Disability inclusive social protection in fragile and conflict-affected settings

Written by Louisa Lippi, Social Protection Expert and STAAR Disability Lead, in collaboration with the STAAR Facility

Disability-inclusive social protection is pivotal for guaranteeing social and economic inclusion of persons with disabilities in their families, communities and societies. It provides income security through cash-based transfers, reduces both direct and indirect extra disability-related costs and facilitates access to essential services.

The function of disability-inclusive social protection, (as shown in Box 1), show that while there has been greater attention in reducing gaps in access and raising the adequacy of benefits in recent years, disparities between persons with disabilities and those without disabilities persist. These gaps are exacerbated by additional risks associated with age, gender, wealth quintile and place of residence, among other dimensions.

While conflict may impact all members of a community, persons with disabilities may experience that conflict differently

However, the vulnerability of persons with disabilities in humanitarian crises is not inherent. Instead, this vulnerability is created by pre-existing inequalities and barriers, which can be compounded in a crisis, and exacerbated by the way humanitarian response is traditionally designed and delivered. Persons with disabilities can experience the risks and impacts stemming from humanitarian crisis in different ways. A global consultation with persons with disabilities affected by crisis revealed that persons with disabilities were strongly impacted:

• Over half the respondents with disabilities (54 percent) stated experiencing a direct physical impact, sometimes causing new impairments, or worsening existing functional difficulties owing to injuries, a lack of quality medical care, or the collapse of essential services.
• Over one-third (38 percent) felt increased psychological stress and/or disorientation because of the crisis.
• Over a quarter (27 percent) reported being subjected to psychological, physical, or sexual abuse.
• One-third of respondents reported increased levels of environmental inaccessibility and increased dependency on others; and additional 13 percent report the loss of their assistive devices or the need to use a damaged one, leading to further isolation.
• Three-quarters of the respondents with disabilities reported they did not have adequate access to basic assistance such as water, shelter, food, or health. Indeed, 42 percent of respondents with disabilities noted the need for cash assistance, but only 17 percent received it. [1]

Actions governments and development partners can take to support disability inclusion

In fragile and conflict affected settings (FCAS), the delivery of social protection benefits and services faces significant challenges, including the disruption of routine delivery systems and increasing needs. Multiple actors are involved in providing social protection benefits and services in FCAS, with their roles adapting as the crisis progresses from response to recovery to reconstruction. Humanitarian safety nets and other temporary social protection interventions are increasingly viewed as inadequate to support longer-term needs [2]. This is particularly salient for persons with disabilities who require longer-term, comprehensive support, in some cases across the lifecycle, often with evolving needs. It is imperative to support the development of national social protection systems that adequately address life course risks, including disability.

Data collection and analysis: While efforts to strengthen disability inclusion in routine data collection have been ongoing, disability data in many countries is unreliable due to narrow definitions of disability or issues in data collection, or simply non-existent. Integrating questions about disability into needs assessments and registration procedures, through purposeful sampling and disability-related questions, can be an efficient way to gain information on coverage and an understanding of the most pressing needs of crisis-affected persons with disabilities. There have also been efforts to incorporate the Washington Group Short Set of Questions (WGQ) into broader humanitarian vulnerability assessments, cash transfer beneficiary data, and post-distribution monitoring.

Twin-track approach. All social protection programmes should mainstream disability inclusion by identifying and mitigating barriers both to access and use of benefits and services. For instance, ensuring programme communications are in accessible formats, ensuring environmental barriers for accessing and using cash transfers and services are minimised, and monitoring and evaluation tools disaggregate by disability status. However, mainstream social protection programmes should be supplemented by targeted interventions to address the specific and diverse needs of persons with disabilities, be it through cash and vouchers, in-kind or complementary services.

Disability extra costs. The cash transfer amounts are typically aimed at meeting the average cost of a household’s basic needs. These transfer values do not factor in the additional expenditures that people with disabilities need to reach the same level of outcome in well-being, or coverage of basic needs during a humanitarian crisis. Disability extra costs can be diminished by providing a top-up to a mainstream social protection programme, initiating a disability social pension, providing concessions and subsidies or through in-kind goods and services. Additional research may be required to understand costs and set the transfer value.

Disability identification, assessment, and certification mechanisms. A precondition of being able to provide persons with disabilities targeted support is the capacity to identify those who need and are eligible for support.  The four functions of a disability identification, assessment, and certification mechanism are outlined in Box 2. Developing or reforming disability assessment and certification mechanisms is challenging, especially in fragile and conflict-affected settings, but not impossible. In FCAS, including screening questions can help boost inclusivity of interventions. This is typically done through including disability questions such as Washington Group Short Set (WGSS) into registration and targeting procedure. While straightforward cost-effective, these questions were designed for statistical purposes and not for assessments and eligibility determination. Efforts to develop more appropriate disability assessments are still emerging it is important to focus on the simple tools that capture functional limitations and basic support requirements to carry out activities of daily living. Such an approach allows for greater consistency, transparency and reliability, and facilitates targeting and edibility determination, particularly in contexts with limited resources.  

Data privacy. Identification and assessment of disabilities is imperative to ensure persons with disabilities receive appropriate support, greater consideration needs to be given to the data gathered through identification and assessment processes. This included the terms of collection and use of the data and the measures to ensure accessible methods and procedures for enabling persons with disabilities to consent to use of their data.

Greater collaboration and partnership with the disability movement. Working with organisations of persons with disabilities is necessary to ensure that persons with disabilities are actively engaged and consulted during the design and throughout implementation of social protection programmes. Such consultations help to inform priority needs, vulnerabilities, and barriers to accessing services.

[1] Handicap International (2015) Disability in humanitarian context: Views from affected people and field organisations

[2]Sabates‑Wheeler, R., Lind, J, Harvey, P. & Slater, R. 2022. Strengthening Responses at the Nexus of Social Protection, Humanitarian Aid and Climate Shocks in Protracted Crises.