CITIZENS ASSESSMENT ON INCLUSION AND ACCESS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES TO BASIC SERVICES IN LAGOS STATE

1 | P a g e
A LACSOP CITIZENS’ ASSESSMENT
ACCESS, INTEGRATION AND INCLUSION OF PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES
Dr Adebayo
Ayo Adebusoye
Dede Kadiri

3 | P a g e
Survey report submitted to the Lagos State Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP)
September 2012
© Lagos State Civil Society Partnership and Lagos Civil Society Disability Policy Partnership
(LCSDPP)
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publishers.
URL : http://www.lacsop.org
URL : http://www.innovationmatters.com.ng.
This report is a research outcome of the extent to which Lagos State has enforced the Special
Peoples’ Law, 2011. This document does not necessarily reﬂect the views of neither the State
Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI) nor the United Kingdom’s Department For International
Development (DFID).
Further copies of the report can be viewed or downloaded from LACSOP’s, LCSDPP and
InnovationMatters’ websites respectively, and printed copies can be obtained from the LACSOP,
LCSDPP InnovationMatters and SAVI offices. No part of this report may be reproduced without the
permission of LACSOP, LCSDPP and InnovationMatters.

4 | P a g e
"Measurement is the first step that leads to control and eventually to improvement. If you
can't measure something, you can't understand it. If you can't understand it, you can't control
it. If you can't control it, you can't improve it."
- H. James Harrington

5 | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The Lagos Civil Society Partnership (LACSOP) and Lagos Civil Society Disability Policy
Partnership (LCSDPP) thanks all those who generously gave their time, energy and
resources in order to contribute to the success of this research study. Specifically, LACSOP
thanks Nigerian Network of NGOs (NNNGO); the Female Leadership Forum (FLF); Civil
Society Action Coalition on Education For All (CSACEFA); Civil Society For HIV/AIDS in
Nigeria (CiSHAN); Development Network (DevNet); Women Law and Development Centre
(WLDCN); 21st Century (C21st); Justice Development and Peace Commission (JDPC),
Women Arise and the Nigerian Renaissance Movement (NRM).
LACSOP is grateful to the State Accountability and Voice Initiative (SAVI), Lagos, one of the
United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) programme suites,
for providing the financial support needed to initiate this assessment.
Finally, LACSOP acknowledges the efforts of its Steering Committee in conceptualizing and
designing this project and for supervising its implementation to completion.

6 | P a g e
Table of Contents
FORWARD ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6
TABLES AND FIGURES ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
ABOUT CONTRIBUTING ORGANIZATIONS ...………………………………………………………………………………………. 10

7 | P a g e
About Contributing Organisations
The Lagos State Civil Society Coalition (LACSOP)
The Lagos State Civil Society Coalition (LACSOP) is a platform of major civil society
networks in Lagos State committed to adding value to development efforts in Lagos State,
Nigeria. Since its establishment in 2007, LACSOP programmes have been targeted at
increasing and sustaining access points for informed citizen-government engagements.
We coordinate citizens’ demands for pro-poor service delivery and promote ownership of
governance processes through collaborative interventions with the executive, legislature
and the media and by conducting independent assessments of government’s performance.
Mission: To promote wide scale ownership and participation in Lagos State
governance processes
Vision: The leading civil society platform for deepening democracy in Lagos State
Lagos Civil Society Disability Policy Partnership (LCSDPP)
LCSDPP is one of the SAVI supported Advocacy partnerships in Lagos State working on the attainment of
inclusive and disability sensitive laws and policies in Lagos State. The Partnership is constituted by Civil
Society Organizations (CSOs) and individuals who have demonstrated real persion and are working in
different aspects of disability issues - capacity-building, advocacy, empowerment leadership etc. The
Partnership was convened on March 10th, 2010.
LCSDPP is currently partnering MDAs of the Lagos State Government which are considered key towards
the implementation of the Lagos State Special People’s Law, 2011 – Lagos State Office of Disability
Affairs (LASODA), Office of Transformation, Office of the Head of Service, Ministries of Youth and Social
Development, Women Affairs and Poverty Aliviation, Justice, Health, Education, Works and
Infrastructure, Information and Strategy, Economic Planning and Budget, Housing, Transport,
Agriculture, etc. The Partnership also has strong relationship with the media through the Lagos State
Chapter of the Nigeria Union of Journalist (NUJ). There on-going efforts to secure effective partnership
with the organized private sector.
The vision of this partnership is the hope that there will exist, some time, "an inclusive society with
operational legislative framework and policies that ensures equity, social justice and rights of all citizens
including people with disabilities."

8 | P a g e
The Mission of LCSDPP is the conduct of of evidence-based disability policy advocacy in Lagos State
through the establishment of strategic partnership with all relevant stakeholders which shall be
sustained through regular knowledge sharing, evidence gathering and documentation, as well as
reviews, reflections and replication of success stories.
LCSDPP's broad objective emphasizes the quest of the partnership to strongly pursue "The presence of
inclusive practices, legislative framework, policies and a broad commitment to the social model of
disability reinforces the removal of barriers and enables persons with disabilities to exercise their
fundamental human rights."
Our vision and objectives constitute our guiding principle and philosophy which all members are
strongly committed and have been working hard to achieve.
InnovationMatters
InnovationMatters (IM) inspires people, organizations and governments to initiate and
adopt new approaches for gaining social and economic advantage. We do this by providing
and managing knowledge, which is needed for transitioning and sustaining institutional
changes.
(a) System Change Architecture (SCA)
Under this portfolio, IM applies qualitative fact finding processes to diagnose changes that
are needed for enhancing the performance of organizations. IM has supported key public
and private institutions in identifying and mapping changes to effective service delivery.
(b) Performance Management
We are building a track record of strengthening institutional capacities to deliver on
mandates. Through our Performance Management portfolio, IM places emphasis on social
impact. We support clients in measuring the qualitative and quantitative values of their
initiatives.

