drc guide to funders

Guide for FundersAddressing the Rights and Requirementsof Disabled People within the Funding Process

Making rights a reality

Research commissioned by the Disability Rights Commission(DRC) in 2001 highlighted the need for support on a local,regional and national level for the development of a partnershipapproach in promoting the rights of all disabled people.

After successfully establishing effective partnerships with keyorganisations through the Yorkshire Pilot Project, thePartnership Unit is now extending their remit to a national levelto develop the DRC’s Transfer of Expertise Programme.

The Transfer of Expertise Programme offers support to nationaladvice and information agencies through a series of toolkits,documents and partnership working. A significant outcome forthe project will be an increase in the number of advice andinformation agencies supporting disabled people to accesstheir rights.

Key themes include:

• improving access to DDA advice and information, caseworkand legal services

• the transfer of expertise from strategic level to local,regional and national organisations involved in DDA-related work

• developing awareness of the cross discrimination andoppression issues experienced by disabled people

• developing resources to enable advice and informationagencies to support disabled people to secure their rights.

The DRC would like to work with strategic units supportingorganisations offering (or planning to offer) advice,information, casework or legal services. Ongoing support isavailable for suitable organisations that wish to develop andimprove DDA-related services for their client group.

For further information please contact the Partnership Unit [email protected]

This publication has been produced in collaboration with:

1

ContentsForeword by Bert Massie, Chair of the Disability RightsCommission 2

1 The Disability Rights Commission 3

2 The Disability Discrimination Act 5

3 Background information to the guide document 16

4 Marketing and awareness raising 18

5 The application process 22

6 Application and guidance materials 28

7 Application support 32

8 Assessment and selection 35

9 Feedback 39

10 Project support, monitoring and evaluation 41

11 Staff/organisational disability, experience and expertise 46

12 Resources 49

13 Adults covered by the DDA 57

Foreword Since our inception in April 2000, we’ve had the opportunityto work and consult with many voluntary and not for profitorganisations.

A key and recurring issue in our partnership work has beenthe problems identified by these organisations in:

• identifying and securing sustainable funding for bothcore and project work

• understanding and complying with different fundingcriteria and deadlines

• balancing the time required to fulfil funder’s reportingrequirements against the demands of delivering a service

• ensuring that projects are meaningful to the lives ofdisabled people and also fulfil funder’s criteria

• investing and allocating long-term funding, specifically onareas of work and services which go beyond the minimumrequirement of government policies and strategies.

In 2003 the Disability Rights Commission undertook asnapshot study of funding issues, involving both funders andapplicants. The guidance and recommendations contained inthis document reflect our findings and the principle that basiclegislative compliance is not enough to challenge thediscrimination experienced by disabled people.

Grant aiding organisations and public funding organisations(collectively referred to as ‘funders’ throughout thedocument) that follow the guidance set out in this book willbe actively supporting the DRC’s vision of a society where alldisabled people can participate fully as equal citizens.

Bert Massie Chair Disability Rights Commission

2

1. The Disability Rights Commission

The Disability Rights Commission (DRC) is an independentbody established in April 2000 by Act of Parliament to stopdiscrimination and promote equality of opportunity fordisabled people.

Disabled people face extensive discrimination and exclusion.For example, if they are of working age, they are twice aslikely as non-disabled people to be out of work and claimingbenefits. Disabled people are also twice as likely to have noqualifications.

We have set ourselves the goal of ‘a society where alldisabled people can participate fully as equal citizens’.

Who we are here for

The DRC works with disabled people, employers and serviceproviders to find practical solutions for everyone. Manydisabled people still don’t know that they are entitled to rightsand assistance in their daily lives. Many employers andservice providers often aren’t sure how to help. The DRC ishere to advise.

Why the DRC is needed

Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA), legalrights for disabled people are already in force. These coveremployment, access to services, education, and someaspects of transport and housing. In September 2002 the lawwas extended to cover access to education for all disabledpeople. New employment rights and access rights becamelaw in October 2004.

3

These new changes in the law brought real changes inpractice for disabled people. However changes in attitudeand awareness are just as crucial. Despite the new law, manydisabled people find it hard to take part in day-to-day life anddo not have the same chances that others take for granted.The DRC is here to put that right.

What the DRC does

• Gives advice and information to disabled people,employers and service providers – between April 2002and January 2005 the DRC Helpline received a total of323,255 contacts.

• Supports disabled people in getting their rights under theDDA.

• Helps solve problems – often without going to a court oremployment tribunal.

• Supports legal cases to test the limits of the law – wefunded 84 legal cases in 2002.

• Provides an independent Disability Conciliation Servicefor disabled people and service providers throughMediation UK.

• Campaigns to strengthen the law.

• Organises campaigns and initiatives – such as our currentemployment initiative – to make businesses aware of thebenefits of recruiting and retaining disabled employeesand providing reasonable adjustments.

• Produces policy statements and research on disabilityissues and publications on rights and good practice fordisabled people, employers and service providers.

4

2. The Disability Discrimination Act

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) was introducedto end the discrimination which many disabled people face intheir daily lives. The Act covers the following:

Definition of Disability (Part 1)

The Act identifies someone as being a disabled person if:

• they have a mental or physical impairment

• this has an adverse effect on their ability to carry outnormal day-to-day activities

• the adverse effect is substantial (ie not minor or trivial)and at least one of the following ‘normal day-to-dayactivities’ must be substantially affected:

• mobility

• manual dexterity

• physical coordination

• continence

• ability to lift, carry or move everyday objects

• speech, hearing or eyesight

• memory or ability to concentrate, learn or understand

• understanding of the risk of physical danger

• the adverse effect is long-term (meaning it has lasted 12 months, or is likely to last for more than 12 months or the rest of the person’s life)

• the definition also includes people who have had adisability in the past that meets the definition in the DDA,even if they no longer have the disability.

5

There are some special provisions, for example:

• impairments such as alcohol addiction and kleptomaniadon’t count as a disability

• past impairments, which no longer impact on the person,are covered even if the impairment occurred before theDDA came into force

• registered or registerable blind or partially sighted peoplewill automatically be covered by the definition

• severe disfigurements are counted.

Employment (Part 2)

Since 1 October 2004 the employment provisions apply to allemployers (except members of the armed forces) regardlessof the number of employees and to all applicants for jobs.

There are four types of disability discrimination under Part 2of the Act:

• direct discrimination

• failure to comply with the duty to make reasonableadjustments

• disability-related discrimination

• victimisation.

Direct discrimination

An employer directly discriminates against a disabled personif he treats them less favourably because of their disability.

To determine whether this has happened, the treatment iscompared with how the employer has treated, or would treat,someone without that disability.

