementation and evaluation of a country’s national poverty reduction strategy. However, this fact simply reflects a common tendency: people with disabil- ities are generally „invisible“ within most societies and lack a strong and united voice. This handbook presents experiences, proposes ideas, and comments on how DPOs and people with disabilities may enter and participate in national PRSP processes. 1.2 For Whom? The handbook generally addresses everyone working in the field of disability (non- everyone working governmental organisations (NGOs),service providers,professional associations,etc.). in the field of disability It is aimed mainly at people with disabilities, DPOs and parents’ associations (PAs) which intend to participate in their respective national PRSP process. It is important to integrate the disability dimension into each national PRSP; people with disabilities and DPOs are clearly qualified experts in this field. Nevertheless, the issue is complex and demands a certain level of education, professionalism and degree of organisation in order to understand and follow the process and its documents.There- fore this handbook addresses in particular key persons within DPOs, coordinators, trainers and facilitators, and seeks to provide them with information, resources and links with regard to important issues in the PRSP process. It may be used as a resource for preparing a training course or a workshop, but is not a training guide itself. 1.3 How to Get the Most out of This Handbook The best way to use this manual is not to read the entire text from the first to the very no need to read the last page. Rather, the most effective way is for readers to choose issues according to entire text from the first to the very their needs, depending on their specific situation and previous knowledge. The hand- last page book proposes a modular system with chapters that provide general background information, links, resources and tools on key issues regarding PRSP, disability and 1 1 Introduction project and process management. What the manual does not do is provide any ready-made prescriptions and solutions that would enable the topic of disability to be successfully integrated into any national PRSP. The first four chapters are required reading, as they provide the reader with orienta- the first four chapters tion and summarise the main themes of this document. These make it easier to use are required reading the specific materials in the final two chapters. 1.4 The Structure of This Handbook The topic of “PRSP and disability” involves a complex series of interactions on three different levels. First, the political, cultural and historical situation varies for each country. Second, the PRSP approach adopted and state reached in the process are also very country-specific. Third, the competences and capacities of DPOs and the existence of a national disability movement plus its strengths differ significantly from country to country. This handbook provides information on important issues concerning the PRSP as concise as possible and as comprehensive process. It seeks to be as concise as possible and as comprehensive as is necessary, as it is necessary balancing between providing basic information for beginners as well as details and useful links designed for more experienced readers interested in or already working in the field of disability. This handbook has a pyramid structure, concise at the top, and progressively becoming broader and more comprehensive towards the bottom, as per the following diagram: 1 Intro- duction 2 Overview "PRSP for beginners" 3 The Process How to initiate a process 4 Entry Points "PRSP for advanced readers" 5 Specific Elements A B C D E Case PRSP Disability Process Lobby studies and and and stake- project advocacy holders management 6 Toolbox 2 1 Introduction The remainder of this handbook is structured as follows: Chapter 2 provides a basic overview of the PRSP process, giving a short summary of the definition, use and overview stakeholders of the PRSP process, and approaches to PRSP and disability. Chapter 3 proposes several steps for initiating a process with the aim of including disability process issues in national PRSPs. Chapter 4 explains the three main phases of a PRSP (for- mulation, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation), and indicates possible PRSP main phases entry points for civil society participation. Chapter 5 is divided into five individual chapters which address important issues related to PRSPs in general, and DPOs trying to become involved in their respective national PRSP more specifically: Chapter 5A – “Case Studies”summarises experiences from four countries (Honduras, case studies Bangladesh, Sierra Leone and Tanzania) on how organisations of and for people with disabilities became engaged in their national PRSP process. Chapter 5B – “PRSP and Stakeholders” presents important elements of the PRSP PRSP and approach, its structure, development and content. It also provides an overview of the stakeholders relevant stakeholders, their internal organisational structures, their mutual links and the relationships between them.This chapter presents different opinions on the PRSP approach as well as its links to the issue of disability. Chapter 5C – “Disability” first introduces the different models, approaches and disability definitions of disability, impairment, etc. It then identifies the key sectors within the concept of PRSP that are most relevant for disability: health, rehabilitation, social protection, education, employment and accessibility. At the same time, this chapter seeks to encourage the mainstreaming of disability in all PRSP sectors. It is designed to serve as background information, enabling an analysis of the relationship between the PRSP and the issue of disability in each individual country. Chapter 5D – “Process and Project Management” seeks to provide general informa- process and project management tion on negotiations as well as project and process management in order to facilitate the development and implementation of a joint national strategy for disability stake- holders in general and, more specifically, in respect to the PRSP process. It introduces the concepts of organisational self-assessment and stakeholder analysis: these tools enable the existing potentials of DPOs to be assessed, and additionally provide a basis for networking. Chapter 5E – “Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies” presents different ways of lobby and advocacy: influencing policies influencing policies, such as effective advocacy, lobbying and campaigning activities. It proposes various communication techniques, and ways of contacting and convinc- ing key representatives in the national PRSP process. Finally, Chapter 6 is designed as a Toolbox containing tools to facilitate the discus- toolbox sion and planning process. It also provides further information on specific issues, as well as a glossary containing key words used in this document, plus terminology specific to the PRSP approach and to the issue of disability. In each section, internet links , bibliographical links and cross references to tools help the reader to intensify his or her research by providing more details on specific topics. 3 2 Overview 2.1 What is PRSP? The abbreviation “PRSP” stands for Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, which is a concept developed by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 1999. The idea behind this was that low-income, highly indebted countries should develop and formulate a national plan on how to reduce poverty in their country and a national plan improve the living situation of their citizens. Once a country has established a na- to reduce poverty tional PRSP, it can apply for debt relief from the World Bank, the IMF and donor countries, and may gain access to new credits, loans and grants. Various national stakeholders participate in the formulation of this strategy and draw participation of up the PRSP document accordingly. The final version should reflect overall stake- national stakeholders holder consensus. PRSPs also provide a roadmap indicating the priority actions to be taken that will lead to poverty reduction. The PRSP approach is becoming increas- ingly important, since it is not an isolated tool used just by the World Bank and the IMF, but is also supported by other international development partners, and is linked to international and national strategies and policies. Today, PRSP processes can be found in almost 70 countries worldwide. Chapter 5B, sub-sections 1–2.2 present the origin and the basic principles of the PRSP approach 2.2 Who is Responsible for the PRSP? A number of stakeholders are involved in the development and implementation of the PRSP: the government, the civil society, the World Bank, the IMF, and other de- velopment agencies. The PRSP should be country-owned: the government has the leading role in the process, and civil society should participate as much as possible. The World Bank, the IMF and development agencies provide technical and financial support for this process. What is the role of the government? The government is responsible for the overall coordination of the process. In many coordination countries a separate unit, department or office is in charge of this task. For example, Tanzania has set up a PRSP unit within the Vice President’s Office. The government outlines the timeline and the methodology for the PRSP process. Which actors are covered by the term “civil society”, and what is their role? The civil society includes all stakeholder groups and individuals besides the govern- single persons ment.The term refers to single persons and organisations, such as NGOs, community- based organisations (CBOs), faith-based organisations, trade unions, etc. The organisations government should develop a strategy for poverty reduction together with repre- sentatives of all of these stakeholders. 4 2 Overview How do the World Bank and the IMF operate? Almost all countries of the world are members of these two international financial institutions (IFI), which intend to regulate the global economic system and provide assistance to nearly all developing countries. The World Bank in particular supports low-income countries through the provision of financial and technical support. As financial and part of the PRSP process, they advise their client countries, decide on whether to lend technical support money and how much, and grant debt relief. The World Bank for its part has written a “Sourcebook on Poverty Reduction Strategies”, which provides guidelines for any PRSP process. International organisations International (donor) organisations have a different function in the PRSP process: they mainly offer technical advice to both government and civil society. They also technical advice provide financial support for all stages of the process, as well as in some cases staff financial support secondment to the national PRSP institutions. In many countries the different donor organisations form groups that meet regularly (e.g. monthly) to discuss the state of progress of the PRSP. How is the cooperation between these stakeholders organised? The national government leads the process. It organises events – such as conferences, seminars or workshops – in which civil society representatives participate, with the aim of offering the opportunity to conduct open discussions and to exchange infor- different events mation. An increasing number of countries have established specific PRSP institu- tions, e.g. technical committees or working groups which provide a sustainable frame- work for the development of the PRSP process. Very often these institutions include institutions a mixture of different stakeholders. In some countries, civil society organisations (CSOs) coordinate their own consultative and participatory process by establishing participatory networks, raising awareness on their behalf and trying to persuade policymakers. process Chapter 5B, sub-section 3, provides more details on stakeholders and their analysis 2.3 What Is the PRSP about? According to the World Bank and the IMF, PRSP documents should do the following: content of PRSP documents 1. Explain the participatory process leading to the formulation of the PRSP 2. Describe the poverty profile of the country 3. Set targets and priorities within the proposed policy measures 4. Provide a plan for monitoring and evaluation. The PRSP document describes the poverty profile of the country, ideally based on a poverty profile of the country poverty analysis. Goals, targets and indicators are based on this profile, defining the criteria for measuring their future achievement (for example: “Within the next five years, the number of persons living in poverty will be reduced by 30 %”). The priori- priorisation tisation and planning of actions follows accordingly. This action plan often turns out action plan to be the most difficult part, as nearly all countries face many different challenges at the same time, and the involvement and coordination of all stakeholders requires in 5 2 Overview fact a very professional approach and effective organisation. The PRSP document also includes a plan for monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the proj- monitoring and ects and programmes. evaluation The new understanding of poverty emphasises its multidimensionality. As a PRSP new understanding affects a wide range of areas, it includes almost all sectors of society. The proposed of poverty measures and actions address many different issues, e.g. the macro economy, trade, private industries, infrastructure, agriculture, governance, education, health, social protection,gender,environmental protection,rural development,etc.In consequence, PRSP documents are very comprehensive and are on average around 200 pages long. Chapter 5B, sub-section 2.3., describes the content of PRSPs 2.4 How Does the PRSP Process Work? A PRSP process consists of three main phases: formulation, implementation and three main phases monitoring/evaluation. PRSP is an ongoing learning process, meaning that all stake- holders involved should critically reflect on their work and make efforts to improve it at all stages. Monitoring Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation (Preparation 1st Annual 2nd Annual PRSP I-PRSP Status PRSP 1 Progress Progress Review PRSP II Report) Report Report The poverty analysis is the starting point of the PRSP process, and is designed to help understand the specific causes and consequences of poverty within the country concerned.The analysis gathers quantitative data (e.g. the number of people living in poverty) as well as qualitative data (e.g. the feelings and individual views of persons affected). The poverty analysis indicates the priority issues and forms the basis for the formulation of the PRSP strategy. This takes several steps, during which the formulation different stakeholders discuss the various drafts of the PRSP until they reach consensus. In this process of formulating the PRSP, it is essential that the government organises participatory events enabling an exchange between all stakeholders. This usually requires a substantial amount of time: the establishment of a full PRSP takes on average 24 months. Most countries therefore formulate an Interim PRSP (I-PRSP) before the full version, in order to gain access to debt relief and credits as soon as possible. However, the drawback of an I-PRSP is that the participation of the civil society is generally limited. The government then sends the finalised PRSP to the World Bank and the IMF for assessment and approval of the strategy. After the proposed activities have been authorised, the implementation phase starts. implementation A comprehensive PRSP will already include the different responsibilities and a budget for the implementation of activities. The government is supposed to align its 6 2 Overview annual national budget according to the PRSP, and the ministries are expected to plan and facilitate the required actions. In some countries, CSOs and international stakeholders are also strongly involved in the implementation phase, which lasts three to five years. The monitoring and evaluation process starts parallel to the implementation. It monitoring allows the actions and measures taken to be monitored and provides an indication of and evaluation their efficiency regarding poverty reduction. The government has to submit regular progress reports (approximately once a year) to the World Bank and the IMF. In the last year of the implementation phase,all stakeholders again jointly evaluate the whole strategy in order to revise the PRSP paper where necessary. The new PRSP is based on this revision, and effectively restarts the process. Experience shows that revising the PRSP entails considerable work, as it normally starts during the implementation and monitoring of actions stage of the original PRSP. The revision itself takes approximately one to two years. Chapter 4 and Chapter 5B, sub-section 2.3, explain the structure of the PRSP process in more detail 2.5 Who Finances the PRSP? The national budget of a country allocates most financial means for implementing national budget the PRSP. However, an increasing number of international donors also support the international donors PRSP concept with a direct budget, adding this to the governmental budget rather than purely providing money for projects and programmes as in the past. The dis- cussion on financial issues and the allocation of money within the national budget also requires a participatory approach with the contribution of the civil society, even though for non-economists this subject is very complex and challenging. In recent years there have been many efforts to make this process more transparent to the public, e.g. by conducting budgetary audits and increasing the number of discussions. However, more improvement still needs to be made in this regard. 2.6 Why Is It Important to Include Disability in the PRSP? Disability is a cause and consequence of poverty: poor people are more likely to have a cause and a disability, and people with disabilities are more likely to be poor. The World Health consequence of poverty Organization (WHO) estimates that 7–10% of the world’s population live with a dis- ability.Various aspects of poverty affect people with disabilities: in general, they have little financial means, but they also have no political power and face discrimination at all levels of society. The PRSP approach accordingly defines poverty not only as a lack of financial and material means, but also as a lack of social freedom, justice and equal opportunities. The PRSP process addresses all sectors of society, all of which are, without exception, approach to disability also relevant for people with disabilities. Studies show that the participation of DPOs leads to a very different approach to disability issues within the PRSP:Without DPOs, 7 2 Overview for example, most activities proposed for people with disabilities follow a concept based on charity, while with the participation of DPOs, the focus shifts clearly to education, training and employment. The active involvement of people with disabil- ities and DPOs is therefore necessary at every stage of the PRSP, as they are the experts on specific poverty issues. Initially only a few PRSPs considered people with disabilities; nowadays, the number PRSPs and disability is increasing. However, the quality and quantity of the proposed activities still varies extremely for the following three reasons: First, for a long time the World Bank itself failed to notice people with disabilities and their requirements. The World Bank’s main guideline, the “Sourcebook for Poverty Reduction Strategies”, lacks a compre- hensive approach that appropriately addresses the issue. Second, in the past people with disabilities and their organisations seldom participated in the PRSP process. Third, few studies have been undertaken regarding the situation of people with dis- abilities, which means that there is only limited understanding of important issues. And as the poverty analyses conducted rarely include people with disabilities, the proposed actions seldom address the real problems. Chapter 5B, section 5 discusses the situation of the PRSP process vis-à-vis disability Chapter 5C provides some basic definitions, as well as an explanation of sector approaches to disability 2.7 How Can a DPO Participate in the PRSP? Like all other CSOs, DPOs have the right to participate in the national PRSP process. the right to The context and approach vary considerably from country to country, as do the stage participate reached and state of progress of the national PRSP. However, in general all stages of entry points for the process offer entry points for the civil society, of which the most significant are: the civil society 1. Formulation: A Participatory Poverty Analysis (PPA) is often part of the formulation formulation stage,allowing DPOs to contribute their opinions and experiences with poverty. After the formulation process has started, DPOs may then review the PRSP drafts, comment on them, propose some new important issues, contact the persons in charge of PRSP formulation, and participate in PRSP workshops, conferences, etc. 2. Implementation: During the implementation of the PRSP strategy, the contri- implementation bution of DPOs includes providing advice, sensitisation, project execution, etc. 3. Monitoring and evaluation: Sometimes the responsible institutions and monitoring and evaluation structures offer the civil society and DPOs the opportunity to participate, observe and evaluate the quality and quantity of activities. The PRSP process is based on a long-term perspective: after entering at one point, a long-term DPOs need patience and endurance to participate regularly and continuously. Single perspective interventions may have an effect in the short term, but they will never result in long- lasting changes. However, a long-term approach demands minimum capacity on the part of the DPO concerned. In order to obtain a realistic picture about a given 8 2 Overview organisation’s capacity, the carrying out of an organisational self-assessment may organisational represent a helpful start. This provides the basis for any future planning on the part self-assessment of the DPO, and offers the opportunity to identify and overcome existing difficulties, thereby contributing to the unity of the national disability movement. The PRSP is a countrywide strategy and involves many different stakeholders; for this reason, networking and alliances are essential ways of becoming stronger. Only through close cooperation with other organisations is it possible to achieve unity; this also ensures unity of the national that essential issues are given more prominence. Furthermore, the systematic use of disability movement lobbying and advocacy tools and techniques is essential in order to find the right and lobbying and advocacy most successful approach for each country. Chapter 4 describes these entry points in more detail Chapter 5C, section 5 explains the sector approaches on PRSP and disability Chapter 5D introduces different approaches to process and project management Chapter 5E presents basic lobbying and advocacy techniques Dimensions of Poverty. Source: Research and Analysis Working Group (2004): Tackling Vulnerability. An Approach to Poverty Reduction. A Plain Language Guide to the 2002/2003 Tanzania Participatory Poverty Assessment. p. 3. Available at: http://www.hakikazi.org/papers/TzPPA-plain-language.pdf 9 3 How to Initiate a PRSP and Disability Process 3.1 Important Steps and Elements There are various methods and approaches that enable DPOs to participate in a national PRSP process.The scope ranges from a single intervention at a specific event to continuous, long-term participation; this depends on many different elements such as the general level of motivation, existing capacities, available funds, and the communication and information system. Independent of these differences, four basic steps need to be followed if a process four basic steps addressing PRSP and disability is to be successfully initiated: PRSP 1 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Orientation phase 1 Meeting of possible allies 2 Identification of possible entry points 3 Development and implementation of a joint strategy 4 In reality, these phases overlap: the information gathering and data collection overlap of all phases proposed as part of the orientation phase are in fact ongoing processes; meetings, workshops and seminars are always the most important means for exchange and coordination; the defined strategy needs to be adjusted from time to time. Therefore these four steps serve as important points of reference that need to be included at some stage when initiating the participation of DPOs in the national PRSP process. 3.1.1 Orientation Phase Usually general and even specific information already exists about disability and PRSP stakeholders. However, an efficient stakeholder analysis will provide interest- ing new aspects even for experienced experts in the field when carried out with a variety of different stakeholders. Analysis of Disability Stakeholders: Internal and External Disability stakeholders can be analysed on two levels: the external and the internal. two levels The external analysis evaluates the whole system of stakeholders involved in the field external analysis : the stakeholders’ system of disability. It supplies information about possible allies and partners, and explains the relationships between these stakeholders. Going into more depth, it facilitates the choice of partner organisations and provides valuable elements for any DPO seeking to find an appropriate position within the system. 10 3 PRSP and Disability Process The internal analysis usually entails an organisational self-assessment. This enables internal analysis: organisational the DPO to evaluate its own capacities and potentials more effectively. Such a self-assessment self-assessment strengthens any organisation as it includes examining the DPO’s iden- tity by analysing its internal strengths and weaknesses, and by identifying opportuni- ties and constraints linked to the environment. The results help to establish a realis- tic picture of existing capacities, and also help the organisation to learn and to adapt more easily to a changing environment. At the same time, this assessment facilitates the planning and implementation of any project or activity. An organisational self-assessment also shows the existing potential of any DPO to participate in or contribute to the development of a national disability movement. Analysis of National PRSP Stakeholders The analysis of national PRSP stakeholders outlines the current stage reached in the details on stakeholders national PRSP process and supplies details on the stakeholders involved and their inter-relationships. This usually includes the responsible government unit as well as the leading civil society stakeholders. On the basis of this information, DPOs can more easily identify possible entry points, as well as possible allies for network- ing at steps 2 and 3 later on. Chapter 5D, section 1, provides more details about stakeholder analysis and organisational self-assessment 3.1.2 Meeting of Possible Allies In the second step, an extensive process of knowledge-sharing takes place between extensive knowledge-sharing the various stakeholders. This allows the stakeholders to get to know each other, and makes information available and transparent. In Tanzania, DPOs organised a specif- ic workshop for this purpose. Other possibilities include conferences, seminars, meet- ings and telephone calls. Usually this first exchange of information on the national PRSP and disability issues also leads to some initial brainstorming about possible solutions. However, it is even more important during this first meeting to agree on a coordination mechanism for any future activity. This again depends on specific local coordination conditions, existing capacities and available funds. mechanism Chapter 5E, section 2.2: Convincing and Strategic Communication 3.1.3 Identification of Possible Entry Points The first knowledge exchange normally answers many questions, but also raises some new update and gather further information ones.As a result, it is necessary to gather further information and also to update some data in order to identify the most suitable entry points into the national PRSP process.As circum- stances vary considerably from country to country, any groupseeking to include disability into the national PRSP will discover different entry points and occasions for participation. different entry points Chapter 4 provides more details about possible entry points 11 3 PRSP and Disability Process 3.1.4 Development and Implementation of a Joint Strategy Once the different entry points and occasions for participation in the national PRSP important issues, have been identified, the organisations concerned need to develop a joint strategy problems and messages on important issues, problems and messages and to agree on the different roles and responsibilities linked to this strategy. Issues include a strategy on how to influence different roles and PRSP decision-makers, how to participate in the process, how to involve more allies, responsibilities how to conduct particular analyses, how to provide specific advice, and how to im- plement projects. Any follow-up requires a specific framework, such as a network, a forum, a way of agreeing on regular meetings, or a news exchange mechanism, such as an email distribution list. The defined strategy will also need to be adjusted from time to time. Chapter 5D provides more details about networks, alliances and strategic planning 3.2 Experiences in Tanzania In 2005 Tanzania published its second PRSP. Due to the sustained involvement of DPOs during the review and formulation process, the document includes a disability dimension at various points. Although this represents a great success, DPOs never- theless discovered various weaknesses in the document: it does not consider all aspects, and the implementation and monitoring stages are still vague. For this reason, the Christoffel-Blindenmission started a project based at the CCBRT Headquarters in Dar Es Salaam to promote the inclusion of people with disabilities in the ongoing PRSP process. First, the project coordinator surveyed the relevant survey of the relevant Tanzanian stakeholders and analysed the PRSP and the PRSP process with regard Tanzanian stakeholders to their relevance to disability (phase 1: orientation). As second step, the coordina- analysis of the PRSP tor organised two meetings of representatives from four important DPOs (phase 2: meetings of DPOs the meeting of possible allies). At these meetings the participants discussed setting up a workshop to develop a strategy to include disability in the PRSP process. Finally, a variety of possible allies participated in the workshop, including more than 60 persons from DPOs, organisations working for people with disabilities, government departments, United Nations (UN) organisations and international NGOs (INGOs). As they were already part of the Tanzanian participatory PRSP process, participants confirmed that they saw the implementation phase as the most relevant entry point for their future contribution (phase 3: the identification of possible entry points). responsibility for Following the workshop, many organisations took on responsibility for certain action certain action points points of the PRSP and introduced projects which they are currently implementing. PRSP Disability Network A newly created PRSP Disability Network observes and coordinates these activities (phase 4: implementation of the strategy). Members or advisors of this network com- prise representatives from DPOs, organisations working for people with disabilities, government departments, UN organisations and (I)NGOs. Tool No. 34 12 3 PRSP and Disability Process Workshop Survey on Establishment Workshop disability and meeting results: Establishment stakeholders, of Workshop plan for of a analysis of Planning network network PRSP process Committee and projects The Case Study in Chapter 5A, provides more details about the Tanzanian workshop and the whole PRSP process Discussion group at the Workshop in Tanzania, September 2005 © Andreas Pruisken, Christoffel-Blindenmission 13 4 Entry Points for the Civil Society in the PRSP Process 4.1 Overview One of the main principles of the PRSP approach is the participation of the civil society (see Chapter 5B). However, in reality civil society stakeholders are often not included in all stages of the PRSP process, not because governments do not want to include them, but rather that they do not know how to include them. CSOs need to claim their right to participate and to be active in terms of showing that they are capable of participating. The following sub-sections propose some ideas and tools for participation in the three main PRSP stages: formulation, implementation, and three main stages: monitoring and evaluation. Still, as the context and the situation vary considerably formulation, implementation, between different countries, the particular entry points into the national PRSP monitoring and process need to be separately identified each time. Experience shows that network- evaluation ing and building alliances play an important role for DPOs as well as the systematic use of lobbying and advocacy tools at all stages (see Chapters 5D and 5E). 4.2 Formulation 4.2.1 Steps and Stages The process leading to the formulation of a PRSP consists of several steps with three different levels of participation: information, consultation and decision-making. The approach and methodology of this process are extremely country-specific; no standard models or miracle solutions exist. The Tanzanian PRSP, for example, was formulated in three stages: Example: Tanzania 1st stage: Broad contacts, networking and gathering information (for example, collecting the results of the PPA) took place at the grassroots level. Result: an initial draft of the PRSP. 2nd stage: Individuals and organisations analysed these grassroots level results, revised the initial draft, and forwarded their recommendations to the drafters. Result: the first draft. 3rd stage: Consultations with selected organisations and entities took place in a one-week event. Presentations followed the structure of the three clusters proposed in the first draft. The participants made concrete comments and gave presentations on specific issues. This example shows how the PRSP document was drafted and revised several times, PRSP document revised several times giving CSOs ample opportunity to comment on the paper. In another example, DPOs and organisations working in the field of disability in Bangladesh, Honduras 14 4 Entry Points and Sierra Leone prepared position papers on their respective draft PRSPs (see Chapter 5A). Many countries set up sector working groups (known as “cluster groups” in Tanzania) sector working groups that are responsible for different parts of the PRSP. People with disabilities need at least to participate in discussions on subjects such as social protection, health, human development, education, employment and infrastructure.Without their participation, there is the danger that the disability dimension will be overlooked, thus potentially reducing people with disabilities to medical and welfare cases. DPOs and other organisations working in the field of disability should try to gather information about the state of progress of their national PRSP process and develop a joint strategy for all important issues. Intense networking is important at this point networking (see Chapter 5D). The development of a joint disability strategy definitely takes a considerable amount of time. However, when trying to influence decision-makers, it is important to be united, since one voice is stronger and louder than many unco- ordinated individual voices. Lobbying and advocacy instruments such as campaigns lobbying and advocacy for awareness-raising (see Chapter 5E) can influence decision-makers; partnerships with the media, (I)NGOs and government officials can improve capacities. It might be useful, for example, to formulate a “Disability Action Plan” and to include differ- “Disability Action Plan” ent stakeholders, e.g. employers in order to analyse working opportunities. It is important that all PRSP stakeholders try to include a disability dimension in their sectors, as selective programmes do not address the whole vicious circle of disabili- ty-exclusion-poverty (see Chapter 5C, section 4). To become more comprehensive and coherent, policy needs to focus on a sector, not on a target group. People with Tool No. 7 disabilities do not constitute a homogeneous group, and their possibilities range from total to zero autonomy; policy formulation therefore has to keep these degrees in mind and to offer a range of opportunities accordingly. 4.2.2 Poverty Analysis The aim of the poverty analysis is to provide the basis for the formulation of the PRSP basis for the document and the implementation of the programmes. If done well, it supplies formulation crucial information on what causes poverty and what needs to be done in order to address the identified shortcomings. Once the poverty diagnostic has been complet- ed, DPOs should ensure that the results already have an effect on the formulation of the PRSP and that, at a later stage, a link is made with the programmes identified in the PRSP. The poverty analysis is essential for setting priorities and influencing policies. However, until now poverty analyses have often failed to consider people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. One reason is the lack of knowledge and reliable data. As the PRSP also offers the opportunity to request data, a DPO’s contribution at that stage includes improving the quality and the type of existing information by executing surveys and small-scale studies with quantitative as well as small-scale studies qualitative data on specific issues. The collection of qualitative data might permit a with quantitative and qualitative data more comprehensive analysis, and is also necessary to understand the causes that lie behind the numbers. While a well-designed poverty analysis provides the basis for more objective decision-making, unreliable data carry a high risk of distorting 15 4 Entry Points reality. Therefore NGOs, DPOs and all stakeholders need to check and question all data that have been provided.The basis for all reliable and comparable data is a com- prehensive definition of disability. All stakeholders must therefore reflect on a joint definition and reliable data collection methods (see Chapter 5E, Lobby and Advocacy). The Honduran PRSP recognised the lack of reliable data on people with Example: Honduras disabilities, and suggested integrating modules on people with disabilities into the national household survey “Incorporate a module within the surveys of the National Statistics Institute, on various aspects of disability in order to identify, among other things, the geographic location and socioeconomic and demo- graphic characteristics of the population with disabilities.” (Gov. of Honduras, 2001, p. 89). On the basis of this statement in the PRSP, Handicap International was able to remind the National Statistics Institute to include a section on dis- ability in the multipurpose household survey and to develop a methodology for data collection together with Honduran DPOs. participatory A specialised method – participatory poverty analysis (PPA) – was developed in the poverty analysis 1990s and first used mainly in rural areas. The definition of poverty in PPA includes a monetary dimension (consumption and income), but it also considers vulnerability, vulnerability physical and social isolation, insecurity, lack of self-respect, lack of access to infor- isolation mation, and powerlessness. The advantages of a PPA are that it takes less time to insecurity complete and is cheaper than a conventional household survey. The methodology lack of self-respect used involves direct contacts with people living in poverty, because they are consid- lack of access ered to be the ones that know best what poverty means in practice. Researchers powerlessness discuss with them their situation, using methods that are adjusted according to the specific objective of the poverty research. In contrast to a traditional analysis, a PPA does not use standardised methods such as pre-formulated questionnaires; instead, the methodology is tailored to the research situation. An additional aim is also to en- able the people concerned to exercise greater control over the whole research process. In Tanzania DPOs were involved in the participatory poverty analysis. Example: Two of them, the Information Centre on Disability (ICD) and Shivyawata Tanzania (an umbrella organisation comprising six DPOs) received funds to conduct a poverty analysis.ICD contacted 80 people with disabilities from different socio- economic backgrounds in four Tanzanian regions and interviewed them about their poverty situation, while Shivyawata conducted a larger analysis in 21 regions.The results of this survey proved that people with disabilities are among the poorest of the poor, and that the causes of poverty are not one-dimensional but rather multidimensional. 