9 | P a g e
PART I
AN INTRODUCTION:
ACCESS, INTEGRATION AND INCLUSION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
“No pessimist ever discovered the sicrete of the stars, or ssailed to an unchatted land
or opened a door way for the human spirit.” –Helen Kelle

10 | P a g e
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document measures accessibility levels of public services and facilities such as those
relating to health, education, public roads and facilities, employment, housing and
recreation, in Lagos State as at August 2012 - one year after the passage of the Lagos State
Special Peoples (“Special Peoples’) Law 2011.
It is pertinent to note that the Special People’s Law, which was passed by the Lagos State
House of Assembly on 31st May, 2011, is the first-ever CSO drafted private-member bill.1
The passage of the landmark law forms a component of the Lagos State Civil Society’s
(LACSOP’s) Citizens Impact Appraisal. This programme applies research and development
tools to assess, promote and impact on multi-sectoral citizens’ needs. Since 2009, LACSOP
has been generating and disseminating credible information for equipping citizens’
engagement with the Lagos State Government (LASG) and providing them the impetus to
demand service delivery.
With sustained civil society advocacy, LASG made provisions for the implementation of the
Law in the 2012 budget. Accordingly, on 9th July, 2012, the Governing Board of the Lagos
State Office of Disability Affairs (LASODA) was constituted and inaugurated by the Lagos
State Governor.
Meanwhile, in order to meet the need to create awareness of, and set a workable agenda for
the full implementation of the law, CSOs have been involved in various technical
engagements with the LASODA and other relevant MDAs of the Lagos State Government
including the Ministries of Health, Education, Economic Planning and Budget, Youth Sports
and Social Development, etc.
On presentation of the LACSOP publications2 in a meeting with the Permanent Secretary of
the Ministry of Health Dr Femi Onigbile, earlier in the year containing the LACSOP
recommendations on the Priority Health Needs Assessment and Health Budget Analysis
including the recommendations for compliance with the Special Peoples Law 2011, the
Permanent Secretary had suggested that in order to enable government act quickly in that
regard, LACSOP should conduct a random sample of health facilities to assess the Health
sector’s state of compliance or non-compliance with the newly enacted Law.
1
The Law was signed by the Lagos State Governor on 24th June, 2011.
2 The Publication was LACSOP’s Community Priority Needs Assessment Survey 2011, which contained
recommendations on compliance with the Lagos State Special People’s Law 2011.
2

11 | P a g e
Further engagements with other sectors particularly in the Education sector (with LACSOP
recommendations to the Ministry of Education MTSS Y2013-Y2015 Planning Process)
demonstrated the wisdom in conducting a similar assessment at the same time in other
relevant sectors to the PWDs.
The survey, which covered Lagos State’s 20 Local Government Councils, assessed seven
specific target areas:
a. Health
b. Education
c. General access to Public areas;
d. Transportation;
e. Housing;
f. Employment;
g. Recreation;
Desired short - medium term outcomes of the Citizens’ Assessment include:
a. Identification of barriers to the enjoyment of public facilities;
b. Provision of a record of improvements; and
c. Development, by LASG, CSOs and Development Partners of strategies based on
current assessment of inclusion and access in Lagos State.
In addition to identifying physical barriers, this document will serve as a tool for measuring
accessibility of public services and facilities for persons with disabilities (PWDs) in Lagos
State. Specifically, LASG, CSOs and other Development Partners can use the report of the
Citizens Assessment as a baseline for periodic evaluation of Lagos State's position on
access, integration and inclusion of citizens with disabilities.
1.2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The survey tool was applied to gauge current levels of inclusivity and accessibility for each
targeted sector.
The data collection methodology was adopted through “shadow assessments.” This means
that data was gathered through direct enumerators’ observation of selected public and
private institutions and infrastructure across the 20 LGAs and relevant MDAs; unstructured
interviews with relevant government officials; and Focused Group Discussions (FGDs) with
persons with disabilities in 6 of the 20 LGAs.
1.3 BACKGROUND ANALYSIS

12 | P a g e
Following the projections of the Lagos State Government of a population of about 20
million, it will be safe to imply that there are over two million PWDs in Lagos state. This is
in line with the estimates reached by the 2006 National Population Census. It also align
with the United Nations and World Bank researches which reveal that persons with
disabilities (PWDs) constitute not less than 10% of the world’s population. This trend cuts
across other geopolitical levels – continents, continental sub-regions, countries, states and
provinces and local communities.
United Nations ( footnotes/attribution) …. as well as International and local civil society
organizations asserts that People With Disabilities (PWDs) constitute a significant
proportion of the poorest of the poor and face inequalities in access to education, health
care, employment, asset accumulation and opportunities for social and community
participation. More than 80% of People With Disabilities live in low and middle income
parts of the society. Among these group, 30% are street Youths and 20% are children (with
disabilities) who do not attend school but prefer alms begging. Women and Girls With
Disabilities are particularly more vulnerable to abuse and are victims of violence, rape or
sexual abuse.
The World Bank ( footnotes/attribution) …. also affirms that people with disabilities make
up around 20% of the poorest of the poor living in absolute poverty. In the words of Paul
Wolfowwitz, former President of World Bank, “People with disabilities are people with
extra talents. Yet, they are often too forgotten. When people with disabilities are denied
opportunities, they are more likely to fall into poverty and people living in conditions of
poverty are more likely to develop disabilities. As long as societies exclude those with
disabilities, they will not reach their full potential and the poor in particular will be denied
opportunities that they deserve”.
In addition, Global Partnership for Disability and Development (GPDD), …..a …. Stated (
footnotes/attribution) that the world’s poorest population comprised mainly of vulnerable
and marginalized groups such as persons with disabilities (PWDs) and this has threatened
the effectiveness and success of development and poverty-reduction efforts. Conversely,
existing inequalities can also exacerbate individual’s vulnerability.
Individuals with disabilities are disproportionately affected in disaster, emergency and
conflict situations due to lack of accessibility in major areas of life and exclusion of
disability issues in planning and preparedness.
People with Disabilities have been conspicuously excluded from the processes of
formulating and implementing strategies and policies aimed at creating public awareness
and positive orientation and attitudes on the realities and challenges of disability and the
need to evolve and sustain environmentally friendly behaviour.
It is widely acknowledged that policy makers, civil society organizations, the organized
private sector and the society at large lack necessary awareness, interest and