6

7

Direct discrimination cannot be justified.

Example

An employer seeking a shop assistant turns down adisabled applicant with a severe facial disfigurementsolely on the ground that other employees would beuncomfortable working alongside him. This wouldamount to direct discrimination and would be unlawful.

Failure to make reasonable adjustments

The duty to make reasonable adjustments arises where aprovision, criterion or practice applied by the employer, or aphysical feature of the employer’s premises, places adisabled person at a substantial disadvantage comparedwith people who are not disabled.

The employer has a duty to take reasonable steps to preventthat disadvantage, these are ‘reasonable adjustments’.

Reasonable adjustments may include:

• making physical adjustments to the employer’s premises

• altering hours of work or training

• fitting an induction loop in the workplace.

The employer’s failure to make reasonable adjustmentscannot be justified.

Example

An employee with a hearing impairment is selected for apost as a TV engineer. He attends the induction coursewhich consists of a video and discussion. The video is notsubtitled and thus the employee cannot participate fully inthe induction. The employer has failed to make areasonable adjustment. This is likely to be unlawful.

8

Disability-related discrimination

An employer discriminates in this way against a disabledperson if he treats them less favourably for a reason relatedto their disability, if that less favourable treatment cannot bejustified.

Unlike direct discrimination, the treatment is compared withhow the employer has treated, or would treat, someone towhom the reason does not apply.

Example

A woman takes three periods of sickness absence in a twomonth period because of her disability, which is multiplesclerosis (MS). Her employer is unaware that she has MSand dismisses her, in the same way that it would dismissany employee for a similar attendance record.Nevertheless, this is less favourable treatment for adisability-related reason (namely, the woman’s record ofsickness absence) and would be unlawful unless it can bejustified.

Whether the less favourable treatment can be justifieddepends on whether the justification:

• is material to the circumstances of the particular case(that is, there is a reasonably strong connection betweenthe reason for the less favourable treatment and thecircumstances of the case); and

• is substantial (that is, a reason carrying real weight).

The employer also needs to consider whether reasonableadjustments would have made a difference to the reasonbeing used to justify the treatment. For the employer’s lessfavourable treatment to be justified, the reason must stillhave applied even if the reasonable adjustment had been

made. The duty to make reasonable adjustments does notapply if the employer did not know and could not have beenexpected to know that the employee was a disabled person.

Victimisation

Victimisation is a special form of discrimination. The DDAmakes it unlawful for one person to treat another person (‘thevictim’) less favourably than he treats another person in thesame circumstances because the victim:

• has brought or given evidence or information inconnection with proceedings under the Act (whether ornot proceedings are later withdrawn)

• has done anything else under or by reference to the Act

• has alleged someone has contravened the Act (whetheror not the allegation is later dropped)

• is believed or suspected to have done or intends to do anyof these things.

Example

A disabled employee complains of discrimination havingbeen refused promotion at work. A colleague givesevidence at the tribunal hearing on his behalf. Theemployer makes the colleague redundant because of this.This amounts to victimisation.

Access to goods, facilities and services and buying or rentingland or property (Part 3)

Part 3 of the DDA gives disabled people rights of access toeveryday goods and services that others take for granted.

In addition to the requirement to make adjustments tophysical features, service providers are also required to makeadjustments to the services around the physical feature.

9

Duties under Part 3 came into force in three stages:

Stage 1: Treating a disabled person less favourably becausethey are a disabled person has been unlawful sinceDecember 1996.

Stage 2: Since October 1999, all service providers have hadto consider providing auxiliary aids and makingreasonable adjustments to the way they delivertheir services so that disabled people can use them.

Stage 3: Since 1 October 2004 service providers may have toconsider making permanent physical adjustmentsto their premises where physical features makeaccess to their services impossible or unreasonablydifficult for disabled people. Examples of physicalfeatures include:

• steps/stairways

• kerbs, exterior surfaces and paving

• parking areas/building entrances and exits (including emergency escape routes)

• internal/external doors/gates

• toilet and washing facilities

• public facilities (such as telephones, counters or service desks)

• lighting and ventilation

• lifts/escalators.

The physical features to which the Act applies are not limitedto buildings or indoor facilities. They include seating in thestreet or a pub garden, stiles and paths in a country park, orfixed signs in a shop or leisure facility.

Action against disability discrimination in respect of accessto goods and services must be commenced in the County

10

Court (or Sheriff’s Court in Scotland) within six months of thediscriminatory act.

Most services, facilities and access to goods are covered bythe provisions of Part 3 of the DDA.

Anyone who provides a service to the public or a section ofthe public is a service provider. Whether a service is paidfor or not is not a relevant factor.

There are currently few exceptions eg transport (but only thetransport vehicle, not everything else connected with it suchas stations, airports and booking facilities).

Education (Part 4)

The provisions which outlaw disability discrimination inrelation to education provided in schools, colleges anduniversities are contained in the Special Educational Needsand Disability Act 2001 which, since September 2002, hasbeen incorporated into Part 4 of the DDA. Since September2002 it has been against the law for education providers todiscriminate against disabled people (children and personsin post-16 education) for a reason related to their disability inrespect of:

• admissions and enrolment

• education and associated services including:

• school trips

• the curriculum

• school sports

• student outings, leisure facilities and canteens, libraries and learning centres, work experience and student accommodation.

11

There are two ways in which a disabled child in school or adisabled student in post-16 education can experiencediscrimination:

• Less favourable treatment

A school or post-16 education establishment may bediscriminating if it treats a disabled child or student ‘lessfavourably’ for a reason related to his or her disability andit cannot justify that treatment.

Examples

A student with dyslexia applies to do a degree in Englishand is told by the university that it does not accept dyslexicstudents on English degrees.

A student who has mobility problems is told she cannot takepart in a recreational trip because of her mobility problems.

Less favourable treatment may be justified if it is the result ofa permitted form of selection.

• Failure to take reasonable steps

In respect of schools, a school may be discriminatingagainst a disabled child if it does not take ‘reasonablesteps’ to ensure the child is not at a substantialdisadvantage compared to the other pupils at the school.

For the time being, the DDA does not require schools toprovide ‘auxiliary aids and services’ such as signlanguage, interpreters or information in formats such asBraille or audiotape. There may be scope for these itemsto be provided under the Statement of SpecialEducational Needs for the child.

In respect of post-16 education, colleges and universities dohave a duty to consider making reasonable adjustments forstudents where their disability places them at a substantialdisadvantage compared with non-disabled students.

12

Transport (Part 5)

The Act also allows the Government to set minimumstandards for public transport vehicles so that disabledpeople can use public transport more easily.