16 4 Entry Points Norton, Andy (2001): A Rough Guide to PPAs – Participatory Tools No. 5–6 Poverty Assessment: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. http://www.odi.org.uk/pppg/publications/books/ppa.pdf Robb, Caroline M. (2000): How the Poor Can Have a Voice in Government Policy. www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/12/robb.htm, (www.imf.org publications) The World Bank Poverty Net with Voices of the Poor: http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/poverty/voices/index.htm Government of Honduras (2002): Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 2001–2015. Tegucigalpa. Downloaded from: www.worldbank.org/prsp 4.3 Implementation 4.3.1 Entry Points Offered by Specific Projects PRSP is considered to be a national strategy. Therefore it is mainly the task of the government in question to budget and implement the activities and actions defined in the PRSP as soon as possible. International donors usually contribute an additional amount to the national budget. (I)NGOs need to check how best to coordinate their activities with the national PRSP strategy. The different stakeholders are supposed to have already negotiated the different roles and responsibilities in respect of different roles and responsibilities different activities and actions defined in the PRSP during the formulation process. Specific CSOs may also have already been identified with regard to implementing a particular action point. Some PRSP documents additionally include a matrix where responsibilities are clearly marked (see Annex of Tanzanian PRSP available at http://www.tanzania.go.tz/nsgrf.html); other countries prefer to develop a separate implementation plan. Sometimes it is possible and even necessary that a CSO con- implementation tributes with its specific knowledge and is prepared to advise the relevant institutions: plan for example, a DPO could advise the Ministry of Labour about employment obsta- cles. However, even if not included in the implementation stage, CSOs play an important role in monitoring the execution of activities or reminding the responsible monitoring the execution institutions about forgotten action points defined in the PRSP. As in all stages of the PRSP, a united, strong network of organisations in the field of disability produces more efficient results, especially by systematically using advocacy and lobbying techniques (see Chapter 5E). Using the PRSP implementation phase and specific projects as entry points, it is im- portant to start at an early stage. The first step assesses which projects are being start at an early stage prepared, while the second step includes the selection of relevant projects and mak- ing contact with representatives of organisations. The most efficient entry point is at the preparation stage (i.e. the formulation of the concept note), not when the project Tool No. 8 is nearly ready for approval. Tools No. 26 –29 17 4 Entry Points 4.3.2 Entry Points Offered by Budgets An important part of the implementation of PRSP activities is budget allocation. budget allocation Government and donors are supposed to allocate budgets according to the PRSP. A budget is effectively the translation of planned actions into resources, and reveals the priorities set by the government. Budgets exist on various levels: national, regional levels: national or communal; there are also departmental and programme budgets. Normally, regional governments formulate and finalise their budget every year. However, the PRSP con- communal text is somewhat different, as an increasing number of countries are now seeking to formulate mid-term budgets covering three to five years.This new instrument is known as a Medium-term Expenditure Framework, or MTEF for short. No matter what kind of budget, MTEF or a conventional annual budget, the civil society must assess and monitor the budget framework. However, this may often be difficult for two reasons. First, budgets often lack transparency, making any involve- lack of transparency ment of the civil society difficult. This may be intentional, or could be attributed to insufficient communication. In the latter case, the collection of relevant information may be difficult and time-consuming, but not impossible. Second, it is doubtful that most non-economists would be sufficiently motivated or expert enough to scrutinise challenge for non-economists budget documents. One solution is to establish a link with local universities and to hire a professional for this work (see Chapter 5A, Case Study Bangladesh). Budgets consist of three phases: 1. Budget formulation: The first phase takes place in the last months of the finan- budget formulation cial year (this differs in many cases from the calendar year, e.g. in Tanzania it spans the period 1st July–30th June), when the government (usually the Ministry of Finance) circulates a draft budget indicating the allocation of funds among the various ministries. This process is traditionally done by the government, although the civil society is becoming increasingly involved. 2. Budget debate and analysis: The second phase consists of the approval of the budget debate and analysis: budget by the parliament and/or legislature. Reading and understanding budget documents is however often challenging as they tend to be very technical.However, parliamentarians could prove useful allies in accessing and understanding these documents. 3. Budget implementation: The third phase is that of implementation, which can budget differ from what was actually planned. The key question is how much money is implementation actually spent, and with what effect. Two possibilities exist in terms of monitoring: • Monitor the inputs, i.e. how much is spent on a specific programme? • Monitor the outputs, i.e. what effects do the programmes have? For this, the tools of the PPA are again useful. 18 4 Entry Points “With its transparency, its cooperative decision-making processes and its Example: sophisticated monitoring system, the Ugandan Poverty Action Fund (PAF) Uganda is probably the most advanced model of institutionalised participation in the context of poverty alleviation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Around 35 percent of the national government budget is now accounted for by the PAF. While in princi- ple, decisions on how this money is used as well as corresponding reporting are dealt with in the course of the regular budget compilation process and are sub- ject to a final decision by parliament, extensive debates take place in public sessions called on a quarterly basis. These debates address priorities set in the PAF, important individual measures, controversial issues as well as government reporting on implementation. A number of NGOs and NGO networks regular- ly and actively participate in these meetings, which are also open to representa- tives of the donor side and journalists.” (VENRO, 2005 pp.5,6). The Poverty Reduction Fund established in 2003 in Honduras has a similar Example: Honduras function: it consists of government representatives and elected civil society representatives. DPOs and organisations working for people with disabilities have succeeded in claiming one seat for a DPO representative (see Chapter 5A, Case Study Honduras). Oxfam (2002): Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide Tool No. 9 Section 4: Monitoring the Implementation of Policy. www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/downloads/ prsp_guide.pdf Trocaire (2002): Guide to Civil Society Engagement in Advocacy on Economic Justice and PRSP Section 3. http://www.trocaire.ie/policyandadvocacy/debt/Guide%20to%20Civil%20 Society%20Engagement%20in%20PRSP/Introduction.htm VENRO (2005): Fighting Poverty without Empowering the Poor? Societal Participation in Implementing Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRS) Falls behind Needs and Possibilities. www.prsp-watch.de/publikationen/archiv/PRSP%20WEB%20Engl.pdf 19 4 Entry Points 4.3.3 Related Instruments There are various other processes linked to the PRSP that also offer potential entry points: • A regular meeting of government and donors, called the Consultative Group Consultative Group Meeting,takes place in most countries.There is a growing tendency to invite mem- Meeting bers of the civil society to this meeting. • Some countries establish sector groups to work and decide on specific issues re- sector groups lated to their sector. These groups comprise not only government officials but also civil society experts. • The discussions on World Bank and IMF lending instruments are generally World Bank and IMF: not open for public participation, but it might be worthwhile to try to obtain some lending instruments information on the content of the IMF’s Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) and the World Bank’s Poverty Reduction Support Credit (PRSC), as these both strongly influence the macroeconomic framework of the PRSP. • The World Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) is increasingly involving Country Assistance Strategy the civil society. As the CAS should be aligned with the PRSP, it is important to control the content. Information on the CAS process is available at the World Bank Resident Mission. • Another interesting entry point is the link with the Millennium Development Millennium Development Goals Goals (MDGs): several of the MDGs will be impossible to attain without addressing disability issues. This is of course most obvious in the case of educa- tion and health. Tool No. 35 Check the websites of the World Bank and the IMF for more information on the CAS, PRGF, PRSC, etc. www.worldbank.org Countries, www.imf.org Country Info For more information on related instruments, see Chapter 5B 4.4 Monitoring and Evaluation The PRSP process is supposed to be an ongoing process of constant learning and constant learning revision of programmes over a long-term period. This process requires regular and and revision strategic monitoring to identify shortcomings and to modify its premises according- ly.The system of regular monitoring and evaluation is not specific to the PRSP process, but can be broadly applied to most projects, programmes and policies (see Chapter 5D). Usually the PRSP describes the monitoring and evaluation system to be used during the implementation of programmes and projects, and lists the targets and indicators (see Chapter 5A, Case Studies). 20 4 Entry Points Definitions: definitions • Monitoring entails ongoing observation of the implementation of the PRSP with monitoring the objective of checking regularly what is happening, how and why, and com- paring this to the original plans. • Evaluation entails an assessment of results, but takes place less frequently than evaluation monitoring at specific intervals (either at project milestones and/or at the end of the implementation phase). The focus is much more on whether or not set tar- gets and goals have been achieved. Three main issues can be monitored and evaluated: three main issues • Input: What activities were planned? What activities were implemented? input • Output: What did the project achieve? (intermediate project results) output • Outcome: What general impact did the project have in the long term? outcome 4.4.1 Indicators Indicators are a set of criteria that have been either mutually agreed on by all stake- set of criteria holders, or imposed by a donor. They allow the input, output and outcome of a project to be measured. Setting indicators is essential for monitoring and evaluation, and is of most use if it has already been completed in the planning phase. Indicators must meet specific conditions, or it becomes difficult to apply them. Qualitative and Tool No. 10 quantitative indicators need to be balanced. Experience shows that most often, PRSP disability programmes have no targets or indicators to monitor. There is a long list of possible indicators for each monitoring issue; among the most essential are a few outcome indicators, such as the number/ outcome indicators percentage of children with disabilities that are enrolled in school, the number/ percentage of people with disabilities who are employed, etc. Some important process process indicators indicators include whether laws have been adopted or building codes introduced (e.g. guaranteeing physical access to buildings, etc.), and so on. 4.4.2 Annual Progress Reports The government prepares an Annual Progress Report (APR) to inform its develop- ment partners and the civil society about the progress made in the implementation progress of the phase of the PRSP. However, in practice the timeframe of one year does not always implementation apply. Many countries have installed their own monitoring and evaluation systems which contribute to their APRs. Some countries present or discuss their APRs with the civil society at events on poverty reduction, e.g. Tanzania’s Poverty Policy Week. Other countries have established their own institutions or councils which are respons- ible for monitoring and evaluation, for example the Poverty Steering Committee and the Dissemination, Sensitization and Advocacy Technical Group in Tanzania. These institutions consist of civil society members (including DPOs) alongside gov- ernmental representatives. 21 4 Entry Points 4.4.3 Review Process A PRSP is valid for three to five years. At the end of this period its implementation after three to five years is evaluated and reviewed. This happens with civil society participation, and the results contribute to the formulation of a new PRSP. Until now, only a few countries have actually conducted a review (e.g. Tanzania and Uganda). The review and for- mulation processes of the new PRSP provide the civil society with new opportunities new opportunities for civil society to make contributions. In this phase another poverty analysis is often conducted, and the priorities for the next implementation phase are redefined. The review is sup- posed to be based on the results of the evaluation of the original PRSP. The revision or review process itself lasts many months (typically between 12 and 18). In Tanzania and Uganda, guiding documents had been drafted which outlined the methodology and the timeframe of the review process. In Tanzania, DPOs were able to integrate a disability dimension into the PRSP Example: Tanzania during the review of the first document. As the review process ends in a new formulation phase, this represents a very efficient entry point. PRSP Process and Phases Monitoring Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation (Preparation 1st Annual 2nd Annual PRSP I-PRSP Status PRSP 1 Progress Progress Review PRSP II Report) Report Report Possible Entry Points • Poverty analysis • Reminders for the • Participate in • Participation in • Participation in implementation of Monitoring and consultations consultations PRSP programmes Evaluation Unit • Influencing the • Influencing the • Investment projects, • Conduct indepen- drafting and content draft and content economic and dent monitoring of the paper of the paper sector work and evaluation • Donor meeting • Review and com- ment on the progress reports • Technical groups Helpful Strategies • PPA methods • Lobbying for • Process and project • PPA methods • Lobbying implementation management • Lobbying • Advocacy • Budget monitoring • Lobbying and • Advocacy • Project management advocacy Figure 1: Entry points for the civil society in the PRSP process 22 5A Case Studies A.1 Case Study 1: Honduras PRSP Process and Phases Monitoring Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation 1st Annual 2nd Annual PRSP I-PRSP PRSP 1 Progress Progress Review PRSP II Report Report 2000 2001 2003 2005 Entry Points • Participatory • Establishment of a • Annual Progress process and Poverty Reduction Report (APR) formulation almost Fund (which finances completed PRSP activities) Strategies • The national • The national • The disability forum disability forum and disability forum and wrote a position Handicap Inter- Handicap Inter- document and national contacted national lobbied to complained that they government workers have a DPO member had not been invited and asked for advice on the board of the to the meeting at • The national dis- Poverty Reduction which the Annual ability forum and Fund Progress Report Handicap Inter- was discussed national sent a position document to the government’s PRSP Division, USAID, and other civil society stake- holders A.1.1 PRSP in Honduras Honduras was one of the first South American countries to publish a PRSP:the process process started started in 2000, a Full PRSP was published in 2001, and the second APR in 2005. The in 2000 main motivation of the government behind starting the PRSP process was to attain debt relief from the IMF and the World Bank. The Ministry of the Presidency was made responsible for overall process coordination. Back in 2001, CSOs criticised the fact that civil society participation was inadequate and that their remarks had not been included. In consequence, a strong network of CSOs conducted their own par- ticipatory process and published an alternative PRSP. In contrast to other countries, the Honduran government takes the PRSP process very seriously, and as a result now serious participatory aims at conducting a serious participatory process. However, democracy is still process relatively new to Honduras, and the government does not have much experience. The majority of problems therefore occur with regard to bureaucratic inefficiency. In 2004 an independent assessment stated that there had still only been a “few inno- vations” concerning participation (see Hunt, 2005, p. 9). 23 5A Case Studies A.1.2 Disability in Honduras Various estimations suggest that there are almost 700,000 persons with disabilities living in the country, which is equivalent to 10% of the population. The 2002 survey recorded 177,516 persons in Honduras as having a disability, but the definition used was rather narrow. 68% of those covered by the census were unemployed (compared to 49 % for the total population), 53% were illiterate, 44% of children with disabili- ties did not have access to school (compared to 8% for non-disabled children), and only 17 % of people with disabilities received any kind of rehabilitation (see CIARH, 2003). At the moment, charitable and welfare approaches are still very common charitable and (Centre for International Rehabilitation, 2004). Honduras has two umbrella organi- welfare approaches sations active in the field of disability: first CIARH (Coordinadora de Instituciones two umbrella y Associaciones de Rehabilitacion de Honduras), which was founded in 1996, and organisations: CIARH today counts as members over half of all organisations working for people with FENOPDIH disabilities, plus a few DPOs; and second FENOPDIH (Federación Nacional de Organismos de Personas con Discapacidad de Honduras), a DPO federation that was created in 2001. A.1.3 Disability and PRSP In 2001 Handicap International realised that the PRSP draft did not address disabil- 2001: ity in an appropriate way. However, by then the formulation and the participatory inappropriate way of addressing disability process had almost been completed. Following the advice and connections of a personal contact personal contact working for the government, Handicap International and CIARH position document jointly wrote a position document and forwarded it to the divisions responsible for PRSP within the government, as well as to CSOs (which conducted a separate par- ticipatory process) and to the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Handicap International mainly provided knowledge, experience, contacts with donors, the media, the government as well as the financial means for meetings, while CIARH presented the position paper to the government. In 2003 the Poverty Re- 2003: duction Fund was established to finance PRSP activities. The board of the fund con- Poverty Reduction Fund sists partly of elected civil society representatives; Handicap International, CIARH and FENOPDIH succeeded in preserving one seat for a DPO representative. DPO representative A.1.4 Results Nearly all the suggestions made by Handicap International and CIARH were in- all the suggestions cluded in Honduras’ PRSP. However, people with disabilities did not achieve the included in PRSP same attention as ethnic minorities, for example, although they have more or less the same percentage within the population. The Honduran PRSP includes disability, own chapter on people becoming in 2002 the only PRSP to have its own chapter on people with disabilities with disabilities (see ILO, 2002, p. 16), recognising people with disabilities as a specific poverty risk group (see Government of Honduras, 2002, p. 18 – while this chapter was already included in the PRSP when Handicap International/CIARH made their assessment, National Information they did suggest some modifications).The obvious lack of reliable data initiated plans System for the establishment of a National Information System on people with disabilities. National Disability A planned National Disability Council is supposed to coordinate disability policies Council 24 5A Case Studies – for example, in the form of a National Plan – as well as a Technical Unit for integrated rehabilitation. Such an institutionalisation of disability issues is a key factor in creating effective and broad policies (see Bonnel, 2004, p. vi). Furthermore, institutionalisation people with disabilities are included in social protection measures, prevention, care of disability issues and rehabilitation programmes. Disability was also considered in the IMF and World Bank Joint Staff Assessment (JSA), which shows that both institutions recognised the importance of the issue (see ILO, 2002, p.20). The APRs detail the initial imple- mentation steps that have already been taken: “the National Policy on Preventing Disabilities and the Comprehensive Care and Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons and Protecting their Rights and Responsibilities has been approved. Meanwhile, the National Plan of Action for the Disabled is being developed, […].” (Government of Honduras, 2005, p. 5). Additionally, as promised in the PRSP, the National Institute of Statistics has included a module for measuring disability prevalence in the multi- measuring disability prevalence purpose household survey and has developed a methodology with the DPOs. A.1.5 Constraints The main constraint is the general lack of capacity: although much has been achieved, lack of capacity the organisations involved in this process faced several challenges. Especially at the beginning, CIARH had available only extremely limited human resources, as limited human capacities were already required to meet other important obligations. In addition, resources CIARH did not have any access to the donor community, although Handicap access to the donor International compensated at least meeting CIARH’s financial requirements. This community contributed to the ambivalence of Handicap International’s role as an INGO: ambivalence Handicap International, as a foreign organisation, was able to influence and drive the process forward, but at the same time intended to leave the ownership of activities to CIARH. Unfortunately, CIARH’s members are mainly service providers with only a few DPOs, and this added to the difficulties and problems concerning the legitimacy and credibility of both organisations within the Honduran disability legitimacy and movement. Additionally, on some issues, for example budget questions, both credibility Handicap International and CIARH lacked expertise and were not able to give lack of expertise satisfactory answers. Limits in terms of capacity and knowledge are also a main problem with regard to the monitoring and evaluation system of the PRSP imple- weak monitoring and evaluation mentation process, which in Honduras is generally weak. Very different persons participate in the sector meetings – bureaucrats and ministers on the one hand, and civil society representatives on the other. Not all participants are able to follow the discussions and understand the documents concerning the budget or macroeconom- ic issues, or to participate actively in the national decision-making processes; people with disabilities moreover face specific difficulties. For this reason, some INGOs and donors created a civil society support programme with specific training courses. In civil society support programme 2003 CIARH was not invited to a discussion about the APR, so the organisation wrote a position paper about the report. As a result, some of its arguments were position paper included. Of course, not all promises have been realised, and in the 2004 APR, civil society members were still calling for more participation of people with disabilities and requesting programmes other than just social welfare measures. 25 5A Case Studies A.1.6 Perspectives At the beginning, the fight to include people with disabilities was easy, as the tech- nocrats who were responsible for PRSP formulation realised their own omission. For local organisations such as CIARH and FENOPDIH, the process offers the possibility to enforce their internal and external legitimacy.The PRSP can open doors enforce internal and and provide a sound basis for further advocacy and action, but it is a long way from external legitimacy empowering people with disabilities to the extent that they see real changes in their living situation. This case study is mainly based on information provided by Thierry Gontier, former country director of Handicap International in Honduras. Bibliography: Bonnel, René (2004): Poverty Reduction Strategies: Their Importance for Disability. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/ Resources/Poverty/PRSPddteam.pdf CIARH (2003): Observaciones sobre el informe del primer año de la Estrategia de Reducción de la Probreza. Position paper on Annual Progress Report. (internal document) Centre for International Rehabilitation (2004): International Disability Right Monitor. Country Report Honduras, available at: http://www.cirnetwork.org/idrm/reports/americas/countries/honduras.html CIARH: http://ciarh.org.hn Government of Honduras (2002): Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 2001–2015. Tegucigalpa. Available at: www.worldbank.org/prsp Government of Honduras (2005): Annual Progress Report. Available at: www.worldbank.org/prsp Hunt, Sarah (2005): Honduras: PRSP Update. 17 April 2005, Final Version. Tegucigalpa. Downloaded from: www.trocaire.org/policyandadvocacy/prsp/Honduras%20Update%20Apr 05%20final.pdf ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies. How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. Downloaded from: www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/discpaper.pdf 26 5A Case Studies A.2 Case Study 2: Bangladesh PRSP Process and Phases Monitoring Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation 1st Annual 2nd Annual PRSP I-PRSP PRSP 1 Progress Progress Review PRSP II Report Report 2003 2005 Entry Points • Consultations for full PRSP formulation Strategies • National Forum of Disability Organi- sations and Handicap International: sent position paper and three-page summary on I-PRSP to key persons in the planning commission and other donor organisations • The National Forum organised its own consultation meeting, headed by the Ministry of Social Welfare • Participation in national and regional consultations, organised by the government • Action on Disability and Development (ADD) hired an economist to advise on disability costs, etc. A.2.1 PRSP in Bangladesh The PRSP process in Bangladesh started in 2001.The country’s I-PRSP was published process started in 2001 in March 2003, and the full version in October 2005. A Planning Commission for PRSP has been established within the Ministry of Finance to formulate the PRSP. A meeting of NGOs took place in March 2002 organised by ActionAid Bangladesh and the People’s Empowerment Trust (PET). This produced a declaration urging the World Bank to change the deadline for the preparation of the full PRSP, with the out- come that the time limit was postponed from September 2002 to the end of 2003. Researchers and NGOs have criticised the fact that the I-PRSP was written by just 27 5A Case Studies two foreign experts, because the government wanted to speed up the process so as to the government receive loans and credits quicker.They also criticised the fact that consultations were wanted to speed up the process only conducted with a professional elite and not with people actually living in poverty. The content of the I-PRSP does not really force the government to change any of its policies, as it omits important issues such as corruption, disaster protection, health and education. A.2.2 Disability in Bangladesh According to the national statistics, 0.47% of the population have some kind of disability (1991 census data; another census was conducted in 2001, but figures from this have not yet been released) (see www.apcdproject.org). Other surveys conduct- ed more recently by different organisations indicate a figure between 5 and 8%,which seems to be nearer to reality and close to WHO statistics for other Asian countries. In Bangladesh, the Disability Welfare Act of 2001 acknowledges the concerns of Disability people with disabilities. This legislation can on the one hand be “considered as a Welfare Act of 2001 milestone”, yet on the other “has been recognised as having various limitations and shortcomings” (www.apcdproject.org). One important organisation is NFOWD NFOWD (the National Forum of Organisations Working with the Disabled), which consists National Forum of Organisations Working of 176 member organisations, including various international organisations such as with the Disabled Handicap International, ActionAid, Sight Savers International, etc. The forum is closely linked to the Ministry of Welfare, so a close relationship exists with the government and, in consequence, also good contacts with the PRSP Planning Commission. The forum’s influence has grown during the long PRSP process and is also based on personal contacts and individual relationships. The Bangladesh case study notes the extremely positive fact that the ministries in Bangladesh are not only aware of the concerns of people with disabilities, but are even very interested in the issue of disability itself. A.2.3 Disability and PRSP In the beginning, only a few organisations (e.g. ActionAid and WaterAid) were involved in the PRSP process. In early 2002 an NGO meeting took place, where these organisations presented the PRSP process and the issues that needed to be addressed. The way the I-PRSP treated disability shocked participants: only one part dealt with people with disabilities, and this simply read “we will take care [regarding] difficult social cases, such as people with disabilities”. The perception that people with disabilities are “social cases” prompted Handicap International and NFOWD to publish a joint position paper taking the ILO paper (ILO, 2002) as a main source. position paper The team added sections on human rights and an analysis of the national I-PRSP, selected the sections that mentioned the term “disability”, and proposed improve- ments. NFOWD then made it possible to present the paper – and especially a three- page summary in the national language Bangla (the original was written in English) summary in the – to key persons in the Planning Commission, within the government and to donors. national language Bangla This summary was extremely useful as it made it possible for a large number of people to read it. The most valuable side-effect was its impact as an eye-opener, valuable side-effect making more persons understand that the inclusion of disability is an issue that is 28 5A Case Studies not only important for the PRSP, but for development in general. In 2003 NFOWD was not able to participate in the large consultations organised by the government, but instead initiated a consultation on disability on its own. The meeting was headed consultation on by the Minister of Social Welfare; other participants included representatives of disability NGOs working in the disability sector, DPOs, journalists, lawyers, educationalists, parents of disabled children and officials from other ministries (health, education, employment, etc.), as well as a member from the Planning Commission. During the meeting the position paper was presented and discussed. This received considerable attention from the Planning Commission representative, who wanted to pay more attention to the concerns of people with disabilities in the future. In 2004 the government organised one national and six regional consultations. NFOWD pushed its member organisations to participate in the regional consultations.All of them used participation in the the translated version of the position document as a reference, and advocated the regional consultations same issues at the regional level. Due to this broad involvement, it became impossi- ble to ignore the issue of disability after the six regional consultations. However, NFOWD had to make a substantial effort to get itself invited to the national consul- tation.This was quite large (with more than 200 participants), and there was little time to present the issue.The government had planned 13 thematic sections, with one joint section for ethnic minorities and people with disabilities under the label of margin- alised groups. However, both groups soon realised that their needs and requirements were not compatible, so they tried – successfully, as it proved – to separate these issues. Parallel to the efforts of NFOWD, other organisations also worked on includ- ing disability in the national PRSP. Action on Disability and Development (ADD) hired an economist who interviewed disabled people, collected their points of view involvement of a and organised a consultation on the basis of the results. professional economist A.2.4 Results Most issues within the government are communicated in Bangla, the country’s official language, and this automatically excludes the majority of the international staff of (I)NGOs. Handicap International therefore relied on NFOWD to get in con- tact with the Planning Commission and other relevant persons. For its part, NFOWD used Handicap International as a technical advisor. Handicap International also partnerships and advised the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and Save the Children UK alliances between na- tional and international on how to include children with disabilities in the national PRSP. These examples organisations show that partnerships and alliances between national and international organisa- tions may be structured in different ways and can be very effective. After the input from Handicap International with respect to the position paper and its summary, NFOWD continued its advocacy with the government while remaining a member of advocacy with the the National Committee on Disability within the government. government A.2.5 Constraints All concerns of people with disabilities fall under the responsibility of the Ministry welfare approach of Social Welfare, so the welfare approach still influences the understanding of disability issues more than the rights-based approach. 29 5A Case Studies The organisation of the PRSP process caused many constraints. The whole PRSP process was very opaque, and even within civil society, the exchange of information process was very opaque was limited. In 2003, after the presentation of the I-PRSP, few people were aware of the process. Furthermore, time pressure was always high: representatives feared time pressure that as soon as the first PRSP is completed, it is already time to start preparing the next version.And in the beginning, some organisations also criticised the fact that the PRSP competes with other policies, such as the national action plans. The National competition Plan for Children or the National Plan for Women are adopted for five years, while with other policies the PRSP only covers three years. However, in the meantime the PRSP has become increasingly important, and no NGO can ignore it any longer. In 2005 the govern- ment stated that organisations will not be allowed to receive international funds for measures that are not linked to the PRSP (in Bangladesh all NGOs receiving funds from abroad have to be registered with a governmental division – the NGO Affairs Bureau – and every project needs this division’s final approval). Governmental and civilian participants are currently struggling with the whole process as, the prepara- tion of the regional consultations, involved a lot of NGOs and generated a lot of only one consultant materials. However, it was felt that this effort was being wasted as the processing of in charge this material was left (reportedly) to only one consultant, who was given the task of preparing a draft report, instead of entrusting a whole team with this task. Although the position of NFOWD is quite good, many DPOs still do not have the capacity to lack of capacity participate and make their statements. To ensure strong argumentation, the relevant facts and figures must be available, yet there are no reliable data on disability and poverty. A.2.6 Perspectives The PRSP document now includes disability as a more or less cross-cutting issue, and disability as includes a separate chapter of two pages about disability. NFOWD plans to review cross-cutting issue and to intervene on other (inter)national strategies and policies. Through consulta- tions and campaigning, the issue of disability in development should be brought to the regional level. The aim is to ensure that regional strategies are harmonised with national plans such as the PRSP. This text is mainly based on information provided by Blandine Le Bourgois (Country Director Handicap International Bangladesh), Anne-Laure Pignard-Rhein (former Country Director Handicap International Bangladesh), and Dr. Nafeesur Rahman (Director of NFOWD) Bibliography: Handicap International & NFOWD (2004): Disability and the PRSP in Bangladesh. A Position Document by Handicap International and NFOWD. Dhaka, January. Asia Pacific Development Centre on Disability: www.apcdproject.org Forum for Development Dialog and Donor Coordination, Bangladesh on PRSP: www.lcgbangladesh.org/prsp/index.php 30 5A Case Studies General Economics Division; Planning Commission; Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh (2005): Bangladesh. Unlocking the Potential. National Strategy for Accelerated Poverty Reduction, 16 October. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPRS1/Resources/ Bangladesh_PRSP(Oct-16-2005).pdf ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies. How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work Is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. Downloaded from: www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/discpaper.pdf NFOWD: www.nfowd.org Sports camp Battambang, Cambodia Bangladesh © L. Duvillier for Handicap International © G.P. Polani, Handicap International, Brussels, Belgium 31 5A Case Studies A.3 Case Study 3: Sierra Leone PRSP Process and Phases Monitoring Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation Preparation 1st Annual 2nd Annual PRSP I-PRSP Status PRSP 1 Progress Progress Review PRSP II Report Report Report 2001 2003 2005 & 2004 Entry Points • Consultations on PRSP draft Strategies • The National Committee and Handicap International wrote a position document on the draft and sent it to the PRSP Unit, donor organisations and the Ministry of Social Welfare A.3.1 PRSP in Sierra Leone Sierra Leone started its PRSP process in 2000 and published an I-PRSP two years process started later. The main motivation was to achieve debt relief. The path to the full PRSP was in 2000 quite long, and this was only published in May 2005. The process at first did not respect the inputs of the civil society at all. The challenge facing civil society actors was first of all to be heard, let alone get involved. ActionAid organised a participa- tory process in parallel to official events, and today the official PRSP document recog- nises this process. Donors and the UN strongly criticised the inadequate level of inadequate level of participation, but at the beginning of 2005 they nevertheless approved the PRSP in participation order to avoid discouraging the Government of Sierra Leone. Otherwise, all process- es might have stopped, and the PRSP process had already been extremely delayed following various postponed deadlines since the first in December 2002. There were various postponed several official explanations for this delay: the impact of post-war activities (disar- deadlines mament, resettlement of internally displaced persons (IDPs), etc.), uncertainty about the elections as well as regarding technical and financial assistance, in addition to structural problems within the Poverty Alleviation Strategy Coordinating Office (PASCO), the institution coordinating the PRSP process. Corruption is in general a corruption very serious problem in the country, and was a primary reason for the restriction of resources regarding the PRSP process. A consultative group meeting of donors to discuss both the PRSP and loans was planned to take place in Paris at the beginning of June 2005, but this has since been postponed. Officially, the explanation given was the upcoming Group of Eight (G8) summit, but the press assumes that the real reason is the ongoing mismanagement and corruption within the government, and the fact that donors fear that loans will disappear again instead of being used for poverty reduction. 