13 | P a g e
understanding on the ‘Plight and Prospects of PWDs’. Disability issues are wrongly and
broadly treated as purely medical and charity matters, while there are obvious lack of
necessary “expertise or capacity or specialization”. As a result, the needs of PWDs
continues to be labeled as ‘Special needs’, and this is severely detrimental to efforts for
promoting INCLUSIVE PRACTICES. Even when disability is mainstreamed in state policies
and planning, there is a severe lack of implementation and “know-how” to translate policy
into effective practice.
1.3.1 Practices which Aggravate Disability in an Urban Mega City – Lagos State
Disability can be caused by various health crises- diseases, heredity, poor medical
attention, drug abuse, malnutrition, etc. Disability can also arise from accidents at home, at
work and in transit. It can also result from environmental hazard and natural disasters.
Often times, disabilities are caused by all forms of violence, torture and various forms of
social neglect and denials, emotional depression, etc.
Irrespective of the form or degree of disability, most disabilities can be managed and most
PWDs can be rehabilitated and empowered to function independently, productively and
progressively in the society.
However, some negative practices, behaviours and trends in the society tend to aggravate
the impacts of disability and worsen the conditions of PWDs. These include:
 Non-availability or inaccurate data-base on disability and PWDs required for proper
planning.
 Poor Government policies and Programs which does not take cognizance of the
welfare and economic well-being of PWDs.
 The presence of attitudinal, institutional, environmental and social barriers which
arise from inadequate or lack of information, awareness, enlightenment and proper
education about disabilities and PWDs.
 Poor access to health care programmes and infrastructure - poor sensitization,
awareness campaign on the importance of, and poor access of PWDs to pre and post
ante-natal care, immunization against all deadly diseases, proper and immediate
care of hereditary related diseases, exclusion from programmes on HIV/STD and
other SRH related activities.
 Inadequate statutory protection from various forms of human right abuses - rape
and domestic violence (in women), denials, torture, discrimination and segregation,
etc.
 Limited access to comprehensive rehabilitation aimed at reducing the physical,
mental/psychological and social impacts of disabilities.
 Limited access to quality Education, vocational Training and other professional
capacity-building programmes.
 Exclusion from various economic and financial empowerment programmes to aid
productive ventures which hinders PWDs from demonstrating and harnessing their
potentials in small and medium scale businesses.

14 | P a g e
 Discriminatory employment policies and work place practices.
 Inaccessible infrastructure – road-side-walks, traffic lights, pedestrian-bridges,
public buildings, jetties, car parks, etc.
 Inaccessible transportation – road, rail and water.
 Lack of inclusive housing policies.
 Exclusion of PWDs from the development and implementation of disaster
management programmes.
 Exclusion of PWDs from the planning and implementation of environmental and
climate change programmes and policies.
( footnotes/attribution)
1.3.2 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
Defining “Accessibility”
Accessibility is the degree to which a product, device, service, or environment is available
to as many people as possible. Accessibility can be viewed as the "ability to access" and
benefit from some system or entity. The concept is often used to focus on people with
disabilities or special needs (such as the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities3) and their right of access to social systems or entities.
But accessibility holds a different meaning to different PWDs. For example, under health
care, access can be gauged by the easy entry and movement within a medical facility and
the ability to use or obtain services from the facility with ease including customer services
and even the use of its toilet facilities. Also, regarding transportation services. accessibility
can be interpreted as the ease at which PWDs reach their destinations. It will mean, on the
one hand, the hearing impaired individual’s ability to understand the direction a public
vehicle is heading and, on the other hand, the physically challenged individual’s ease of
boarding a public transport vehicle. Both PWDs experience the transport service
differently.
A standard definition of accessibility was adopted by the team of analysts, enumerators and
supervisors in this project. However, the administration of the survey tools revealed even
more diverse understanding of the term by the general public. An instance can be selected
from the transportation section. While enumerators were encouraged to speak with (and
educate) transporters of the popular danfo buses,4 many respondents argued that their
3
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol was adopted on 13 December
2006 and entered into force on 3 May 2008, after the Convention received its 20th ratification. Nigeria ratified the
Convention and the Optional Protocol on 24 September 2010.
44
Danfo is the local term for small buses operated by the private individuals under the aegis of the National Union
of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) in Lagos State.

15 | P a g e
buses were accessible to wheelchair users given that conductors were on available to carry
PWDs into buses. Similarly, under the education aspect of this survey, respondents insisted
that that toilet facilities were accessible to and indeed used by PWDs even though they did
not meet the required PWD specification.
These experiences demonstrate one crucial fact: there is a pressing need to create
awareness of the meaning of accessibility. Awareness of the meaning of accessibility is the
anchor on which the success of the newly established Lagos State Office of Disability Affairs
(LASODA) is hinged. When methodically implemented, awareness creation will help
citizens understand the rationale behind government efforts and foster wide spread
cooperation for deepening PWD integration in the larger society.
CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES
Article 9: Accessibility
1. To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take
appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to
transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to
other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. These measures, which shall include

16 | P a g e
1.3.2 Action Path to Social Inclusion
All stakeholders – the government, the private sector, the media, civil society organizations
(CSOs), the family and the society must take necessary action to reduce and/or remove all

17 | P a g e
attitudinal, institutional, environmental and social barriers which aggravates the
challenges of PWDs.
These actions must seek to rehabilitate, re-empower and reintegrate PWDs into
mainstream society so they can live independently just as other citizens.
Although the establishment of the Lagos State Office of Disability Affairs (LASODA) is
positive step, it is not sufficient. LASODA should be empowered as provided in the Law to
fully implement the Special People’s Law 2011; and among others, ensure that:
1. LASODA commences the gathering of demographic data base of PWD across the
20 LGS and 37 LCDAs, a step that has been initiated by LACSOP.
2. Relevant ministries, departments and agencies, (MDAs) in collaboration with
CSOs should create awareness about the Special People’s Law.
3. Public buildings should be made accessible to PWDs by providing, ramps, lifts
and other gadgets to facilitate their movements in and out of them. In addition,
PWD-friendly conveniences should be provided in the public buildings.
4. Roads/walk-ways, Pedestrian bridges, Jetties/terminal buildings should be
designed with adequate PWD friendly facilities.
5. Physical Planning authorities should ensure strict compliance with the provision
of the Law by individuals and the organised private sector (OPS) in the approval
of their building plans.
6. Government should device a strict monitoring strategy to ensure adequate
compliance in providing PWD friendly facilities as provided by the law.
7. The Inclusive Education Programme of the State should be reviewed. Well
trained Special Education Teachers should be employed to handle each
special/disability area (blind, deaf, mentally retaded etc), while adequate
classrooms as well as teaching and instructional materials are provided.
8. Health facilities in the state should be made accessible to PWDs. Sign-language
interpreters, Special Care Givers, counsellors and other Disability Health
Specialists should be provided in all state General Hospitals and selected local
and community health centers. Also, specialized free health care programs like
Blindness Prevention Program, Limb Deformity Corrective surgery, Cleft hip and
palate corrective surgery, free Eko Malaria Program, Eko free Health Mission and
Hypertension and Diabetes Screening among others should be sustained.
9. PWDs should be actively involved in the poverty alleviation and empowerment
programme of the State Government. Easy access should be created for PWDs to
obtain credit facilities. Youth and women with disabilities should be
mainstreamed in on-going vocational training and skill acquisition programmes
in the state.
10. The rehabilitation programmes of the State should be improved and provided
with required human and material resource to function effectively.
11. The State government’s policy on employment should give adequate concession
to qualified and competent persons with disabilities as provided by the Law.