Disability Equality Duty

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 has been amended bythe Disability Discrimination Act 2005 so that it now places aduty on all public authorities to promote disability equality(referred to as the ‘general duty’). This duty means that publicauthorities must, in carrying out their functions, have dueregard to:

• the need to eliminate discrimination that is unlawfulunder the Act

• the need to promote equality of opportunity betweendisabled persons and other persons, and

• the need to take steps to take account of disabled persons’disabilities, even where that involves treating disabledpersons more favourably than other persons.

The Act states that the general duty applies to ‘publicauthorities’, and specifies that ‘public authority’ includes anyperson certain of whose functions are functions of a publicnature. A person will be exercising a ‘public function’ where itis in effect standing in the shoes of government – and whereindividuals have to rely upon that person for the exercise ofthe governmental function.

Certain key public bodies, including local authorities, willhave to produce a Disability Equality Scheme and they will berequired to report on progress. When an organisation isfunded or contracted to deliver a service on behalf of thepublic authority, then it is the responsibility of the publicauthority to ensure that funding and contracting processes

13

14

include a requirement that enables the public authority tofulfil their duties under the Act. In particular, this shouldsupport the requirements of the Disability Equality Schemeand contribute towards the bodies progress. This mayinclude ensuring that the organisation delivering the service:

• collects information in relation to their employment ofdisabled people and the accessibility and suitability of theirservices

• identifies action that they can undertake to ensure theyare eliminating unlawful discrimination and promotingequality of opportunity for disabled people

• is assessing the impact of new policies or initiatives onequality for disabled people and addressing anyproblems

• is reporting on their effectiveness in eliminating unlawfuldiscrimination and promoting equality of opportunityboth in service delivery and employment.

Example

A voluntary organisation delivers meals on wheelsservices on behalf of a local Social Services department.

This function would be covered by the Disability EqualityDuty. The contract between the Social Servicesdepartment must include at least the information outlinedabove plus other information and action required by theauthorities Disability Equality Scheme in order for theSocial Services department to fulfil their duty in terms ofbeing able to:

• report on disabled service users and employees

• make reasonable adjustments if feedback indicates thatthe requirements of disabled people are not being met.

This may be best achieved by the voluntary/not for profitorganisation producing a Disability Equality Scheme andAction Plan.

It should be noted that it does not limit the public sector’sobligation to comply with the rest of the DDA.

15

16

3. Background information to the guide document

Research

In 2004 the Disability Rights Commission commissioned areport on the outcomes of research into the level of supportoffered by organisations that manage and administergovernment funding (public funding organisations) and thebarriers perceived by applicant organisations run by or fordisabled people.

Although the focus of the research was public fundingorganisations, experience gained through our work withpartners suggests that many of the findings are equallyapplicable to other funding streams.

The research was undertaken in three stages:

Stage 1: Having identified eight to12 public fundingorganisations, application and guidance materialsissued by these organisations were reviewed toidentify the appropriateness of the materials and theextent to which disability access is highlighted.

Stage 2: Interviews were held with 12 public fundingorganisations to discuss their funding applicationpolicy and processes in order to highlight examplesof good practice and possible barriers that mayprevent applicants accessing funding.

Stage 3: Telephone interviews were conducted with 14applicant organisations to map the fundingapplication process and identify the extent to whichthe process helped or hindered their application forfunding.

17

The aim of the original research was to identify how fundingcan be accessed by or on behalf of disabled people and to findevidence of barriers to funding and good practice examples,particularly in relation to physical access to the builtenvironment and ‘reasonable adjustments’. Furtherconsultation through the Disability Rights Commission’sPartnership Unit identified that the barriers experienced byapplicants were not unique to one particular set of providers,eg public funders, or specific issues, eg access and the builtenvironment.

The results of this research and information gatheredthrough additional consultation were used to developrecommendations that are equally applicable to all funders /grant aiders and a wide range of issues affecting the lives ofdisabled people.

Support and further information to enable theimplementation of these recommendations can be found inthe resources section of this document.

Recommendations

It is not possible or practical to anticipate every eventuality orprovide detailed guidance on how to implement each andevery one of the recommendations contained within thisdocument. In order to take these recommendations forwardin a way that is meaningful to both the funder and existingand potential applicants it is recommended thatorganisations:

• follow up on the resources outlined in the resourcessection of this document (see Chapter 12)

• use the recommendations and guidance on resources asthe basis for further consultation with disabled peopleand people with an understanding and knowledge of thebarriers faced by disabled people.

4. Marketing and awareness raising

In order to ensure information on different types of fundingand the funding process reaches as wide an audience aspossible, many of the funding organisations had adoptedspecific marketing strategies, using a wide range of media,and where appropriate targeting specific applicant groups.

Several of the funding organisations had specialist teams toimplement and manage the marketing strategy. Others hadless formal structures and systems in place to assist with thisactivity.

The Internet is a key tool used by funders for marketing andraising awareness about grants available. However, ease ofnavigation, the amount of specific information available andgeneral Web accessibility varied.

Other tools included local radio and newspaper coverage,mail shots, articles in specialist publications anddissemination of information through community events(some targeted at specific groups). These strategies wereconsidered to be particularly effective in attracting more localand smaller applicant organisations.

Six of the funders operated targets or adopted priorities toensure that target groups accessed grants.

Despite the various strategies adopted by funders, manyapplicant organisations reported difficulties in finding outabout different funding opportunities. This was particularlytrue where funders limited their marketing to existingapplicants or the larger, well known organisations.

18

Types of funding available

Half of the funding streams reviewed were available for bothcapital spend and revenue, although the type of spend wasweighted by some funders, eg restricting capital spend to aspecific percentage.

Capital spend for access work is generally limited tosupporting the development of the service, eg anorganisation seeking funding to develop an advice andinformation service for disabled people may also seek capitalfunding to ensure that their premises are accessible.

Just over 50 per cent of the funders interviewed includedmatched funding as a requirement, ranging from 10 per centto 55 per cent of an applicant’s total budget.

Matched funding presented various problems for applicants,in particular where:

• funding criteria and objectives varied

• applicants experienced problems in identifying funderswith a sound understanding of the rights, requirementsand aspirations of disabled people

• funding timetables varied.

Some funders have adopted a policy of not subsidising thecost of DDA compliance for organisations delivering existingservices, as it is acknowledged that this should already beintegrated into service provision. Whilst most funders wouldnot consider funding projects which do not comply with theDDA, one had a specific policy to only fund disability-relatedprojects that go beyond simple compliance with the DDA.

In order to ensure that disabled people are not simplyrestricted to disability-related opportunities, there is a need to

19

consider how mainstream applications can be developed toincrease the participation of disabled people.

