Government Action on Disability Policy

A Global Survey
Part III

Download 'Government Reports on the UN Standard Rules' as a PDF file (440 KB)

---

© Dimitris Michailakis 1997

Part III

Survey of NGO Replies

Introduction

This part of the report analyses the replies to the questionnaire sent to 600 NGO's within the disability field. 163 NGO's responded. No comparison between the views of NGO's and of governments is made in this part.

The distribution of NGO's, according to regions, is as follows:

Table A Regions

Regions	Frequency	Valid Percent
South, East Asia and the Pacific	17	10,4
Industrialized countries	46	28,2
Latin America and the Caribbean	20	12,3
Middle East and North Africa	10	6,1
Sub-Saharan Africa	34	20,9
Countries in transition	36	22,1
Total	163	100,0

The distribution of NGO's, according to the international organization to which they belong, is as follows:

Table B Organization type

Organization type	Frequency	Valid Percent
DPI	33	20,2
ILSMH	46	28,2
RI	15	9,2
WBU	33	20,2
WFD	31	19,0
WFPU	2	1,2
Other	3	1,8
Total	163	100,0

General Policy

Table 1 (Question No.1)
Number of NGO's having an officially recognized disability policy expressed in:

Disability policy expressed in:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Reporting having an officially recognized policy	130	85,5
Reporting not having an officially recognized policy	22	14,5
Law	93	61,2
Guidelines adopted by the Government	80	52,6
Guidelines adopted by a disability council	64	42,1
Policy adopted by political parties	33	21,7
Policy adopted by NGO's	66	43,4

Total 152, No answer 11

As Table 1 shows the majority of the NGO's are reporting that there is an officially recognized disability policy and that the disability policy is expressed in law and in guidelines adopted by the government.

Table 2 (Question No. 2)
The emphasis of disability policy

Emphasis in national policy	Number of NGO's indicating respective emphasis
	1	2	3	4	5
Prevention	26	20	28	20	13
Rehabilitation	49	42	16	10	2
Individual support	30	25	25	13	16
Accessibility measures	5	21	26	37	13
Anti-discrimination law	20	7	10	16	40

1 = very strong emphasis
5 = very weak emphasis

According to the NGO's the strongest emphasis is on rehabilitation while the weakest emphasis is on anti-discrimination law and accessibility measures.

Table 3 (Question No. 3)
Government action to convey the message of full participation

Conveying the message of full participation	Frequency	Valid Percent
NGO's reporting action	66	42,3
NGO's reporting no action	90	57,7

Total 156, No answer 7

As Table 3 shows, the majority of the organizations are reporting that the governments, since the adoption of the Rules, have not done anything to initiate or support information campaigns, conveying the message of full participation.

Legislation

Table 4 (Question No. 4)
Types of legislation to protect the rights of persons with disabilities

Types of legislation	Frequency	Valid Percent
Only special legislation	37	23,6
Only general legislation	51	32,5
A combination of these two types	69	43,9

Total 157, No answer 6

As Table 4 shows, the most common type of legislation is the use of a combination of special and general legislation. The next common type of legislation is general legislation applicable to all citizens, the least common type being special legislation, specifically referring to disabled persons rights.

Table 5 (Question No. 5)
Mechanisms to protect citizenship rights

Judicial/no-judicial mechanisms	Frequency	Valid Percent
Due process	97	72,4
Recourse procedure	28	20,9
The Ombudsman	48	35,8
Governmental body (administrative)	73	54,5
Expert bodies	26	19,4
Arbitration/conciliation body	14	10,4

Total 134, No answer 29

As Table 5 shows the majority of the NGO's are reporting that mechanisms have been adopted to protecting the rights of persons with disabilities. The most usual judicial mechanism adopted is legal remedy through the courts, the most usual non-judicial mechanism being a governmental body (administrative).

Table 6 (Question 6)
Civil and political rights of persons with disabilities

NGO's reporting that general legislation does not apply with respect to:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Education	8	6,0
Employment	23	17,2
The right to marriage	50	37,3
The right to parenthood/family	54	40,3
Political rights	47	35,1
Access to court-of-law	34	25,4
Right to privacy	40	29,9
Property rights	51	38,1

Total 134, No answer 29

As Table 6 shows, a considerable number of NGO's are reporting that general legislation does not apply to persons with disabilities with respect to: the right to parenthood/family, the right to marriage and property rights. The general legislation applies in almost all countries with respect to the right of education.