18 | P a g e
12. There should be adequate provision for PWDs disabilities to participate actively
in the State’s Development Plan. PWDs should be encouraged and enabled to
participate in such strategic meetings like the State’s Economic Summits,
Stakeholders Meetings on Budgets, the Educational Summits, Policy Review
Meetings, etc
13. The Government should partner with CSOs, the private sector, the media and
other stakeholders to step up capacity building programmes so as to ensure the
implementation of the Lagos State Special People’s Law and its sustainability.

19 | P a g e
PART II
FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS:
QUALITATIVE FINDINGS ON THE DISABILITY ACCESS AND INTEGRATION
“Disability is a matter of perception, it should not mean being disqualified from
having access to every aspect of life.”
-Anonymous.

20 | P a g e
Focus group discussions (FGDs) were used to collect opinions of the key affected persons in the
issues concerning (i) general access to public facilities; (ii) access for pedestrians with disabilities
and (iii) recreation. In this regard, 6 FDGs were organised in selected Local Government Areas
(LGAs) that were strategically spread within three Lagos State Senatorial Districts, namely Lagos
Central, Lagos East and Lagos West. Specific LGAs are included in Table 1 below.
Table 1: FDG Locations and senatorial spread
SENATORIAL DISTRICT FDG Centres
Lagos Central Surulere
Eti-Osa
Lagos East Kosofe
Ikorodu
Lagos West Badagry
Ikeja
A total of 6 groups were involved in this study. Participants were primarily drawn from visually
impaired individuals; the hearing impaired and their interpreters and physically challenged person
including wheel chair users.
Although 48 persons responded to the invitations to the FDGs at the various locations only 45
people showed up for the interviews. This comprised of females and males. A list of respondents,
date/time and the gender spread of the study, can be found in Table 2 below and in more details on
Annex …..
Table 2:
DATE TIME SENATORIAL
DISTRICT
LGA # of
Female
# of Male
TUESDAY 11TH
SEPTEMBER,
LAGOS EAST IKORODU

21 | P a g e
2012
LAGOS CENTRAL SURULERE 2 5
LAGOS WEST BADAGRI
WEDNESDAY,
12TH SEPTEMBER,
2012
LAGOS EAST KOSOFE
LAGOS CENTRAL ETI-OSA 1 6
LAGOS WEST IKEJA
Gender considerations
Unequal gender participation in the FGDs was observed. On the one hand, while … men
participated only …. female were engaged in this process. However, the marginal
participation of women was not an oversight. This occurred because even though … women
were invited to the FGDs, only a few of them responded to invitations. Another challenge
occurred during the FGD recordings as only 2 out of 6 sessions disaggregated participants
responses according to gender. This further limited analysts’ capacity to conduct a
comprehensive gender audit or even to capture women specific needs fully.
Nevertheless, an analysis of female responses revealed that concerns were primarily
targeted at … market and shopping, where most visually impaired females expressed a
level of dependence on their family members and friends for the purchase of goods and
services at local markets, stores and shopping malls. The most common mention for this
exclusion was the threat of heavy vehicular activity around these public spaces and that
they had often been protected by their families from these sort of activities. In this regard,
it is clear that women PWDs, especially the visually impaired, have not been provided the
opportunity to live independently as their male counterparts.
Only one female at the FDGs expressed interest in sporting activities and recreation. Most
females did not respond to this question. Other responses as to PWD accessibility were in
consonance with male experiences.
DETAILED FINDINGS
General access to public facilities:

22 | P a g e
Reactions to Law Courts and Police Stations
For most participants, public buildings are not easily accessible to PWDs. One of the most
critical concerns recorded was attitudinal obstruction/discrimination especially in
connection to communicating grievances at law courts or at Police Stations, for example.
Other complaints showed up in connection with the design of the public buildings.
References were made to features such as staircases, pillars and external impediments,
such as vehicular activities or open drainages that interrupt movement for visually
impaired and physically challenged individuals. For the hearing impaired inaccessibility is
presented by the lack of interpreters at public institutions and the non-labeling of offices,
units and departments within public organizations and places resulting in their inability to
access, or use public services.
Reactions to Banks and Banking Services
When categorized as public buildings, the general consensus was that banks are not
accessible. For example, guide canes which are made of mental material are not allowed
through electronic doorways and wheelchair users are denied entry into banking halls with
their chairs. As a consequence PWDs are compelled to rely on guides or strangers to cash
monies on their behalf. Other concerns include poor skills for engaging with PWDs from
customer service support. As a matter of fact, a common mention was that the complication
of supporting PWDs complete tellers or to cash cheques often led to their neglect at
banking halls. In addition, the absence of brailed account statements was a common
mention among visually impaired respondents.
Regarding automatic teller machines (ATMs), discussions revealed varying perceptions on
accessibility. While the physically challenged persons such as amputees had little or no
challenges to ATMs, these machines were mostly inaccessible to wheelchair users as a
result of the staircases and the narrow width of the spaces.
Visually impaired individuals face a more complex challenge as the absence of brailed
features or screen readers on ATMs hampers usage. In addition, variations in ATM designs
do not encourage visually impaired users count the timing in between voice prompts, if
any.
There are interesting consequences to this state of events. For one thing, since a number of
PWDs avoid the use of banking services, they will likely form a considerable portion of the
Quotes from the Field
“Most times polices officers don’t know how to communicate with deaf or blind
persons. When Tafa Balogun was the DPO of Igbogbo Police State, he gave a standing
order that whenever a PWD comes with any report they should allow the person meet
him…. When he left other officers did not continue with the order.”
“Several deaf persons who came to report a case had been locked behind bars because
the police officer felt he was aggressive when speaking.”
“In my [law] practice I have cause to go to all these public buildings like courts and
police stations…. At the Magistrate Court, off Bode Thomas, the entrance not
accessible or even identifiable. Oftentimes, we are trying to run a legitimate business
but when blind people like us have to use public buildings, we have to design our own
access to the places. Whenever I request for directions at public buildings, the
gateman will give me responses like ‘I no fit leave this place, if i see somebody i go tell
the person make e take you go there ’ and then I have to wait at the gate for a long
time for a kind and considerate person to lead me. This takes out a lot of man hours
from me! How can I earn a living like this?”