Recommendations

Adoption of the following recommendations will enableapplicants to identify appropriate funding streams for theirneeds and, where applicable, find the appropriate level ofsupport and guidance to ensure their application issuccessful.

Additionally, by requiring projects to fulfil objectives that gobeyond the minimum legislative requirements, funders willbe contributing to the development of services andopportunities that make a significant difference to the lives ofdisabled people. They will:

• ensure that the number of funding streams is minimisedand focused, always providing clear guidance, so thatapplicants can easily identify the most appropriatestream for their needs

• provide both capital and revenue funding, ideally in thesame funding stream, to avoid gaps where some items donot count as either capital or revenue

• require that all applications for funding comply with therequirements of the DDA

• ensure all applications for disability-related projectsdemonstrate benefits that clearly exceed therequirements of the DDA

• where feasible use funding to encourage organisations togo beyond simply fulfilling legislative requirements andto seek to improve the lives of disabled people throughthe adoption of good practice

• consider the provision of additional funding support tofacilitate the participation of disabled people within

20

mainstream projects, eg support to meet additionaltransport costs for disabled people

• consider using intermediary specialist agencies or aregional structure to create accessibility and focus,especially in areas (eg the arts) where applicants may lackthe specific expertise.

21

5. The application processSeveral of the funders interviewed required applicants toinvolve users in the application process to ensure thatprojects met identified needs in a meaningful and attainableway. Where potential users were not already part of theorganisation, applicants had consulted with specific usergroups, including disabled people’s groups or involved usergroups, to develop the application.

Key learning point

Consultation and representation

Historically, the ‘needs’ of disabled people have beenidentified with little or no consultation with disabledpeople. This has resulted in the development ofinappropriate and often inaccessible services. Animportant criterion for any project seeking to deliverservices to disabled people should be evidence ofconsultation with existing and potential disabled serviceusers. The extent of the consultation will, of course,depend on the resources of the funding applicant.However, at a minimum the applicant should be able todemonstrate that they have either consulted directly withdisabled people or used up-to-date research outcomes todemonstrate the need for the service. Additionally,applicants able to demonstrate consultation with disabledpeople on how the service is to be delivered are more likelyto meet the targets and desired outcomes set by the funder.

Funders are often confused by the different types oforganisations claiming to represent disabled people.

22

23

‘Representative’ organisations fall into two maincategories outlined below:

Organisations of disabled people

These are organisations run by disabled people and set upto directly represent the requirements of disabled people.Generally speaking, their management committee andemployee/volunteer structure will consist almost entirelyof disabled people.

Organisations for disabled people

These organisations might not have representation ofdisabled people on their management committee oramongst their workforce. However, many are beginning torecognise the importance of including disabled people intheir decision-making processes in order to meet therequirements of disabled people. These organisationsoften start from the basis of delivering a specific service orresponding to a perceived ‘need’. Their credibilityamongst disabled people will be very much dependent ontheir ability to show that they have consulted and involveddisabled people in all aspects of their organisation.

It is not for the Disability Rights Commission to make ajudgement as to the credibility of either. However, it shouldbe recognised that disabled people are not a homogenousgroup, and therefore it is unlikely that one organisation willbe able to represent the views of all disabled people.

When assessing projects, we would advise on aconsultation process that involves many different types oforganisations, representing a diversity of experiences andrequirements, and a focus on how:

• the need for the service/project has been identified

• project delivery and outcomes go beyond simple compliance with the DDA

• the service/project will be delivered

• the service directly and positively impacts on the lives of disabled people

• the project provides additional benefits to disabled people, eg employment and volunteering opportunities

• evidence of consultation with disabled people is shown.

Deadlines for submissions varied across funders andpresented both opportunities and barriers to organisationsseeking funding. The adoption of different timetables byindividual funders presented an additional problem wherematched funding was a requirement.

When setting a timetable for bids, funders need to considerhow organisations gain access to this information and,where appropriate, target under-represented applicants.

Examples

A budget-related call to quarterly or twice yearlysubmission dates enables organisations ‘in the know’about the fund timetable to plan their applications.However, many organisations with limited resources andlimited access to information complain that they find outabout funding too late.

Submissions linked to funder’s regional objectives enableorganisations to ensure their projects are part of a largerplan. However, if the funder’s objectives do not easily linkinto the requirements and aspirations of disabled people,then the opportunity to make a significant impact into thelives of disabled people living within the region may be lost.

24

25

An open-ended policy to funding submissions could meanresources are used up before organisations get to hear ofthem. However, monitoring to evaluate a low take-up ofspecific applications, supported by targeted promotion toaddress under-representation, could reduce the negativeimpact of this approach and enable organisations to developprojects according to requirement and resources, rather thansimply responding to externally driven timetables.

Many funders had a one-stage funding process which meantthat applications were submitted and then assessed. Thisapproach may put applicants developing more complexprojects, or those with little experience of fundingapplications, at a disadvantage.

A number of funders operated the following two-stageprocess, which enabled the exploration of complex issuesand resource requirements, and enabled the lessexperienced applicant to gain an understanding of thefunding process before they submitted their final bid.

Stage 1: Developing the bid

A period of time (one to 12 months in most cases), financedby the funder, during which the applicant could undertakeinvestigative work and buy in project-related expertise.

Stage 2: Applicant submission

The submission of the final application and supportingdocumentation included detailed work plans, access auditsand financial forecasts.

Several funders required applicants to take into account theaccess requirements of the DDA, with a small numberrequesting information or proposals for an access audit andaccess plan. The absence of funding to pay for such audits

could limit the eligibility of smaller organisations. However,the complexity of an access audit, and hence the cost, will bedependent on the size of the asset. This was not a problemwhere funders included and funded a project developmentstage.

Most funders required evidence of an Equal OpportunitiesPolicy. One funder assessed applicants’ Equal OpportunitiesPolicy by a visit or telephone interview.

Recommendations

The adoption of the following recommendations will enablefunders to provide support to inexperienced fundingapplicants and the effective development of complex projects.

Additionally the implementation of these recommendationsinto the funding process will ensure that applicants do notwaste valuable employee/volunteer time completingapplications that will not fulfil funder’s requirements.

It is recommended that funders:

• Ensure that the application process is clear andtransparent, identifying stages and timeframes andsticking to them.

• Consider an early filtration stage for larger bids soapplicants can have an indication of whether theirproposals are of interest. Consider following this with aproject development phase, where applicants areresourced to undertake feasibility assessments, accessaudits and bid development.

• If possible, operate a roll-on-roll-off application cycle,with frequent or no deadlines. This is helpful if disabledpeople need more time to complete an application andhelps ensure that applications are made in response toservice requirements, and not to chase funding.