Table 7 (Question No. 7)
Economic and social rights of persons with disabilities

NGO's reporting that the following benefits are not guaranteed by law: does not apply with respect to:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Health/medical care	37	25,5
Rehabilitation	37	25,5
Financial security	63	43,4
Employment	78	53,8
Independent living	92	63,4
Participation in decisions affecting themselves	87	60,0

Total 145, No answer 18

According to the NGO's, the rights less often guaranteed by law to persons with disabilities are the following: independent living, participation in decisions affecting themselves and the right to employment. The right which is most often guaranteed by law is the right to health and medical care.

Table 8 (Question No. 8)
New legislation concerning disability since the adoption of the Rules

Legislation on disability	Frequency	Valid Percent
NGO's reporting enactment of new legislation	54	36,5
NGO's reporting no enactment of new legislation	94	63,5

Total 148, No answer 15

As Table 8 shows, the majority of the NGO's are reporting that no new legislation concerning disability has been enacted since the adoption of the Rules.

Accessibility

Table 9 (Question No. 9)
Regulations to ensure accessibility in the built environment

NGO's reporting that:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Accessibility standards exist	99	67,3
Accessibility standards do not exist	48	32,7

Total 147, No answer 16

As Table 9 indicates, a considerable number of NGO's are reporting that no accessibility standards exist.

Table 10 (Question No. 10)
Accessibility of the built environment

NGO's reporting accessibility in:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Public places	90	90,9
Outdoor environment	68	68,7
Transportation	49	49,5
Housing	54	54,5
Accessibility standards do not exist	48	32,7

Total 147, No answer 16

As Table 10 indicates, the majority of the NGO's are reporting that accessibility standards concerning public places exist, accessibility standards concerning means of public transportation existing to a lesser extent.

Table 11 (Question No. 11)
Supervision of the accessibility in the built environment

Accessibility in the build environment is observed by:	Frequency	Valid Percent
National authority	56	44,1
Local Governments	72	56,7
The constructor	22	17,3
The organizers/providers of the activities	15	11,8
No responsible body exists	27	21,3

Total 127, No answer 36

As Table 11 shows, 21% of the NGO's are reporting that no responsible body exists for observing accessibility in the build environment. The supervision is mostly done by a national authority and the local governments.

Table 12 (Question No. 12)
Measures to facilitate accessibility of the built environment

Government measures promoted:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Levelling off pavements	71	55,9
Marking parking areas	81	63,8
Installing automatic doors, lifts and accessible toilets	66	52,0
Ensure accessibility in the public places	78	61,4
Improving accessibility in housing	47	37,0
Financial incentives/support for accessibility measures	40	31,5
Special lighting/contrast colours for visually impaired	22	17,3
Provision of specially adapted motor vehicles	59	46,5

Total 127, No answer 36

According to the NGO's, the following measures to facilitate accessibility in the build environment are the most frequently promoted: levelling off pavements, marking parking areas and ensuring accessibility in public places. The measure being least of all promoted is the special lighting/contrast colours for visually impaired.

Table 13 (Question No. 13)
Special transport system

Special transport is available for:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Medical treatment	79	85,9
Education	84	91,3
Work	71	77,2
Recreational purpose	75	81,5
No special transport system exists	56	37,6
Special transport exists	93	62,4

Total 148, No answer 15

Special transport is most often available for medical treatment and education. There are 56 NGO's out of 92 providing information on this issue, reporting that no special transport system exists.

Table 14 (Question No. 14)
Adaptation of the built environment

Obstacles reported by NGO's when building accessible environments:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Attitudinal factors	101	66,4
Economic/budgetary factors	119	78,3
Technical factors	32	21,1
Geographical and climatic factors	17	11,2
Lack of legislation and regulations	73	48,0
Lack of planning and design capacity	52	34,2
Lack of knowledge, research and information	64	42,1
Lack of user participation	49	32,2
Lack of co-operation from other organizations	53	34,9
Lack of enforcement mechanism	86	56,6

Total 152, No answer 11

As Table 14 shows, the three main obstacles, reported by NGO's, when building accessible environments are the following: economic/budgetary factors, attitudinal factors and lack of enforcement mechanism.