32 5A Case Studies A.3.2 Disability in Sierra Leone No clear data are available about the prevalence of disability. The PRSP document no clear data available mentions a number of 7.0 per thousand persons, but this can be assumed as definite- ly being too low. War in the country has led to many impairments, e.g. amputations. The census data from 2003 indicate that 2.7 % of the population have a disability. There are only a few DPOs in Sierra Leone, and these are all relatively new and there- fore do not have much capacity. A.3.3 Disability and PRSP In August 2004 (I)NGOs were invited to comment in writing within 14 days on the last draft of the PRSP, which created extremely high time pressure. Together with local partners (among others, the National Committee of Rehabilitation for People with Disabilities), Handicap International wrote a position paper which was partly position paper modelled after the Bangladeshi position paper, the main sources being again the ILO paper and the UN Standard Rules. This position paper was sent to the planning committee, to various donors and to the Ministry of Social Welfare. The introduction of the paper strongly criticises the way in which disability is generally treated in the PRSP draft, which it argues ensures that “disabled persons will still remain in the deepest black holes where they have remained over centuries.” (Handicap Interna- tional Sierra Leone, 2004). The government, it states, addresses people with disabili- ties in an inappropriate way, even though there consultations with people with disabilities did take place in the PRSP formulation process.The position paper, which analyses the PRSP draft chapter by chapter, criticises and makes suggestions con- cerning mainly the terminology: words like “the disabled”,“the handicapped” or even the “crippled” are said to “reflect the lack of knowledge and absence of a real defi- nition”. Further criticism relates to the lack of data and the use of unreliable figures, resulting in a general misunderstanding of “disability”, which is mainly reduced to physical impairment, e.g. loss of limbs as the consequence of war. The position paper also disapproves of the actions planned as being purely global and unspecific, because if disability is to be seriously integrated into policies and society, it needs to become a cross-cutting issue. A.3.4 Results The impact this position paper actually had is very difficult to evaluate. The recently published official version of the PRSP still includes most of the parts about disability which had been criticised by the position paper. No significant change in termi- no significant change nology is apparent: the document still uses terms such as “the disabled” and “the in terminology handicapped”, although at least the term “crippled” was eliminated. Throughout the paper it is obvious that there is still no comprehensive understanding of the differing concepts of disability, as the term is still mainly used to denote the physically disabled, especially war victims. In the PRSP people with disabilities are summarised, along with other groups, as a “vulnerable group”: However, this is not helpful, as specific exclusion mechanisms are neither recognised nor addressed. The chapter entitled slightly better “The Vulnerable” does however reveal a slightly better understanding: it shows how understanding 33 5A Case Studies people with disabilities face difficulties in a number of ways, such as limited access to resources, employment, health and rehabilitation services, discrimination and abuse. Nevertheless, the political actions suggested in relation to disability are still very selective and do not establish it as a cross-cutting issue. Other parts of the official no cross-cutting issue paper where disability is addressed in some form are: Education, Improving the Live Quality of the Vulnerable, Human Development, Health and Nutrition Services, and Child First Policies. A.3.5 Constraints In general the participatory processs of the PRSP can be assessed as “broad, but not participatory process: deep” (Kovach, 2005, p. 3). The CSOs were contacted at different levels (community, “broad, but not deep” regional and national), but their comments were not really taken into account. Participation was interpreted as merely consultation or information exchange, which meant that the civil society could not really influence the content of the PRSP. Handicap International and its partners also faced this problem: most of the sugges- tions made in the position paper were not considered. The whole PRSP process at that point seemed to have encountered numerous structural problems: the timeline numerous structural had been changed various times, the process was much more expensive than expect- problems ed, and cooperation with the IFIs and other donors was sometimes complex. A.3.6 Perspectives The team that prepared the position paper did not receive any feedback from donors no feedback or other agencies. Nevertheless, the joint work still had some positive effects as it created a new dynamic within the field of disability. Some follow-up discussions did a new dynamic within the field of disability take place with USAID (a main donor in the PRSP process), and USAID staff genuinely seemed interested in the issue and wanted to forward the paper to the US ambassador. This section is mainly based on communication with Lucile Papon, former Country Director of Handicap International Sierra Leone Bibliography: Handicap International Sierra Leone (2004): Disability and the PRSP Sierra Leone. Comments and Propositions by Members of the National Committee of Rehabilitation for People with Disabilities. Freetown, August. ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies. How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work Is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. Downloaded from: www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/ discpaper.pdf 34 5A Case Studies Kovach, Hetty (2005): A New Development Agenda? Sierra Leones First PRSP. European Network on Debt and Development, July. Available at: http://www.eurodad.org/uploadstore/cms/docs/Microsoft_Word__A_new_ development_agenda__Sierra_Leone’s_first_PRSP.pdf Sierra Leone Census: http://www.statistics-sierra-leone.org Transparency International, Corruption Report: www.transparency.org Somaliland: International Disability Day ©V. Rousselle / Handicap International Mali: Disability Week © N. Moindrot / Handicap International 35 A.4 PRSP Process and Phases Monitoring Monitoring Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation (Preparation 1st Annual 2nd Annual 3nd Annual PRSP 1st Annual 2nd Annual PRSP I-PRSP Status PRSP 1 Progress Progress Progress PRSP II Progress Progress PRSP III Report) Report Report Report Review Report Report Review 2000 2000 2001 2003 2004 2003–05 2005 Case Study 4: Tanzania Entry Points • Annual Poverty • Poverty analysis • Implementation of • Monitoring and Policy Week and • Consultation at PRSP action points evaluation planning discussion of APR regional level • Consultations on the draft Strategies • Participation, • Application for funds, • Establishment of • Participation in lobbying, conducting of PRSP and Disability planning meeting presentation of analyses about Network for infor- opinions people with disabili- mation sharing, ties’ living situation monitoring and • Participation in evaluation meetings • Networking via NGO Policy Forum • Participation in Drafting Unit 36 5A Case Studies 5A Case Studies A.4.1 PRSP in Tanzania Tanzania was one of the first countries to start a PRSP process. The I-PRSP was distributed to the World Bank and the IMF in March 2000, and the full version followed a few months later. The intention of the government was to obtain debt first documents available in 2000 relief as soon as possible. As the first PRSP was written under high time pressure, there was not enough space for civil society participation, and INGOs and donor high time pressure organisations dominated the process. In 2002 the Poverty Policy Week took place for the first time, enabling all stakeholders to discuss the state of progress of the PRSP, and civil society to participate in formulating the APR. This event, together with the establishment of a Poverty Monitoring Committee and different technical working groups, gradually increased civil society participation. The Tanzanian civil society gradually increased network is quite strong: it was able to conduct independent monitoring, and produced civil society participation easy-to-understand material on PRSP. Many NGOs are organised in the NGO Policy Forum to ensure civil society participation in the PRSP. The review of the first PRSP started in 2003, and in 2005 the second strategy (known locally as MKUKUTA) was MKUKUTA: published. The Ministry of Finance and the Vice President’s Office are coordinating the second PRSP in 2005 the whole process. A.4.2 Disability in Tanzania According to the 2002 national census, 3% of the Tanzanian population have a disability. Other official statistics (e.g. the 2002/2003 Poverty Analysis) claim that 10% of the population have a disability, which is equivalent to 3,456,000 persons. Disability is mainly caused by physical and visual impairments. There are a number of DPOs and organisations for people with disabilities. In comparison to other African coun- disability movement is well-established tries, the disability movement in Tanzania is quite well-established. Shivyawata is an umbrella organisation of six DPOs representing different types of impairment plus their regional branches, and covers a large number of people. Other important DPOs in Dar es Salaam are the Disabled Organization for Legal Affairs and Social Economic Development (DOLASED) and the Information Centre on Disability (ICD). A.4.3 Disability and PRSP The first PRSP rarely took people with disabilities and their interests into consider- ation.At the Consultative Group Meeting of 2002 (a meeting of donors, governments Consultative Group and the civil society) donors mentioned for the first time this fact. Later that year a Meeting 2002 DPO representative (from DOLASED) participated and spoke at the Poverty Policy Week. From then on, different DPOs and the umbrella organisation Shivyawata regularly tried to be heard. They were successful during the review process, manag- successful during the review process ing to obtain funds from the Vice President’s Office and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to conduct participatory poverty assessments participatory poverty (PPAs) and to organise consultations in 2002/2003. The objective of these PPAs was assessments to collect the “voices of the poor” and to obtain specific information about the living situation of people with disabilities. The survey was conducted by Shivyawata and ICD in 21 regions across the entire country. The main result was that people with disabilities are among the most vulnerable to poverty, and that their problems are 37 5A Case Studies multidimensional. In the drafting process of the second PRSP (MKUKUTA), DPOs DPOs were invited were invited at all stages to attend consultative meetings or seminars organised by at all stages the Vice President’s Office. They thus influenced the paper by first gathering data and then participating in the formulation of the final draft. Strong networking and lobbying were important throughout the process. For example, ICD, DOLASED and strong networking other DPOs participated in the NGO Policy Forum. They had good contacts with and lobbying persons on decision-making committees.These contact persons provided information on the ongoing process and could speak about disability issues. The cooperation with the Ministry of Labour Youth and Sports/Social Welfare, which is responsible for disability issues, is especially notable. To push the implementation of the PRSP forward, the Christoffel-Blindenmission (CBM) and Tanzanian DPOs organised a workshop in September 2005 at the CBBRT workshop in Headquarters in Dar Es Salaam and invited a number of organisations of and for September 2005 people with disabilities, as well as representatives from governmental and inter- national institutions. The workshop was a major success, with an average of over 60 persons participating on each of the three days. One result was the establishment of the MKUKUTA Disability Network in Tanzania, which closely follows up on the implementation of action points. A.4.4 Results Due to the ongoing engagement of DPOs, the PRSP now mentions people with disabilities and their interests at various points. The matter is almost handled as a diasability is almost a cross-cutting issue, as it is included in seven sectors and all of the so-called clusters of cross-cutting issue the paper. Disability is recognised as a main cause of poverty. The second PRSP clearly acknowledges the weakness of the first PRSP on these points. This shows that the Tanzanian PRSP process represents a genuine learning cycle, and that the strategy has been adjusted to the country’s specific situation. The workshop in September 2005 was a real milestone as it brought many different stakeholders together.As a result, a number of participating organisations promised to implement poverty reduction projects and made useful suggestions. The workshop formed the starting point for the MKUKUTA Disability Network. A.4.5 Constraints Time considerably restricted the production of the first PRSP and, as the process was time restrictions still in its infancy, the civil society had hardly any possibility to participate. People lack of participation with disabilities were completely excluded. At the beginning, networking, coordina- tion, information exchange and task-sharing between the different DPOs were all very weak. This situation was definitely improved by the September 2005 workshop and the establishment of the network. The Permanent Secretary of Health opened the workshop, still participants saw it as disadvantage, that no other high-ranking official from the government, ministries or the World Bank participated. So, while the second PRSP now addresses disability at many points, some issues are nevertheless still unclear, such as rehabilitation, technical assistance and how to combat negative no common Tanzanian attitudes. Even now, there is still no common Tanzanian definition of disability, definition of disability 38 5A Case Studies making data collection and the comparison of figures difficult. Although the second PRSP has already been published, plans for implementation (timeline, responsibili- ties, etc.) and for monitoring and evaluation are still not well-elaborated. Therefore plans for implementa- tion, monitoring it remains difficult for the Tanzanian DPOs to find a way to cooperate with the and evaluation not responsible institutions. They are still overlooked and not invited to meetings, for well-elaborated example for the revision of the monitoring plan. A.4.6 Perspectives The September workshop offered genuinely new options, as it popularised the issues genuinely new options around PRSP and disability, and enabled participants from various different back- grounds to engage in a broad discussion of the subjects. The establishment of the MKUKUTA Disability Network will ensure the implementation of the decided action points and is a useful platform for information-sharing and monitoring. This useful platform network not only consists of DPOs, but also comprises representatives from govern- ment and international institutions, who function as advisors and providers of technical support. In the first year the network will concentrate on implementing activities related to education. With such a clear priority, the network does not risk pursuing too many things and thereby losing a clear focus. This case study is mainly based on information from Judith van der Veen (Workshop coordinator, CBM co-worker for CCBRT Tanzania), Gideon Mandes (Director of DOLASED), Henry Wimilie (Board Member of ICD), as well as presenters and participants of the September 2005 workshop. Bibliography: African Decade (2005): Tanzania Country Profile (with information on disability organisations). Available at: www.africandecade.org.za Comprehensive Community Based Rehabilitation Tanzania (CCBRT): www.ccbrt.or.tz PRSP Watch (2005): Tanzania Country Profile. Available at: http://www.prsp-watch.de/countries/tanzania.pdf Tanzania’s Poverty Monitoring Website: www.povertymonitoring.go.tz, which includes reports from the Poverty Policy Weeks United Republic of Tanzania. Vice President’s Office (2005): National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP), April. Available at: http://www.tanzania.go.tz/nsgrf.html 39 5A Case Studies A.5 Lessons Learned A.5.1 The Role of INGOS The first three case studies were mainly reported from the view point of Handicap International’s staff. They usually defined their own position with regard to technical and financial assistance, but they generally tried not to dominate the process. lack of legitimacy versus Moreover, they lacked legitimacy in defining national policies, especially in Honduras lack of capacities and Bangladesh, where their direct influence was in any case restricted. On the other hand, local NGOs or DPOs often do not have the necessary capacities and compe- tences for intervention. Time pressure is immense in PRSP processes, so the possi- bility of conducting a participatory process with local stakeholders or even strengthening their own capacity remains extremely limited if they are unable to find strong allies. A.5.2 Lack of Capacity The lack of capacity, knowledge and resources has been clearly identified as a main lack of knowledge and resources problem for the civil society in general, and for people with disabilities in particular, as their level of education is on average lower. DPOs are often relatively recently established and tend to be weak, and with them the whole disability movement. DPOs often face internal struggles and conflicts such as the question of representation (as the example of CIARH in Honduras showed), or serious problems concerning their organisational structures. A.5.3 Exclusion In all four case studies the PRSP process first ignored the issue of disability and peo- ple with disabilities; only after considerable efforts in terms of participation and con- sultation were the relevant issues finally addressed. In Honduras, Bangladesh and Tanzania, the responsible persons genuinely seemed to be interested in the topic or were even ashamed that disability had been forgotten; this made recognition of the issue much easier. In Sierra Leone, however, representatives showed no interest in civil society participation, although this simply reflected a larger problem with the whole PRSP process. In general, stakeholders from the other three countries com- plained that the process had not been very transparent and for a long time little opacity of the process or nothing was known; stakeholders felt that they had not always been invited to consultations or other related events. A.5.4 Strategies for Inclusions Honduras, Bangladesh and Sierra Leone used their position papers in various ways. position papers These papers facilitated external awareness raising, but also promoted internal internal orientation orientation and the definition of a joint strategy. In Honduras, Bangladesh and key contacts Tanzania, it was possible to get in touch with key persons in government, and such personal contacts proved very helpful. The Bangladeshi summary of the position 40 5A Case Studies paper had a major impact on the results and opened doors in other contexts as well. Thus lobbying, networking and building alliances is highly recommended, as such ac- lobbying, networking and building alliances tions facilitate access to information and, in a best-case scenario, influence decisions. A.5.5 Inclusions in all Stages of the PRSP It is not sufficient merely to include disability issues in the PRSP document: after PRSP document the formulation of the paper, the next challenge is implementation. Although this is mainly the responsibility of the government, organisations working in the field of disability can participate in programme and in project implementation, as the programme Tanzanian case study shows. This will improve their influence on decision-making as and project implementation well. People with disabilities and DPOs should also try to participate in monitoring monitoring and and evaluation systems. If this does not take place, the promised actions may easily evaluation be forgotten. The example from Honduras shows that the PRSP serves as a strong basis for argumentation. Tanzanian stakeholders explained that it was very effective to be involved in all stages of the PRSP review and formulation process. DPOs and other organisations need to become involved with a long-term perspective. long-term perspective A.5.6 Side-effects Apart from the PRSP itself,all persons concerned noticed the side-effects of this work: awareness-raising awareness-raising of donors and within the governments, strengthening of internal legitimacy and external legitimacy, and capacity-building. Furthermore, the PRSP offers an op- capacity-building portunity for data collection (as was the case in Honduras and Tanzania) that can data collection prove useful in other situations as well.Therefore, the work on the PRSP significantly contributes to the improvement of national disability issues. Vulnerable Groups. Source: Hakikazi Catalyst in Collaboration with Dissemination, Sensitization and Advocacy, Technical Working Group (DSA-TWG) of the Poverty Monitoring System (June 2005): Growing out of Poverty. A plain language guide to Tanzania’s National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP). p. 4. Available at: http://www.hakikazi.org/papers/PL-NSGRP .pdf 41 5B PRSP and Stakeholders B.1 Introduction – Overview The World Bank and the IMF initiated the PRSP concept in 1999. The idea was for initiated in 1999 low-income countries to formulate a national strategy for reducing poverty which describes the country’s development objectives, the programmes that have to be introduced to achieve these objectives, and the funding required to implement them. By establishing their own Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS), countries obtain access access to debt relief to debt relief and other financial support from the IFIs and other donors. A wide variety of different stakeholders should participate in the formulation of the nation- al PRSP, such as the government, members of parliament, civil society groups and private sector representatives. The whole process is coordinated and led by the governments of the countries in question.The World Bank and the IMF may provide technical support and advice, but the main leader of the process should be the country itself. The development of the PRSP process, its stakeholders and their (inter)relations are described in this chapter. B.2 PRSP – Origin and Structure B.2.1 Background: From Neoliberalism to Poverty Reduction In the 1960s the conviction that development could be achieved through economic 1960s: economic growth growth and trickle-down effects dominated the policies of the World Bank and the IMF. With Robert McNamara as World Bank President from 1968–1981, the policies 1970s: “basic needs” approach of the Bank already appeared to emphasise poverty reduction in the form of a “basic needs” approach. However, in the 1980s the idea of development through economic 1980s: Structural Adjustment growth regained importance.The often criticised Structural Adjustment Programmes Programmes (SAPs) (SAPs) were introduced during this period. The vision of both Bretton Woods institutions was organised around the so-called Washington consensus, which em- phasised the importance of sound macroeconomic policies and free markets. In the 1990s criticism of the SAPs increased considerably, not only externally by NGOs and 1990s: criticism increased UN organisations such as UNICEF, but also within the World Bank: an internal report from 1992 (the Wapenhans Report) stated that over one-third of World Bank projects were failures. Furthermore, other Bank reports were showing little or no reduction in poverty in Africa. Beside the mounting criticism of the SAPs, two other aspects may be responsible for change in the World Bank’s policy the change in the World Bank’s policy towards poverty reduction: • One factor was a reassessment of the World Bank’s role, which concluded that the reassessment of the Bank’s programmes should give a greater weight to poverty reduction. World Bank’s role • Another factor was the new vision of development. Starting in the 1990s, a shift new vision of occurred in the understanding of the concept of development within the inter- development national development community.This shift was marked by a series of events like 42 5B PRSP and Stakeholders5 the introduction of the Human Development Index (HDI) by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 1990, the UN’s decision to name 1992 the “International Year for Eradication of Poverty”, the “World Summit for Social Development” in Copenhagen in 1995 and the formulation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), as well as the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) debt relief initiative in 1996. Now, poverty is not only measured in terms of its monetary aspects but also along a social and political dimension. Development for its part is no longer viewed purely as a technical process of the social and political capital accumulation in the context of sound macroeconomic policies, but also dimension of poverty as a change affecting the entire society. This shift meant that the development policies of countries could no longer be defined by donors alone. Instead, the ideas and policies for development had to emerge from the affected countries and societies themselves. All of these changes led to the introduction of the concept of PRSP in 1999. Today, more than 70 countries are conducting their own PRSP process. About relationships within the world, see Hope, Anne and Sally Timmel (1995): Training for Transformation: A Handbook for Community Workers, Book 3 Chapter 9A: The Evolution of Global Thought and Policy, pp. 6 – 30. About the Wapenhans Report: http://www.whirledbank.org/ourwords/wapenhans.html World Summit for Social Development: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/wssd The Millennium Development Goals: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ B.2.2 Basic Principles According to the World Bank and the IMF, PRSPs should be national programmes that are: • country-driven and -owned, developed through a broad-based participatory country-driven process; and -owned • results-oriented, focusing on outcomes that would benefit the poor; results-oriented • comprehensive in scope, recognizing the multidimensional nature of the causes comprehensive of poverty and measures to attack it; • partnership-oriented, providing a basis for the active and coordinated participa- partnership-oriented tion of development partners (bilateral, multilateral, nongovernmental) in sup- porting country strategies; and • based on a medium- and long-term perspective for poverty reduction, recogniz- based on a medium- ing that sustained poverty reduction cannot be achieved overnight. (quoted from and long-term perspective Klugman, 2002, p. 3) The central idea behind the new approach is to ensure the broad participation of broad participation of different stakeholders, such as representatives of NGOs, CSOs, people living in different stakeholders 43 5B PRSP and Stakeholders poverty, government, parliaments, the private sector, etc. The degree of participation depends on the country’s specific situation, and can vary from simple information exchange to joint decision-making. The World Bank and the IMF have clearly stated that they cannot set standards:“The design and execution of the participatory process, however, is a matter for the national authorities” (Klugman, 2002, p. 5). The aim of this participatory approach is country ownership: if the stakeholders are allowed country ownership to contribute ideas, negotiate and develop the strategy, they will identify much more with the result, and they will be convinced and willing to advance the strategy. Normally a section or department of the national government – very often within the Ministry of Finance – is in charge of conducting the PRSP process. The level and level and intensity intensity of civil society participation depends on the decisions and abilities of indi- of civil society participation vidual stakeholders. Most often participatory events are organised (e.g. workshops) where different members of the civil society can come together, discuss and work on specific issues. Participation can take a variety of different forms, ranging from information and consultation to joint policymaking. Until now, a consultative approach has generally channelled participation in most countries. The World Bank Homepage provides an useful introduction to PRSP; this link can also be used to find answers to most common questions: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/ EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,menuPK:384209~pagePK:162100~piPK:1593 10~theSitePK:384201,00.html (www.worldbank.org/prsp Overview) The IMF has published a Factsheet on its website which also offers a good introduction: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/prsp.htm (www.imf.org about the IMF More Factsheets Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers) B.2.3 Developement and Structure of the Process Preparation Process A PRSP is not a static document. It is intended to be a record of an ongoing process, not a static document- which is reviewed, modified and reformulated at regular intervals. The first version but an ongoing process of the PRSP often takes the form of an Interim PRSP (I-PRSP), largely because an Interim PRSP (I-PRSP) I-PRSP takes less time to prepare than a normal PRSP. This option allows countries to access debt relief faster. However, it is expected that the full PRSP will follow the I-PRSP, theoretically within a year, although in practice this may take anywhere between nine and 24 months. The full PRSP is valid for three to five years, and each year the government must present an Annual Progress Report (APR) to show what Annual Progress Report (APR) progress has been made in implementing the strategy. All I-PRSPs, PRSPs and APRs are assessed in the Joint Staff Advisory Note (JSAN) prepared by World Bank Joint Staff Advisory Note (JSAN) and IMF staff. The purpose is to provide the Executive Boards of the IFIs with an assessment of the quality and relevance of the strategy described in the PRSP. 44 5B PRSP and Stakeholders Monitoring Formulation Implementation & Evaluation Formulation (Preparation 1st Annual 2nd Annual PRSP I-PRSP Status PRSP 1 Progress Progress Review PRSP II Report) Report Report Figure 2: The PRSP Process As Figure 2 shows, there are three different phases: formulation, implementation and three different phases monitoring and evaluation. The different stakeholders are supposed to participate in each of these phases (see Chapter 4: Entry Points). Content According to the World Bank, the PRSPs should contain: 1. A poverty analysis, including an analysis of trends and their relationship poverty analysis to government policies 2. Prioritisation of programmes needed to achieve the national development prioritisation objectives 3. Targets and indicators targets 4. A plan for monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the programmes monitoring and the progress achieved in reaching the targets 5. A description of the participatory process in preparing the strategy (Klugman, participatory process 2002, p. 4) The Sourcebook states four key areas for policy actions: 1. Macroeconomic and structural policies to support sustainable growth and the macroeconomic and structural policies increased participation of the poor in the development process. 2. Improvements in governance, including public sector financial management governance 3. Appropriate sectoral policies and programmes sectoral policies 4. Realistic costing and appropriate levels of funding for the major programmes. costing (quoted from Klugman, 2002, p. 4). In summary, the PRSP should include all relevant policies, from macroeconomic is- sues to health and human development. Governance, gender and the environment are considered cross-cutting issues.The PRSP should also contain the estimated costs and expenditures of the programmes designed. Klugman, Jeni (ed.) (2002): A Sourcebook for Poverty Reduction Strategies, Volume 1: Core Techniques and Cross-cutting Issues – The World Bank Sourcebook. Single chapters are also available on the World Bank’s website: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVE RTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20175742~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062 ~theSitePK:384201,00.html (www.worldbank.org/prsp PRSP Sourcebook). The Preface and the Overview provide information on the principles. 45 5B PRSP and Stakeholders Independent guides: Bretton Woods Project (2003): Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs): A Rough Guide, April, available at: http://www.campaignforeducation.org/resources/Apr2002/prsp_roughguide.pdf This paper is structured by questions, and is easy to read. Driscoll, Ruth and Karin Christiansen, (ODI) (2004): The PRSP Approach: A Basic Guide for CARE International, March. Available at: http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0001499/P1843-CARE_basic-guide_ PRSP_March2004.pdf The first ten pages are about the origins, structure and principles of PRSP. Oxfam: Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide, available at: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/prsp_guide.htm The Introduction and the first section summarise the basic facts of PRSP. B.3 Stakeholders B.3.1 The Global Role of the IMF and the World Bank The World Bank and the IMF are sometimes categorised as International Finance Institutions (IFIs). Both are specialised UN agencies, with the same origins and a sim- ilar governance structure. A country has to be a member of the IMF to become a member of the World Bank. Today, 184 countries are members of the IMF. Each 184 countries member state holds shares in the Bank and the Fund which are calculated in relation are members to the economic capacity of that state. The voting power of the member states is also in accordance with their share. That means that the US, which holds about 17%, has the most powerful voice on the Board, followed by Japan, Germany, France and the UK. Traditionally the World Bank President is chosen by the US government while the Europeans propose the Managing Director of the IMF. The IMF and the World Bank work in a complementary manner. As their tasks are complementary work related, they launch some programmes and concepts in tandem, such as PRSP. However, there are some clear differences: the World Bank’s focus is mainly on World Bank: medium to long-term economic and social development.To facilitate this process, the medium to long-term Bank provides medium-term loans (to medium and high-income countries) and long- development term credits to low-income countries. Recently, it started to provide grants to low-in- come countries that are experiencing balance of payments difficulties in the form of high and unsustainable debt service ratios. In addition to financial assistance, the World Bank also provides technical assistance and analytical advice through its economic and sectoral work. By contrast, the IMF focuses more on short-term macro- IMF: economic issues arising from fiscal, monetary and exchange rate policies. To help short-term macroeconomic countries overcome macroeconomic crises, the IMF provides short-term loans. issues 46 5B PRSP and Stakeholders Information on quotas and voting power: http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/memdir/members.htm (www.imf.org About the IMF Members Quota and voting power) “Critical Voices on the World Bank and IMF”: www.brettonwoodsproject.org B.3.2 PRSP-related Instruments of the IFIs The IMF and the World Bank have introduced technical and financial approaches to support PRSP programmes. The World Bank provides credits for low-income countries that are highly conces- credits for low-income countries sional in the sense that no interest rate is charged (only a small service charge is levied on committed funds), and repayments are stretched over a 40-year period. This means that these credits are 70% equivalent to a grant (in other words, a World Bank credit of $100 is equivalent to a grant of $70). The World Bank sees its work as fitting within a broad strategic vision of develop- ment. In 1999 the Bank introduced the Comprehensive Development Framework Comprehensive (CDF), which forms the conceptual basis of the PRSP. This framework “emphasised Development Framework (CDF) the multisector, long-term development vision approach, as well as country leader- ship in designing the ‘architecture’ of local donor co-operation” (Rogerson, Hewitt and Waldenberg, 2004, p. 17). This means that development should not focus on single projects, but should rather be seen in a wider context and with regard to all relevant aspects. The World Bank also provides analytical services. At the request of governments, analytical services it prepares economic reports such as country economic memoranda, public expen- diture reviews and poverty assessments. For the PRSP, the Bank produced a “Sourcebook of Poverty Reduction Strategies”, a two-volume manual on how to prepare PRSPs. To guide its programme of assistance to countries, the Bank has developed a Country Country Assistance Assistance Strategy (CAS), which resembles a medium-term business plan (Oxfam Strategy (CAS) Guide,p.6).Its objective is to indicate how the Bank’s lending programme and planned analytical work will be implemented over the medium term. The countries’ govern- ments – and sometimes also representatives of the civil society – participate in preparing this document, although the World Bank clearly states that “it is not a negotiated document” (World Bank, 2003, p. 38). The CAS system already existed before the PRSP approach, but must now be modified in order to indicate more clearly how CAS instruments, e.g. investment projects, analytical advice and/or budgetary support in the form of Poverty Reduction Support Credit (PRSC), will Poverty Reduction contribute to the implementation of each country’s PRS. This is not easy as both Support Credit (PRSC) instruments follow a different logic: PRSP implies a bottom-up approach, whereas CAS works top-down. The IMF’s lending instrument for low-income countries is the Poverty Reduction and Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF). The PRGF mainly supports macroeconomic programmes Growth Facility (PRGF) such as tax policy, fiscal management or customs administration. The IMF provides its expertise in these areas in particular to client countries. 