26

• Require the applicants to provide evidence that they haveconsidered how equality and diversity issues in general –and disability issues in particular – would be taken intoaccount in the project. This should include the provisionof a project-specific equality strategy, evidence ofconsultation with user groups and an access policy andaudit where applicable.

• For small grants avoid the need for matched funding.

• Where matched funding is a requirement, provide aflexible bidding timetable to enable applicants to securethe necessary funding.

• Promote the requirement to undertake access audits andthe development of access plans. Support thisrequirement with appropriate levels of funding to enableapplicants to undertake audits and prepare access plans.

27

6. Application and guidance materials

The ease and accessibility of application and guidancematerials were a significant factor in the success ofapplications. Providing a wide range of accessible sourcesthrough which the materials could be accessed increased thelikelihood of organisations pursuing and completing fundingapplications.

Application forms, guidance documents and materials weremade available through a variety of sources:

• Direct mailing

Documentation was available on CD-ROM or hard copy.Some funders provided large print versions on request.

• Downloaded from the Web

Websites varied in their accessibility. Some sites wereoverloaded with information and others required detailedsearches because the relevant information was stored ondifferent parts of the website.

• Email

Many of the funders emailed applications and guidance material directly to applicants.

• Flow chart/diagrammatic guidance

Several of the application packs contained step-by-stepcompletion instructions; some provided this in a cleardiagram format. Additionally several of the fundersprovided clear guidance on equal opportunities and thenature and content of supporting evidence.

28

• Audio format

Some funders provided audio copies of application forms and guidance notes. One funder noted that providing separate tapes for the application form and the guidance notes presented additional problems forapplicants, as they had to keep swapping between thetwo tapes in order to follow the instructions.

A small number of funders had reviewed their packs in lightof consultation with users and people with an understandingand awareness of disabled people’s issues.

Most application packs contained an evaluation formfocusing on the ease of the application process and thecontents of relevant documentation. In some cases, particularattention was given to feedback from disabled user groups.

Packs covering more than one level of grant were found to beconfusing to applicants.

Recommendations

By adopting the following recommendations, funders makeit possible for a wider range of disabled people to participatein the funding process and develop projects which reflect thereal aspirations, rights and requirements of disabled people.

In recognising disabled people as funding applicants (ratherthan simply as receivers or beneficiaries of projectoutcomes), funders will directly address the discriminationexperienced by disabled people when reliant on services thatare identified and delivered in isolation of their views orrequirements.

For example funders should:

• seek advice in order to review all materials to ensure

29

compatibility with current communication/assistivetechnology

• ensure that materials are available in a wide range ofaccessible formats on request, including:

• Braille

• Audio

• Large Print (Font size 16-22)

• Easy Read

• accept applications in any format

• where audio guidance (eg tapes) are made available,ensure that the guidance follows each question on theapplication form (reducing the need for applicants toswap between tapes or scroll through a tape to link in thequestion to relevant sections in the guidance notes)

• as a standard, make material available through variousmedia eg direct mailing, websites etc

• ensure that websites meet accessibility guidelines, someexamples of this include:

• keep links to a minimum, ensuring only necessary and genuine links are identified

• ensure ways of navigating are consistent eg in terms of appearance and what they do

• use different (but accessible) text formatting, to show the structure and hierarchy of links

• show links back to the home page on every page

• make searching accessible

• ensure page titles reflect their content

• avoid complicated structures of information

30

• provide contrasting text

• provide a text equivalent for every non-text element

• limit the use of pop ups and new windows

• ensure that electronic versions of application materials are compatible with applicants’ systems (which may notbe as sophisticated as the funder’s), and take account ofthe requirements of disabled people

• provide a checklist of all materials required and how toaccess them and make sure they are all in one place andeasy to access

• ‘Crystal Mark’ all materials to help ensure clarity andmake them as brief as possible

• have separate application forms and guidance for eachfunding stream

• ensure that application forms are as streamlined aspossible

• provide examples of how funding has been used tobenefit disabled people or disability organisations

• provide guidance on equality legislation, compliance andbest practice with a specific selection on disability,including access issues (attitudinal and intellectual aswell as physical).

31

7. Application supportThe level and range of support available to completeapplications can have a significant impact on whetherfunding is pursued. Many organisations do not havededicated funders, and the option to secure support througha wide range of communication methods may influencewhether applications are completed and meet the funder’srequirements.

Support (including pre-application support) was provided invarious ways eg:

• Email

Applicants receive responses to questions or commentson their draft application via email. This method isparticularly useful where travel or regular contact withfunders via other means may prove problematic.

• Telephone and meetings

Applicants receive support either via telephone meetings orface-to-face meetings. Telephone support is particularlyuseful where travel may be a problem. Some funders alsoprovided interpreters eg BSL interpreters for meetings.

• Input from experts

Applicants are ‘mentored’ or supported by an expert inthe chosen project area.

The availability of advice from ‘experts in the areacovered by the project, enables applicants to ensure thedevelopment of viable bids that meet both legislative andprofessional requirements,’ and reflect realistic resourceanalysis.

Involvement of experts could include a disabled adviser

32

with particular knowledge of the rights and requirementsof disabled people, or a panel of disabled peoplerepresentative of potential users of the project, in thechosen area.

• An appraisal of outline funding bids

The provision of early feedback on the fundingapplication enabled applicants to ensure that theyfulfilled the funder’s criteria, and provide additionalinformation and evidence to support their bid.

• The provision of contacts for additional support

In a number of cases, funders provided contacts withdisability groups and organisations.

Recommendations

The adoption of the following recommendations will ensurethat funders are able to choose from a more diverse range ofapplications, and address the requirements of groups new tofunding (many of whom come from minority groups):

It is recommended that funders:

• Provide sustainable development and capacity-buildingsupport for small voluntary and community user-ledgroups. This could be provided directly or by specialistvoluntary sector umbrella organisations. This isimportant as currently there would appear to be somedominance of larger providers over small ones in thedisabled people’s sector.

• Provide networking opportunities for small voluntary andcommunity organisations and user-led groups to enablethem to link up with larger organisations and accessfunds aimed at strategic partnerships or for capitalfunding.

33

34

• Provide a nominated officer to help applicants throughthe process.

• Provide a choice of communication methods throughwhich support is provided.

• Provide support for applicants unable, eg because of animpairment-related issue, to complete the applicationform.

• Provide regular and accessible opportunities forapplicants to receive free application support on theirproject proposals in ways appropriate to applicants’needs.

• Signpost to local, regional and disability organisations asappropriate. Details of local groups within the applicant’sarea will be available through the local communitydevelopment section of Local Authorities; additionalnational sources of contacts are contained in theresources section of this document.