23 | P a g e
unbanked and the underserved adult categories in the Nigeria.5 Therefore, glossing over
PWD accessibility at banks can frustrate current developmental efforts by the Central Bank
of Nigeria (CBN) and its partners. Specifically, programmes directed towards increasing
access to finance or introducing cashless banking can be stunted as current invisible PWD
populations have, inadvertedly or not, been excluded from these financial institutions and
their services.
On occasion, there were complaints of lack of privacy and security at the ATM machines as
a reason why a number PWDs have refused to activate their debit cards.
5
A 2010 EFINA Access to Financial services in Nigeria Survey indicated that 63.5% of adult males are unbanked
and 76.8% of adult females are unbanked.
“Some of the banks like UBA, WEMA BANK, SKY BANK do not give ATM card to the
blind.”
“They say we cannot access the machine but they deduct the money for ATM from our
accounts”
“If they are aware that we cannot access the ATM then they should not be removing
money from our account each time we withdraw over the counter.”
“The banks say we do not need the ATM card’
“Apart from the initial greetings, there are no audible signals for the visually impaired
to operate the ATM.”
‘There should be braille inscription on the bottoms of ATMs to operate them.”
‘Each bank branch should have at least one staff trained in customer services for
PWDs.”
“Any amputee without artificial hands cannot use the ATM, they should be voice-
enabled.”

24 | P a g e
Reactions to Stores, Supermarkets, Shopping Malls and Local Markets
Outlets such as stores, shops, supermarkets and shopping malls and local markets present
a different accessibility challenge to PWDs. The primary barrier is communicating needs
for the visually challenged and hearing impaired as well as selecting goods that are needed.
Other challenges faced by wheelchair users include accessing the stores and shopping malls
especially staircases. Shopping inhibitions to PWDs also include the heavy vehicular
activities around markets as well irregular parking arrangements. Specific reference was
made to motor bikes (known as okada) and the common 3-wheeled buggies (also known as
keke). As a result a number of PWDs do not visit these public shopping outlets and remain
dependent on their families.
Reactions to public information for the Hearing-Impaired
“Despite all the CSR that First Bank does in the area of disabilities, access to
their banking services for PWDs are among the worst - next to
Intercontinental Bank. GTB is the most PWD-friendly.”
“GTB branches all have ramps, they assist PWDs on wheelchairs in entering
the bank by collapsing the security doors.”
“Bank officials refuse to assist visually impaired people to fill their bank
tellers and forms.”
“The banks security personnel need to be trained to assist any visually
impaired person.”
“Shoprite is largely accessible – there are a lot of ramps, revolving escalators are
available.”
“The State and Local Government build shopping plazas do not have ramps and the stairs
should be accessible for wheelchair users. “
“Spiral staircases should be banned in these public stores!”

25 | P a g e
A question posed to assess the effectiveness of public information systems and visual
signals for hearing-impaired persons to move around safely and independently in your
community was responded with resounding negative responses. It was emphasized that
illiteracy was a challenge among PWDs including the hearing impaired. In this regard,
because of the high cost of equipment needed for educating the hearing impaired, these
category of people are often ignored and are unable to read and interpret signage.
Another remarkable observation was the limitation in accessing public transportation
except for a few of the Bus Rapid Transit systems. For the hearing impaired vocal bus stop
calls by conductors of the popular danfo buses does not show the route. Therefore, PWDs
especially the hearing-impaired rely on directions from strangers and raw instinct to reach
their destination.
In this light it was remarked that through public signs were increasingly being made
available, this has not visible and clear enough to ease of movement for PWDs and non-
PWDs alike.
Reactions to access for pedestrians with disabilities
This question, which covered issues around access to road infrastructure for persons with
disability especially the visually impaired, the physically challenged and wheelchair users,
was received with animated contributions. In this regard, respondents remarked that
pedestrians with disabilities are unable to easily use recently constructed pavements on
public roads.
Non continuity of walkways and high kerbs: Most participants expressed concerns that
kerbs were too high for PWDs to climb. In addition, the consistent roll up and down of the
kerbs break the continuity of the walkway for pedestrians with disability. Although a few
mentioned that although dropped kerbs been installed at a few road intersections there
were no rough marking at these points to hold down the wheelchairs from slipping off the
roads. These are generally neither practical nor safe for blind persons as well as wheelchair
users
Open drainages on walkways: Wheelchair users and visually impaired persons are
hindered by the open drainages on walkways which they complained are often deep.
“I remember in the 1980s, I used to enter buses that time … and those danfo used to
write what direction they are going to but it has changed now… those conductors prefer
to say where they are going. Sometime when I am going out< I don’t like to ask people
for what the conductor is saying because people are not always patient especially when I
don’t have an interpreter with me. So I just enter … sometimes it is the wrong bus …. ”.

26 | P a g e
Without prior warning, visually impaired persons have complained that they easily fall into
this holes and this can be life threatening and traumatic to them.
Flower pots and poles: Although it was widely understood that the purpose of flowerpots
meets the Lagos State Governments environmental policy on beautification, PWDs often
struggle with these obstacles which are placed in the middle of walkways. There was a an
agreed recommended that flower pots and poles should be placed behind a barricade to
enable continuity of the walk ways.
Human obstruction on walkways: In some areas of Lagos State, trading activities and
other transactions take place on the walkways thereby hindering movement for persons
with disabilities.
Floods: Like all other citizens, pedestrians with disability face challenges during the rainy
season and when floods occur.
Reactions to public information and auditory signals for people with visual
impairments
In response to this question, participants responded in the negative. Remarks were made
about public lifts which were made without brailed numbers. It was acknowledged that in
government building employees are placed in lifts to select floors, but participants
emphasized that there are instances of mistakes and the fear of getting off at the wrong
floor discourage many PWDs from using the lifts.
Another challenge faced is in connection with traffic lights. It was stated that crossing roads
also presented PWDs with traumatic experiences especially visually impaired individuals.
Although traffic lights work, PWDs especially the visually impaired are unaware of traffic
light and do not know where and when they should walk. Beeping streetlights were
recommended.
On Montgomery Road, the pavement is not accessible. Some slabs removed and not
replaced. Oba Akran, not accessible for wheelchair users and the kerbs are too high. For
VIP exit and entry points ought to be identifiable by them. Beeps are essential for VIPs.
Flower pots and signpost not accessible.