47 5B PRSP and Stakeholders World Bank (2003): A Guide to the World Bank Comprehensive Development Framework: www.worldbank.org/cdf Country Assistance Strategies: www.worldbank.org/cas World Bank FAQs: www.worldbank.org FAQs About the World Bank IMF: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/glance.htm, http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/faqs.htm PRGF Factsheet: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/prgf.htm Rogerson, Andrew with Adrian Hewitt and David Waldenberg, (ODI) (2004): The International Aid System 2005–2010: Forces For and Against Change. Available at: http//:www.odi.org.uk/publications/working_ papers/wp235.pdf Oxfam: Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide. Available at: http//:www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issue/democracy_rights/prsp_guide.htm B.3.3 Government The government of each country is supposed to be the leading actor in the PRSP leading actor in the process. It decides on the timeframe and design of the PRSP process, and is respon- PRSP process sible for initiating the participatory process and writing the document, as well as other documents required, such as status and progress reports. However, each country may conduct its PRSP process in a different way. Other state institutions such as national parliaments should also participate in the PRSP process, as they are the legally voted representatives of the countries’ citizens. Tool No. 32 To find out who is responsible for the PRSP in your country, check the homepage of your government or the World Bank homepage on PRSP: www.worldbank.org/prsp www.worldbank.org/countries www.prsp-watch.de (unfortunately not all country profiles are available in English) 48 5B PRSP and Stakeholders B.3.4 Civil Society The term “civil society” is very frequently encountered these days, but rarely clearly institutions independent from defined. It generally consists of institutions which are independent from the govern- the government ment. Most PRSPs do not define “civil society”, and there is no reference to any definition in the Sourcebook. In fact, a wide range of very different civil society stake- holders participate in the PRSP process, such as NGOs, CBOs, trade unions, religious organisations, ethnic associations, academic institutions, private sector members, the media and the press, as well as individuals. There is no standard to assist countries in making decisions about the participation of civil society members in their nation- al PRSP process. The only requirement is to include the civil society at every stage of the PRSP, but there is no basic standard concerning the adequate participation Tool No. 32 of civil society. www.worldbank.org/prsp presents details on the different participants of various country B.3.5 Other Stakeholders Other development cooperation agencies also have an influence on the PRSP process development agencies through their technical and financial assistance or by their actively participation in the formulation of the PRSP.They include bilateral and multilateral donors and their donors agencies (such as USAID, DFID, GTZ, etc.), as well as international NGOs (Care, Oxfam, Save the Children, ActionAid, etc.). According to the principles of the PRSP INGOS process, other partners are invited to contribute to the PRSP, but the strategy itself must be country-owned. The ultimate goal is that other agencies and development partners view the PRSP as providing an overall guiding framework for their assis- tance and arrange their activities to match the priority areas identified in the PRSP. National Government President, Ministries, Planning Committees, Regional Divisions, etc. planning, timing, writing, statistics, M & E, implementation, budgeting Civil Society guidelines, World beeing NGOs,CBOs, informed, technical and Bank private sector, financial & IMF religious orga- consulted, giving, PRSP assistance, Country nisations, assessment, Offices, press, media, input, acceptance, Executive individuals, etc. M&E M&E Boards, etc. technical and financial assistance, implementation, M&E Others UN organisations, bilateral and multilateral donors, development agencies, INGOs, etc. Figure 3: PRSP Stakeholders 49 5B PRSP and Stakeholders B.4 Interpretation of the Concept When the IFIs introduced the PRSP concept, the development community, especial- ly NGOs, reacted in most cases sceptically.There was no real faith in the policy change, and many criticised the strategy as being old wine in new bottle. It is still too early to old wine in new bottle? come up with a definitive judgement as the PRSP approach is quite new and is still evolving, making it impossible to estimate long-term results.What the following chap- ters do show is that the PRSP process provides a range of opportunities as well as constraints. B.4.1 Constraints Constraints due to the process Some of the criticisms of the PRSP concern the design of the process. First there are internal constraints that are implicit in large organisations such as the World Bank internal constraints and the IMF. It takes time before everybody has internalised and understood a new concept. The instruments of the Bank and the Fund (e.g. the CAS, PRGF) are supposed to be fully aligned with the PRSP. However, in actual fact their own guidelines and constraining guidelines rules constrain them considerably. For example, the CAS does not seem to be fully and rules aligned to the PRSP concept. Drafts are often not published or discussed with the civil society, which makes it impossible for the civil society to influence the CAS. Theoretically the Poverty Reduction Support Credit (PRSC) aims at facilitating the implementation of the national development goals of the PRSP, seeking to ensure that the poverty reduction objectives of the country are taken into account. In reality, however, the PRSCs are not very well-aligned. Some critics furthermore argue that the process is strongly donor-driven; indeed, it is quite likely that the macroeco- process is strongly nomic programmes of the IMF shape the macroeconomic programmes of the PRSP, donor-driven rather than vice versa. Countries writing a PRSP are among the poorest in the world and are unable either to have a major influence on world politics or on the decisions of the IFIs. In fact, the IFIs have the final decision on whether a PRSP is approved IFIs have the final or not. In many countries, the key motivation for starting a PRSP process is not decision poverty reduction but instead obtaining access to debt relief and credits.Additionally, key motivation is there is the problem of funding the planned projects. In general, funds and credits debt relief from both the World Bank and the IMF are usually not enough to finance the whole budget needed to implement the PRSP. Nevertheless, the link between PRSP and debt relief strengthens the power of the IFIs, which does not allow developing countries much flexibility to implement their own programmes. Content Many authors state that, thematically, PRSCs (and indirectly, the PRSP) do not represent a real change from the previous SAPs. A country and the IFIs may no real change from agree to continue to focus the adjustment programmes on macroeconomic issues, the previous SAPs e.g. inflation, growth, privatisation, market efficiency and investment in human resources. In this case, self-censorship may take place, leading the country to fulfil self-censorship the expectations of IFIs instead of insisting on its own specific programmes. Another 50 5B PRSP and Stakeholders problem is that the IFIs and the countries indicate that the objective of the PRSCs “pro-poor growth”: is to support “pro-poor growth”, even though there is no satisfactory definition of no satisfactory definition this key word. It is therefore not surprising that the “new” adjustment programmes do not meet the needs of the extremely poor. Quite often poverty is defined in terms of income, thereby excluding other factors such as powerlessness. The World Bank has devel- oped a technique for Poverty Social Impact Analysis (PSIA) which analyses the Poverty Social Impact Analysis (PSIA) impact of macroeconomic reforms on the poor, but it has only rarely applied this method to date. In fact, the PRSPs of very different countries tend to be quite similar, and this is hard- ly the result of real ownership and participation. The civil society rarely participates in the discussion of macroeconomic issues. As a result, “active participation” gener- ally only concerns classic “soft issues” such as health, social protection and education. One solution is to establish links with local universities and to hire a professional for specialist economic topics (see Chapter 5A: Bangladesh). Inadequate participation The quality of participation is a serious cause for concern, because the participatory cause for concern process itself and the participants may significantly influence the successful imple- mentation of the PRSP. The idea of civil society participation in the PRSP concept is based on a western western understanding understanding of nation states and democracy, and it may be difficult to adapt it to countries with a completely different political history and social structure. Another problem within the PRSP process is the lack of access to information: often lack of access to the process is not transparent and is difficult to understand. For example, the PRSP information and relevant documents may be available only in English and not in the local language(s). Normally the government or the department in charge decides who participates in the PRSP process.This can lead to the exclusion of relevant stakeholders, even if they are already politically organised, such as parliaments and trade unions. The selection selection of of participants is not necessarily made according to their legitimacy and representa- participants tion. Another challenge concerns the structure and organisation of participatory events: too often they lack sufficient preparation and execution, e.g. invitations only ever arrive at short notice, while papers for preparation are either sent shortly before the workshop or not at all. It is a structural dilemma that there is always too little time time allocated for preparing the PRSP, despite the fact that adequate participation needs ample preparation time.All of these factors contribute to low quality. However, even low quality if the participation is adequate and adapted, it does not necessarily mean that the final paper includes the inputs of the civil society. Spranger and Wolf summarise this experience as follows: “I participate, you participate, he/she participates, we partici- pate, you participate and THEY decide” (Spranger and Wolf, 2003, p. 56). As explained above, the IFIs did not define or set standards for participation; no standards for this lack certainly also contributes to the overall poor quality. In fact, until now participation participation has mostly taken the form of consultations. The IFIs and the civil soci- ety (via NGOs) assess this completely differently: the IFIs state that the influence of the civil society is high, whereas the NGOs feel that the contrary is the case. 51 5B PRSP and Stakeholders The low quality of participation is not only due to the donors and the governments, but also to the civil society itself. Often financial means, knowledge about interna- tional cooperation and/or insufficient numbers of skilled staff limit capacity and therefore the active participation of the civil society. B.4.2 Opportunities Focus on poverty issues Although some authors state that the macroeconomic policies in PRSPs are not a real improvement on the SAPs, others see a new focus on poverty reduction. With new focus on poverty reduction the PRSP, poverty reduction has become a central issue in national and internation- al politics.This commitment to poverty reduction can actually have effects at the local level and on poor people’s interests, as research proves: “For countries like Senegal, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Bolivia, Honduras and Nicaragua, PRSPs offered the prospects of a renewed commitment to education and health care at the local level, coupled to the provision of new resources from donors and the release of debt servicing funds for the implementation of long-term strategies.” (Whaites, 2002, p. 14). Opportunities for civil society participation Despite all the criticisms, the main ideas of the PRSP are increasingly gaining in acceptance and approval, as the PRSP process seems to offer real opportunities. Experience shows that in many countries, the exchange of views between government exchange of views and civil society has already started more or less successfully. There is a quantitative quantitative rise in rise in cooperation between the civil society and governments, and the transparency cooperation of politics in general has increased. Case studies show that the “space for public transparency of politics increased participation in policy formulation has indeed opened up in Kenya, Nepal, Malawi, Rwanda, Uganda, and Vietnam.” (Houghton, 2002, p. 8). The process of political participation also provides new opportunities for marginalised groups, which until now have not been able to wield any political influence. Moreover, the process allows different parts of the civil society to get to know each other for the first time, creat- ing valuable opportunities in the fight to reduce discrimination. Altogether, their involvement in the PRSP process forces all stakeholders to change change of behaviour their behaviour. NGOs and CSOs have to organise themselves in order to gain real influence; governments must learn to communicate with civil society representatives and engage with them in a real dialogue. The IFIs need to transfer the responsibili- ties of the whole PRSP process to the country concerned, and all donors should align their support with the country’s poverty reduction strategy. In general it can definitely be beneficial to work on the PRSP because it offers new Tool No. 2 opportunities for civil society as well as governments. Many countries do not have an actual choice as to whether they prepare a PRSP or not because they completely depend on debt relief. However, a positive effect can already be detected in the fact that all stakeholders need to strive to formulate a joint policy strategy for the PRSP. The results of national PRSPs executed to date are difficult to assess, as the strate- gies are long term and the process is still quite new and dynamic. Problems in the first difficult assessment phase must therefore be considered as a challenge. It will be up to future generations to evaluate the real effects and results of the PRSP process. 52 5B PRSP and Stakeholders http://www.eldis.org/poverty/prsp.htm, http://www.eurodad.org/workareas/default.aspx?id=92 and www.prspsynthesis.org provide a wide collection of documents commenting on PRSP from various viewpoints (NGOs, national and international institutions, researchers, etc.). The Bretton Woods Project presents “Critical Voices on the World Bank and IMF”; there is a separate section with documents on PRSP. Available at: http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/topic/adjustment/index.shtml O’Mally, Kate (2004): Children and Young People Participating in PRSP Processes: Lessons from Save the Children’s Experiences. London. Available at: http://www.eldis.org/fulltext/SCUK-participation-PRSP.pdf Oxfam Briefing Paper (2004): From “Donorship” to Ownership? Moving towards PRSP Round Two, January. Available at: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/ bp51_prsp.htm Piron, Laure-Hélène and Alison Evans (2004): Politics and the PRSP Approach: Synthesis Paper. Working Paper No. 237, Overseas Development Institute, London, March. Available at: www.odi.org.uk/publications/working_papers/wp237.pdf Rowden, Rick and Jane Ocaya Irama (2004): Rethinking Participation: Questions for Civil Society about the Limits of Participation in PRSPs. An ActionAid USA/ActionAid Uganda Discussion Paper. Washington, D.C., April. Available at: www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/int/bwi/2004/0404think.pdf Whaites, Alan (ed.) (2002): Masters of Their Own Development? PRSPs and the Prospects for the Poor. World Vision, Monrovia and California. Available at: http//:www.worldvision.org.uk/resources/mastersprsps.pdf Houghton, Ir˜ ung˜u (ActionAidUSA) (April 2001): Up Against the Wind: Recent ActionAid experiences of engaging the Poverty Reduction Strategies and other IFI lending policies. Presentation to the conference entiteld “From Engagement to Protest” organised by Structural Adjustment Participatory Review International Network (SAPRIN) et al., April 19th, Washington DC, North America; Washington D. C. Available at: www.actionaidusa.org/pdf/Upaagainstwinds.pdf B.5 PRSP and Disability Until now no PRSP has contained an adequate disability dimension, even though no adequate disability people with disabilities are among the most vulnerable and prone to poverty. In fact, dimension they are locked in a vicious circle of poverty, causing bad health, disability and further impoverishment (see Chapter 5C). However, the participation of DPOs and organisations working in the field of disability is necessary, as only these actors are able to change the focus of action concerning disability to meet their real interests. A study conducted by a World Bank consultant (see Bonnel, 2005) shows that when 53 5B PRSP and Stakeholders DPOs had the possibility to participate in and contribute to the PRSP, the focus was on the economic dimension. exclusion at People with disabilities face exclusion at various levels of the PRSP approach: various levels 1. The PRSP Sourcebook rarely considers people with disabilities.The Sourcebook PRSP Sourcebook discusses disability in an inconsistent way. People with disabilities are mostly re- rarely considers people with disabilities stricted to the category of social protection and considered as being economi- cally inactive or as welfare cases. On the other hand, statements on inclusive education and with regard to transport and communication make it clear that the surrounding conditions and the environment have to be changed in order to include people with disabilities in society more successfully. In short, the Sourcebook lacks a clear understanding of the term “disability”, and indeed the terminology used is at times obviously prejudicial: people with disabilities are addressed as “the disabled” at a number of points. In the Sourcebook people with disabilities are often included in other vulnerable groups, a fact that risks overlooking the special exclusion mechanisms or special needs that these groups require. Such groupings might be helpful in explaining main tendencies, but do not result in appropriate analysis and solutions. In an ideal scenario, the chap- ter on “Cross-cutting Issues” should include a specific section on disability. 2. People with disabilities rarely participate in consultations for the formulation people with disabilities and preparation of the PRSP. DPOs are seldom able to participate in any stage rarely participate in consultations of the process, as they usually lack the necessary capacities and connections. The general constraints for civil society participation are discussed above. DPOs and organisations working in the field of disability face the same limits, but very often in an intensified form: the process, for example, is even more non-transparent for people with an impairment, as the information is not provided in an accessible format (e.g. Braille or sign language). 3. Most PRSPs do not address people with disabilities in a comprehensive way. most PRSPs do not PRSPs contain mainly vague formulations for policy measures, and suggestions address people with disabilities in a are often selective and do not include the wider context. It is not enough that comprehensive way disability issues are mentioned in the PRSP itself: they must also be included in the action plan or policy matrix, which sets the priorities of the PRSP. Furthermore, these measures must be considered in the budget, and all related instruments such as the PRGF, PRSC, CAS or the APRs, as otherwise they will be forgotten in day-to-day policy, and resources will be scarce. Given the lack of data available and that the understanding of disability and of the situation of people with disabilities is low, the latter are often treated as a homogeneous group, or even only included in the huge group of “vulnerable persons”.The main characteristic of members of this group is their inability to work, so the solutions proposed concern only social protection. Little attention is paid to the various types of disability and the differences in terms of living situation – for example, disability is never mentioned in the context of rural development. Tool No. 4 54 5B PRSP and Stakeholders Klugman, Jeni (ed.) (2002): A Sourcebook for Poverty Reduction Strategies, Volume 1: Core Techniques and Cross-cutting Issues, and Volume 2: Macroeconomic and Sectoral Approaches http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVER- TY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20175742~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~the SitePK:384201,00.html Bonnel, René (2004): Poverty Reduction Strategies: Their Importance for Disability. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ DISABILITY/Resources/Poverty/PRSPddteam.pdf ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies: How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work Is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/ discpaper.pdf GPDD Working Group on Disability and Poverty Reduction: http://www.stakes.fi/sfa/disabilityandpoverty PRSP Countries (End 2005) 55 5C Disability C.1 What is Disability? There are many different ways of understanding and interpreting disability. Disability different ways of takes various forms and is quite difficult to understand for both non-disabled persons understanding and interpreting and people with disabilities. The available data reflect this confusion as well: accord- available data ing to an oft-cited WHO figure, the prevalence of people with disabilities is on average 10 % worldwide. However, DISTAT, the UN database on disability which summarises statistics from different countries, mentions figures from 0.3% (in Thailand) to 20% (in New Zealand). These examples show that disability is difficult to measure and define. In the PRSP context, data and figures are very useful means of convincing decision-makers. In order to obtain a comprehensive understanding as well as to produce reliable and comparable data, international agencies – such as the WHO – are currently working on a general definition. Modifications of existing general definition models in the last few years, and the emergence of a new definition (the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)), show that we are still in a process of understanding the concept. The research currently underway towards achieving an international definition is extremely challenging, as models of disabili- models of disability ty are strongly influenced by culture. The following sub-sections explain the three main models for understanding disability, the ICF, and the international guidelines on disability. However, we need to keep in mind that these models and definitions are proposals for understanding “disability”, and that a personal situation, or a country-specific one, may not exactly fit the models.These models and definitions are moreover mainly influenced by western researchers and/or DPOs in industrialised countries. Consequently they do not necessarily fit other country contexts and cul- tural backgrounds. These models (especially the social model) provide the basis for any action concerning disability, e.g. development programmes. It is helpful to be aware of these models when communicating with somebody from another context in order to know what s/he is talking about and to find effective ways of explaining your own position. The following sub-sections also explore the differences between the terms “disabi- differences between lity”, “impairment”, etc., because the distinctions are not commonly known. The the terms problem is also linked to the use of different definitions. Problems of understanding different definitions are reinforced when translating the terms into or from other languages: some lan- guages do not have an equivalent word for “disability”, but many words for different types of impairment. Even different European languages face this problem. There is an ongoing discussion about the use of non-discriminatory language. This document does not seek to judge which words are right or wrong, but rather to encourage reflection and discussion about the different terms. C.1.1 The Charity Model The Charity Model sees people with disabilities as victims of their impairment. Their victims of their situation is tragic, and they are suffering. Consequently, they need special services, impairment 56 5C Disability special institutions, etc., because they are different. Sometimes people with disabili- ties themselves adopt this concept, in which case they usually feel “unable” and have a low sense of self-esteem. need to be looked after need help charity sympathy to be pitied special services special schools etc. problem welfare = brave disabled can’t walk courageous inspirational individual talk see sad bitter tragic twisted passiv aggressive Figure 4: The Charity Model of disability and its associations (adapted from Harris and Enfield, 2003, p. 172) C.1.2 The Medical Model The Medical (or Individual) Model considers people with disabilities as persons with physical problems which need to be cured physical problems which need to be cured. This pushes people with disabilities into the passive role of patients. The aim of a medical approach is to make people with disabilities “normal” – which of course implies that people with disabilities are in some way abnormal. The issue of disability is limited to the individual in question: in case of disability,the disabled person has to be changed,not society or the surrounding environment. can’t welfare walk social talk special services see institutions decide sheltered employment patient case problem special schools = cure disabled special transport individual care medical hospitals professionals social therapists & workers specialists Figure 5: Medical Model of disability and its associations (adapted from Harris and Enfield, 2003, p. 172) 57 5C Disability C.1.3 The Social Model The Social Model regards disability to be a result of the way society is organised. result of the way Because society is not well organised, people with disabilities face the following types society is organised of discrimination (see Figure7): • Attitudinal:This is expressed in fear, ignorance and low expectations (influenced types of discrimination by culture and religion); • Environmental: This results in physical inaccessibility affecting all aspects of life (shops, public buildings, places of worship, transport, etc.); and • Institutional: This means legal discrimination (e.g. by not being allowed to marry or to have children), or exclusion from school, etc. These three types of barriers make people with disabilities unable to take control of their own lives. passivity dependency poverty & economic prejudice dependency discrimination no jobs problem isolation segregation = disabling inadequate no rights education society inadequate inaccessible services transport (medical, social, etc.) inaccessible buildings (schools, offices, hospitals) Figure 6: The Social Model of disability and its associations (adapted from Harris and Enfield, 2003, p. 172) Figure 7: Integrating people with disabilities means overcoming different types of barriers (STAKES, 2003, p. 29.) 58 5C Disability Coleridge, Peter (2001): Disability, Liberation and Development. An Oxfam Publication. Oxford. Chapter 1: “Why This Book?”. Harris, Alison with Sue Enfield (2003): Disability, Equality and Human Rights: A Training Manual for Development and Humanitarian Organisations. An Oxfam Publication in association with Action on Disability and Development (ADD). Oxford. Chapter 1 on “Defining Disability” and Chapter 9 on “Disability Equality in Practice”. Disabled People South Africa (2000): Pocket Guide on Disability Equality: An Empowerment Tool. Available at: www.dpsa.org.za/documents/Pocket%20Guide.htm Chapter 1: “Disability, Definitions, Models and Terminology”. An interesting discussion on definitions can be found on the website of Disability Awareness in Action (DAA): www.daa.org.uk/disability%20 definitions.htm htm www.daa.org.uk Issues Definitions of Disability Definition of Disability – A Briefing Paper. C.1.4 The WHO Classification The WHO is one of the most important organisations that are continuously working working on a general definition on a general definition of disability: Since 1980 the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps (ICIDH) has been the leading classification International Classification of system regarding the process of understanding and defining disability. It was reviewed Impairments, in the late 1990s and led to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability Disabilities and Handicaps (ICIDH) and Health (ICF) in 2002. In the understanding of the ICIDH, “impairment” refers to the physical situation of “impairment” the person; “disability” means the restriction of activities due to the impairment; and “disability” “handicap” expresses the limitations in terms of fulfilling a social role. Impairment “handicap” refers to the level of an organ as a functional or structural abnormality of the body; disability means the impact of the impairment on the performance of the individual; and a handicap is the overall consequence of the impairment and/or disability, as per the figure below: Disease or Impairment Disability Handicaps disorder Polio Paralysis Limited Limits in finding mobility employment Facial Limited ability for disfigurement social interaction 59 5C Disability These two examples show that the ICIDH saw the impairment as the crucial cause of disability and handicap. The ICIDH was therefore linked to the medical or indi- vidual model of disability. An impairment must not necessarily result in a disability and a handicap, but an impairment could result directly in a handicap, without being a disability. With the emergence of new disability models, the WHO reviewed its classification International Classification of and published the ICF in 2002. This classification came up with three dimensions of Functioning (ICF) human functioning and disability:the body,activities,and participation.Thus disability three dimensions of involves dysfunctionality at one or more levels: it is an umbrella term for impairment human functioning (meaning problems in body functions and structures), activity limitation and partic- and disability ipation restriction (WHO, 2002, p. 10) (see Figure 8). Health Impairment Activity Participation Examples Condition Limitation Restriction Leprosy Loss of feeling Difficulties in The stigma of leprosy in the extremities grasping objects leads to unemployment A person who None None Denied employment formally had a because of employer mental problem prejudice and was treated for a psychotic disorder By using the term “functioning”, less emphasis is put on the individual deficiencies the term “functioning” of a person, and “a continuum of health status” (Bonnel, 2004, p. 30) is recognised. The classification stresses the environmental factors (including the physical environ- ment, as well as attitudes, services and policies) which facilitate or restrict a person’s potential to participate in daily life. The ICF accepts neither the medical nor the social model as valid on its own. Disability means a complex system with elements occurring on the individual body level in combination with the structure of society. The ICF suggests a synthesis of the two models under the new name the biopsy- biopsychosocial model chosocial model (see WHO, 2002, p. 9). However, this model is not yet established, and other authors do not use it. The ICF provides a planning tool for decision-makers: together with the new defini- a planning tool for decision-makers tion, the WHO has published a checklist for measuring a person’s level of function- ing. This checklist not only gathers medical data, but also social data, and the questions concern health status, activity and participation. 60 5C Disability Health condition (disorder or disease) Body Functions Activity Participation & Structure Environmental Personal Factors Factors Contextual factors Figure 8: ICF – Levels of functioning (adapted from WHO, 2002, p. 9) World Health Organization (2002): Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health. ICF, Geneva. Available at: www3.who.int/icf/beginners/bg.pdf ICF website: http://www3.who.int/icf/ The Dictionary on Disability Terminology by the Disabled People’s Orga- nisation, Singapore might also be helpful. The four parts are available at: http://www.dpa.org.sg/Dictionary.html C.2 Disability and Policies The national and international legislation presented in the following sub-sections could (and should) serve as the basis for any PRSP seeking to include disability issues. C.2.1 The UN Standard Rules The UN Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for People with Equalization of Opportunities for Disabilities from 1993 are not legally binding for states, but offer a basis for policy- People with Disabilities making. Although the UN Standard Rules are addressed to governments they offer basis for policymaking a valuable orientation for NGOs and other parties. The Standard Rules consist of 22 single rules touching three issues: Preconditions for Equal Participation,Target Areas for Equal Participation, and Implementation Measures. The UN Standard Rules call for concrete measures for people with disabilities, demand at the same time changes, and promote awareness-raising in society. Their implementation is monitored by the UN special rapporteur. 61 5C Disability C.2.2 The UN Convention It is the task of policies to create equal opportunities for all. International guidelines and commitments exist beside the legal frameworks of nation states. The most im- portant are the UN Standard Rules on Equalization of Opportunities for People with Disabilities, which advise nation states on how to promote equalisation. At the moment the International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights International and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities is in preparation, which means a specific Convention on the Protection and human rights convention for people with disabilities. However, it should not be Promotion of the forgotten that all other human rights conventions include people with disabilities. Rights and Dignity of Persons with Therefore, the first article of the Convention states: “The purpose of this Convention Disabilities is to promote, protect, and fulfil the full equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with disabilities.” Since 2002 representatives from the UN, governments and NGOs worldwide have been discussing the drafting and formulation of the Convention, and it is expected that it will be ready for ratification in 2007. Disabled People South Africa (2000): Pocket Guide on Disability Equality: An Empowerment Tool. Available at http://www.dpsa.org.za Documents Pocket Guide Chapter 3: “The International Disability Rights Movement” and Chapter 4: “Roles of the United Nations in Promoting Disability Equity”. United Nations (1994): The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. New York. Available at: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/dissre00.htm Reports on the implementation of the UN Standard Rules in different countries are available at: http://www.independentliving.org/standardrules/ PowerPoint presentation on the UN Standard Rules: http://www.worldenable.net/standardrules/Default.htm You can check the status of the UN Convention and the reports and discussions of the ad hoc meetings at: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/ enable/index.html. A CD-Rom on “The Disability Convention – Making it Work” provides an impressive collection of documents and issues related to the UN Convention. It can be obtained from: www.iddc.org.uk/cdrom. 62 5C Disability C.2.3 Other International and Regional Commitments This section provides a list of other significant international/regional conventions and Tool No. 3 agreements, in each case noting whether they are binding or non-binding. • The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (a binding convention) was pub- lished by the UN in 1948. Although this declaration is universal and valid for everybody, people with disabilities have nevertheless often been disregarded. • ILO Convention No. 159 concerning the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employ- ment of Disabled Persons, 1983 (non-binding) • The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted in 1989: Articles 2 and 23 mention children with disabilities (binding) • The Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons, 1993–2002 (non-binding) • The UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Sala- manca Statement and Framework for Action “Education for All”, formulated at the World Conference on Special Needs Education in 1994 (non-binding) • The African Decade of Persons with Disabilities, 1999–2009 (non-binding) • The Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimi- nation against Persons with Disabilities, 1999 (binding) • The Biwako Millenium Framework for Action towards Inclusive, Barrier-free and Right-based Society for Persons with Disabilities in Asia and the Pacific, 2002 (non-binding) • The Asian and Pacific Decade of Persons with Disabilities, 2003–2012 (non-binding) • The Arab Decade for Persons with Disabilities, 2004–2013 (non-binding). UN Enable – the United Nations Focal Point on Persons with Disabilities: Overview on International Legal Frameworks for Disability Legislation. Available at: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disovlf.htm DAA: International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities. Available at: http://www.daa.org.uk/convention.htm The World Conference on Special Needs Education, Access and Quality (1994): The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education, Salamanca, Spain, 7–10 June 1994. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000984/098427eo.pdf Review of the Salamanca Statement 10 Years Later. Available at: http://eenet.org.uk/salamanca/salamanca.shtml UNICEF: Convention on the Rights of the Child. Available at: http://www.unicef.org/crc The African Decade: http://www.africandecade.org.za 63 5C Disability The Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons: How It Worked http://enabledonline.com/news/N_ASPAC.php United Nations: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, available at: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html Some information about the Arab Decade is available at http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disarabdecade.htm http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/recomm/instr/c_159.htm provides an overview of the ILO Convention Read the Inter-American Convention at: http://www.cidh.oas.org/Basicos/disability.htm C.3 Disability in Development Governments and development organisations use various approaches to ensure the various approaches equal participation of people with disabilities. These approaches also provide a pos- sible guideline on how to include disability in PRSPs. C.3.1 Inclusive Development Inclusive development claims to address people with disabilities and to include a disability dimension as a mainstreaming issue. As a consequence, people with disability dimension as disabilities should be included in all phases of any project and programme cycle. a mainstreaming issue Decisions on budgets also need to consider the disability dimension. The goal of inclusive development is to create an inclusive society; the concept can and must take other vulnerable and marginalised groups into account as well. The basis of the con- cept is the social model of disability and the rights-based approach, which demands a close exchange of views between different stakeholders (e.g. through networking). As the participation of people with disabilities is a central concern, capacity-building strategies for empowering DPOs have become a fundamental issue. C.3.2 The Right-based Approached The focus of this model is on the fulfilment of human rights, for example the right to the right to equal equal opportunities and participation in society. Consequently, society has to change opportunities and participation in society to ensure that all people – including people with disabilities – have equal possibili- ties for participation. It is a fact that people with disabilities often face a denial of basic human rights, for example the right to health (physical and psychological) or the right to education and employment. Laws and policies therefore need to ensure that these barriers created by society are removed. The rights-based approach states that support in these areas is not a question of humanity or charity, but instead a basic human right that any person can claim. The two main elements of the rights-based approach are empowerment and accountability. Empowerment refers to the partici- empowerment pation of people with disabilities as active stakeholders, while accountability relates accountability to the duty of public institutions and structures to implement these rights and to justify the quality and quantity of their implementation. 64 5C Disability C.3.3 Twin-track Approach A twin-track approach Addressing inequalities Supporting specific between disabled and non-disabled initiatives to enhance persons in all strategic areas the empowerment of of our work people with disabilities Equality of rights and opportunities for persons with disablities Figure 9: Twin-track approach to disability and development (adapted from DFID, 2000, p. 4) The so-called twin-track approach originated in the UK and was then translated into development activities. Organisations working in the field of disability realised that the provision of concrete services to people with disabilities is necessary, but stop- ping there was not sufficient. Rather, it is only the first step in empowering people with disabilities. The twin-track approach addresses special needs (e.g. mobility aids) special needs and disability: and treats disability as a cross-cutting issue at the same time. It aims at mainstream- cross-cutting issue ing disability into every sector and every development action with the overall goal of increasing the general level of awareness. The approach addresses able-bodied persons as well as people with disabilities; the latter are very often not aware of their rights and perceive themselves according to the medical and charity models (see Figure 9). Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID Issues. London, February. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf Inclusion International (nd): “Disability, Development and Inclusion in International Development Cooperation: A Scan of Disability-Related Policies and Research at Selected Multilateral and Bilateral Institutions”. This analysis compares different development policies of multilateral and bilateral agencies. Available at: http://www.inclusion-international.org/ site_uploads/1119016919121949239.pdf European Guidance on Disability and Development, available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/body/publications/docs/ Disability_en.pdf#zoom=100 65 5C Disability STAKES (2003): “Label Us Able: A Pro-active Evaluation of Finnish Development Co-operation from the Disability Perspective” Chapter 2: Development Co-operation on Disability Issues http://global.finland.fi/evaluations/labelable.pdf See Mobility USA’s Checklist for Inclusion, available at: http://www.miusa.org/publications/freeresources/Checklist_for_Inclusion.pdf C.4 Why Disability Must be Included in PRSP C.4.1 The Vicious Circle of Poverty and Disability Infectious Congenital Diseases Diseases 20 % 20 % Others (including ageing) 13 % Non-Infectious Diseases Accident/ 20 % Trauma/War 20 % Malnutrition 20 % Figure 10: Causes of impairment (adapted from DFID, 2000, p. 3) The relationship between poverty and disability is dialectic. The limited data that is the relationship between poverty and available suggests that most of the people with disabilities live below the poverty line disability is dialectic in developing countries. For example it is estimated that people with disabilities make up to 15 to 20 per cent of the poor in developing countries (Elwan,1999,p.v).However, there is still a lack of detailed research on the links between poverty and disability, even though it has been suggested that 50% of impairments are preventable and directly linked to poverty (see Figure 10). Tool No. 4 The main linkages between poverty and disability are (see Figure 11): main linkages between poverty and disability • unhealthy and risky living conditions, such as inadequate shelter, water supply living conditions and sanitation, unsafe traffic and working conditions; health care and • absence and inaccessibility (due to environmental and/or monetary barriers) of rehabilitation timely and adequate health care and rehabilitation; education and • restricted access to education and employment; employment • exclusion from social life: people with disabilities often do not have access to pub- social life lic places because of physical barriers, and often people with disabilities cannot participate in political decision-making. 