• Provide targeted application seminars (inexperiencedapplicants have different needs to experienced ones),through which applicants can gain an understanding ofthe different funding stages outlined in this document,and the setting of targets and objectives to meet fundingobjectives.

• Provide advice to applicants on their duties under theDisability Discrimination Act, Race Relations AmendmentAct and the Sex Discrimination Act, including where toseek additional help and information.

35

8. Assessment and selectionBy gaining an understanding of the rights and requirementsof disabled people, and the barriers faced by disabled peoplein securing their rights, funders reduce the possibility of theirselection process inhibiting applications for disability-relatedprojects. Applying this understanding to the development ofassessment criteria can greatly improve the success rate ofsuch applications.

The majority of funders interviewed:

• provided details of funding criteria to applicants

• assessed bids through panels

• required applicants to have an equal opportunities policycovering employment and/or service delivery

• did not require applicants to demonstrate how equalopportunities would be put into practice

• did not focus specifically on disability access andcompliance with the DDA

• had an appeals process in place for unsuccessfulapplicants.

Good practice example

One funder required applicants to demonstrate how theywould make their premises accessible to disabled peopleand demonstrate increased participation by disabled people.

Some funders and applicants were concerned at the lack offlexibility of targets appropriate to disabled people. Forexample, employment and training are key outputs for somefunding streams, whereas outcomes relating to participationmay be more appropriate to certain groups of disabled people.


One funder required applicants to prove the need for theproject and set their own targets.

Key learning points

Mainstreaming

Ultimately, disabled people need and have the right toaccess mainstream services. However, the historicexclusion of disabled people at all levels in society, and inparticular the denial of the right of disabled people torepresent their own requirements, means manyorganisations struggle to make adjustments in order forthis to happen. As a result, many disabled people chose toturn to the voluntary sector and not-for-profit sector todeliver services to them or at the very least, to act asadvocates in securing their rights and requirements.

This issue was specifically highlighted at the DisabilityRights Commission’s ‘Our Rights; Our Choices’ conferencein 2004, where black and minority ethnic disabled peoplestated that mainstream provision often did not meet theircultural, social or independent requirements. Additionallysome of the participants said that they would prefer toreceive some services through their own communityorganisations.

In some cases an applicant may be applying for funding tofill in a gap in mainstream service provision. This canpresent problems for funders, as they quite rightly do notwant to be allocating resources to services which shouldbe provided by statutory organisations. Equally, therefusal of such applicants could perpetuate thediscrimination of groups whose needs are not currentlyaccommodated within mainstream provision.

36

A possible way forward for funders may be to requireapplicants to provide evidence that this service is notcurrently available and set a project target or outcome thatdemonstrates how the applicant will take action toinfluence and advise the mainstream provider of the gap inservice provision.

Recommendations

The adoption of the following recommendations will ensurethat funders address the current imbalances in fundingapplications for disability-related projects.

When equality proofing their assessment processes, fundersmay wish to refer to the Equality Standards for LocalGovernment (2001). Although designed primarily for large-scale public sector organisations, a number of the criteriacontained within the Standards could be easily adapted toenable an equality assessment of smaller organisations.

For example funders could:

• Through consultation with disabled people and disabledpeople’s organisations develop criteria which ismeaningful to the rights, requirements and aspirations ofdisabled people.

• Develop guidance on assessment criteria and scoring (ega step-by-step guide that goes through each of theassessment questions).

• Ensure that service users and employee equal opportunityissues are prominent in the selection process and thatdisability issues (for all relevant groups) are specificallyincluded. There are a variety of methods of doing this:

• gateway questions

37

38

• weighting questions

• appraisal of the organisation’s equality and diversity policy and strategy

• appraisal of the organisation’s access policy and audit.

• Ensure that an assessment of the applicant’s equalopportunities policy addresses both employee andservice user rights and requirements.

• Ensure that training is provided for all assessors, and thatfocused equality checking and monitoring procedures arein place to ensure consistency in the scoring process.

• Establish an appeals procedure and make applicantsaware of this when bidding and when they are informedin writing that their bid has been unsuccessful.

• Keep the selection process flexible, so for good projectsthere is the opportunity to attach conditions to the awardoffered, eg to improve equality and diversity policy orpractice.

• Consider positive action to encourage the participation ofdisabled people and their representative organisations infunded projects, eg by funding projects that actively seekto recruit and retain disabled people.

• Evaluate why disability projects fail so that guidance andapplication processes can be strengthened to givepotential applicants clearer advice and avoid groupswasting time.

9. FeedbackAll of the funding organisations interviewed providefeedback to unsuccessful applicants. Feedback included thereasons why a bid failed and was usually in the form of aletter. Feedback to unsuccessful applicants was considered tobe important, particularly where a small number of issuesneeded to be addressed to turn the application into asuccessful bid.

Some funders provided practical solutions, where successwas low for certain groups.

Good practice examples

One funder provided ‘application briefings’ for a particulargroup of applicants whose general standard of applicationwas weak.

Another funder operates a programme to help with themanagement and financial aspects of running a project.Unsuccessful applicants are referred onto the programmeto develop the relevant skills, so as to be in a better positionto secure funding next time round.

Recommendations

Feedback to unsuccessful applicants is an essential part ofthe process, and will enable applicants to both target theirfunding applications and to ensure that future bids reflectfunder’s requirements. Where possible, feedback should bemade available before the deadline for bid, to enableinexperienced applicants to further develop theirapplications:

39

40

• Provide constructive, specific and detailed feedback tounsuccessful applicants on how to improve their bids forfuture bidding rounds.

• Signpost unsuccessful applicants to sources of expertiseto strengthen aspects of their bid or to more appropriatefunding streams.

• Provide early feedback to unsuccessful applicants as tohow their bid could be enhanced or suggestions on howthe project could be better implemented.

• Provide written feedback in the first instance, followed bythe opportunity for the applicant to discuss theconclusions by telephone or in a meeting whereresources permit.

41

10. Project support, monitoring and evaluation

Although all funders interviewed monitored the number ofdisabled people accessing projects they fund, the majoritydid not break the information down into categories eg visualimpairment, hearing impairment, mobility impairment,learning disability or mental health survivor.


One funder provided a breakdown by funding to groupsrepresenting various types of impairment eg hearingimpairment, visual impairment etc in their policy paper.

Project monitoring varied greatly between the differentfunding regimes and was dependent on the level of theaward and available resources.

There was a particular emphasis on the provision of projectfunding, rather than core funding, which meant applicants:

• were unable to make long-term ‘service development’plans

• were constantly chasing funding in order to maintaintheir work

• often had to make employees redundant until the next raftof funding was received, resulting in the breakdown ofservices and the loss of experienced staff.