27 | P a g e
RECREATION
There have been considerable efforts from the public sector to integrate or increase in the
participation of persons with developmental and other disabilities in regular education
classrooms and community workplaces. The purpose of these approaches among others, is
to create ideal spaces for PWDs to enable experiences of social inclusion and friendship
building. One of the most effective methods of doing this is through recreation.
Recreation encourages play and interaction such that PWDs can maintain physical,
emotional, psychological, and social well-being while they live, learn, work, and live
alongside nondisabled peers. Recreation programs have a number of characteristics that
make them ideal places for individuals with disabilities to experience social inclusion and
friendship building.
This survey sought to assess if there existed any barriers to integrated recreational
participation and whether community-based services, programs, and activities for PWDs
exist.. In this survey, the predominant opinion on whether are PWDs integrated into
community sports and recreation programmes, is the negative. Apart from references to
the recently concluded London 2012 Paralympic Games where Team Nigeria had a glorious
outing that earned the country 13 medals , there is little known about adaptive sports and
recreation among PWDs in Lagos State. Two reasons were proffered for this (i) engaging
with sports was a matter of individual interest only and not all PWDs are engaged in sports
or recreations. Consequently information on sports and recreation facilities available and
accessible for only individuals who show an interest in participating in sports or even
through various cluster groups; (ii) medalists of the current and past paralympians have
not beens celebrated and this is not an incentive to engage or even earn a living from
special sports. Earning an income is viewed in priority over sports or any other form of
recreation; (iii) although a few participants claim that special sport equipment exist at
public stadia, these are not often available on demand; (iv) although support groups who
assist persons with disabilities to take part in integrated recreational activities are
available at public stadia for example, these services are not often voluntary and service is
grounded on a fee-based relationship; (v) disability awareness training for staff in sports
and recreational centres are not available to guide performance of duties more effectively.
Regarding private sports facilities accessible to PWDs, these are generally not made
accessible to all categories of PWDs. Although, the hearing impaired did not express any
inhibitions at private gymnasiums except for the lack of interpreters, most visually
impaired individuals expressed difficulty in accessing sport facilities by virtue of their
design and the equipment which may prove dangerous and may obstruct movement.
Wheelchair users respondents do not access private sports facilities.
“When blind people run and there is a guide runner but most of the [guide runners]are not
fast as fast as the blind person and hold them back instead of letting them run. Guide
runners are outdated. Even the deaf play football and there is either a vibrators watch/ red
cloth if there is a penalty” but this equipment is not always available.

28 | P a g e
Why should I bother? The real question you should ask us is whether these gyms where
designed with us in mind.
“Beer parlors are accessible!”
“Some of the churches have sign language interpreter like Jehovah witness, RCCG, Faith
Apostolic”
“Jehovah Witness has braille bible and hymn book for the visually impaired.”
“ the only time my church put a ramp at their front door was when they were getting more
funerals and they had to wheel in more caskets!”
“You know, I don’t even go to the mosque on the island anymore... there are just too many
staircases there! On Fridays, I stay at home so that I can go to a more accessible mosque or I
don’t go at all.”
Most doors of restaurant, church, social places are quite small for wheel chair users.

29 | P a g e
PART III
QUANTITATIVE RESULTS
CITIZENS’ ASSESSMENT OF THE POSITION OF LAGOS STATE ON ACCESS,
INTEGRATION AND INCLUSION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
“Suicide preventi

30 | P a g e
2.1 Introduction
This section contains a brief introduction and a presentation of results of a perception
survey. The research tool was a semi-structured questionnaire, which was administered by
trained interviewers. The questionnaire included a mix of structured and open-ended
questions and was designed to elicit information from participants for assessing position of Lagos
State on Access, Integration and Inclusion of persons with disabilities in their respective LGAs.
The following were the findings from the survey, based largely on the structured
questionnaire.
2.2 Local Government Areas covered in the Survey
.
Table 12: Survey questionnaire distribution in 20 LGAs in Lagos State
LGA Percent
Not
Specified
4.597701
Agege 4.214559
Ajeromi 4.214559
Alimosho 6.51341
Amuwo
Odofin
5.363985
Apapa 4.214559
Badagry 4.597701
Epe 5.363985
Eti-Osa 6.130268
Ifako Ijaiye 4.214559
Ikeja 4.597701
Ikorodu 4.597701
Island 3.831418
Kosofe 3.448276

31 | P a g e
Lekki Ibeju 4.214559
Mainland 4.980843
Mushin 6.51341
Ojo 4.597701
Oshodi 3.831418
Somolu 4.597701
Surulere 5.363985
2.3.2
Level of Schools:
Forty one percent of the schools surveyed were primary level schools while 38% were Secondary
level schools. Almost 5% were vocational schools, while 3% were tertiary level schools. Eleven
percent of the school did not specify which level they were.
Figure 1
Category of School:
Fivety two percent of the respondents were public schools while 43% were private schools. Four
percent of the respondents did not specify which category they were.
0
20
40
60
School Type

32 | P a g e
Figure 2
Are all schools in your community accessible to students and/or staff with disabilities?
Sixty five percent of the respondents state that their schools were not accessible for students and /
or staff wit disabilities, while 25% of the respondents claim that their schools are accessible. The
remaining Nine percent either did not specify or did not know if their schools were so accessible.
Figure 3
Are there any regulations to ensure the accessibility of new schools?
Thirty six percent of the respondents say they do not know if there are any regulations to ensure
the accessibility of new schools while 33% say there are no such regulations. Seven percent of the
respondents say there are regulations while 23% either did not specify or said the question was not
applicable for them.
0
20
40
60
Not
Specified
Public Private
Category
0
20
40
60
80
Student Access

33 | P a g e
Figure 4
Is there an accessibility plan and budget for modification of existing schools?
Forty one percent of the respondents did not know if there was an accessibility plan and
budget for modification of existing schools, while 39% did not know if there was any such
plan and budget. Six percent said there was an accessibility plan and budget, while 14% of
the respondents either did not specify or said the question was not applicable to them.
Figure 5
Are secondary education buildings easily accessible to PWDs?
Forty six percent of the respondents said the secondary school was not easily accessible to
PWDs, while 7% of the respondents said the secondary school was accessible to PWDs.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
10
20
30
40
50
Accessibility Plan &
Budget