Table 15 (Question No. 15)
Disability awareness component

Disability awareness in the training:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Countries having a disability awareness component	50	35,0
Countries not having a disability awareness component	93	65,0

Total 143, No answer 20

The majority of the NGO's are reporting that a disability awareness component is not incorporated in the training of planners, architects and construction engineers.

Table 16 (Question No. 16)
Status of sign language

The status of sign language as reported by the NGO's:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Recognized as the official language	59	42,4
The first language in education	21	15,1
The main means of communication	19	13,7
No officially recognized status	40	28,8

Total 139, No answer 24

As Table 16 indicates, there are 40 NGO's out of 139 providing information on this issue, reporting that sign language has no officially recognized status, 59 NGO's though report that sign language is recognized as the official language of deaf people.

Table 17 (Question No. 17)
Accessibility measures in media

Accessibility measures in media	Frequency	Valid Percent
Reporting accessibility measures	64	40,3
Reporting no accessibility measures	95	59,7

Total 159, No answer 4

As Table 17 shows,, the majority of the NGO's are reporting that there are no accessibility measures for encouraging media to make their information services accessible for persons with disabilities.

Table 18 (Question No. 18)
Accessibility measures in public information services

Public information services	Frequency	Valid Percent
Reporting accessibility measures in information	41	27,3
Reporting no accessibility measures in information	109	72,7

Total 150, No answer 13

The majority of the NGO's are also reporting that there are no government measures to make other forms of public information services accessible for persons with disabilities.

Table 19 (Question No. 19)
Access to information and communication

Services to facilitate information and communication	Frequency	Valid Percent
Literature in Braille/tape	111	73,0
News magazines on tape/Braille	72	47,4
Sign language interpretation for any purpose	45	29,6
Sign language interpretation for major events	43	28,3
Easy readers for persons with mental disabilities	32	21,1
None	27	17,8

Total 152, No answer 11

As Table 19 indicates, 18% of the NGO's report that no services at all are provided in order to facilitate information and communication between persons with disabilities and others. The services most frequently provided is literature in Braille/tape, services such as sign language interpretation and easy readers for persons with disabilities being less often provided.

Organizations of Persons with Disabilities

Table 20 (Question No. 20)
National umbrella organization

National umbrella organization	Frequency	Valid Percent
There is an umbrella organization	114	72,2
There is no umbrella organization	44	27,8

Total 158, No answer 5

As Table 20 shows the majority of the NGO's are reporting that there is an umbrella organization for the organizations of persons with disabilities.

Table 21 (Question 21)
Participation in policy making

Participation in policy-making	Frequency	Valid Percent
NGO's reporting paricipation	63	40,4
NGO's reporting no participation	93	59,6

Total 156, No answer 7

As Table 21 shows, 60% of the NGO's report that there are no legal provisions mandating the representatives of persons with disabilities to participate in policy-making or to work with governmental institutions.

Table 22 (Question 22)
Consultations with organizations of persons with disabilities

Organizations are consulted:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Never	18	11,6
Sometimes	71	45,8
Often	46	29,7
Always	20	12,9

Total 155, No answer 8

Table 22 shows that a majority of the organizations reports that consultations sometimes take place, 12% of the NGO's are reporting that, when preparing laws, regulations and/or guidelines with a disability aspect are being prepared, consultations with organizations of persons with disabilities never take place.

Table 23 (Question 23)
Level of consultations

Level of consultations	Frequency	Valid Percent
National	130	94,2
Regional	47	34,1
Local	59	42,8

Total 138, No answer 25

Table 23 shows that consultations, when this is the case most frequently take place at the national level.

Table 24 (Question 24)
Support to organizations of disabled people

Kind of support	Frequency	Valid Percent
Financial	105	73,4
Organizational/logistic	39	27,3
No support at all	24	16,8

Total 143, No answer 20

The majority of the NGO's are reporting that the government gives financial support to organizations of persons with disabilities. However, 24 NGO's out of 143 providing information on this issue which are reporting that no support at all is given to organizations of persons with disabilities.

Table 25 (Question 25)
Participation in political and public life

Areas of political and public life	Number of countries reporting participation
	Limited	Some	Great
Government	107	14	12
Legislature	101	15	14
Judiciary	106	9	6
Political parties	89	23	15
NGO's	29	28	85

1 and 2 = limited extent
3 = some extent
4 and 5 = great extent

Table 25 shows that the majority of NGO's are reporting that persons with disabilities to a very limited extent participate in government, legislature, judicial authorities and political parties but to a great extent in NGO's.