Monitoring activities tended to focus on the achievement oftargets and milestones to release funds and to achieveoverall programme targets. However, there was evidence of

some funders attaching greater importance to qualitativeoutcomes and the delivery of equal opportunities.

Projects with an element of funding for disabled people’saccess were usually checked to ensure compliance with theDisability Discrimination Act.

Good practice examples

One funder evaluates all projects, against a set ofperformance criteria, to ensure compliance with theDisability Discrimination Act and addresses more generaldisabled people's issues.

One funder requires evidence that the project will deliveroutcomes that go beyond the minimum requirements ofthe Disability Discrimination Act.

Several funding organisations provided a named case officeror mentor to support successful bids, either through visits orthe provision of telephone support.

Some funders launched projects with a specific event orseminar which enabled successful applicants to network andraise issues or ask questions.


One funder held a number of training events coveringissues such as the meaning of inclusion, promotinginclusive play and inclusive play ideas. Supporting materialfor these events included information on the social modelof disability, language and terminology, empowerment,communication and signposting to other agencies.

Some of the larger funders are themselves subject to externalprogramme evaluations and included equalitymainstreaming as part of their own mid-term review of the

42

43

programme as a whole. One of the recommendations of thismid-term review (not implemented, because of timerestraints) was to identify whether resources were going to:

• organisations led by disabled people

• major charities

• other organisations simply targeting disabled people as one of their beneficiary groups.

Key learning point

Diversity amongst disabled people

In 2004 the Disability Rights Commission held aconference to consult black and minority ethnic disabledpeople on meeting their advice and information needs.Although specifically targeted at advice and informationprovision, comments from attendees clearly indicated thatservice providers often assumed that the requirements ofall disabled people were the same and were unable to takeinto account issues such as cultural requirements. As aresult black and minority ethnic disabled people wereforced to choose between their identities as disabledpeople or as black and minority ethnic people. There was aclear demand from participants for service providers totake a more holistic approach.

Additionally, service providers attending the conferenceexpressed the need for more support and advice in order tounderstand how to develop their services to meet differentrequirements.

Recommendations

Effective monitoring of applicant organisations, types ofprojects and beneficiaries of projects, will enable funders toassess under-representation in applicants and target theirmarketing to address this. Recommendations are givenbelow.

• Provide a mix of ‘core’ and ‘project’ funding, to enableorganisations to develop services and retain anappropriate skill level within the organisation.

• Ensure project monitoring requirements are appropriatefor the size of grant awarded.

• Ensure outputs can be flexible to take account of targetgroup needs. Make greater use of outcome, impact andsoft indicators to take account of disability target groupsand their potential difficulties in achieving outputs overthe short-term. Consider the use of project-determinedoutputs.

• Develop organisational equality targets and strategies.Include targets for numbers of disabled people supportedfrom a range of different types of impairments, includingmultiple impairments and those experiencing multiplediscrimination eg disabled women, and black andminority ethnic disabled people.

• Undertake regular benchmarking and monitoring of thenumbers and requirements of disabled people accessingfunded projects. Disaggregate by impairment orrequirement.

• Ensure monitoring information distinguishes betweenorganisations ‘of’ disabled people and organisations ‘for’disabled people.

• Ensure that the results of monitoring, consultation andresearch are used to change policy and practice.

44

45

• Monitor applicants’ compliance with equality policies andstrategies, especially in relation to the DDA.

• Require monitoring of involvement (employment /volunteering) and take-up of services provided throughthe project to ensure access and opportunities areavailable to all disabled people.

• Provide a range of project support mechanisms (egseminars, guidance notes, visits) to include specificsupport on disabled people’s issues and areas whereappraisal indicates consistent weaknesses acrossprojects.

• Undertake an interim and final programme evaluation toidentify what is working well and what can be improvedand if funding is being accessed by disabled people.

11. Staff/organisational disability, experience and expertise

A number of the funders interviewed employed specificadvisers with knowledge of disabled people’s issues orgeneric equality. A few of them were working towards or hadimplemented a policy of mainstreaming equality issues.


One funder liaises closely with disabled people’s groupsand people with an in-depth understanding of disabilityissues.

Both funders and applicants referred to the importance ofgrant assessor panels being fully informed and updatedabout disability issues and current legislation.

Key learning point

Developing partnerships with disabled people

By actively demonstrating an understanding of the rights,requirements and experiences of disabled people,organisations can increase the confidence disabled peoplehave in their organisation.

There are a number of ways an organisation can achievethis:

• the recruitment of disabled people as employees or volunteers

46

• projects which include funding to employ staff, demonstrating that they will take appropriatemeasures to:

• encourage applications from disabled people

• make reasonable adjustments to recruitment and work practices to enable disabled people to take up employment or volunteering opportunities with them

• the training of staff to ensure an understanding of the rights and requirements of all disabled people, including those relating to gender, sexuality, religious and cultural needs.

Recommendations

Increasing the awareness and understanding of employeeson the rights and requirements of disabled people will assistfunders to ensure that they or their representatives do notinadvertently discriminate against disabled people.

The recruitment and retention of disabled staff and peoplewith an understanding of disability issues will ease theidentification of effective disability-related projects, and senda positive message to disabled people and organisationsdeveloping disability-related services and opportunities.

Funders should:

• seek through positive action to employ disabled staff andstaff with an understanding and awareness of the rightsand requirements of disabled people

• ensure all involved in assessing, selecting, supportingand monitoring projects are trained in DDA complianceand good practice and that this training is updatedregularly

47

48

• employ or liaise with disabled people, or people with anin-depth understanding of the issues facing disabledpeople (individuals and groups), to provide specialistexpertise tailored to applicants’ needs

• mainstream equality throughout each project (eg byallocating responsibility for equality and diversity topolicy officers within each programme team).

12. ResourcesResources to support the recommendations are brokendown according to their location in the document.

Each chapter refers to the relevant Disability RightsCommission’s publications that can be ordered:

• through our Helpline:

Post: DRC Helpline FREEPOST MID 02164 Stratford upon Avon CV37 9BR

Telephone: 08457 622 633Fax: 08457 778 878Textphone: 08457 622 644 (You can speak to an operator at any time between 8amand 8pm, Monday to Friday).

• or downloaded from the publications section of ourwebsite: www.drc-gb.org/publicationsandreports/publications.asp

Chapter 1

• The Disability Rights Commission’s website:www.drc-gb.org

• Information on the role of the Disability Rights Commission:www.drc-gb.org/whatwedo/oppdetails.asp?id=34

Chapter 2

DRC Publications:

DRC3: Challenging disability discrimination – a guide toservices

Adescription of all the services offered by the DRC to the public.

