The Role of the Community in the implementation of the CBR Matrix:

Experiences of Local Inclusive Development

Priscille Geiser4th CAN CBR Conference, Abuja, 28th October 2010

Break-Out Session

Evolutions of disability models…

• CBR as an approach has evolved over the years with the shift of disability paradigm

• From a medical perspective seeking to ‘repair the broken’ or ‘fix the impairment’ to a social model recognising the central responsibility of the environment, including the community, in creating barriers and exclusion

• Recognising the responsibility of the community implies that we also recognise their role in changing this situation

• CBR: not “community-located” or “based in” but “based on”, “driven by”, “initiated from”: the role of communities in implementing the CBR Matrix is central

…and related challengesJoint Position Paper 2004, new CBR Guidelines and Matrix Prompt CBR actors to address 4 major challenges:

• HUMAN RIGHTS AND PARTICIPATION : challenge to actively involve people with disabilities and realise their rights

• MULTI-SECTOR APPROACH : challenge to ensure access to mainstream services and opportunities in all sectors (not only functional rehabilitation)

• COMMUNITY MOBILISATION : challenge to mobilise the community to become welcoming, inclusive and to actively engage in the realisation of people with disabilities’ rights

• COORDINATION: challenge of coordinating between the multiple actors involved

New opportunities on the international scene

The UNCRPD• Article 1 - recognises the role of the community in

creating barriers • 1st Convention linking so strongly human rights and

development• New obligations created by the UNCRPD towards

States Parties, impacting on their internal policies as well as international cooperation

• Participation of people with disabilities becomes a central requirement (articles 3, 4.3, 29, 32)

New opportunities on the international scene

DECENTRALISATION• Growing trends of decentralisation reforms in

developing countries• Local authorities in developing countries are

devoted new responsibilities to decide on priorities of the local development agenda at community level

• Increase of ‘decentralised cooperation’ initiatives • Need to address the lack of capacities of local

authorities to take these new responsibilities -> their interventions unlikely to address the situation of groups that are traditionally excluded

Inclusive Local Development• Building on these opportunities to explore solutions to address

these challenges from a different perspective:– Instead of designing a strategy focusing on people with

disabilities, on which the community would need to be mobilised…

– …look at the community strategy and try to improve it and get it adapted to people with disabilities’ priorities

• Inclusive Local Development as a strategy to make community development inclusive of people with disabilities

• Giving a new emphasis to participation of people with disabilities as citizens and active stakeholders of their community through influencing community decision-making (article 3, 4.3, 29)

Inclusive Local Development• Trying to embed our interventions in the

decentralised system, we looked at the community as « the smallest administrative area in which people live » (WHO Helsinki 2003)

• Community = geographical/ political/ administrative meaning – in French: ‘approche territoriale’

• Community = people – 3 major types of actors:– People with disabilities, their families and their

representative organisations– Local authorities/ decision makers– Local development stakeholders in all sectors (public and

private service providers, NGOs, professionals…)

Stakeholders and relationships in a community

COMMUNITY

corresponding to the smallest administrative

division

People with disabilities, their families and

representative organisations (DPOs)

Local development stakeholders(public and private providers, professionals, and others from civil society)

Local Authorities(administrative and/or

traditional)

6 major project components

1. Strengthen the capacity and skills of Disabled People’s Organizations to increase their participation in development processes and local governance

2. Support communities to conduct a local participatory diagnosis/ assessment of the situation of people with disabilities

3. Facilitate consultations between people with disabilities and local authorities for the development of inclusive community policies and actions (community development action plans);

4. Provide financial support for the development of inclusive community development actions resulting from this consultation.

5. Create a cross-cutting network of local services and facilitate effective systems for referral and information.

6. Train local stakeholders on disability issues, supporting them to change and adapt their practices to meet the needs, interests and priorities and enforce the rights of people with disabilities.

Stakeholders and relationships in a community

COMMUNITY

corresponding to the smallest administrative

division

People with disabilities, their families and

representative organisations (DPOs)

Local development stakeholders(public and private providers, professionals, and others from civil society)

Local Authorities(administrative and/or

traditional)Strengthening capacities to efficiently manage their community and address key issues of exclusion

Strengthening capacities to take part in community decision-making, to strategise advocacy

Strengthening capacities to welcome and include people with disabilities on an equal basis

Stakeholders and relationships in a community

COMMUNITY

corresponding to the smallest administrative

division

People with disabilities, their families and

representative organisations (DPOs)

Local Authorities(administrative and/or

traditional)

Mechanisms for dialogue and consultation:

-Joint analysis of the situation of PwDs (LPD)

- Joint decision-making (inclusive CDAP)

- Improved continuum of services through cross-cutting referral mechanisms Local development

stakeholders(public and private providers, professionals, and others from civil society)

Local Participatory Diagnosis - Mali

Communities: 10 District Councils in Gourma Rharous

Steering committee including local elected decision makers and PwDs, deciding on the assessment methodology and priority objectives

Teams of surveyors: 2 person teams including 1 person with a disability

Analysis

Multi-stakeholder workshop presenting the results

Local Participatory Diagnosis - Mali

Focus: situation of PwDs, education, health + the process

110 PwDs surveyed, 20 DPOs, 9 schools, 5 health centres

Example of key findings:

•75% of PwDs surveyed think that in general PwDs are excluded

•The 9 schools surveyed are not accessible physically

•99% of PwDs estimate that their priority needs are not met•48% are members of a DPO, among which 60% have a role

Inclusive Community Development Action Plans- Mali Local DPOs took part in

consultations to elaborate the district council development action plan, together with local authorities, services providers and other development actors

Based on the results of the local participatory diagnosis, priorities identified to address the situation of PwDs were included in each of the 10 district councils action plans in Gourma Rharous

Results: new community infrastructures accessible, increased access to school for children with disabilities, increased employment opportunities, reduced stigma…

Improving continuum of services - Mozambique

The local participatory diagnosis focused on access of people with disabilities to services (Maputo, Matola)

-> directory of existing mainstream community services using pictogrammes to indicate accessibility of services

-> The diagnosis served to identify further training needs of mainstream service providers to design relevant training/ awareness-raising curriculum

-> directory particularly used by agents of community social services who play a major role in informing and referring PwDs towards appropriate services

Towards community-based inclusive development…

• Work on key mechanisms to foster coordination between community actors

• This approach has been implemented in more than 15 countries: Mozambique, Morocco, Algeria, Palestine, Egypt, Mali, Togo, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Madagascar, the Philippines, Indonesia, Nepal, Brasil…

• Key successes include:– Helping more ‘traditional’ models of CBR to evolve (Nepal,

Philippines…) – Increased sustainability – Community ownership– Participation of people with disabilities– Better continuum of services

Resource documents

• Coming soon: – Good practices on Inclusive Local Governance covering 7 countries of West

Africa (Making it Work): www.makingitwork-crpd.org – Practical Guide to Conduct a Local Participatory Diagnosis– Practical Guide on Inclusive Community Development Action Plans

Thank you!