34 | P a g e
32% of the respondents said the question was not applicable for them, while 15% of the
respondents either did not know or did not specify any answer.
Figure 6
Are tertiary education facilities easily accessible to PWDs?
Sixteen percent of the respondents said the tertiary education facility was not easily accessible to
PWDs, while 2% said the tertiary education facility was easily accessible to PWDs. Sixty five percent
of the respondents said the question was inapplicable to them, while 12% did not know if tertiary
education facilities were easily accessible to PWDs. Five percent of the respondents did not specify
any answer.
Figure 7
Are all facilities, such as gymnasiums and science laboratories, inside your school easily
accessible to PWDs?
Not
Specified
5%
Yes
7%
No
46%
Don't
know
10%
Not
applicabl
e
32%
Secondary School
Access
Not
Specified
5%
Yes
2%
No
16%
Don't
know
12%
Not
applicabl
e
65%
Tertiary Education
Access

35 | P a g e
Sixty one percent of the respondents said school facilities like gyms and laboratories were
not easily accessible to PWDs, while 9% said their school facilities were easily accessible to
PWDs. Seventeen percent of the respondents said the question was inapplicable to them,
while 13 either did not know or did not specify any answer.
Figure 8
Were Toilets for PWDs in Schools physically sighted for verification?
Only 10% of the schools surveyed had their toilets physically sighted by the enumerator for
verification.
Figure 9
Are there toilets easily accessible to PWDs on each floor in your school?
Seventy Nine percent of the respondents do not have easily accessible toilets in their
schools, while 12% said they have such easily accessible toilets in their schools. Ten
percent of the respondents either did not know, or did not specify any answer or felt the
question was not applicable to them.
Not
Specified
5% Yes
9%
No
61%
Don't
know
8%
Not
applicabl
e
17%
Gym & Science Lab Access
0 20 40 60 80 100
Not Specified
Not sighted
No answer
Toilet Sighted

36 | P a g e
Figure 10
Are there toilets easily accessible to PWDs, made specifically for women and girls living
with disability in your school in each floor?
Eighty Five percent of the respondents do not have easily accessible toilets for women and girls
living with disabilities, while almost 5% say they have such toilets. Ten percent either did not know,
or did not specify any answer or said the question was not applicable to them.
Figure 11
Are students with disabilities placed in classrooms with non-disabled students?
Fifty nine percent of the respondents say that PWDs in their schools were placed in
classrooms with non-disabled students, while 31% of the respondents said that PWDs were
not placed in classrooms with non-disabled students. Eleven percent of the respondents
either did not know, or did not specify any answer or felt the question was not applicable to
them.
5%
12%
79%
4%
0%
Toilet Accessible
Not Specified Yes
No Don't know
Not applicable
0 50 100
Not Specified
No
Not applicable
Women & Girls Toilet
Accessibility

37 | P a g e
Figure 12
Are you aware of the Special Peoples Law of Lagos State?
Sixty five percent of the respondents are not aware of the Lagos State Special Peoples Law,
while 19% say they are aware. Sixteen percent of the respondents either did not know, or
did not specify any answer or felt the question was not applicable to them.
Figure 13
Is there a policy covering inclusion of all students in your school?
Thirty four percent of the respondents do not know if they have a School Inclusion Policy,
while 30% of the respondents do not have a School Inclusion Policy. Twenty three percent
of the respondents say they have school Inclusion Policy, while 13% either did not specify
any answer or felt the question was not applicable to them.
0 20 40 60
Not specified
No
Not applicable
PWD in Class with non-
PWDs
5%19%65%
10%1%
Awareness of Special
Peoples Law
Not specified Yes
No Don't know
Not applicable

38 | P a g e
Figure 14
Do parents contribute to the decision-making process through the School Based
Management Committees (SBMC), Parent Teachers Association (PTAs) etc on issues
concerning students with disabilities?
Forty one percent of the respondents say that parents contribute to the decision-making process of
SBMCs, PTAs on issues concerning PWDs, while 41% equally say parents do not contribute to such
decision-making process. Eigteen percent of the respondents either felt the question was not
applicable to them, or did not know, or did not specify any answer.
Figure 15
Educational support provided for persons with disabilities in your school-
Scholarships:
Seventy percent of the respondents do not have scholarships for PWDs in their schools,
while 5% of the respondents say they have scholarships for PWDs.
0
20
40
School Inclusion Policy
Not Specified
5%
Yes
41%
No
41%
Don't know
6%
Not applicable
7%
Parents contribute to SBMC decisions on PWD

39 | P a g e
Figure 16
Bursaries:
Sixty Seven percent of the respondents do not have bursaries for PWDs in their schools, while 4%
of the respondents say they have such bursaries for PWDs in their schools.
figure 17
Equipment including instructional materials:
Sixty three percent of the respondents do not have equipment including instructional
materials, while 14% of the respondents say that they do have such equipment.
0 20 40 60 80
Yes
No
Don't know
Not applicable
Scholarships
0
50
100
Bursaries

40 | P a g e
Figure 18
Computer screen readers:
Sixty six percent of the respondents do not have computer screen readers for the PWDs in
their schools, while 9% of the respondents say that they have computer screen readers in
their schools.
Figure 19
Are students with disabilities able to participate in all or most extra-curricular activities?
Forty eight percent of the respondents say students with disabilities are not able to
participate in all or most extra-curricular activities in their schools, while 40% of the
respondents say that students with disabilities are able to participate in such extra-
curricular activities.
Figure 20
0 50 100
Not Specified
No
Not applicable
Equipment
Not
Specifi
ed
5%
Yes
9%
No
66%
Don't
know
5%
Not
applica
ble
15%
Computer Screen
Reader
0
50
PWD Participate in Extracurricular
activities