66 5C Disability Disability Social and cultural Denial of opportunities exclusion and stigma for economic, social and human developement Vulnerability to poverty Poverty and ill-health Reduced participation Deficits in economic, in decision-making, social and cultural rights and denial of civil and political rights Figure 11: The linkages between poverty and disability (adapted from DFID, 2000, p. 4) More details about these linkages are explained in the sector-relevant sub- sections 5.1–5.7 later in this chapter. Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID Issues. London, February. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf Elwan, Ann (1999): Poverty and Disability. A Survey of the Literature. Social Protection Discussion Paper Series. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Poverty/ Poverty_and_Disability_A_Survey_of_the_Literature.pdf Yeo, Rebecca & Karen Moore (2003): Including Disability in Poverty Reduction Work: “Nothing About Us, Without Us”, in World Development, Vol. 31, No. 3, Montreal, pp. 571–90 (available at: www.sciencedirect.com for a fee) Yeo, Rebecca (2001): Chronic Poverty and Disability. Somerset. Available at: http://www.chronicpoverty.org/pdfs/04Yeo.pdf 67 5C Disability C.5 Sectors in PRSPs Relevant for Disability The PRSP Sourcebook of the World Bank describes sectors which should be addressed in PRSPs. Indeed, most of the documents published to date concentrate more or less on these sectors. Their linkages to disability are discussed in this chap- ter. Since every PRSP has its own shape due to country-specific issues, it would in fact be preferable if disability were included as a cross-cutting issue in every chapter. Tool No. 5 C.5.1 Health As mentioned above, poor people are more likely to live and work under unhealthy circumstances, for example in areas with an increased exposure to natural disasters, such as areas prone to flooding, or to man-made risks, such as landmines. In case they get injured, they can rarely afford or obtain access to appropriate health services.The absence of timely and adequate health care and rehabilitation causes impairments absence of timely and and long-lasting disabilities. In developing countries there is usually a lack in the pro- adequate health care and rehabilitation vision of health services and rehabilitation measures. Moreover, people who are il- literate or have received less formal education may not know about the possibilities health and rehabilitation services could offer them. Health-oriented development cooperation addresses three areas in particular: prevention, medical support, and rehabilitation (although the latter is also linked to other areas). Primary prevention of disease and impairment includes vaccinations primary prevention and also education, especially for mothers. Programmes preventing infectious diseases such as malaria, leprosy, poliomyelitis and HIV/AIDS have to consider their linkages to impairment and disability. Awareness-raising programmes, especially on HIV/AIDS, need to be adjusted so that people with disabilities also have access to this information (e.g. Braille or sign language). Prevention also includes adequate nutrition, especially for children, as malnutrition is one of the main causes of im- pairment. Medical support of people with disabilities includes the supply of drugs, surgery or medical support the provision of orthopaedic aids and supporting devices (prostheses, wheelchairs, etc.). However, this can only be ensured if all health services are accessible to people with disabilities, which means not only the physical accessibility of the buildings, but also access to information about possible treatment, risks of drugs, etc. Medical rehabilitation aims to restore a person’s mental and physical health status. medical rehabilitation Disability is addressed in the Tanzanian PRSP in the following ways: Example: Tanzania • “Improve neonatal care and infant care and ensure screening of under 5s for developmental disabilities and target nutrition education and supplemen- tation for undernourished children.” • “Reduce HIV and AIDS prevalence among woman and men with disabilities (among age group 15–35 years)” • “Evaluate and critically assess the human resource development strategy in the health sector to identify gaps in skills among health workers and execute 68 5C Disability a plan for immediate training in key areas, including special health needs of older and disabled persons.” • “Eliminate all forms of barriers to health care by exempting the poor, preg- nant women, older persons and disabled persons, children, and by removing unofficial charges and reduce the distance to, and by improving treatment.” Wiman, Ronald, Einar Helander and Joan Westland (2002): Meeting the Needs of People with Disabilities: New Approaches in the Health Sector. World Bank, Washington, June. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Community- Based-Rehabilitation/Meeting_the_Needs_of_People_with_Disabilities.pdf United Republic of Tanzania, Vice President’s Office (2005): National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty, (NSGRP), April. Available at: http://www.tanzania.go.tz/nsgrf.html C.5.2 Rehabilitation Rehabilitation aims at restoring the participation of people with disabilities in every- participation of people with disabilities day life. While it therefore addresses much more than just the health status of a in everyday life person, the health sector does offer a good starting point in the PRSP context (other sectors could be social protection, education or employment). One must also compare the situation in the relevant country and check which ministry is in charge of rehabilitation (e.g. in Tanzania it is the Department of Social Welfare; in Uganda, Community Development). Only 2 % of people with disabilities in developing countries have access to rehabili- tation and appropriate basic services (DFID, 2000, p. 2). Very often the provision of rehabilitation services is shifted from governmental institutions to (I)NGOs, which typically cannot serve whole countries. If there is a lack of rehabilitation, then a sit- long-lasting uation is created of long-lasting dependence of people with disabilities on others. dependence At the community level NGOs have been applying the Community-based Community-based Rehabilitation (CBR) Rehabilitation (CBR) concept in many developing countries for 20 years now. This concept attempts to be realistic by acknowledging that specialised institutions (such as orthopaedic centres and professionals) are not able to reach all people with disabilities and do not contribute to a real inclusion of people with disabilities in society. Today CBR is a national strategy in many countries. According to a joint position paper by the ILO, UNESCO and the WHO, communi- ty-based rehabilitation is “a strategy within general community development for the rehabilitation, equalization of opportunities and social inclusion of all people with disabilities. CBR is implemented through the combined efforts of people with disabilities themselves, their families, organizations and communities, and the relevant governmental and non-governmental health, education, vocational, social and other services.” (ILO, UNESCO and WHO, 2004, p. 2). Under certain conditions it is estimated that 80% of rehabilitation needs may be met through CBR (DFID, 2001, p. 10). 69 5C Disability ILO, UNESCO and WHO (2004): CBR: A Strategy for Rehabilitation, Equalization of Opportunities, Poverty Reduction and Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities. Joint Position Paper 2004. Available at: www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/download/jointpaper.pdf Community Based Rehabilitation Network (South Asia): www.cbrnetwork.org.in CBR Resources: www.cbrresources.org World Health Organization Disability and Rehabilitation (DAR) Team (August 2001): Rethinking Care from the Perspective of Disabled People: Report and Recommendations. Available at: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/WHO/whoreport.pdf WHO DAR Team: http://www.who.int/disabilities/en/ Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID Issues. London, February. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf C.5.3 Social Protection In the majority of developing countries there is either no official system of social protection or only a weak one, and thus families function as safety nets. Families care for their disabled relatives and this engages one or even more workforces (i.e. not only the person with disabilities but also those of the carers). The UN estimates 25% of any population is directly or indirectly affected by disability (DFID, 2000, p.4). In general the aim of social protection is to protect the most vulnerable and to man- protect the most age any risks to society and to individuals. The UN Convention understands social vulnerable protection as a means of ensuring an adequate standard of living. Therefore social protection measures include the provision of appropriate and affordable services, devices and other assistance, covering disability-related expenses or housing pro- grammes. The World Bank has a wider understanding of social protection and suggests a range of legislative measures and expenditure programmes. These inter- ventions address and overlap with various sectors such as labour and health. The World Bank’s Sourcebook suggests starting disability programmes such as inclusive education, sheltered workshops, technical aids, rehabilitation, disability insurance, pensions, etc. The aim of the Tanzanian PRSP is that “20% of children and adults with Example: Tanzania disabilities [are] reached with effective social protection measures by 2010” (United Republic of Tanzania, Vice President’s Office, 2005). 70 5C Disability Definition of the World Bank on social protection: http://www.worldbank.org/sp The position of the Asian Development Bank on Social Protection: http://www.adb.org/SocialProtection/default.asp The Social Protection Chapter of the Sourcebook is available at: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/ EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177536~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:3 84201,00.html Grushka, Carlos O and Gustavo Demarco (2003): Disability Pensions and Social Security Reform: Analysis of the Latin American Experience. World Bank, Washington. Available at: http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/HDNet/HDDocs.nsf/0/14d1379d30815d52 85256e0a0053a68e/$FILE/ATTJKD1V/0325.pdf C.5.4 Education Children with disabilities in developing countries have restricted access to education: restricted access only 1 to 2 % receive an education (DFID, 2000, p.3). And the “(l)ack of education to education remains the key risk factor for poverty and exclusion of all children, both those with key risk factor for poverty disabilities and the non-disabled.” (Takamine, 2004, p. 20). Children with disabilities are mostly separated from their peers in special schools, which have weak capacities, special schools are too small and are often run by (I)NGOs. Sometimes only infrastructural barriers limit their access to school; however, attitudinal barriers also play a major role in this context (see Figure 7).Children with physical impairments are often not sent to school, for example, because parents believe that they also have learning disabilities, or they invest education on another child. In addition, school staff often assume that they are not able to teach a child with disabilities. After the school years are over, there are not many possibilities for children and youth with disabilities to receive further education or vocational training. To address the education needs of people with disabilities, inclusive education can inclusive education be a cost-effective solution: the aim is to include the majority of the children with dis- abilities in regular schools, so that less special schools are needed. Therefore modifi- cations in the infrastructure and the existing curriculum as well as the training of teachers are necessary. It is suggested that 80–90% of children with special needs 80 – 90% of children with special needs could be included in regular schools (see Jonsson and Wiman, 2001, p. 6). This would could be included in not only provide them with an education, but facilitate their inclusion in society at regular schools the same time.The remaining 10–20% of children with more serious disabilities should still receive education in special schools (see Figure 12). It is important to find an educational system which systematically links special and inclusive education. 71 5C Disability Changes in Special Needs Education Mentally Physically Blind Deaf Retarded Disabled Special School "Children with Special Education Needs" 5% 20 % 75 % Severe Moderate Mild Blindness Seeing Low Vision Difficulties Deafness Hearing Hard of Hearing Difficulties Mental Slow Learning Retardation Learning Difficulties Profound Moving Difficulties, Speach Difficulties Light Social and Emotional Difficulties Inclusive Education Special School Figure 12: Inclusive Education (adapted from Jonnson and Wiman, 2001, p. 8) 72 5C Disability One of the Tanzanian PRSP’s goals is “ensuring equitable access to quality Example: Tanzania primary and secondary education”. Children with disabilities are addressed at various points: • “the proportion of children with disabilities that are enrolled in, attending and completing school should increase from 0.1% in 2000 to 20% in 2010” • “reforms should be undertaken in primary, secondary and teachers’ education curricula,teacher training,teaching materials,assessment and examination,and school inspection to promote critical, creative and skill-based learning, and to incorporate gender, HIV/AIDS, disability and environment issues.” (United Republic of Tanzania, Vice President’s Office, 2005) World Conference on Special Needs Education, Access and Quality (1994): The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education, Salamanca, Spain, 7–10 June 1994. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000984/098427eo.pdf Review on the Salamanca Statement 10 Years Later: http://eenet.org.uk/salamanca/salamanca.shtml Enabling Education Network: http://eenet.org.uk Takamine, Yutaka (2004): Working Paper Series on Disability Issues in East Asia: Review and Ways Forward. Paper No. 2004-1, May. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Regions/ East-Asia-Pacific/Disability_Issues_in_East_Asia_Takamine.pdf Jonsson, Tyre & Ronald Wiman (2001): Education, Poverty and Disability in Developing Countries: A Technical Note Prepared for the Sourcebook. Sponsored by the Thematic Group on Disability Issues and financed by the Finnish Consultant Trust, June. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Education/ Education_Poverty_and_Disability.pdf C.5.5 Employment As people with disabilities have on average a lower level of formal education, they also have more difficulties in finding employment. Even after participating in further education, they still face discrimination at the hands of employers and colleagues. discrimination Consequently the unemployment and underemployment rates of people with disabilities are much higher compared to the rest of the population. And even if people with disabilities have a job, on average they earn less than people without dis- abilities. This lack of employment naturally leads to income poverty. Data on unem- ployment rates of people with disabilities are rare or unreliable, as such data depend on the definition of disability and unemployment (see Hernández-Licona, pp. 3–6) For example, in a number of Latin American countries somebody is only defined as disabled if he/she is unemployed. The ILO suggests that unemployment rates among unemployment people with disabilities are two to three times higher than among people without rates are two to three times higher disabilities. Numerous individuals with disabilities depend on begging to earn their 73 5C Disability living. For a long time special vocational workshops have been the main solution used special vocational workshops in the employment sector, although such workshops are again a western approach imported to developing countries, with two key drawbacks in that they are restricted in number and do not enhance social inclusion. Promoting a different approach, the ILO devised Standards on Management of Disability at the Workplace, providing Standards on Management of orientation in this area. Solutions generally propose improvements to the legal Disability at the framework, which should eliminate exclusion and facilitate employment, for exam- Workplace ple by giving subsidies to employers who recruit people with disabilities. This is a field where DPOs and (I)NGOs can assist in lobbying and advocacy work as well as in providing advice on how workplaces should be designed. Regarding both the em- ployment and the education sectors, policies should avoid creating parallel structures, but instead promote a single structure which facilitates access to the same opportu- nities for all. In fact, in most developing countries a great number of people live or work in the informal sector and on subsistence agriculture; only a minority of people are formally employed, yet employment policies only address this minority.Therefore strategies specifically need to consider people with disabilities in a rural context. rural context The Tanzanian PRSP suggests the need to: Example: Tanzania “Develop affirmative action to create employment opportunities for youth, women and people with disabilities.” (United Republic of Tanzania, Vice President’s Office, 2005) ILO (2002): Managing Disability at the Workplace. ILO Code of Practice. Geneva. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/ codeeng.pdf (this includes definitions of employers, discrimination, voca- tional rehabilitation, etc.) Hernández-Licona, Gonzalo (2004): Disability and the Labour Market: Data Gaps and Needs in Latin America and the Caribbean. Available at: http://www.iadb.org/sds/doc/Rev2bEditedDisability- LaborMarketHernandez-Licona.pdf The Disabled People’s Association, Singapore (nd): Employing Somebody Who Is Disabled. Available at: http://www.dpa.org.sg/employment.htm Mont, Daniel (2004): Disability Employment Policy. World Bank Social Protection Discussion Paper. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/ Employment-and-Training/Disability_Employment_Policy.pdf 74 5C Disability C.5.6 Accessibility An important element facilitating the access of people with disabilities is infrastruc- infrastructure ture, and this is linked to other sectors such as health, education or employment. A “Design for All” strategy should be considered in all PRSP measures. The “Design for All” constructing of accessible infrastructure costs only slightly more and less special solutions are needed for people with disabilities.Accessibility should address not only the physical but also the virtual infrastructure, such as the accessibility of informa- tion on the internet. The infrastructure need also to include an adequate water supply and sanitation, for water supply and two reasons: a number of impairment-causing illnesses are transmitted by water, and sanitation the lack of accessible sanitation services at a public building, school or health centre may deter people with disabilities from even going there. Transport is another key element that needs specific accessibility. Travelling is transport important to increase opportunities, for example to reach health centres, schools or places of employment. The Tanzanian PRSP states the following requirements: Example: Tanzania • “Increased access to clean, affordable and safe water, sanitation, decent shel- ter and a safe and sustainable environment and thereby reduced vulnerability to environmental risks at all public institutions – schools, health centres, mar- kets and public places, including access for the disabled.” • “Ensure adequate sanitation facilities at all public institutions – schools, health centres, markets and public places, including access for the disabled.” • “Studies on access and cost of water and sanitation, paying attention to house- hold make-up and age, disability and gender.” • “Adopt National Housing Program, promote the participation of the private sector in housing, enhance appropriate and affordable housing materials and construction technology, increase the availability of low-cost housing and serviced plots to the most needy members of society (including the disabled).“ (United Republic of Tanzania, Vice President’s Office, 2005) Wiman, Ronald (STAKES) and Jim Sandhu (INDRA) (2004): Integrating Appropriate Measures for People with Disabilities in the Infrastructure Sector. Available at: www.stakes.fi/gtz/ United Nations Enable http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/designm/ The Transport chapter of the Sourcebook: http://web.worldbank.org/ WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMD K:20177554~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html The Water and Sanitation chapter of the Sourcebook: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/ EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177595~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:38 4201,00.html 75 5C Disability The Information and Communication Technology chapter of the Sourcebook: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/ EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177596~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK: 384201,00.html ESCAP (1995): Promotion of Non-handicapping Physical Environments for Disabled Persons: Guidelines. Available at: http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/disability/decade/publications/z15009gl/ z1500901.htm C.5.7 Other Sectors As mentioned above, governance and legislation address various sectors. An exam- governance ple of intervention can be the provision of legislation against discrimination. Inter- legislation national standards, conventions, legislations and human rights can provide orienta- tion in this regard. United Nations Enable on International Laws and Policy Guidelines: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disother.htm The PRSP Sourcebook on Governance: http://web.worldbank.org/ WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMD K:20177435~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html With regard to vulnerable groups, specific attention should be paid to the double dis- gender crimination that woman and children with disabilities experience. Gender is already a cross-cutting issue in the PRSP approach. As it is estimated that there are more women and girls with disabilities than men, this group needs special attention.Women are moreover doubly affected by disability in that they are much more likely to be providing care for disabled relatives than men. Disability Awareness in Action (DAA): Disabled Women. Resource Kit No. 6. Available at: http://www.independentliving.org/docs2/daa6.pdf PRSP Sourcebook on Gender: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/ EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:2017744 9~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html 76 5C Disability Environment is also a cross-cutting issue in the PRSP approach: natural disasters environment cause impairments, so the prevention of natural disasters can also lead to a reduction in impairment. PRSP Sourcebook on Environment: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVER TY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177457~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~the SitePK:384201,00.html Macroeconomic Policies: One main objective of PRSPs is to encourage economic macroeconomic policies growth and stability by influencing the economic framework, e.g. via tax policy, fiscal management, customs administration or trade policy. All this has an effect on people with disabilities as well. PRSP Sourcebook on Macroeconomic Issues: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY /EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177473~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSit ePK:384201,00.html Togo © J. Cerda for Handicap International Senegal, Casamance © Marie-Paule Nègre/Métis for Handicap International 77 5D Process and Project Management D.1 Networks and Alliances The objective of successfully including disability in the PRSP process needs strong lobbying and a well-organised national disability movement. This requires each national disability movement organisation concerned to have a clear and conscious identity, and this should also apply at the level of the whole movement. Networking and building alliances are im- portant techniques for any DPO or organisation working in the field of disability, as this is an effective way of gaining political weight and being heard more easily by official representatives. Sharing resources also means being more cost-efficient. However, this networking approach also entails a considerable risk: discussing with potential allies and finding consensus takes a considerable amount of time and some- times conflicts may emerge. The challenge is to find a balance between a credible consensus and time pressure. This document uses the following terms: • Alliances are loose agreements between several organisations working on the alliances same issue. • Networks are a more formalised type of alliance. networks • Partnerships are a specific type of intense cooperation and usually concern two partnerships organisations; they take place supposedly on a complementary and egalitarian level, even though in reality the contrary is often the case. Several important elements are needed to form effective alliances, networks and part- nerships. The following sub-sections explain the importance of organisational self- assessment as a means of providing a shared identity for the disability movement. In particular, the results of the stakeholder analysis provide key information on the importance and relationship of the different organisations and persons in the context of disability and PRSP. Work on the strategy and positioning of an organisation offers stakeholders another opportunity to discuss possible alliances, networks and partnerships. Networking and alliances also require the following questions to be taken into consideration: • Who would be an acceptable partner in order to achieve the objectives? • Who might oppose or even actively reject this process? The power issue is at the heart of any bilateral and multilateral cooperation. However, power issue even though this is an important issue that may promote or destroy any partnership or alliance, the subject is usually so sensitive that it is difficult to address properly. Still, all organisations involved in cooperation should be interested in making the internal and external power structures and decision-making procedures more trans- parent in order to avoid mutual mistrust and manipulation. Tools No. 21–22 78 5D Process and Project Management The Case Studies in Chapter 5A also provide information about the strategic planning of alliances and networks Harris, Alison with Sue Enfield (2003): Disability, Equality and Human Rights: A Training Manual for Development and Humanitarian Organisations. An Oxfam Publication in association with Action on Disability and Development (ADD), Oxford. On pages 224 and 225 you will find a brain- storming exercise about who might be helpful, prioritisation with regard to who to contact first, which contacts already exist, who will certainly help, who has to be convinced, etc. CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. The CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: www.cedpa.org/publication/pdf/advocacy_english5.pdf, Session Five, pp. 40–47. R. Tennyson (2003), The Partnering Toolbook: http://www.energizeinc.com/art/subj/documents/ThePartneringToolbook March2004.pdf Frank, Flo and Anne Smith (2000): The Partnership Handbook. Available at: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/epb/sid/cia/partnership/partnerhb%5fe.pdf D.1.1 Organisational Self-Assessment An organisational self-assessment strengthens any organisation that implements this process: it includes working on the organisation’s identity by analysing its internal analysing internal strengths and weaknesses and by identifying opportunities and constraints linked to strengths and weaknesses the environment.The results help to establish a realistic picture of existing capacities, and the organisation is able to learn and to adapt more easily to a changing environ- ment. At the same time, this assessment facilitates the planning and implementation facilitates planning of any project or activity. Representatives who know about and can agree on a cor- and implementation porate identity are able to act more coherently and efficiently in any field, including corporate identity that of the disability sector. In the field of development and cooperation, joint projects are usually implemented by two or more organisations working both together and independently of each other. Sometimes a shared identity may result from this cooperation, which can create am- ambivalance bivalence and insecurity within and outside the organisations concerned. Knowing one’s own identity and being aware of one’s capacities and deficiencies facilitates any cooperation and the planning of a joint project, as the mutual expectations are more realistic. A synthesis of an organisational self-assessment and a stakeholder analysis gives the persons and organisations concerned a realistic impression of their poten- the potential as a tial as a disability movement. On this basis, they will be able to develop a strategy for disability movement joint activities that is adapted to their specific national context. 79 5D Process and Project Management An organisational self-assessment is an internal analysis of an organisation carried out by key representatives. Such assessments vary considerably in terms of intensity and extent, depending on the time and resources available. Either the representatives Tools carry the assessment out themselves, or they are accompanied by an external facilitator. No. 11–18 and 20 The following questions and issues need to be discussed: key questions • Who are the key persons within the organisation? • What is their motivation, what is their vision? • What is the relationship between these key persons? • How does this influence the performance and the activities of the organisation? • What is the influence of each key person on a specific project or activity? • Who is responsible for what? • What is the history and evolution of the organisation, the project and the partnership? D.1.2 The Identity of the National Disability Movement and the PRSP Process As described in the previous sub-section, the organisational self-assessment concerns the internal and external capacities of any organisation that wants to start this process. The analysis of stakeholders and their relationships within the disability sector or the analysis of stakeholders PRSP process provides valuable elements for any organisation seeking to find an finding an appropriate appropriate position within the system, and facilitates the choice of a partner organ- position isation to implement joint activities. The type and the capacities of the partner organisation have a considerable influence on any joint project. An organisational self-assessment also shows the existing potential for participating in or contributing to the development of a national disability movement. There is never one single stakeholder system, especially with regard to existing there is never relationships; instead, there are several, each of them corresponding to different one single stakeholder system perspectives and perceptions. And in a dynamic environment, each system is again influenced by the formation, merger and disappearance of local organisations/insti- tutions. The results of a stakeholder analysis depend mainly on the number and function of the people participating. The most interesting discussions and issues usually result from bringing together a group of people who are active in the field of disability, in an ideal scenario the representatives of important stakeholders. However, at the same time this approach is very time-consuming and requires a substantial amount of energy, depending on the group’s specific dynamics. This kind of exercise is in fact in itself already a capacity-building activity, independent of the results of the stake- capacity-building activity holder analysis. The stakeholder analysis may also serve as a means of data collection. Using the same means of data collection tools with different stakeholders enables a complex picture to be built up composed Tools of different perspectives and points of view. No. 2, 11, 18, 20 –22 80 5D Process and Project Management The following questions and issues need to be discussed: key questions • Who are the stakeholders of the disability movement? If there is no disability movement: Who is important within the field of disability? • Who is an important stakeholder? Why? • What is their motivation, what is their vision? • What is the relationship between the main stakeholders of the disability move- ment/within the field of disability? • How does this influence the performance and the activities of the movement/ the field of disability? • What is the influence of each main stakeholder on the disability movement/ disability sector? • Who is responsible for what? • Timeline: What is the history and evolution of the disability movement? James, Rick (1998): De-mystifying Organisational Development; Practical Capacity Building Experiences from African NGOs. INTRAC. Gubbels, Peter and Catheryn Koss (2000): From the Roots up: Strengthening Organizational Development through Guided Self-assessment. World Neighbours. www.capacity.org: Practice reports provide helpful imformation. International NGO Training and Research Centre: www.intrac.org International Development Research Centre: www.idrc.ca/en/ev-23581-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html www.eldis.org “The Gateway to Development Information” offers numerous resources and manuals for download QSTG (2000): Self-assessment Workbook: http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/asp/uploads/uploadedfiles/3/459/ self-assessment.pdf ICD (2005): Capacity Building for Local NGOs. Available at: http://www.ciir.org/Templates/Internal.asp?nodeid=91674&int1stParentN odeID=89630&int2ndParentNodeID=90417 81 5D Process and Project Management D.2 Important Elements of Process Management D.2.1 Vision, Objectives and Activities Not everything can be included in the PRSP. It is therefore important that the or- ganisations involved reach consensus on priorities and make realistic proposals about consensus the means and possibilities of including disability in the national PRSP. This requires proposals the national disability movement to show a minimum level of unity with a common unity vision, clear objectives and a joint strategy. A vision is useful to give guidance in the long term and to provide the motivation for vision all activities. At the same time a vision is usually either too ambitious or too vague to guidance in the be attained, e.g. “improving the living standard of all people with disabilities”, or “ long term people with disabilities will be fully integrated into society”. An objective, on the other hand, is the translation of one part of the vision into objective reality. This by contrast may be achieved within a specific period, e.g. “convince translation into reality decision-makers to formulate a law against discrimination”. A vision consists of sev- eral objectives that lead closer to the achievement of the vision. Every organisation, alliance, network or partnership needs clearly defined objectives. All concerned, either the persons within an organisation or the key persons representing an alliance, need to agree on and understand the objectives to be achieved. From the beginning it is important to find realistic objectives and valid indicators. Tool No. 10 Finally, activities are even more specific, contributing to the achievement of one or activities several objectives, for example: “invite decision-makers to a day-care centre for children with disabilities” or “contact and visit decision-makers and explain your point of view to them”. D.2.2 Developement of a Strategy As already mentioned, the basis for identifying these visions, objectives and activities is knowledge about the identity and potential of the organisation itself, which can be gained with the help of an organisational self-assessment. The analysis of the stake- holder system then helps in a second step to understand the identity and the relations of all the stakeholders involved. The next step is the establishment of a strategy. The development of a strategy or its modification is based on four overlapping key issues overlapping key issues that have been mentioned above: • The identity of the organisation: Who are we? (organisational self-assessment) • The vision, the sense: What are we doing/what do we want to do, and why? (vision, objectives, activities) • The stakeholder system:Who are the others? What are they doing? What do they want? (identity of the national disability movement) • The establishment of a strategy based on an interpretation and a combination of the results of the analysis: What is our position, and why? Given the frequent overlaps between these four elements, certain questions and prob- lems can be anticipated. For example, discussing the identity and the profile of the 82 5D Process and Project Management organisation leads almost inevitably to an examination of the vision and what is being done in this regard. Nevertheless, it is still important to examine all four elements in turn, because only then will it be possible to develop a coherent strategy that systematically answers the question “How will we achieve our objectives?”. D.2.3 Action Planning The action planning phase combines issues, questions and results identified during the previous phase. It translates ideas and suggestions into a realistic proposal, and translates ideas and suggestions into represents the first step for implementing concrete activities. The aim of any Action a realistic proposal Plan is to improve the integration of disability issues into the national PRSP.The local DPOs and parents’ associations should be mainly responsible for the implementa- tion of such plans. An Action Plan is a tool that translates a common vision and strategy into specific and locally adapted activities. It unites the different stakehold- ers, indicates the different steps to be undertaken, and identifies roles and responsi- bilities for each stage. Any Action Plan needs to be clear, logical and transparent, but at the same time clear requires sufficient flexibility, as it needs to react to a dynamic and sometimes fast- logical transparent changing environment. The two key issues that are essential in action planning sufficient flexible concern the objectives to be achieved and the potential allies for a cooperation agree- ment, both of which have already been dealt with in detail in the previous sub- sections. Action planning is a process that includes several steps (see also Chapter 3).After an a process that includes several steps orientation phase, meetings with possible allies need to discuss the following issues: 1. What are the specific national entry points into the PRSP process? 2. Which issues in the field of disability are the most important and need to be in- cluded in the national PRSP? (priority-setting) 3. How can you encourage and support the inclusion of the identified priorities in the national PRSP? (Brainstorm proposals as a group.) 4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each proposal? How much time, money and personal effort will be needed for each proposal? 5. Which proposal/plan should be accepted? (several suggestions may be possible). 6. Who will do what, when, where and how? (Meta plan) – Responsibilities 7. What needs to be done first in terms of implementation? Define the next steps and priorities. 8. How can the implemented activities be monitored? Who will be responsible for this? – Monitoring 9. Who should be involved in the evaluation, and at what point is an evaluation Tools No. 23–25 necessary? 