Table 26 (Question 26)
The role of organizations

Areas organizations are involved	Frequency	Valid Percent
Advocating rights and improved services	147	91,9
Mobilize persons with disabilities	135	84,4
Identify needs and priorities	131	81,9
Participate in the planning, implementation etc.	96	60,0
Contribute to public awareness	147	91,9
Provide services	119	74,4
Promote/organize income generating activities	102	63,8

Total 160, No answer 3

Table 26 shows that organizations foremost are involved in advocating rights and improved services, contributing to public awareness and mobilizing persons with disabilities. Organizations report being least involved in the participating, in the planning, implementation and evaluation of services and measures concerning the lives of persons with disabilities. Nontheless, the rates are high in all areas concerning organization involvement implying that the NGO's apprehend that their role involves a wide range of tasks.

Co-ordination of Work

Table 27 (Question 27)
Co-ordinating committee

Co-ordinating committee	Frequency	Valid Percent
There is a co-ordinating committee	108	68,4
There is no co-ordinating committee	50	31,6

Total 158, No answer 5

Table 27 shows that the majority of the organizations report the existence of a co-ordinating committee. 50 organizations out of 158 providing information on this issue reporting there being no co-ordinating committee.

Table 28 (Question 28)
Where the co-ordinating committee is reporting to

The co-ordinating committee is reporting to:	Frequency	Valid Percent
A particular Ministry	77	72,6
The Prime Minister's office	15	14,2
Other	14	13,2
There is no co-ordinating committee	50	31,6

Total 154, No answer 9

The authority, according to the NGO's, to which the co-ordinating committee usually is reporting is the Ministry of Social Affairs or another Ministry.

Table 29 (Question 29)
Representation in the co-ordinating committee

Representatives of:	Frequency	Valid Percent
Ministries	94	92,2
Organizations of persons with disabilities	87	85,3
Other NGO's	46	45,1
The private sector	25	24,5
There is no co-ordinating committee	50	31,6

Total 152, No answer 11

According to the NGO's, the co-ordinating committee usually includes representatives from Ministries and from organizations of persons with disabilities. Representatives from other NGO's and from the private sector are not so often included in the co-ordinating committee.

Table 30 (Question 30)
Participation in policy-development

Involvement of the co-ordinating committee	Frequency	Valid Percent
Participation in policy development	90	87,4
No participation in policy-development	13	12,6
There is no co-ordinating committee	50	31,6

Total 153, No answer 10

Table 30 shows that 90 NGO's out of 103 providing information on this issue report that the co-ordinating committee is expected to participate in policy development.

Table 31 (Question 31)
Participation in performance of other tasks

Involvement of the co-ordinating committee	Frequency	Valid Percent
Reporting performance of other tasks	52	57,1
Reporting no performance of other tasks	39	42,9
There is no co-ordinating committee	50	31,6

Total 141, No answer 22

Only 52 NGO's out of 91 providing information on this issue report that the committee is expected to perform other tasks.

Table 32 (Question 32)
Effects of the establishment of the co-ordinating committee

Effects	Frequency	Valid Percent
Improved co-ordination of measures/programmes	54	56,3
Improved legislation	43	44,8
Improved integration of responsibility	37	38,5
Better dialogue in the disability field	57	59,4
More accurate planning	30	31,3
More effective use of resources	27	28,1
Improved promotion of public awareness	42	43,8
Too early for an assessment	30	31,3
There is no co-ordinating committee	50	31,6

Total 146, No answer 17

According to the NGO's, the establishment of the co-ordinating committee has had the following effects: improved co-ordination of measures/programmes, a better dialogue in the disability field and improved legislation. However, 30 NGO's out of 96 providing information on this issue report that it is too early for an assessment regarding the effects of the co-ordinating committee.

Table 33 (Question 33)
Effects of the adoption of the Standard Rules

The effects of the Standard Rules	Frequency	Valid Percent
NGO's reporting a rethinking	56	47,5
NGO's reporting no rethinking	56	47,5
Too early for an assessment	112	5,1

Total 118, No answer

---