49

50

GENO1: Disability conciliation service – a brief guide

A brief introduction to the Disability Conciliation Service(DCS). Aimed at disabled people and providers of goods andservices, as well as advice and information givers.

Chapter 3

Web Accessibility InitiativeThese guidelines help to make multimedia content moreaccessible.www.w3.org/WAI/

Bobby-web Accessibility TestingA free service to test and scan web pages and to identify andrepair barriers to accessibility.http://bobby.watchfire.com

DRC Publications:

FOCUS14: Guidance on providing BSL and EnglishInterpreters under the DDA – Full version

This guidance explains what British Sign Language (BSL) is,who uses BSL, and what BSL/English interpreters do.

FOCUS14: Guidance on providing BSL and EnglishInterpreters under the DDA – Quick reference

This is a summary of guidance which explains what BritishSign Language (BSL) is, who uses BSL, and what BSL/Englishinterpreters do.

FOCUS12/ER: How to use easy words and pictures – EasyRead guide

Chapter 4

The National Register of Access AuditorsInformation on how to get the best from an access audit.www.nrac.org.uk

51

Centre for Accessible Environmentswww.cae.org.uk

DRC Publications:

FOCUS7: Creating an Inclusive Environment – a report onimproving the Built Environment

What is ‘Inclusive Design’ and how can it achieve a builtenvironment to be enjoyed by everyone?

FOCUS6: Good Signs – Improving Signs for People with aLearning Disability

This report considers ways in which signs and other ways ofgiving directions can be made accessible for people withlearning disabilities. Most of the answers seem to becommon sense, but are often not used.






Chapter 5

RNIB See it Right pack

Practical advice on designing, producing and planningaccessible information.

www.rnib.co.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/publicwebsite/public_seeitright.hcsp

RNID Louder Than Words

Resources, including training and BSL interpreters, availablethrough the RNID Communications Service.www.rnid.org.uk/helpdesk/frequently_asked_questions/louder_than_words_charter/

The Plain English Campaign’s Crystal Mark

The Crystal Mark is the standard that all organisations aim forwhen they produce public information. www.plainenglish.co.uk/crystal.html

Mencap’s accessibility services

Resource for translating material into Easy Read.www.mencap.org.uk/html/accessibility/accessibility_services.htm

DRC Publications:

FOCUS14: Guidance on providing BSL and EnglishInterpreter under the DDA – Full version





52

Chapter 6

DIAL UK

The national organisation for 160 Disability and AdviceInformation Line services in the UK.www.dialuk.info

NACVS

The network of over 300 Councils for Voluntary Service inEngland.www.nacvs.org.uk

Types of Assistive Technology Products

A brief overview of different types of Assistive TechnologyProducts.www.microsoft.com/enable/at/types.aspx

Accessing Technology

Accessing Technology is a book which provides informationand resources about technology for people with sight problemsin education, employment, lifelong learning and at home.

Accessing Technology is published by the Royal NationalInstitute of the Blind. It includes information about the typesof technology that blind and partially sighted people use to:

• read and produce printed materials

• access the Internet

• learn in schools

• study in further and higher education

• be successful in employment.

www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/PublicWebsite/public_rnib003063.hcsp

53

54

Assistive technologies

RNID Guide to Assistive technologies:www.rnid.org.uk/helpdesk/accessibility/assistive_technologies/

Chapter 7

CRE Sample Employment Policy

Advice on producing an Equal Opportunity Employment Policy.

The Equality Standard for Local Government (2001):www.lg-employers.gov.uk/publications/fullpublications/eslg.html

DRC Publications:

FOCUS16: Our rights, Our choices: Meeting the informationneeds of black and minority ethnic disabled people

Practical steps for organisations providing information andadvice for black and minority ethnic and disabilityorganisations.

Chapter 8

RNIB See it Right pack

Practical advice on designing, producing and planningaccessible information.www.rnib.co.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/publicwebsite/public_seeitright.hcsp

RNID Louder Than Words

Resources, including training and BSL interpreters, availablethrough the RNID Communications Service.www.rnid.org.uk/helpdesk/frequently_asked_questions/louder_than_words_charter/

55

DRC Publications:






Chapter 9

DRC Publications:

SP13: Organising Accessible Events

This practical guide aims to help event organisers and otherservice providers make events and associated services moreaccessible and inclusive for disabled people. It givesinformation and guidance on working towards better practice.

The Disability Rights Commission’s Good Practice TrainingDirectory

This document provides details of different organisationsproviding a variety of disability-related training courses.

Chapter 10

TALKV: Talk video/DVD

The award-winning film by David Mansell challengescommon preconceptions of disability in an interesting andprovocative way.

56

The British Council of Disabled People

The website has links to local and regional organisations ofdisabled people and information relating to disabilityequality.www.bcodp.org.uk

DRC Publications:

DX25: Good practice training directory

Organisations which want to include disabled people fully, asemployees or as ‘customers’, are legally bound to appreciatethe difficulties presented by their attitudes, practices,procedures and physical features. Training for personnel atall levels of the organisation plays a vital part in this process.

57

13. Adults covered by the DDA

Breakdown of figures prepared by the Department of Workand Pensions 2004.

England Wales ScotlandAdults 8.2 million 700,000 900,000Children 700,000

Adult impairment estimates

MillionsMobility 6.1Lifting, carrying, moving everyday objects 5.9Manual dexterity (using hands for everyday tasks) 2.4Continence 1.2Communication (speech, hearing, reading, writing) 1.3Memory, concentration, learning, understanding 1.7Understanding of physical danger 0.4Other areas of life 1.5

Source: Family Resources Survey

Adults covered by the Disability Discrimination Act by region

Region MillionsNorth East 0.6North West and Merseyside 1.2Yorkshire and Humberside 1.0East Midlands 0.7West Midlands 0.8East Anglia 0.7London 1.1South East 1.1South West 0.8Wales 0.7Scotland 0.9

58

Telephone 08457 622 633

Textphone 08457 622 644

Fax 08457 778 878

Website www.drc-gb.org

Post DRC HelplineFREEPOST MID 02164Stratford upon AvonCV37 9BR

If you require this publication in an alternative format and/or language please contact the Helpline to discuss your needs. It is also available on the DRC website:www.drc-gb.org

The DRC Language Line service offers an interpretationfacility providing information in community languages and is available on the DRC Helpline telephone number.

You can email the DRC Helpline from our website:www.drc-gb.org FOCUS19

drc guide to funders

Economy & Finance

partially sighted people

british sign language

british sign language

dda full version

dda quick referencethis

disabled peoples issues

hcsp rnid louder

requirementsof disabled people