83 5D Process and Project Management INTRAC Praxis Series Experience from and for Capacity Building Practitioners: http://www.intrac.org/pages/praxisseries_publications.html Lefevre, Pierre, Patrick Kolsteren, Marie-Paule De Wael, Francis Byekwaso and Ivan Beghin (2000): Comprehensive Participatory Planning and Evaluation. Available at: http://www.ifad.org/pub/bsf/cppe/cppe.pdf National School Board Foundation, strategic planning tools: http://www.nsba.org/sbot/toolkit/spt.html D.2.4 Organising Work There are many different ways of getting people together to work on issues, among them seminars, working groups, conferences and workshops, just to name a few. The seminars, working groups, conferences, frequency of these ranges from a single to occasional or regular/ongoing meetings workshops and interventions. Everything depends on the local situation, the capacity of organ- isers and the financial resources available. Any results of joint work depend mainly on the number and function of the partici- pants: the more persons participate, the more different views and opinions will surface, and the harder it may become to reach common conclusions. The work may in addition become more difficult and more time-consuming, depending on the group’s specific dynamics. Even given substantial time, energy and discussion, success is not assured. However, the advantages of trying to find a common position are finding a common position obvious: arguments and issues will be strongly backed up by a majority of national disability stakeholders, who together have a much stronger possibility of getting their voices heard. The alternative approach of having one person who coordinates the different stakeholders and speaks on their behalf may be more efficient and quick in terms of organisation, but does lack representativeness and risk a low level representativeness of ownership. But no matter what approach is adopted, it is important when organising work with people with different impairments to know about their individual disabilities and to people with different be aware of how these impact on their ability to work and to participate. In the se- impairments lection of pedagogical tools and didactic methods, the different types of disabilities need to be considered as well as the desires and specific needs of each individual. Serious consideration needs to be given to the following two components when organising joint work: • The facilitator: It is always helpful to have an independent facilitator. His/her task facilitator is to structure the discussion and encourage all participants to contribute. • The per diem/allowances: In many countries it is common practice to provide par- per diem/allowances ticipants a per diem. However, finding the right balance is often tricky: if the sum is too low, people may not be able to come because of other obligations or because they cannot afford the travelling expenses, etc. If it is too high, conversely, there is the risk that people will come more because they will be paid well, not because they are interested in the subject. Tools No. 1, 23, 27, 34 Impact Alliance Resource Centre on Facilitation Techniques: http://www.impactalliance.org/ev.php?ID=3779_203&ID2=DO_TOPIC 84 5D Process and Project Management D.2.5 Funding Every planning stage and project implementation stage needs resources, including material material, staff, knowledge and money. Many development agencies obtain financing staff from other parties (e.g.national and international donors or private donors).(I)NGOs knowledge can apply for grants from public institutions (e.g. ministries and departments) or money from private foundations and organisations. Normally the grant-givers require re- ports and a list of expenses from the beneficiary, in order to control the implemen- tation of the activities and to ensure the appropriate use of the money. Network Learning (2004): A Guide to Fundraising. Available at: http://www.networklearning.org/download/fundraising.pdf D.3 Project Management D.3.1 Basics: Act, Observe, Decide Project management follows a predefined logic and structure.The logical framework predefined logic and structur (or “logframe”) is very commonly used, as is the project cycle. Both systems consist of alternating phases of acting, observing, learning and adjusting (see Figure 13). Tool No. 19 Both the logical framework and the project cycle are tools that facilitate discussion discussion and planning and planning and should not just be filled out. The observing phases can consist of ongoing monitoring, and are not necessarily an objective in themselves. This means that when conducting a project, it is not only necessary to plan the implementation of measures and activities, but also the method used, time and resources necessary for monitoring and evaluation. Observe Act Decide Implementation Act Decide Observe Act Figure 13: Project management: alternating between acting, observing and deciding 85 5D Process and Project Management Network Learning (2004): The Project Cycle: A Learning Module. Available at: http://www.networklearning.org/download/project-cycle.pdf The Impact Alliance Resource Centre on Project Design and Management: http://www.impactalliance.org/ev.php?ID=1354_203&ID2=DO_TOPIC D.3.2 Project Cycles of the World Bank The World Bank’s cooperation with countries follows a project cycle. For every step of this cycle, the Bank uses defined methods and completes specific documents. The cycle starts with the PRSPs and the Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) as the Bank’s blueprint for cooperation.The countries and the World Bank then identify needs and prioritise activities. Each step of the project cycle forms the basis for the next. (See Figure 14) Country Assisstance Strategy Project Evaluation Identification Implementation Preparation Completion Implementation Appraisal and Supervision Approval Figure 14: The World Bank project cycle 86 5D Process and Project Management The PRSP process itself is also a learning cycle. The poverty analysis forms the basis PRSP process is a for identifying needs and defining objectives. The objectives are then translated into learning cycle activities. An evaluation shows if the activities will lead to the achievement of the objectives.The results of this evaluation modify or change activities where necessary, eventually leading to new or modified objectives. Decide who Participates Establish Goals Project Take Action Monitoring & Develop Evaluation Indicators Learning Cycle Analyse Results Gather Information Figure 15: Cyclical nature of the PRSP process (see Sourcebook, Chapter on participation, p. 264) www.worldbank.org Projects and Operations Project Cycle http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/0,,content MDK:20120731~menuPK:41390~pagePK:41367~piPK:51533~theSitePK:40 941,00.html 87 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies E.1 Advocacy, Lobbying and Campaigning – A Definition In politics, and therefore in the discussions around PRSP, a range of techniques can be used to initiate and promote change. These forms of promotion are often known as advocacy, lobbying or campaigning. 1. Advocacy means to “give a voice to people”. The aim of advocacy is to promote advocacy to “give a change, to influence or to reform policies. The target audience is policymakers. voice to people” 2. Lobbying is the practice of private advocacy with the goal of influencing lobbying to influence a governing body, in order to ensure that an individual's or organisation’s point a governing body of view is represented in the government. In many countries, lobbying is regu- lated in an attempt to prevent political manipulation and corruption. People are paid to be lobbyists. 3. Campaigning is the sum of actions and activities that an organisation plans or campaigning: actions to executes in order to influence policy and to raise awareness on a specific issue. influence policy and raise awareness The aim is not only to influence policies, but also to raise public support. A successful campaign should have a simple and strong message that appeals to people’s emotions. Celebrities can be very useful in conveying the messages of a campaign to as wide an audience as possible. Typical campaigning activities include public events such as marches or vigils, the setting up of an exhibition, or the distribution of pamphlets and posters. CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. The CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf Oxfam (2002): Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide Section Three: Influencing the Content of Policy. Available at: www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/downloads/ prsp_guide.pdf E.2 Basic Techniques Seriousness, reliability and credibility are the basis for any discussion and lie behind all efforts to change existing situations. Criticism alone is not helpful: only in combi- nation with the introduction of alternative solutions is a dialogue between opponents productive. In any discussion, it is important to have reasonable and reliable argu- ments and to be well-informed. Thus it is essential to conduct research on the issue be well-informed under discussion in order to convince others, and this accordingly represents the first step of preparation for advocacy or lobbying activities. Research is not only helpful research 88 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies in finding and defining one’s own position, but also in gathering information on the opinions of others (not only possible allies, but also opponents). The second step is to communicate the results of the research and the position reached. Communication communication is fundamental to attract listeners, to change situations and to solve problems. As a result, the method of communication requires thorough planning and preparation. E.2.1 Gathering Information Access to information is essential when involved in politics. The internet provides an sources of information almost unlimited range of information. Although the use of the internet is becoming more widespread, it is still not accessible everywhere. Besides the internet, other sources of information include: • printed documents: books, journals, magazines and newspapers • audio and visual media: radio, TV, videos, etc. • governmental institutions/ministries • universities and other research institutions • NGOs • public information centres (e.g. of the World Bank, of ministries, etc.). The media represents a key source, as the different forms of media outlined above not only provide information, but also reflect the opinions of different persons, par- ties and organisations. However, before citing or using any information, it should be checked for reliability, as the data gathering methodology used greatly influences the reliability final result. The importance of data Figures are an excellent basis for discussion, but only if they are reliable. The aim of any data collection on disability or other issues is to describe a real situation and to data to describe find ways which could change this situation. If one has detailed facts about a situa- a real situation tion, the planning becomes easier. For example, if it is definitely known that 100 chil- dren in a region have a hearing impairment, it is relatively easy to calculate how many sign language teachers are required and thus how much will be needed for salaries. Data also help to compare situations. For example, if there are reliable data on the data help to compare percentage of unemployed people with disabilities in both 1995 and 2005, it is easy situations to assess whether the employment policy introduced in the meantime was effective or not. It takes both time and financial resources to produce quality data, so, there is the risk time and financial that data collection may not be one of the main priorities. resources Statistics on disability When gathering information for lobbying on PRSP and disability, you will probably concentrate on disability statistics. Typically the number of persons with disabilities numbers vary living in one country or region varies widely, for any one of the following reasons: 89 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies • The situation could really differ from one area to the next. The disability preva- lence in developing countries is lower because child mortality is very high for children with disabilities in these countries, for example. • Definitions on disability vary. • The data could measure different issues, for example impairment or disability. • Measuring methods can also differ. Some countries conduct special disability surveys, while in other cases disability statistics are a part of general household surveys or the national census.The questionnaires used to establish whether or not someone is disabled can greatly vary. Tool No. 33 E.2.2 Convincing and Strategic Communication Communication is always important, but campaigning, advocacy and lobbying need a strategy that can attract the attention of the targeted persons. Plans should be made a strategy attracting for internal (within the organisation or network) and external (with allies and oppo- attention nents) communication. In any case, the strategy must reflect who you are communi- cating with, about what, and why. Who? – The target audience Communication is always two-sided. Messages must be formulated according to the communication is always two-sided audience. Therefore the target audience must be correctly analysed and identified. The target audience is not a homogeneous block, as other stakeholders can also in- analysis of the target audience fluence members of this grouping. It is essential to know who one’s opponents and allies are, and to remember that the whole system is dynamic and may change at any moment. Tool No. 31 When? – Timing The right timing of a strategic communication approach is important. It is a good idea to align advocacy or lobby activities with other important dates, e.g. before elections important dates politicians are more open to the civil society, while disability is already in everyone’s minds on the 3rd of December (the International Day of Disabled Persons). Conversely, bad timing can be disastrous: for example, it will be very difficult to force a politician to change his or her position when he or she has already officially an- nounced it to the media. What? – Messages It is essential to send clear messages, despite the fact that the issues are necessarily send clear messages complex and multidimensional.To convince decision-makers and win public support, it is important to formulate clearly what you want. Outsiders do not want to spend (or cannot spend) much time in understanding an issue or to listen for too long, and nor do they want to have to read long texts. Messages must be formulated in a way that gets the audience’s attention, and should be immediately understandable. 90 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies A clear message consists of the following elements: Example Element Message 1 Statement Few disabled children receive formal education. 2 Evidence Only 2% of disabled children are enrolled in school. 3 Example 10-year-old John from Kenya has difficulties in walking: he never attended school, because the next school is 2 km away from his home and his parents cannot pay for the bus. 4 Invitation to action Transportation reduction or a financial support (this is optional and system would help this family. depends on what you want to achieve) How? – Ways of communication In all methods of communication it is necessary to find the right tone, according to the right tone the target audience. For example, World Bank staff or members of the Ministry of Finance may prefer a primarily economic argument based on data and figures. 1.Writing Writing letters, emails, faxes, memos or position papers are all useful ways of clearly letters, emails, and effectively presenting an issue or a position. The advantage of these written faxes, memos, position papers forms is that they offer effective communication with a target audience that could be difficult to meet personally. The same paper can moreover be sent to several persons at the same time, spreading a position widely. Written communication is also highly highly transparent transparent, in the sense that anybody can read it. However, one key danger is that opponents (or the media) could read your statements and distort them to use against you. The preferred mode of communication must be selected according to the target au- dience: for example, sometimes sending a letter is more official than an email. However, an email does reach your target faster, usually costs much less, and may be sent to an infinite number of persons. In Honduras, Bangladesh and Sierra Leone, Handicap International and its Examples partners wrote several position papers on the contents of the draft PRSPs. These papers were very helpful, as they clearly stated the writers’ opinions and influenced the final PRSPs. These position papers were also useful in defining and pursuing a joint strategy within the whole disability movement. Finally, they raised awareness among other stakeholders – besides the government – and contributed to disability issues in general. (see Case Studies, Chapter 5A) 2.Visits and meetings Knowing other people is important when trying to influence policies. Events like knowing other people seminars, conferences or workshops offer the possibility to get to know other partic- ipants. Working groups, breaks and other occasions give ample space to establish new contacts or to deepen existing ones. 91 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies Meetings offer a good chance to present a position. Many countries have meetings, workshops or consultations on PRSP issues. These events are very often huge, with hundreds of participants. It is helpful to build alliances in advance and agree with building alliances others on a joint position, as in such cases a group will be more likely to get the possibility to speak up than an individual. Tool No. 27 Any kind of meeting needs: • Ample preparation and information about the discussed issue(s). • Confirmation of the agenda, not only to fix general issues, but also the details to be discussed. • If possible: a professional, independent facilitator who structures the discussion • The right people to attend: lower-level civil servants are often more involved in a specific topic than ministers. Despite their lower rank, they still have influence! • An atmosphere which enables fruitful discussions, i.e. not confrontational, but instead friendly and polite. • A follow-up of the results of the meeting. 3. Presentation to a group and public speaking One way of presenting a position or situation in meetings or conferences is by giving a speech. This needs extensive preparation, as it is difficult to attract and keep the clear structure interest of an audience. A speech or presentation should have a clear structure, and the speaker should endeavour to speak as entertainingly as possible. It might be helpful to illustrate the talk with visual elements such as diagrams, graphs or slides. visual elements When campaigning in public, it is also helpful to have visual eye-catchers like posters or pamphlets to attract passers-by. Tool No. 28 E.2.3 Working with Media The media is important as newspapers, radio and TV can disseminate your message reach a great number and reach a great number of people. In many countries the media functions as a of people watchdog and exerts pressure on politicians. However, the media is not always inde- watchdog pendent. In some countries the state monopolises the media and it can be dangerous to publish a critical opinion. If it is therefore impossible to work with the national media, one solution may be to turn to the international media. However, the pressures on the media do not only originate from the government: all newspapers, pressures on the media radio and TV stations also have to contend with economic issues. People working in the media must be convinced that an issue will be of interest to as many people as possible before they include it in their broadcasts. The objective of the media, especially radio and TV, is not purely to inform, but also to entertain. Any coopera- tion with the media needs to consider that the topics covered can quickly change, and that the media face a range of deadlines for all their reporting. Tool No. 29 You can read about the worldwide situation of the freedom of the press at www.rsf.org (Reporters without borders) and at www.freedomhouse.org. 92 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies Press release A press release or a press statement is a short written statement on a specific issue. short written A press release is designed to inform the media and hopefully to be published. statement Normally a press release is sent to as many media stations as possible. Email or fax are the best ways to distribute press releases, which in general will only be published if they are considered sufficiently newsworthy and interesting. After distribution, a systematic follow-up can ascertain whether journalists actually received the press Tool No. 30 release and if they need more information. Interviews Giving interviews to the media is another way of distributing information, although it is more likely that journalists will themselves ask for an interview if the issue is already in the news. Writing a press release is often the first step before giving an interview. Any interview needs ample preparation, including the anticipation of ample preparation uncomfortable questions. Notes summarising the main points of the issue at hand are particularly useful. During the interview it is important to speak slowly and clearly. Answers need to be short and should directly answer the question, otherwise they could be edited, and important details could be lost. Anecdotes and real-life situations help to make the issue interesting and more concrete to the audience. The atmosphere should be polite, friendly and open. Journalists should not be allowed to put words into your mouth. Letters to the Editor A letter to the editor comments on a previous article or letter. There are two comments possibilities: • criticising the article, correcting incorrect facts, or • confirming the facts and information given and adding more information. Such letters have to be short, otherwise they will either not be published or will be shortened, risking losing important parts. CARE: Advocacy Tools and Guidelines. Available at: http://www.careusa.org/getinvolved/advocacy/tools.asp CIVICUS: MDG Campaigning Toolkit. Available at: www.civicus.org/mdg/title.htm CIVICUS: Handling the Media. Available at: http://www.civicus.org/new/media/Handling%20Media.pdf CIVICUS: Writing Effectively and Powerfully. Available at: http://www.civicus.org/new/media/writing%20Effectively.pdf CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. The CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf 93 6 Toolbox The proposed tools are designed with the intention of initiating a discussion on specific issues and facilitating the compilation of results. A result may be a direct answer to a question, but as the context is usually very complex, there are often several possible answers, or even in some cases none at all. So one result of working with the proposed tools can be the modification and adaptation of the original question to the specific context, which can lead to a proposal on how to deal with this question in the future, or to an answer (or at least, a partial answer). The proposed tools have a variety of different functions. Some of them, like the checklists, help the user to prepare for specific activities, or just assist in planning. Others provide very detailed information, e.g. statistics on disability. Most tools aim at facilitating the analysis of a situation, e.g. the power relations between different stakeholders. Most tools are already based on results from individual field testing. However, they have not yet been tested in their totality, or in the specific context of PRSP and disability. This situation will hopefully be addressed by the end of 2006 when a 2nd edition of this handbook is planned. Tool Page 1 Handout: Main Points on PRSP and Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 2 Checklist: PRSP in Your Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 3 Checklist: National Disability Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 4 Checklist: PRSP and Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 5 Problem Tree Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99 6 Participatory Poverty Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 7 Checklist: The Formulation Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 8 Checklist: The Implementation Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 9 Checklist: The Monitoring and Evaluation Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 10 Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 11 Inventory and Ranking of Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 12 Influences between Key Persons/Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 13 The Venn Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 14 Matrix of Key Persons/Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 15 Portfolio Analysis: Evaluation of Projects / Activities/ Partners / Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 16 Influence of Key Persons/Stakeholders on a project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 17 Ownership Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 18 Timeline of an Organisation/Project/Partnership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 19 Logical Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 20 SWOC Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 21 The Ideal Approach to Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 22 Power Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 23 Proposition to Initiate the Participation of DPOs in a National PRSP Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 24 The Eight Sunrays of Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 25 Action or Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 26 Checklist: The Cs of Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121 27 Checklist: Organising Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 28 Checklist: Presentations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 29 Checklist: Media Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 30 Structure of Press Releases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 31 Analysing Your Audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 32 PRSP – Some Country Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 33 Disability and Poverty: Some Global Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 34 Example: Workshop on PRSP and Disability in Tanzania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 35 The Millennium Development Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 94 1 Handout: Main Points on PRSP and Stakeholders This handout provides an example of how to summarise the main points with regard to the entire PRSP process. It can be used in a workshop, seminar, etc., and should be adjusted according to the knowledge of the partici- pants and the individual country’s situation. PRSP What is it? PRSP stands for Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. Poor countries formulate and implement a strategy stating how they intend to reduce poverty.The term “PRSP” denotes variously a document, a political process, and an instrument to fight poverty. Who is involved? The World Bank and the IMF, the two most important international financial institutions, with 184 countries as members.These institutions initiated the PRSP approach in 1999, and approve the PRSPs of their member countries. Government: Today, approximately 70 countries are conducting their own PRSP process. The governments of these countries are supposed to be the main actors in the process. Civil society: The civil society should play an important role in the PRSP process. Organisations and institutions such as NGOs, churches, parties and trade unions should be able to give their opin- ion on how to reduce poverty. Others: Parliaments, international development agencies and UN agencies also participate in the process. Why was the PRSP approach established? The PRSP strategy was set up by the World Bank/IMF to enable countries which formulate such a strategy to obtain debt relief and access to World Bank/IMF credits. This money should be used to implement the country’s Poverty Reduction Strategy. How does it work? The PRSP is an ongoing learning process, consisting of three main phases: • Formulation (9–24 months): all stakeholders decide on the main points of the strategy.To under- stand the nature of poverty in the country, a poverty analysis should be conducted. Consultations, workshops and other events also take place. • Implementation (3–5 years): The programmes and actions decided in the formulation process and written down in the PRSP are put into action. • Monitoring and evaluation (this phase starts in parallel to the implementation phase): This is an ongoing process. Every year a progress report is written, with an evaluation at the end of the implementation phase which influences the formulation of the next PRSP. 95 2 Checklist: PRSP in Your Country These questions provide orientation on how to assess the country-specific PRSP process. To obtain informa- tion, you should discuss in groups, ask resource persons, or check the web, newspapers or other sources. What stage has the PRSP process reached? Formulation Implementation Evaluation/monitoring/review Next important steps and dates: What other strategies and instruments are currently being used in your country that might influence the PRSP? National policies (poverty reduction and others): World Bank/IMF credits, CAS, national policies, etc.: Who is involved? (if possible, name concrete departments, institutions, persons) World Bank/IMF: Donors: (I)NGOs: Department for Coordination: Members of civil society: Government: Parliament: Organisations/institutions working in the field of disability: DPOs/PAs: Others: How is participation practised? Describe the type of participatory events: Number of the events/person contacted: Quality of these events: What relationships exist between different parties? (e.g. how is the atmosphere at the meetings? Is an open discussion possible? Are there any tensions? Do the stakeholders have equal influence, or is anyone dominant?) Government – Civil Society World Bank/IMF – Government World Bank/IMF – Civil Society Others What opportunities has the civil society ? Is there potential to increase its influence ? Yes, because No, because Useful resources: www.worldbank.org www.imf.org www.prsp-watch.de Tools No. 11–16 (PRSP – Some Country Facts) 96 3 Checklist: National Disability Legislation These questions provide the reader with orientation regarding how to assess the country’s legislative frame- work. To obtain further information, you should discuss issues in groups, ask resource persons (e.g. lawyers), and check the legislation or other sources. Are there national laws for the promotion of opportunities of people with disabilities? If yes, which: When were they published? Is the public aware of them? Yes No Partially Do these laws regard the UN Standard Rules? Yes, because No, because Partially, because Has the government made any commitments to any international conventions and legislation (e.g. the UN Standard Rules, the UN Convention on Human Rights etc.)? Are there any discriminatory laws (e.g. prohibiting people with disabilities to marry)? If yes, which: Are there anti-discrimination laws? If yes, which: Is there a ministry, department or government unit responsible for people with disabilities? If yes, which: Is there a Member of Parliament or government representative who has a disability? If yes, are you in contact with him/her? Yes No Does s/he actively promote the interests of the national disability movement? No, because Partially, because does not 97 4 Checklist: PRSP and Disability Situation 1: Your country has either not yet drafted or published a PRSP document, or there is a PRSP, but the document does not mention disability at all. How is the living situation of people with disabilities in your country? What are the connections in your national context between poverty and disability? Which points would be very important to include in your opinion? In Health:____________________________________________________________________________________ In Social Protection: _________________________________________________________________________ In Education: ________________________________________________________________________________ In Employment:______________________________________________________________________________ In Accessibility: ______________________________________________________________________________ In other sectors: ______________________________________________________________________________ What strategies and approaches do you want to promote? In Health:____________________________________________________________________________________ In Social Protection: _________________________________________________________________________ In Education: ________________________________________________________________________________ In Employment:______________________________________________________________________________ In Accessibility: ______________________________________________________________________________ In other sectors: ______________________________________________________________________________ Situation 2: A PRSP document is already available (either drafted or completed). Is a disability dimension included in: In Health? Yes No In Social Protection? Yes No In Education? Yes No In Employment? Yes No In Accessibility? Yes No In other sectors? Yes No Are the statements made in the PRSP adequate? Yes, because _________________________________________________________________________________ No, because _________________________________________________________________________________ What do you expect in the implementation process? ______________________________________________ How likely is it that the points will be put into practice? __________________________________________ 98 5 Problem Tree Analysis A problem tree is a useful way of analysing the causes and effects of a specific problem, e.g. the relationship between education and disability. The central problem is placed in the middle of the trunk; the causes then form the roots, and the effects become the branches and leaves. It is best to conduct this exercise in small groups. The problem tree is also a good planning tool. Youth with disabilities do not find jobs No access to vocational training Only 2 % of children with disabilities recieve a formal education School buildings are physically inaccessible Teachers are not trained in sign language, Braille A more detailed description is available at: http://www.fao.org/Participation/ft_more.jsp?ID=4424 99 6 Participatory Poverty Analysis To conduct a substantial Participatory Poverty Analysis (PPA) you need knowledge, experience, time and resources. This section can only give an introduction to PPA methodology. When planning a PPA, the following points should be considered: Which methodology do you want to use and why? How many persons do you want to question and why? How will you select these persons? Can you pre-test your methods? 6.1 Semi-structured Interviews For semi-structured interviews you do not use a questionnaire, but instead follow a guideline. The guideline reminds you of the topic you want to address. A semi-structured interview should resemble a natural conversa- tion. When interviewing, the following points should be remembered: Greet the interviewee politely Find a quiet place and ensure confidentiality Ensure that your positioning is good and that your body language is positive Use clear language Ask the right questions and listen carefully Show respect Say goodbye nicely at the end. 6.2 Focus Group A focus group discussion enables you to gather information from 5–12 persons who are experts on a specific issue.A experienced moderator should guide the discussion.A guideline (around 20 questions) must be prepared, as this helps keep the discussion focused on the subject at hand.The discussion guide- line should have a funnel structure: start out broad, and gradually narrow to become more detailed. The group should be quite homogeneous. If the participants have diametrically opposed viewpoints, the atmosphere will become too tense. Participants should feel comfortable and should not confront each other, although they should also be independent and free to express their views. The discussion must be recorded because it will need to be analysed in detail afterwards. Audio cas- settes or videos are the best option for this; if this is not possible, then two persons should take notes, not only recording the content of the discussion, but also elements which illustrate emotions, such as gestures or the tone of the conversation. 6.3 More Methods • Ranking exercises • Questionnaires • Mapping • Institutional mapping (Venn diagram, see Tool No. 13) Research on chronic poverty and disability: http://www.chronicpoverty.org/CPToolbox/Disability.htm 100 7 Checklist: The Formulation Process Find out who is responsible for PRSP formulation Governmental department, person in charge: _________________________________________________________________ Find out who is active in the PRSP process Government stakeholders: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Civil society stakeholders: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Donors: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Others: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Try to make an appointment with the important/active stakeholders that you have identified. Find out when the next participatory event for the formulation of the PRSP is to take place (e.g. workshops, conferences and consultations) and ask to participate Try to obtain access to the PRSP drafts (e.g. from the government or from other stakeholders) Check whether disability is included in the draft, and if so, how Define your position on the content of the PRSP Make your position public and suggest alternative solutions. Check the stage of your country’s PRSP at www.worldbank.org/prsp and at www.prsp-watch.de Notes: 101 8 Checklist: The Implementation Phase Review which points related to disability have been included in the final version of the paper. In particular, you should ask the following questions: Which areas have been missed out, and which managed to be included? How specific are the objectives and actions related to disability? Is it clear who needs to do what? To what degree has a budget been specifically allocated? How can your organisation contribute towards the actual implementation of the objectives set? Prioritise your actions according to the objectives of the PRSP. How can you stimulate more local activities by other groups? Find out if the government has specific sector or cluster meetings, and see if you can obtain an invitation: What sector meetings exist: ______________________________________________________________________________________ Can you send a representative to these meetings? Do you have experts on this theme, or do you need to start a disability sector group to develop your expertise? Invite outside experts to advise the network. Budget allocation: Find out how the budget is allocated to the specific objectives Find out about the yearly budget cycle and where it can be influenced Use disability representatives in parliament when available. Check if responsibilities are defined in your country’s PRSP www.worldbank.org/prsp If your organisation wants to take an active role in implementing projects, you should take into consideration planning tools, such as the logframe matrix. The CIVICUS “Overview of planning” manual provides you with an initial orientation when designing a project. This is available at: www.civicus.org/new/media/Overview%20of%20Planning.pdf 102 9 Checklist: The Monitoring and Evaluation Phase What does the PRSP document say about monitoring and evaluation? Are objectives and indicators clearly defined? Are there baseline data? Is there an institution, working group etc. that is responsible for monitoring and evaluation? Is it within or outside the government? Are there any civil society stakeholders currently conducting monitoring and evaluation? Can you participate in this institution, working group, etc.? Do the PRSP document and/or the Evaluation and Monitoring Plan mention targets and indicators? Are the targets and indicators disability-specific? Does the government complete regular Annual Progress Reports (APRs)? Are these APRs discussed in public? Are disability issues mentioned in the report? Is there a plan to review the current PRSP phase? When is it supposed to start? Notes: 103 10 Indicators Indicators are a set of criteria that allow measuring the input, output and outcome of a project. Setting indicators is essential for monitoring and evaluation. In this context, the following questions and issues need to be discussed: • Quantity: How much? • Quality: How well? • Time: When? • Target group: When? • Location: Where? Example Goal or objective = Improve the well-being of people with disabilities in Uzbekistan. Possible indicators: • The number of people with disabilities who are employed has increased by 50% in 2010 (compared to 2005). • The life expectancy of people with disabilities has increased by ten years in 2010 (compared to 2005). • The percentage of disabled children enrolled in schools has increased by 50% in 2010 (compared to 2005). This example shows that an effect cannot be measured by just one indicator, and that baseline data are needed to compare data from two different periods. SMART Indicators So-called SMART indicators help to assess the quality of the objectives. These are defined as follows: Specific: Not general and vague, but practical and concrete Measurable: Answering the questions: How many? How much? To what degree? Achievable: Do you have enough material and human resources? Realistic: Is it possible to achieve? Time-bound: When do you want to achieve your objectives? Adapted from: Harris, Alison with Sue Enfield (2003): Disability, Equality and Human Rights: A Training Manual for Development and Humanitarian Organisations. An Oxfam Publication in association with Action on Disability and Development (ADD), Oxford, p. 278. You can find a checklist to assess objectives in CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf p. 23. 104 11 Inventory and Ranking of Stakeholders Step1. Structured brainstorming of all participants Who are the most important stakeholders in the chosen field? (disability, PRSP, others). Use the following list to complete the brainstorming session if necessary: • Associations of people with disabilities: ___________________________________________________________________________ • Associations for people with disabilities: __________________________________________________________________________ • Associations of professionals: __________________________________________________________________________________________ • Governmental structures: – Ministry 1 Politics: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Technical/executing: _________________________________________________________________ ___ Technical/decision: ___________________________________________________________________ ___ – Ministry 2 Politics: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Technical/executing: _________________________________________________________________ ___ Technical/decision: __________________________________________________________________ ____ – Ministry 3 Politics: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Technical/executing: __________________________________________________________________ __ Technical/decision: ___________________________________________________________________ ___ • Decentralised governmental structures/services: ____________________________________________________________ • Community-based organisations: ___________________________________________________________________________________ • International organisations: ____________________________________________________________________________________________ • Religious authorities: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ • Private sector: enterprises and private businesses: _________________________________________________________ • Resource persons/individuals: _________________________________________________________________________________________ • Others: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Step 2.What are the criteria for deciding on the importance of a stakeholder/organisa- tion for the national disability movement/field of disability? Possible criteria: • Implemented activities/projects: history and experiences of past cooperation and project implementation • Size: human, physical and financial resources • Legitimacy: number and level of satisfaction of members • Relationships: connections with key persons in politics, the media, etc. • Type of organisation: identity (vision, ambitions, motivation, etc.), its mission (mandate), its internal structure, staff (permanent staff, volunteers, etc.), and so on. • Others Step 3. Establish a ranking of stakeholders/organisations according to the criteria fixed in step 2 105 12 Influences between Key Persons/Stakeholders This tool may be used to discuss the influences between two persons or organisations at a specific time. It allows both to be placed on the two axes to show what the influence of X is on Y, and vice versa. Capacity of X to influence Y high medium low Capacity of Y low medium high to influence X Example A local DPO and the World Bank Capacity of the local DPO to influence the World Bank high medium low low medium ✗ high Capacity of the World Bank to influence the local DPO 106 13 The Venn Diagramm Objectives To reveal important linkages and constraints according to the perceptions of different groups of participants: • within an organisation; and/or • within a certain institutional context, for example: village structures or an institutional environment Materials Chalk on a concrete floor or a stick in the sand or pens, paper, scissors, tape/glue. Time 45 minutes – 1 hour Procedure Circles of different sizes are allocated to different stakeholders, institutions, groups, departments or programmes. Their size varies according to the importance of the stakeholder or institution. The distance between the different circles (or their overlapping) indicates the intensity of contact and mutual influence. Group Methodology • One group: Constructing a Venn diagram together may facilitate the discussion between members of an organisation or a certain environment about linkages, constraints and the structure in general. • Several groups: Participants should join a group either according to what they know about an organisation or according to hierarchy/department. Each group then produces a Venn dia- gram of their organisation. The different diagrams are then exhibited, and key differences and underlying causes are analysed and discussed. Example 1. Venn diagram by project staff 2. Venn diagram by farmers Farmer Farmer Farmer Project Farmer Farmer Governement Research centre Farmer Governement Project A more detailed description on this topic can be found at: FAO field tools@participation http://www.fao.org/Participation/tools/venndiagram.html 107 14 Matrix of Key Persons/Stakeholders This tool is more complex than the Venn diagram, but also more systematic in its use. • List the key persons or main organisations on the vertical axis • List the key persons or main organisations on the horizontal axis • Fill in the “impact” fields discussing the mutual influences between two key persons or between two main organisations at a time Key person 1 or Key person 2 or Key person 3 or … stakeholder 1 stakeholder 2 stakeholder 3 Key person 1 or Impact of key person/ Impact of key person/ stakeholder 1 Name of key person/ stakeholder 1 stakeholder 1 stakeholder 1 on key person/ on key person/ stakeholder 2 stakeholder 3 Key person 2 or Impact of key person/ Impact of key person/ stakeholder 2 stakeholder 2 Name of key person/ stakeholder 2 on key person/ stakeholder 2 on key person/ stakeholder 1 stakeholder 3 Key person 3 or Impact of key person/ Impact of key person/ stakeholder 3 stakeholder 3 stakeholder 3 Name of key person/ on key person/ on key person/ stakeholder 3 stakeholder 1 stakeholder 2 … Notes: 108 15 Portfolio Analysis: Evaluation of Projects/ Activities/Partners/Stakeholders Make a list of your projects, activities, partners or important stakeholders, together with your team (brainstorm- ing). Discuss and organise the listed items according to the following criteria: 1. Stars Strong projects/activities with a potential for growth: these are dynamic, popular and creative. 2. Question marks New or innovative projects/activities that are not yet proven. These may become very effective and develop into “stars”, or they may just as easily fail and become “dead ducks”. 3. Foundation stones Reliable, safe projects/activities that provide a degree of financial security, credibility and reputation. 4. “Dead ducks” Projects/activities that take up management and financial resources and provide little or no added value in terms of the effort required. Stars ???? Foundation Stones Dead Ducks 11 (adapted version, INTRAC/Oxford, 2003 seminar paper) 109 16 Influence of Key Persons/Stakeholders on a Project In respect to the national disability movement, the following two questions need to be addressed: What is the influence of each main stakeholder on the disability movement? What is the influence of the disability move- ment on this stakeholder? Capacity of a key person to influence the project/activity or Capacity of a stakeholder to influence the disability movement /the field of disability high medium Capacity of the project/activity to low influence the a key person or low medium high Capacity of the disability movement/ field of disability to influence a stakeholder This tool may be used to analyse what influence the project has on one key person/stakeholder at a time; it is also possible to include all of the most important stakeholders. Example 1 Example 2 The DPO and a project Several stakeholders and a project Capacity of the DPO Capacity of the stakeholders to influence the project to influence the project ✗ Ministry ✗ ✗ ✗ DPO NGO Capacity of Capacity of the the project project to influ- to influence ence the DPO stakeholders 110 17 Ownership chart This tool facilitates participants’ discussions concerning the distribution of roles and the question of owner- ship within a project or activity. Project/activity: ........................... Person 1 or Person 2 or ……… organisation 1 organisation 2 Who identifies/ identified the problem? Who proposes/ proposed a solution? Who takes the decisions? Who funds activities? Who supplies the technical expertise? Who mobilises the human resources? Who manages the project resources? Who links the different stakeholders? Who evaluates them? Who is responsible for the fund? Who is responsible for the results? How are conflicts managed? 111 18 Timeline of an Organisation/Project/Partnership Objectives • To enable participants to produce a timeline that indicates significant events, achievements, setbacks and changes in the history of the organisation. • To understand better the specific context of a project/activity or partnership. • To generate initial findings that will be deepened in subsequent exercises. • To assess the organisation’s capacity to learn and to cope with change. • To provide a reference point for a later assessment of the impact of important changes on the organisation’s development. • To help bring out assumptions. Selection of participants • The longest serving members of the organisation, leaders, administrative staff and field staff should be chosen. • In the case of a project, activity or partnership assessment, the inclusion of the key partners should be considered. Partners may also establish a timeline in an independent group of their own. The results should then later be compared and discussed. Steps 1. Present the blank timeline diagram, and explain that a timeline helps outline a historical sequence of events over a period of several or many years. 2. Add the checklist of key events to be recorded to the timeline, and ask participants to include other important types of events in this list. 3. Have participants list key events in their organisation’s/project’s/partnership’s history. Write these events and the year/month when each took place on blank cards. 4. Ask the participants to indicate whether each event can be assessed as "positive”, “negative” or “neutral/normal”. Positive events are those which improved performance or strengthened the organisation; negative events by contrast are those that set back performance or weakened the organisation. 5. Tape these cards onto the timeline, near the corresponding dates and placing them as follows: • Positive events above the horizontal line, • Negative events below the horizontal line, and • Neutral/normal events along the line. The criteria for sorting the events into these three categories should be determined by the participants themselves. Checklist of key events (to be completed by participants) • Creation of the organisation/office, or start of the project/activity/partnership • Changes in staff and leadership: expatriates or locals • Funding changes • Programme evaluations and assessments • Starting and ending of specific activities or projects • Programme shifts in terms of strategy or objectives • Key training courses • Establishment of links to external groups • Acquisition of legal status • Changes to organisational systems and procedures (e.g. accounting, project management, etc.) • Internal crises • Political events influencing staff and their work. 112 The questions to be asked depend on what events have been cited. The questions provided here should purely serve as an indicative example. Some key questions for a semi-structured interview with participants could be: • Who was primarily responsible for creating the organisation/establishing the office? • What motivated this decision? • What caused a particular setback to happen? • How did the organisation expand to reach more groups? • What brought about a change in the purpose of the organisation? • Why did a certain leader/important staff member/partner resign? • How did the organisation succeed in obtaining a major funding grant? • What did the organisation do with the funding received in year X? • Are there any critical issues affecting the organisation’s performance or viability that arise from analysing the timeline? Example: 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Creation March: Joined regional Sep.: NGO network Feb.: Training in + Dec./Jan.: work started in village #1 Started Working in village #2 fundraising July: Village #2 Sep.: Oct.: Legal Status Feb.: Village #1 formed group Health formed group promoter hired March: Feb.: = Two programme staff hired Aug.: Evaluation May: A major grant Village group #1changed name not renewed Nov.: Conflict with another NGO – Feb.: Replacement of 1 staff member Dec./Jan.: Two staff members leave This timeline is a modified version of an original taken from Gubbels, Peter and Catheryn Koss (World Neighbors) (2000): From the Roots Up. Strengthening Organizational Capacity through Guided Self-Assessment. Pp. 102–105. 113 19 Logical Framework The logical framework approach is used by a number of development agencies, such as the European Union, the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID), the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Expert Group on Aid Evaluation, the Australian Government Overseas Aid Program (AusAID) and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ). It provides a project overview, but also forms a basis for monitoring and evaluation. The most important instrument of the approach is a matrix, the so-called logframe. This consists of four columns where you fill in a short summary of the project description, elements of monitoring and evaluation, and the project assumptions. Before using the logframe, the following analyses have to be carried out: • Stakeholder analysis: An overview of all persons, groups, institutions and so on that are affected by the project (direct and indirect beneficiaries, target groups, project staff, etc.). • Problem analysis: Analysis of an existing problem, its linkages to other problems and its reasons and effects. A problem tree can be used as a visualisation method. • Goal analysis: A description of the future situation. This analysis translates the negative situation outlined in the problem analysis into positive sentences or goals. • Alternative strategies analysis: This assesses different project strategies and helps to choose the most feasible approach. Narrative Objectively Means of Important summary verifiable verification assumptions indicators Goal Purpose Results Activities Explanation of key words: • Goal: Broader development impact or overall objective. The problem which the project intends to solve. What will be improved in future? • Purpose: Impact/effect of the project. • Results: What must be achieved in order to fulfil the project purpose? This often takes the form of project milestones, which must be achieved by a specific date. • Activities: What must be done in order to achieve the results? • Objectively verifiable indicators: Indicators that show whether the goal, purpose and results have been achieved, or if the activities have been conducted. The indicators can be quantitative or qual- itative, but must be measurable. • Means of verification: Where can we obtain information on the indicators? Can we use existing sources, or do we have to conduct a survey? (for more information on indicators, see Tool No. 10) • Important assumptions: The framework and working environment that influence the project. This includes conditions for success as well as risks. 114 The logframe follows a horizontal and a vertical logic, whereby the elements are linked to each other logically and cause each other (see the figure below). The activities influence the assumptions, and the assumptions in turn influence the results, and so on. Narrative Objectively Means of Important Narrative Objectively Means of Important summary verifiable verification assumptions summary verifiable verification assumptions indicators indicators Goal Goal Purpose Purpose Results Results Activities Activities Example of a logframe (Taken from BOND) Narrative Objectively Means of Important summary verifiable indicators verification assumptions Goal: For Jamaica to Jamaica seen as a The international Other teams are become dominant in serious winter media report about not more successful. the field of competitive sports competitor. the success of the bobsledding. Jamaican team. Purpose: For Jamaica to The Jamaican Results of the 2002 There is enough snow win the gold medal for team wins. Winter Olympics. for the Games to be bobsledding at the 2002 held, and the Jamaican Winter Olympics. team qualifies. Results: Team members Team members Fitness report by selected by (date). Team capable of running team doctor. at full fitness by (date). x meters in x seconds by x time. Activities: Develop Four-year training Schedule written and a training schedule. schedule, budget and agreed by coach, Find a practice venue. outcomes developed team members and Conduct a publicity and agreed by x, etc. team doctor. campaign to recruit Inputs: funding, coach, Budget and means team members, etc. bob, etc. for the project exist. Exercise Distribute a short description of a project, or ask participants to describe one of their projects. Let them discuss the internal (horizontal and vertical) logic of their project, filling in the logframe only as a final summary of their discussion. BOND (nd): Logical Framework Analysis. Guidance Note No. 4. Available at: http://www.gdrc.org/ngo/logical-fa.pdf The Disability Knowledge and Research Programme (DisabilityKar) (2004): Constructing a Logical Framework. Available at: http://www.kar-dht.org/logframe.html 115 20 SWOC Analysis Purpose: This tool can be used in a structured brainstorming session to analyse and discuss a given situation. Material: A large sheet of paper, marker pens or a blackboard and chalk, etc. Procedure: The group discusses a situation based around the following keywords: Strengths: Subjects that have worked well internally, which people are proud of. Weaknesses: Subjects that have not worked well internally. Opportunities: External occasions promoting the situation discussed Constraints: External facts that limit the situation discussed. Factors … … promoting … blocking internal Strengths Weaknesses external Opportunities Constraints Adapted from: Save the Children (2003): Toolkits. A Practical Guide to Planning, Monitoring, Evaluation and Impact Assessment. You can find more details at FAO field tools@participation: http://www.fao.org/Participation/ft_more.jsp?ID=720 Notes: 116 21 The Ideal Approach to Cooperation Partner 1 Partner 2 • Identity: Who we are • Identity: Who we are • Vision, sense: What are we • Vision, sense: What are we doing/what do we want to do? doing/what do we want to do? • System of stakeholders: Criteria • System of stakeholders: Who are the others? of choice Who are the others? • Strategy: What is our position? • Strategy: What is our position? Negotiation Relationship Define common rules for cooperation, mechanisms for conflict management and sanctions, etc. Project Define activities, resonsibilities, roles, etc. k Evolution Will the relationship change over time? If so, how and why? What does this mean for the project activities? Will the project activities change over time? If so, how and why? What does this mean for the relationship? 117 22 Power Mapping Power mapping is useful in that it shows not only those stakeholders who might be supportive, but also those who might be neutral or those who actively oppose an activity or project: The exercise is quite similar to the Venn Diagram (see Tool No. 13). However, this time the paper (or whatever background material is used) is divided into two areas: support and opposition, both separated by a line indicating a neutral zone. You should write down the different stakeholders on different types of paper (i.e. using different colours and sizes, etc.; photos and pictures can also be useful) and arrange them in relation to the objective/target you want to achieve, and in relation to each other. Objective/Target: ______________________________________________ INGO Governement DPO 1 DPO 2 Support Neutrality Opposition When building alliances it is important to keep in mind the following observations: • You should think as widely as possible: your partners in addition to your neighbours can be ones further away. Remember that the civil society includes all actors who are not part of the government, and thus ranges from academia to unions or to the media. You might even find support within governmental institutions. • You have to reach consensus and define aims and objectives with your partners. These aims should be prioritised and will form your joint bottom line. • Establish a mechanism for decision-making and information-sharing, and identify different roles within the alliances. • You have to be representative, even though the real work might only be done by a few key actors. Power Map, adapted from CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. Available at: www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf, p. 24. 118 23 Proposition to Initiate the Participation of DPOs in a National PRSP Process Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Orientation phase 1 Meeting of possible allies 2 Identification of possible entry points 3 Development and implementation of a joint strategy 4 Step Time Purpose Expected results Tools Orientation Start Initiate the process One person identified as Recruitment the coordinator procedures Orientation I: 2–3 days To improve knowledge of the Report/summary of stakeholder analysis: Stakeholder disability national disability sector identification of key DPOs, assessment analysis: stakeholders of the field of disability No. 11–22 Orientation II: 2–3 days To improve knowledge of the Report/summary of the assessment: • Stakeholder PRSP PRSP situation knowing about the PRSP document and analysis: stakeholders each stage of the process creates criteria No. 11–22 for selecting possible allies • Summary of disability stake- holder analysis Contact Preparation of the first Selection and contacting of participants; Assessment report: meeting of allies date for a kick-off meeting fixed selection criteria Meeting of possible allies First meeting 2–4 h • Getting to know each other • Minutes are taken of the meeting • Agenda • Common aims and objectives • Minutes sent to all participants and • Short presentation • Update on the situation everybody who may be interested in on objectives, • Brainstorming possible the future summary of results solutions of the orientation • Future coordination phase mechanisms Identification of possible entry points Next meetings To be • Detailed work on Minutes of meeting(s): • Minutes of past defined possible entry points • Initial ideas and propositions for the future meetings • Possible contributions • Distribution of general and specific tasks • Identification of tasks (Who does what before the next meeting) and responsibilities • Schedule for future meeting(s) Development and implementation of a joint strategy Workshop(s), To be DPOs are jointly involved in • Future action plan According to seminars, etc. defined the national PRSP process • Implementation of actions needs: external • Preparation • Evaluation of experiences speakers • Implemen- tation • Evaluation 119 24 The Eight Sunrays of Planning The sun reminds all participants involved in the planning that if this is not done well, rain and clouds will appear.The circular form of the sun symbolises the ongoing planning process, allowing participants to start at any point. Participants should form small working groups and answer the following questions: Who? Who should be involved? Who? Why? Why should they be involved? With Why? What is the aim? what? When? When should it happen? Where? Where should it happen? How? When? What for? What objectives do you want to achieve? What? What needs to happen in order to achieve the objectives? What? Where? How? How should it happen which methods do you use? What With what? What resources (money, people, etc.) for? do you need? Adapted from: Harris, Alison with Sue Enfield (2003): Disability, Equality and Human Rights: A Training Manual for Development and Humanitarian Organisations. An Oxfam Publication in association with Action on Disability and Development (ADD), Oxford, pp. 144–46. 25 Action or Implementation Plan This chart facilitates the planning of project and programme activities. Activity Resources needed Person(s) responsible Timeframe Adapted from: CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. pp. 51/52. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english6.pdf 120 26 Checklist: The Cs of Communication The application of this tool is designed to ensure that your communication is: Clear What you say should be understood after first reading or hearing. Correct Avoid making mistakes and do not supply incorrect data. If you have conducted your research thoroughly and if you are well-informed, your chances of retaining credibility are high. Complete The information collected should not have gaps, and should clearly answer the “Four Ws and the one H”, namely: Who? Why? What? When? How? Coherent The given information should be logical and easy to read. Concise Use words economically: do not waste time saying the same thing in three different ways. Courteous Adopt an appropriate neutral tone, not too formal but not too colloquial either. Culturally Keep in mind that communication is also related to culture. When communicating adapted with somebody from another culture (e.g. with a staff member of an INGO), you must realise that not only is his/her language different, but also his/her attitudes and behaviour, which also form an important part of communication. 27 Checklist: Organising Meetings If you are organising a meeting, you should think carefully about the following aspects: The room: Try to find one which is large enough for everyone to sit in a circle, so that all involved can see each other. Accessibility: This applies not only to the room, but also to information provided. Documents can for example be printed in Braille and translated into different languages. The number of persons: This affects the dynamics of the meeting. Fix a clear agenda, which allows everyone the chance to voice his or her opinions. Facilitator: S/he is a very important person for the success of the meeting, and must be very skilled. S/he must be a listener and should enable everybody to participate, rather than dominating discussions. Ice-breaker: Allow participants time to get to know to each other. Breaks: Plan regular breaks, after 1.5 to 2 hours. The work will be more productive if the participants have time to relax. Breaks are also a good way for participants to get to know each other informally. Evaluation: Ask participants for feedback, as it is important to learn from mistakes and successes. 121 28 Checklist: Presentations In a meeting, workshop, seminar or other situation you may be asked to present an issue. When pre-paring for this, you should think about the following points: The structure: 1. Welcome the audience, but do not make this too long. Present yourself or (better) let somebody else present you. 2. Give a clear introduction: briefly summarise what you plan to present and how long you intend to speak. 3. Start with your main point. 4. Tell the audience how they can support you and the issue. 5. Summarise your most important points. 6. Thank the participants for their attention and allow time for questions. Ways of keeping the interest of the audience: • Speak freely, keep your language simple (e.g. avoid using abbreviations or technical terms as far as possible). • Use visual elements to underline your main points. • Try to be friendly and impartial even if you feel really passionate about an issue. • Interact with your audience. 29 Checklist: Media Campaigns Before you start a media campaign, you should consider the following points: What is the most important type of media in your country? Radio? TV? Newspapers? Who is reached by a specific newspaper, radio/TV station, etc.? What is the target audience really interested in? Is this target audience also your target audience? Who publishes a specific newspaper, owns a radio/TV station, etc.? What is their relationship to government and other institutions? Who are they influenced by? What topics do they normally write/talk about? 122 30 Structure of Press Releases Press releases should be easy to read, clear and short – one page is normally enough. Write in short sentences and use active (rather than passive) voice, using as many verbs as possible. Quotations can enliven a story. You should structure your text using headlines, which should be short and concise. Structure Provide contact information (contact persons, telephone number if possible) at the top of the page or at the end of the document. Summarise the most important facts in the first paragraph. Answer the “Ws” in the first two sentences: What? Who? Where? When? Why? Provide more background information in the following paragraphs. The most important points should be placed at the beginning (see Figure 16). Press Release Format Headline (highlight the main news point) For immediate release or Embargoes for relaesed until … Intro/Lead Start with a bang. Aim to answer as many of the five W’s as possible in your first sentence. Source If you have not already done so, answer the question: “How do I know?” This provides credibility. Essentials This includes why the story is significant – the perspective. Here you answer the questions “So what?” And “How?” Quotes Give the release life and add quotes. Anything else? Note to the editor Is there anything missing? Contact Your last chance to tell Name, telephone and email journalists where they can Ends of people who can provide get copies of a report, a photo- Type “ends” more information. Remember graph or other information. at the end. to include after hours numbers. Figure 16: Press Release Format (adapted from MDG Campaigning Toolkit, Chapter 5: Campaigning Skills, p. 5). CIVICUS: MDG Campaigning Toolkit. Available at: www.civicus.org/mdg/title.htm 123 31 Analysing Your Audience Make a list of the organisations, institutions and/or individuals who you want to reach. If the list is too long, set priorities. Audience Analysis Form: Target audience: Issue: 1. Evaluate the target 1 = low level 2 3 4 5 = high level audience according to its level of….: • …familiarity with your organisation • …knowledge about your issue • …agreement with your position on the issue • …previously demon- strated support for your issue 2.With regard to your target audience, identify…: • …its potential interest/benefit related to the issue: • …influential persons (secondary audiences who can exert influence over your target audience): Adapted from: CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. p. 30. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english3.pdf 124 Country National name Responsible government unit Important civil society stake- Important donor PRSP timeframe (APR= for PRSP holders (especially networks) stakeholders Annual Progress Report) Albania Growth and Poverty GPRS Technical Secretariat Civil Society Advisory GPRS Core Donor Group PRSP: 2001 Reduction Strategy within the Ministry of Finance Group (CSAG) Nationa l1st APR: 2003 (GPRS) (www.minfin.gov.al) Civil Society Advisory 2nd APR: 2004 Group (NCSAG) Armenia – Ministry of Finance and the Armenian Civil Society and World Bank, GTZ, PRSP: 2003 (www.prsp.am) Economy; Participatory Partnership Network (CSPN) UNDP 1st APR: 2004 Steering Committee (http://www.cso-network.am) (monthly meetings) Bolivia Estrategia Boliviana PRSP: 2001 de Reducción de Pobreza (EBRP) Burkina Faso Secrétariat Technique pour la Permanent Secretariat of NGOs, PRSP II: 2004 Coordination des Programmes Liaison Office for NGOs and 1st APR: 2004 de Développement Économique associations; networks for et Social (STC-PDES) within information, communication the Ministry of Economic and training of women in NGOs Development Cambodia Council for Social Development NGO Forum on Cambodia World Bank, UNDP, PRSP: 2002 (CSD) under the Ministry of (http://www.ngoforum.org.kh) Asian Development Bank 1st APR: 2004 Planning (http://www.cdc-crdb.gov.kh/) 32 PRSP – Some Country Facts Ethiopia Sustainable Ministry of Finance and Economic Poverty Action Network of Development Assistance Review approximately As some processes are changing fast, it is no substitute for on-site research. Development for Development (MoFED) Civil Society in Ethiopia (PANE) Group (DAG) until June 2006 Poverty Reduction (http://www.mofed.gov.et) (http://www.dagethiopia.org) PRSP: 2002 Programme 1st APR: 2003 (SDPRD) Ghana Ghana Poverty National Development Review started in Reduction Strategy Planning Commission (NDPC) September 2004 (GPRS) PRSP: 2003 1st APR: 2004 Honduras Estrategia para la Ministry of the Presidency PRSP: 2001 (http://www.sierp.hn) Reducción de la 1st APR: 2003 Pobreza (ERP) 2nd APR: 2005 This chart can only provide a brief introduction to each country and does not claim to be comprehensive. 125 Kyrgyzstan National Poverty National CDF Council, PRSP: 2002 Reduction Strategy CDF Secretariat 1st APR: 2004 (NPRS) Nicaragua Estrategia Reforzada Secretaría Técnica de la El Consejo Nacional de PRSP: 2001 Sources: (http://www.cisas.org. de Crecimiento Presidencia (SETEC) Planificacion Economica y 1st APR: 2002 ni/prsp/indexbfe.htm) Económico Social de Nicaragua (CONPES) 2nd APR 2003 y de Reducción de Pobreza (ERCERP) Niger Permanent Secretariat within the PRSP: 2002 Office of the Prime Minister 1st APR: 2003 2nd APR: 2004 Rwanda Secretariat of the Poverty PRSP: 2002 Reduction National Programme 1st APR: 2003 2nd APR: 2004 Senegal Ministry of Economy and PRSP: 2002 Finance (MEF) 1st APR: 2004 Tanzania MKUKUTA/ Vice President’s Office NGO Policy Forum Tanzania Development PRSP II: 2005 (http://www.poverty National Strategy for Partners Group monitoring.go.tz/) Growth and Poverty (http://www.tzdac.or.tz/) Reduction (NSGPR) Uganda Poverty Eradication Ministry of Finance, Planning and Ugandan Debt Network (UDN) DFID PRSP II: 2005 Action Plan (PEAP) Economic Development (MFPED) (http://www.udn.or.ug/); www.prsp-watch.de; www.worldbank.org/prsp; www.imf.org (http://www.finance.go.ug/peap.html) NGO Forum; (http://www.ngoforum.or.ug/) Civil Society Task Force (CSOTF) Vietnam Comprehensive Ministry of Planning and Investment Vietnam Chamber of Commerce; PRSP: 2003 (http://www.cprgs.org) Poverty Reduction (MPI) (http://www.mpi.gov.vn) and Industry (VCCI) (http:// 1st APR: 2003 and Growth Strategy www.vcci.com.vn/) VUFO-NGO (CPRGS) Resource Centre Vietnam (http://www.ngocentre.org.vn/) Zambia PRSP unit within the Ministry of Civil Society for Poverty Reduction Review started 2005 Finance and National Planning; (CSPR) (http://www.cspr.org.zm/) PRSP: 2002 sector advisory groups (SAGs) 1st APR: 2004 2nd APR: 2004 126 33 Disability and Poverty: Some Global Facts The facts listed below illustrate the linkages between poverty and disability on a global scale. If you do not find figures for your region or country elsewhere, these might be helpful in convincing other parties. However, these statistics should not be used if the actual situation in your country is substantially different: • One person in 20 worldwide has a disability, of which more than three out of five live in a developing country (UN figures). • One in five of the world’s poorest have a disability (World Bank estimate). • Only 2 % of people with disabilities in developing countries have access to rehabilitation and appropriate basic services. • 20 million women a year suffer disability and long-term complications as a result of pregnancy and childbirth. • 1 to 2 % of children with disabilities in developing countries receive an education. • 25 % of the entire population worldwide is directly or indirectly affected by disability (UN figures). • Over 100 million girls and women in more than 28 African countries alone are disabled as a result of female genital mutilation. • Mortality for children with disabilities may be as high as 80% in countries where under-five mortality as a whole has decreased to below 20%. • 7 to 10 % of the population has a disability, with country differences ranging from 4 to 20% (WHO figures). • More than 10% of the world’s population has a disability (USAID figures). • In High Human Development (HHD) countries, 9.9% of the population has a disability; in Medium Human Development countries (MHD) the percentage drops to 3.7%; and in Low Human Development (LHD) countries, falls to just 1.0% (UNDP figures). • Depending on the estimate, between 281.7 million and 608.4 million persons worldwide have a disability, of which 112.5 to 490.5 million live in developing countries. • US$ 1.71–2.23 trillion of global GDP is lost because of disability, which adds up to a rate of between 5.35% and 6.97%. • Persons with disabilities make up 15–20% of the poor in developing countries (World Bank figures). • 82 % of persons with disabilities live below the poverty line in developing countries (UN figures). Metts, Robert L. (2000): Disability Issues, Trends and Recommendations for the World Bank. Social Protection Discussion Paper No. 0007, February. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Overview/Disability_Issues_ Trends_and_Recommendations_for_the_WB.pdf Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID issues, February, London. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf You can find examples of disability surveys, their questionnaires and data from a number of countries at DISTAT – The United Nations Disability Statistics Database: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/sconcerns/disability/disab2.asp. There is some information on the prevalence of disability in African countries on the African Decade’s website: http://www.africandecade.org.za The Asia Pacific Development Center on Disability also publishes country profiles on its website: http://www.apcdproject.org/countryprofile/index.html 127 34 Example:Workshop on PRSP and Disability in Tanzania Background The Christoffel-Blindenmission (CBM) and Handicap International have jointly started the PRSP disability programme in Tanzania. The aim of the programme is to promote the inclusion of disability in the Tanzanian PRSP (known locally by the acronym MKUKUTA). The first step of the project was to plan a workshop. In the project planning phase, the project coordinator conducted a survey on organisations working in the field of disability in Tanzania. A planning group consisting of five representatives from different organisations (DPOs and organisations working in the field of disability) was established to draft the concrete vision, objectives and contents of the workshop. They formulated the following vision and objectives: “An enhanced environment exists for full inclusion of disabled people in the implementation, moni- toring and evaluation of the MKUKUTA towards a better quality of their lives”. Objectives • To popularise the PRSP among workshop participants and among people with disabilities in Tanzania • To bring the DPOs and other stakeholders together in order to plan strategically the implementation process of the MKUKUTA • To establish a countrywide disability network, enabling better cooperation and information- sharing • To prioritise and operationalise concrete points in the MKUKUTA concerning disability • To chart the way forward, whereby each participant commits himself/herself to certain actions in order to achieve the MKUKUTA’s objectives • To establish ways of mobilising resources. Workshop Report The workshop took place from 27 to 29 September 2005 in Dar es Salaam. On average there were about 60 participants, drawn from a wide range of DPOs, organisations working in the field of disability, serv- ice providers, governmental and UN institutions, and national and international NGOs and institutions. The whole workshop was chaired and facilitated by members of Tanzanian DPOs and organisations working in the field of disability. The presentations were provided by internal and external resource persons. Day 1 The first day had around 90 participants. The basic principles of PRSP and disability were outlined in a number of presentations. The opening speech was given by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Health. Other presentations covered the PRSP approach in general, the living situation of people with disabilities in Tanzania, and legislation and regulations for people with disabilities, as well as an introduction to special and mainstream approaches. 128 Day 2 The day started with an overview of the points in the MKUKUTA that are related to disability, which can now be found in seven sectors (Health, Education, Employment and Vocational Training, Accessibility, Social Protection, HIV-AIDS, Governance and Accountability). This was emphasised as a positive result of the lobbying work of different organisations. However, it is still the case that not all points are included in a comprehensive way. There are still open questions on the quality and quantity of the implementation activities. After that, the participants divided themselves into groups according to the seven MKUKUTA sectors that relate to disability. Each group was asked to develop strategies showing how the points relating to disability in the MKUKUTA could be put into action. The results were very comprehensive and glob- al. Within the group work and the presentation of the results, the participants were able to discuss and explore many ideas intensively. There was lively interest in these discussions and the exchange of ideas. The results of the working groups were documented and are available upon request. Day 3 A representative from the Vice President’s Office started the third day with a presentation about the MKUKUTA, focusing on implementation, monitoring and evaluation, and the involvement of people with disabilities in the whole process. A concrete structure for implementation and for monitoring and evaluation still needs to be developed. The Vice President’s Office is coordinating the whole process, but the participation of all stakeholders (including the government and the civil society) is needed. After the presentation, the participants went back to their working groups of the previous day and con- tinued to develop strategies. The focus was now on two concrete activities and their implementation as well as their relation to specific points within the existing Tanzanian PRSP. The aim of this exercise was for the participants realistically to put the proposed activities into action. On this basis, it proved pos- sible to elaborate clear action plans.The participants committed themselves to projects and programmes which will further advance the implementation of the points. After the Workshop In order to implement the proposed activities and the action plan, an Implementation Committee was established, consisting of the members of the planning group for the workshop as well as stakeholders from different governmental and non-governmental institutions, as follows: • One umbrella organisation consisting of six DPOs • Three NGOs working with/for people with disabilities • Three governmental units: the Ministry of Finance; the Ministry of Labour, Youth and Sports/Social Welfare; and the Vice President’s Office • One UN organisation: the ILO • One CSO • Two INGOs. 129 35 The Millenium Development Goals At the UN Millennium Summit in September 2000, all 191 member states of the UN adopted the Millennium Declaration, which contains the eight Millennium Development Goals. These are a vision of development and poverty reduction, and should be achieved by 2015. The MDGs The disability dimension Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty Eradicate extreme poverty for people with and hunger disabilities and their families Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education Achieve inclusive education Goal 3 Promote gender equality and Promote gender equality for women empower women with disabilities Goal 4 Reduce child mortality Reduce the mortality of children with disability Goal 5 Improve maternal health Achieve the rights of children and families Goal 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, Combat HIV/AIDS and other diseases Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability Ensure environmental sustainability Goal 8 Develop a global partnership Develop a global partnership for development for development and disability Links to PRSP The issues discussed in the PRSP approach and the MDGs are very similar. The two concepts were developed at the same time, although so far they have not been officially linked to each other. They fundamentally differ in terms of their functions:the MDGs represent a vision of what should be achieved, while PRSPs represent ways of achieving this (beside other approaches). In their PRSP documents, countries also formulate visions, goals, targets and indicators for development. These can be orientat- ed to the MDGs, but should also be country-owned. For example, the Tanzanian PRSP is “committed to the MDGs”, but the country has its own “Vision 2025”. The Tanzanian PRSP (called the National Strategy for Growth and Reducing Poverty (NSGRP)) is specifically described as a “vehicle to achiev- ing” the MDGs. The United Nations about the MDGs: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals The World Bank about the MDGs: www.developmentgoals.org For the global campaign to make the achievement of the goals reality, with tips on how to campaign and reports on events in every region, see: www.millenniumcampaign.org A PowerPoint presentation on the MDGs of Inclusion International is available at: http://www.cercle.lu/IMG/pdf/mdgreports/inclusionpresent.ppt Trocaire (2005): More Than a Numbers Game? Ensuring that the Millennium Development Goals Address Structural Injustice, April. Available at: http://www.trocaire.org/policyandadvocacy/mdgs/numbersgame.htm 130 Glossary Budget The budget lists the planned expenses and revenues of institutions, e.g. of nation states. The constitu- tion of a nation state defines which agency is responsible for drafting this plan: the government, the legislature, parliament, etc. In recent years, developing countries have witnessed a growing tendency towards participatory budget formulation. Traditionally the state budget is valid for one year, but nowadays states try to plan according to a medium-term perspective. Civil society There is no clear definition of this often used term. In the political context, “civil society” refers to all organised forms apart from the government, for example trade unions, NGOs, charity organisations, religious organisations, community-based organisations, civic movements or advocacy groups. Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF) The Comprehensive Development Framework can be understood as the conceptual basis for the PRSP. It was introduced by World Bank president James Wolfensohn in 1999, and it emphasised that development is a long-term process which is influenced by all sectors. Development should therefore not focus on individual projects, but should be seen in a wider context, taking all relevant aspects into consideration. Consultative Group Meetings These are regular meetings on the issues facing donors and lending countries, in particular the cooper- ation between the two: this may include the APR of the PRSP or new lending facilities. They comprise a delegations from the relevant country (mainly government representatives, but the civil society is sometimes invited too), and a donor delegation (World Bank and IMF representatives, as well as rep- resentatives of the main donor countries). Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) The Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) is a sort of medium-term business plan created by the World Bank for each of its client countries. The CAS system was already in place before the PRSP approach was introduced, and is now supposed to change and align itself to the PRSP, as the CAS is obligatory for PRSP countries. Disability The usage of this term depends on the underlying model or definition (see Chapter 5C). For example, in the social model, “disability” refers to the outcome of impairment in combination with social and external factors. This combination leads to discrimination against people with impairments. Disability movement The disability movement can be seen as a latter-day civil rights movement. In a few parts of the world this process started back in the late 1970s; nowadays there is a growing dynamic that supports the emer- gence of a worldwide movement. Empowerment There are various scientific definitions of this term. In general, “empowerment” is used to refer to strengthening the capabilities of the poor with the aim of enabling them to better control their lives. Evaluation Evaluation consists of making a judgement or an assessment of something. In development projects or programmes, evaluation enables the user to check whether a predefined objective has been reached after a specific time period. 131 Glossary G7/G8 The major industrial countries have held regular economic summits since 1975 as the Group of Seven (G7) and, since 1994, when Russia participated for the first time, as the G8. The G8’s members are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the UK and the US. Gender When used in a social context, the term “gender” addresses the different roles and situations of women and men in society. Grassroots organisation A collective term for purely local level organisations. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) GDP is defined as the total value of final goods and services produced within a nation state in a given year. Handicap Handicap refers to the limitations of a person in fulfilling a social role due to his/her impairment. However, this term has been increasingly criticised by disability movement stakeholders; indeed, it has been dropped from the new World Health Organization classification. Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) The HIPC Initiative commenced in 1996 and was reviewed in 1999, and is designed to reduce the debt of these countries classified as highly indebted and poor. Basically, the richer countries promised to give debt relief if these countries fulfil specific conditions. Human Development Index (HDI) The Human Development Index (HDI) was developed in 1990 and measures the average achievement in a country according to three basic dimensions of human development: • A long and healthy life, as measured by life expectancy at birth. • Knowledge, as measured by the adult literacy rate (given a two-thirds weight) and the combined pri- mary, secondary and tertiary gross enrolment ratio (one-third weight). • A decent standard of living, as measured by GDP per capita at purchasing power parity (PPP) in USD. The UN publishes each year a ranking which shows each country’s HDI. International Financial Institutions (IFIs) An umbrella term for the World Bank and the IMF. International Labour Organization (ILO) The International Labour Organization (ILO) was founded in 1919 and is now a specialized agency of the UN with specific responsibility for labour issues. Its headquarters are in Geneva, Switzerland. Impairment Impairment addresses the physical dimension of disability. International Monetary Fund (IMF) A specialised UN agency, which aims to control the economic system of the world. It monitores the global finance system (e.g. exchange rates). The IMF assits low-income countries by providing loans, credits and technical support. 132 Glossary Joint Staff Advisory Note (JSAN) The JSAN replaces the Joint Staff Assessment (JSA) of the PRSP since 2004. The JSAN is a comment on PRSP document written by world Bank and IMF staff. This JSAN is a basis for concessional lend- ing from the IFIs. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) The Millennium Development Goals consist of eight goals, alongside 18 targets and 48 indicators. They were adopted by a consensus of experts from the UN Secretariat and the IMF, the OECD and the World Bank, and were publicly announced at the UN Millennium Summit in September 2000. Monitoring Monitoring is the ongoing observation of a process, for example a development project. Non-governmental organisation (NGO) An NGO is defined as an organisation that is not part of a government and was not founded by a na- tion state. The term generally refers to social, cultural, legal and environmental advocacy groups whose objectives and goals are primarily non-commercial. Ownership Identification of the stakeholders with a project or programme, e.g. the PRSP. Ownership should also lead to self-responsibility. Participation In the context of development work, the term "participation” refers to the idea that beneficiaries of projects and programmes should participate in planning and decision-making. Poverty In general, poverty denotes a lack of resources. There are various definitions of poverty: • Absolute poverty: people who live below a defined poverty line (e.g. USD 1 per day) • Relative poverty: compared to the living standard of the society in the area/region/country • Income poverty: persons with a low income Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) PRSP is an approach that was developed and initiated by the World Bank and the IMF in 1999 to encourage developing countries to formulate their own strategy on how to reduce poverty. The term is potentially confusing as it is used for the document itself as well as for the process of formulating and implementing the strategy. To avoid confusion, some authors use the term “Poverty Reduction Strategy”, or PRS, for this process. However, this handbook employs the term “PRSP” for both. Poverty Reduction Growth Facility (PRGF) The PRGF is the financing instrument used by the IMF to support national PRSPs.Very often the PRGF sets the macroeconomic framework of the PRSP. It is settled for three years with an annual interest rate of 0.5 %. Repayment begins five and a half years later and ends after ten years. Poverty Reduction Support Credit (PRSC) The PRSC is the credit programme of the International Development Agency (IDA), one of the five members of the World Bank group, to support poverty reduction strategies. It is lent with no interest and a small service charge to the countries over a period of grace of ten years. It must be repaid over a period of 40 years; this means that 70% is in fact given as a grant. 133 Glossary Private sector The private sector comprises all entities that are not controlled and owned by the state or government and are part of the economic system: this includes private firms and companies, corporations, private banks, NGOs, etc. Rehabilitation In general, rehabilitation denotes either the restoration of lost capabilities, or the treatment aimed at producing this effect. Sometimes the term is restricted to physical therapy. Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) SAPs were programmes initiated by the World Bank and the IMF and which operated until the 1990s. The basic idea was that developing countries should adjust their framework conditions to support their economic development and to obtain loans and credits from the IMF and the World Bank. The condi- tions for receiving these loans were mainly the acceptance of privatisation and deregulation, e.g. cutting social expenditure, devaluing currencies against the dollar, lifting import and export restrictions, balancing budgets and not overspending, and removing price controls and state subsidies. United Nations (UN) The association was founded in 1945 and now has 191 member states. The aim of the UN is to find and agree on joint strategies for international laws, security, economic development and social equity. The UN body consists of various agencies and institutions, such as the WHO, the World Bank, UNESCO or the UN Development Programme (UNDP). World Bank Group The World Bank was originally called the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development, or IBRD. Later on, it became known as the World Bank (the name “World Bank” originated from an ar- ticle in the magazine The Economist). Following its creation, four additional branches to the IBRD were created which now form the World Bank Group: the International Development Association (IDA), the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) and the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). World Health Organization (WHO) Founded in 1948 with its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, the WHO coordinates international health issues, such as combating HIV/AIDS, malaria or tuberculosis. It also provides international research and classifications on health issues. 134 Internet Links The following pages present all internet links mentioned in the handbook. A click on the link connects directly to the appropriate site. 4 Entry Points for the Civil Society in the PRSP Process p. 17 Norton, Andy (2001): A Rough Guide to PPAs – Participatory Poverty Assessment: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. http://www.odi.org.uk/pppg/publications/books/ppa.pdf Robb, Caroline M. (2000): How the Poor Can Have a Voice in Government Policy. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/12/robb.htm, (www.imf.org publications) The World Bank Poverty Net with Voices of the Poor: http://www.worldbank.org/prem/poverty/voices/index.htm Government of Honduras (2002): Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 2001–2015. Tegucigalpa. Downloaded from: http://www.worldbank.org/prsp p. 19 Oxfam (2002): Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide Section 4: Monitoring the Implementation of Policy. http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/downloads/prsp_guide.pdf Trocaire (2002): Guide to Civil Society Engagement in Advocacy on Economic Justice and PRSP Section 3. http://www.trocaire.ie/policyandadvocacy/debt/Guide%20to%20Civil%20Society%20Engagement%20in%20PRSP/Introduction.htm VENRO (2005): Fighting Poverty without Empowering the Poor? Societal Participation in Implementing Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRS) Falls behind Needs and Possibilities. http://www.prsp-watch.de/publikationen/archiv/PRSP%20WEB%20Engl.pdf p. 20 Check the websites of the World Bank and the IMF for more information on the CAS, PRGF, PRSC, etc. http://www.worldbank.org Countries, www.imf.org Country Info 5A Case Studies A.1 Case Study 1: Honduras p. 26 Centre for International Rehabilitation (2004): International Disability Right Monitor. Country Report Honduras, available at: http://www.cirnetwork.org/idrm/reports/americas/countries/honduras.html CIARH: http://ciarh.org.hn Government of Honduras (2002): Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 2001–2015. Tegucigalpa. Available at: http://www.worldbank.org/prsp Government of Honduras (2005): Annual Progress Report. Available at: http://www.worldbank.org/prsp Hunt, Sarah (2005): Honduras: PRSP Update. 17 April 2005, Final Version. Tegucigalpa. Downloaded from: http://www.trocaire.org/policyandadvocacy/prsp/Honduras%20Update%20Apr05%20final.pdf ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies. How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. Downloaded from: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/discpaper.pdf A.2 Case Study 2: Bangladesh p.30 Asia Pacific Development Centre on Disability: http://www.apcdproject.org Forum for Development Dialog and Donor Coordination, Bangladesh on PRSP: http://www.lcgbangladesh.org/prsp/index.php General Economics Division; Planning Commission; Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh (2005): Bangladesh. Unlocking the Potential. National Strategy for Accelerated Poverty Reduction, 16 October. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPRS1/Resources/Bangladesh_PRSP(Oct-16-2005).pdf ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies. How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work Is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. Downloaded from: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/discpaper.pdf NFOWD: http://www.nfowd.org A.3 Case Study 3: Sierra Leone p. 34 ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies. How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work Is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. Downloaded from: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/discpaper.pdf Kovach, Hetty (2005): A New Development Agenda? Sierra Leones First PRSP. European Network on Debt and Development, July. Available at: http://www.eurodad.org/uploadstore/cms/docs/Microsoft_Word__A_new_development_agenda__Sierra_Leone’s_first_PRSP.pdf Sierra Leone Census: http://www.statistics-sierra-leone.org Transparency International, Corruption Report: http://www.transparency.org A.4 Case Study 4:Tanzania p. 39 African Decade (2005): Tanzania Country Profile (with information on disability organisations). Available at: http://www.africandecade.org.za Comprehensive Community Based Rehabilitation Tanzania (CCBRT): http://www.ccbrt.or.tz PRSP Watch (2005): Tanzania Country Profile. Available at: http://www.prsp-watch.de/countries/tanzania.pdf Tanzania’s Poverty Monitoring Website: http://www.povertymonitoring.go.tz United Republic of Tanzania. Vice President’s Office (2005): National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP), April. Available at: http://www.tanzania.go.tz/nsgrf.html 5B PRSP and Stakeholders p. 43 About the Wapenhans Report: http://www.whirledbank.org/ourwords/wapenhans.html World Summit for Social Development: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/wssd The Millennium Development Goals: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ p. 44 The World Bank Homepage provides an useful introduction to PRSP; this link can also be used to find answers to most common questions: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,menuPK:384209~pagePK:162100~piPK:159310~theSitePK:384201,00.html The IMF has published a Factsheet on its website which also offers a good introduction: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/prsp.htm p. 45 Klugman, Jeni (ed.) (2002): A Sourcebook for Poverty Reduction Strategies, Volume 1: Core Techniques and Cross-cutting Issues – The World Bank Sourcebook. Single chapters are also available on the World Bank’s website: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20175742~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:384201,00.html Bretton Woods Project (2003): Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs): A Rough Guide, April, available at: http://www.campaignforeducation.org/resources/Apr2002/prsp_roughguide.pdf Driscoll, Ruth and Karin Christiansen, (ODI) (2004): The PRSP Approach: A Basic Guide for CARE International, March. Available at: http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0001499/P1843-CARE_basic-guide_PRSP_March2004.pdf Oxfam: Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide, available at: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/prsp_guide.htm p. 47 Information on quotas and voting power: http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/memdir/members.htm “Critical Voices on the World Bank and IMF”: http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org p. 46 Comprehensive Development Framework: http://www.worldbank.org/cdf Country Assistance Strategies: http://www.worldbank.org/cas World Bank FAQs: http://www.worldbank.org FAQs About the World Bank IMF: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/glance.htm, http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/faq/faqs.htm PRGF Factsheet: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/prgf.htm Rogerson, Andrew with Adrian Hewitt and David Waldenberg, (ODI) (2004): The International Aid System 2005–2010: Forces For and Against Change. Available at: http//:www.odi.org.uk/publications/working_papers/wp235.pdf Oxfam: Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide. Available at: http//:www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issue/democracy_rights/prsp_guide.htm http//:www.worldbank.org/prsp http//:www.worldbank.org/countries http//:www.prsp-watch.de p. 49 http//:www.worldbank.org/prsp presents details on the different participants of various country p. 53 http://www.eldis.org/poverty/prsp.htm, http://www.eurodad.org/workareas/default.aspx?id=92 http://www.prspsynthesis.org The Bretton Woods Project presents “Critical Voices on the World Bank and IMF”; there is a separate section with documents on PRSP. Available at: http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/topic/adjustment/index.shtml O’Mally, Kate (2004): Children and Young People Participating in PRSP Processes: Lessons from Save the Children’s Experiences. London. Available at: http://www.eldis.org/fulltext/SCUK-participation-PRSP.pdf Oxfam Briefing Paper (2004): From “Donorship” to Ownership? Moving towards PRSP Round Two, January. Available at: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/bp51_prsp.htm Piron, Laure-Hélène and Alison Evans (2004): Politics and the PRSP Approach: Synthesis Paper. Working Paper No. 237, Overseas Development Institute, London, March. Available at: http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/working_papers/wp237.pdf Rowden, Rick and Jane Ocaya Irama (2004): Rethinking Participation: Questions for Civil Society about the Limits of Participation in PRSPs. An ActionAid USA/ActionAid Uganda Discussion Paper. Washington, D.C., April. Available at: http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/int/bwi/2004/0404think.pdf Whaites, Alan (ed.) (2002): Masters of Their Own Development? PRSPs and the Prospects for the Poor. World Vision, Monrovia and California. Available at: http//:www.worldvision.org.uk/resources/mastersprsps.pdf Houghton, Ir˜ ung˜u (ActionAidUSA) (April 2001): Up Against the Wind: Recent ActionAid experiences of engaging the Poverty Reduction Strategies and other IFI lending policies. Presentation to the conference entiteld “From Engagement to Protest” organised by Structural Adjustment Participatory Review International Network (SAPRIN) et al., April 19th, Washington DC, North America; Washington D. C. Available at: http://www.actionaidusa.org/pdf/Upaagainstwinds.pdf p. 55 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20175742~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:384201,00.html Bonnel, René (2004): Poverty Reduction Strategies: Their Importance for Disability. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Poverty/PRSPddteam.pdf ILO (2002): Disability and Poverty Reduction Strategies: How to Ensure That Access of Persons with Disabilities to Decent and Productive Work Is Part of the PRSP Process. Geneva, November. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/discpaper.pdf GPDD Working Group on Disability and Poverty Reduction: http://www.stakes.fi/sfa/disabilityandpoverty 5C Disability p. 59 Disabled People South Africa (2000): Pocket Guide on Disability Equality: An Empowerment Tool. Available at: www.dpsa.org.za/documents/Pocket%20Guide.htm Chapter 1: “Disability, Definitions, Models and Terminology”. An interesting discussion on definitions can be found on the website of Disability Awareness in Action (DAA): www.daa.org.uk/disability%20definitions.htm www.daa.org.uk Issues Definitions of Disability Definition of Disability – A Briefing Paper. p. 61 World Health Organization (2002): Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health. ICF, Geneva. Available at: ttp://www3.who.int/icf/beginners/bg.pdf ICF website: http://www3.who.int/icf/ The Dictionary on Disability Terminology by the Disabled People’s Organisation, Singapore might also be helpful. The four parts are available at: http://www.dpa.org.sg/Dictionary.html p. 62 Disabled People South Africa (2000): Pocket Guide on Disability Equality: An Empowerment Tool. Available at http://www.dpsa.org.za Documents Pocket Guide Chapter 3: “The International Disability Rights Movement” and Chapter 4: “Roles of the United Nations in Promoting Disability Equity”. United Nations (1994): The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. New York. Available at: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/dissre00.htm Reports on the implementation of the UN Standard Rules in different countries are available at: http://www.independentliving.org/standardrules/ PowerPoint presentation on the UN Standard Rules: http://www.worldenable.net/standardrules/Default.htm You can check the status of the UN Convention and the reports and discussions of the ad hoc meetings at: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/index.html. A CD-Rom on “The Disability Convention – Making it Work” provides an impressive collection of documents and issues related to the UN Convention. It can be obtained from: ttp://www.iddc.org.uk/cdrom. p. 63 UN Enable – the United Nations Focal Point on Persons with Disabilities: Overview on International Legal Frameworks for Disability Legislation. Available at: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disovlf.htm DAA: International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities. Available at: http://www.daa.org.uk/convention.htm The World Conference on Special Needs Education, Access and Quality (1994): The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education, Salamanca, Spain, 7–10 June 1994. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000984/098427eo.pdf Review of the Salamanca Statement 10 Years Later. Available at: http://eenet.org.uk/salamanca/salamanca.shtml UNICEF: Convention on the Rights of the Child. Available at: http://www.unicef.org/crc The African Decade: http://www.africandecade.org.za The Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons: How It Worked http://enabledonline.com/news/N_ASPAC.php United Nations: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, available at: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html Some information about the Arab Decade is available at http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disarabdecade.htm http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/recomm/instr/c_159.htm provides an overview of the ILO Convention Read the Inter-American Convention at: http://www.cidh.oas.org/Basicos/disability.htm p.65 Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID Issues. London, February. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf Inclusion International (nd): “Disability, Development and Inclusion in International Development Cooperation: A Scan of Disability-Related Policies and Research at Selected Multilateral and Bilateral Institutions”. This analysis compares different development policies of multilateral and bilateral agencies. Available at: http://www.inclusion-international.org/site_uploads/1119016919121949239.pdf European Guidance on Disability and Development, available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/body/publications/docs/Disability_en.pdf#zoom=100 STAKES (2003): “Label Us Able: A Pro-active Evaluation of Finnish Development Co-operation from the Disability Perspective” Chapter 2: Development Co-operation on Disability Issues http://global.finland.fi/evaluations/labelable.pdf See Mobility USA’s Checklist for Inclusion, available at: http://www.miusa.org/publications/freeresources/Checklist_for_Inclusion.pdf p. 67 Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID Issues. London, February. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf Elwan, Ann (1999): Poverty and Disability. A Survey of the Literature. Social Protection Discussion Paper Series. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Poverty/Poverty_and_Disability_A_Survey_of_the_Literature.pdf Yeo, Rebecca & Karen Moore (2003): Including Disability in Poverty Reduction Work: “Nothing About Us, Without Us”, in World Development, Vol. 31, No. 3, Montreal, pp. 571–90 available at (for a fee): http://www.sciencedirect.com Yeo, Rebecca (2001): Chronic Poverty and Disability. Somerset. Available at: http://www.chronicpoverty.org/pdfs/04Yeo.pdf p. 69 Wiman, Ronald, Einar Helander and Joan Westland (2002): Meeting the Needs of People with Disabilities: New Approaches in the Health Sector. World Bank, Washington, June. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Community-Based-Rehabilitation/Meeting_the_Needs_of_People_with_Disabilities.pdf United Republic of Tanzania, Vice President’s Office (2005): National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty, (NSGRP), April. Available at: http://www.tanzania.go.tz/nsgrf.html p. 70 ILO, UNESCO and WHO (2004): CBR: A Strategy for Rehabilitation, Equalization of Opportunities, Poverty Reduction and Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities. Joint Position Paper 2004. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/download/jointpaper.pdf Community Based Rehabilitation Network (South Asia): http://www.cbrnetwork.org.in CBR Resources: http://www.cbrresources.org World Health Organization Disability and Rehabilitation (DAR) Team (August 2001): Rethinking Care from the Perspective of Disabled People: Report and Recommendations. Available at: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/WHO/whoreport.pdf WHO DAR Team: http://www.who.int/disabilities/en/ Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID Issues. London, February. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf p. 73 World Conference on Special Needs Education, Access and Quality (1994): The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education, Salamanca, Spain, 7–10 June 1994. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000984/098427eo.pdf Review on the Salamanca Statement 10 Years Later: http://eenet.org.uk/salamanca/salamanca.shtml Enabling Education Network: http://eenet.org.uk Takamine, Yutaka (2004): Working Paper Series on Disability Issues in East Asia: Review and Ways Forward. Paper No. 2004-1, May. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Regions/East-Asia-Pacific/Disability_Issues_in_East_Asia_Takamine.pdf Jonsson, Tyre & Ronald Wiman (2001): Education, Poverty and Disability in Developing Countries: A Technical Note Prepared for the Sourcebook. Sponsored by the Thematic Group on Disability Issues and financed by the Finnish Consultant Trust, June. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Education/Education_Poverty_and_Disability.pdf p. 74 ILO (2002): Managing Disability at the Workplace. ILO Code of Practice. Geneva. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/skills/disability/download/codeeng.pdf (this includes definitions of employers, discrimination, vocational rehabilitation, etc.) Hernández-Licona, Gonzalo (2004): Disability and the Labour Market: Data Gaps and Needs in Latin America and the Caribbean. Available at: http://www.iadb.org/sds/doc/Rev2bEditedDisability-LaborMarketHernandez-Licona.pdf The Disabled People’s Association, Singapore (nd): Employing Somebody Who Is Disabled. Available at: http://www.dpa.org.sg/employment.htm Mont, Daniel (2004): Disability Employment Policy. World Bank Social Protection Discussion Paper. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Employment-and-Training/Disability_Employment_Policy.pdf p. 75–76 Wiman, Ronald (STAKES) and Jim Sandhu (INDRA) (2004): Integrating Appropriate Measures for People with Disabilities in the Infrastructure Sector. Available at: http://www.stakes.fi/gtz/ United Nations Enable http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/designm/ The Transport chapter of the Sourcebook: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177554~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html The Water and Sanitation chapter of the Sourcebook: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177595~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html The Information and Communication Technology chapter of the Sourcebook: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177596~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html ESCAP (1995): Promotion of Non-handicapping Physical Environments for Disabled Persons: Guidelines. Available at: http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/disability/decade/publications/z15009gl/z1500901.htm United Nations Enable on International Laws and Policy Guidelines: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disother.htm The PRSP Sourcebook on Governance: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177435~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html Disability Awareness in Action (DAA): Disabled Women. Resource Kit No. 6. Available at: http://www.independentliving.org/docs2/daa6.pdf PRSP Sourcebook on Gender: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177449~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html p. 77 PRSP Sourcebook on Environment: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177457~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html PRSP Sourcebook on Macroeconomic Issues: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTPRS/0,,contentMDK:20177473~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384201,00.html 5D Process and Project Management p. 79 CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. The CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: ttp://www.cedpa.org/publication/pdf/advocacy_english5.pdf, Session Five, pp. 40–47. R. Tennyson (2003), The Partnering Toolbook: http://www.energizeinc.com/art/subj/documents/ThePartneringToolbookMarch2004.pdf Frank, Flo and Anne Smith (2000): The Partnership Handbook. Available at: http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/epb/sid/cia/partnership/partnerhb%5fe.pdf p. 81 Practice reports provide helpful imformation. http://www.capacity.org International NGO Training and Research Centre: http://www.intrac.org International Development Research Centre: http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-23581-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html “The Gateway to Development Information” offers numerous resources and manuals for download http://www.eldis.org QSTG (2000): Self-assessment Workbook: http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/asp/uploads/uploadedfiles/3/459/self-assessment.pdf ICD (2005): Capacity Building for Local NGOs. Available at: http://www.ciir.org/Templates/Internal.asp?nodeid=91674&int1stParentNodeID=89630&int2ndParentNodeID=90417 p. 84–85 INTRAC Praxis Series Experience from and for Capacity Building Practitioners: http://www.intrac.org/pages/praxisseries_publications.html Lefevre, Pierre, Patrick Kolsteren, Marie-Paule De Wael, Francis Byekwaso and Ivan Beghin (2000): Comprehensive Participatory Planning and Evaluation. Available at: http://www.ifad.org/pub/bsf/cppe/cppe.pdf National School Board Foundation, strategic planning tools: http://www.nsba.org/sbot/toolkit/spt.html Network Learning (2004): A Guide to Fundraising. Available at: http://www.networklearning.org/download/fundraising.pdf p. 86 Network Learning (2004): The Project Cycle: A Learning Module. Available at: http://www.networklearning.org/download/project-cycle.pdf The Impact Alliance Resource Centre on Project Design and Management: http://www.impactalliance.org/ev.php?ID=1354_203&ID2=DO_TOPIC p. 87 www.worldbank.org Projects and Operations Project Cycle http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/0,,contentMDK:20120731~menuPK:41390~pagePK:41367~piPK:51533~theSitePK:40941,00.html 5E Lobby and Advocacy: Influencing Policies p. 88 CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. The CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf Oxfam (2002): Influencing Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Guide Section Three: Influencing the Content of Policy. Available at: http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/democracy_rights/downloads/prsp_guide.pdf p. 92 You can read about the worldwide situation of the freedom of the press at http://www.rsf.org (Reporters without borders) and at www.freedomhouse.org. p. 93 CARE: Advocacy Tools and Guidelines. Available at: http://www.careusa.org/getinvolved/advocacy/tools.asp CIVICUS: MDG Campaigning Toolkit. Available at: http://www.civicus.org/mdg/title.htm CIVICUS: Handling the Media. Available at: http://www.civicus.org/new/media/Handling%20Media.pdf CIVICUS: Writing Effectively and Powerfully. Available at: http://www.civicus.org/new/media/writing%20Effectively.pdf CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. The CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf 6 Toolbox p. 96 http://www.worldbank.org http://www.imf.org http://www.prsp-watch.de p. 99 http://www.fao.org/Participation/ft_more.jsp?ID=4424 p. 100 Research on chronic poverty and disability: http://www.chronicpoverty.org/CPToolbox/Disability.htm p. 101 Check the stage of your country’s PRSP at http://www.worldbank.org/prsp and at www.prsp-watch.de p. 102 Check if responsibilities are defined in your country’s PRSP http://www.worldbank.org/prsp The CIVICUS “Overview of planning” manual provides you with an initial orientation when designing a project. This is available at: http://www.civicus.org/new/media/Overview%20of%20Planning.pdf p. 104 You can find a checklist to assess objectives in CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. CEDPA Training Manual Series, Volume IX, Washington. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf p. 23. p. 107 FAO field tools@participation http://www.fao.org/Participation/tools/venndiagram.html p. 115 BOND (nd): Logical Framework Analysis. Guidance Note No. 4. Available at: http://www.gdrc.org/ngo/logical-fa.pdf The Disability Knowledge and Research Programme (DisabilityKar) (2004): Constructing a Logical Framework. Available at: http://www.kar-dht.org/logframe.html p. 117 You can find more details at FAO field tools@participation: http://www.fao.org/Participation/ft_more.jsp?ID=720 p. 118 Power Map, adapted from CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english_all.pdf, p. 24. p. 120 Adapted from: CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. pp. 51/52. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english6.pdf p. 123 CIVICUS: MDG Campaigning Toolkit. Available at: http://www.civicus.org/mdg/title.htm p. 124 Adapted from: CEDPA (1999): Advocacy: Building Skills for NGO Leaders. p. 30. Available at: http://www.cedpa.org/publications/pdf/advocacy_english3.pdf p. 127 Metts, Robert L. (2000): Disability Issues, Trends and Recommendations for the World Bank. Social Protection Discussion Paper No. 0007, February. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Overview/Disability_Issues_Trends_and_Recommendations_for_the_WB.pdf Department for International Development (2000): Disability, Poverty and Development. DFID issues, February, London. Available at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/disability.pdf You can find examples of disability surveys, their questionnaires and data from a number of countries at DISTAT – The United Nations Disability Statistics Database: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/sconcerns/disability/disab2.asp. There is some information on the prevalence of disability in African countries on the African Decade’s website: http://www.africandecade.org.za The Asia Pacific Development Center on Disability also publishes country profiles on its website: http://www.apcdproject.org/countryprofile/index.html p. 130 The United Nations about the MDGs: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals The World Bank about the MDGs: http://www.developmentgoals.org For the global campaign to make the achievement of the goals reality, with tips on how to campaign and reports on events in every region, see: http://www.millenniumcampaign.org A PowerPoint presentation on the MDGs of Inclusion International is available at: http://www.cercle.lu/IMG/pdf/mdgreports/inclusionpresent.ppt Trocaire (2005): More Than a Numbers Game? Ensuring that the Millennium Development Goals Address Structural Injustice, April. Available at: http://www.trocaire.org/policyandadvocacy/mdgs/numbersgame.htm