41 | P a g e
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Increase in physical accessability will be achieved if special and urgent
attention is given to the provision of purpose-built classrooms, laboratories,
libraries, toilets, recreational/sporting facilities and the remodeling of the
general school environment to aid easy movement. At the moment, the
government may focus on primary, junior and senior secondary schools
designated as inclusive schools.
2. At the primary school level, inclusion may be sustained at the level of
integration (where inclusive units are established within same premises)
due to inadequate teaching materials and teachers. However, at least ten to
twelve classrooms, a resource centre, accessable toilets, adequate teaching
and instructional materials and assistive technologies should be provided in
each inclusive unit. Furthermore, teachers and school heads may design
inclusive programmes to promote the culture of inclusion among pupils.
3. At the junior and senior secondary school levels, real inclusion should be
encouraged as students have attained appreciable levels of maturity and
adaptation to learning environments
4. All inclusive (primary, junior and senior secondary) schools should be
provided with a fully equipped resource centre to facilitate remedial classes
in the learning of braille, sign language, speech therapy, etc.
5. More teaching staff and relevant specialists should be recruited to handle all
the disability types: blind, deaf, downs syndrome, autism and other learning
disabilities.
6. An Inclusive Education policy should be instituted for the state within which
proper synergy with the health ministry is established to provide regular
medical monitoring and support to pupils and students with disabilities.
7. The Inclusive Education Policy should provide for the establishment of at
least one Inclusive Unit with burden facilities in each Senatorial District to
accommodate children with very critical disabilities. The policy should
establish stringent measures to discourage dumping and abandunment of
children by parents.
8. The inclusive Education Policy should provide for effective synergy with the
Ministry of Science and Technology to facilitate effective mainstreaming of
learning assistive technologies in the provision of ICT facilities for schools in

42 | P a g e
the state. Furthermore, regular training of teachers should be encouraged to
keep up with rapid improvements and changes.
9. The policy should emphasize the provision of various educational support:
scholarships, etc to pupils and students with disabilities as provided for in
the Lagos State Special People’s Law.
10. Deliberate plans should be made to ensure proper inclusion of pupils and
students with disabilities in all school sports and general recreational and
extracurricular activities to eradicate discrimination and other negative
practices among all children.
11. The government should provide each inclusive unit with at least one
eighteen seatter bus to ease movement of pupils and students with
disabilities to and from their homes.
12. The Inclusive Education Policy should promote the effective participation of
parents in the SBMCs of the inclusive units.
Health:
LGA
Percent
Agege 5.714286
Ajeromi 4.761905
Alimosho 4.761905
Amuwo
Odofin
4.761905
Apapa 3.809524
Badagry 4.761905
Epe 5.714286
Eti-Osa 3.809524
Ibeju Lekki 4.761905
Ifako Ijaye 4.761905
Ikeja 5.714286
Ikorodu 4.761905
Island 5.714286
Kosofe 4.761905
Mainland 5.714286
Mushin 5.714286
Ojo 4.761905
Oshodi 5.714286

43 | P a g e
Somolu 4.761905
Surulere 4.761905
Total 100
Type of Health Facility Surveyed:
Fifty Seven percent of the respondents were Primary Health Facilities, while 34% were secondary
facilities. Three percent of the respondents were tertiary health facilities, while 6% did not stipulate
specifically what type of facility they were.
Figure 21
Category of Health facility Surveyed:
Seventy Percent of the respondents were public health facilties, while 30% of the respondents were
private health facilities.
Figure 22
Availability of the following in your health facility-
Free Medical Care for PWDs:
Sixty two percent of the respondents say free medical care for PWDS is not available in their health
facility while 32% say free medical care for PWDs is available in their health facilty.
0
20
40
60
Not
Stipulated
primary Secondary Tertiary
Facility
70%
30%
Category

44 | P a g e
Figure 23
Sign Language interpreters:
Seventy nine Percent of the respondents say sign language interpreters are not available in their
health facility, while 7% of the respondents say that such interpreters are available in their health
facility.
Figure 24
Sign language interpreters at ante-natal/post natal clinics:
Seventy five Percent of the respondents say sign language interpreters at ante-natal/post natal
clinics are not available in their health facility, while almost 10% of the respondents say that such
interpreters are available in their health facility.
Figure 25
0
50
100
Yes No Dont
Know
Not
applicable
Free Medical Care Available
0 20 40 60 80
yes
No
Dont know
Not applicable
Sign language Interpreters
0
20
40
60
80
yes no Dont know Not
applicable
Interpreters Ante/post-natal Clinics

45 | P a g e
Special Care Givers:
Sixty eight percent of the respondents say Special Care Givers for PWDs are not available in their
health facility, while 16% of the respondents say that such Special Care givers are available in their
health facility.
Figure 26
Counselors:
Fifty eight percent of the respondents say counsellors for PWDs are not available in their health
facility, while 23% of the respondents say that such counsellors are available in their health facility.
Figure 27
0
20
40
60
80
yes no dont know Not
applicable
Special Caregivers
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Counsellors

46 | P a g e
Disability Health Specialists:
Seventy Percent of the respondents say Disability Health Specialists are not available in their health
facility, while 6% of the respondents say that such Disability Health Specialists are available in their
health facility.
Figure 28
Are regular health awareness and enlightenment programmes organized for persons with
disabilities, their care givers and families?
Eighty Four Percent of the respondents say regular health awareness and enlightenment
programmes are not organized for PWDs in their health facility, while 9% of the respondents say
that such awareness programmes are organized in their health facility. Six percent do not know of
such awareness programmes, while 2% of the respondents said the question was not applicable to
them.
Figure 29
yes
6%
no
69%
dont know
5%
not
applicable
20%
Disability Health Specialists
0 20 40 60 80 100
yes
no
dont know
not applicable
Awareness Program

47 | P a g e
Has the MOH in collaboration with the Office of Disability Affairs developed a template for
Certificate of Disability, as well as procedures for its issuance and withdrawal respectively?
Seventeen Percent of the respondents say the Office of Disability Affairs had not yet developed
a template for Certificate of Disability while less than one percent of the respondents say that
the template had been developed. Twenty one percent of the respondents do not know of such a
template, while 57% of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them.
Figure 30
Are there toilets easily accessible to PWDs on each floor in your health facility?
Seventy six percent of the respondents do not have easily accessible toilets in their health
facility, while 18% of the respondents say that such easily accessible toilets are available in their
health facility.
0
20
40
60
Not
stipulated
yes no don't
know
not
applicable
Certificate of Disability

48 | P a g e
Figure 31
Toilets physically sighted for verifiction:
Only 18% of the respondents’ toilets were physically sighted for verification.
Figure 32
Are there toilets easily accessible to PWDs made specifically for women living with
disability in your health facility?
Ninety three percent of the respondents do not have easily accessible toilets for women with
disabilities in their health facility, while 4% of the respondents say that such easily accessible
toilets for women with disabilities are available in their health facility.
0 20 40 60 80
not stipulated
yes
no
dont know
not applicable
Toilets
Not
sighted
18%
No answer
82%
Toilet Sighted

49 | P a g e
Figure 33
Employment:
LGA
Percent
Agege 5.263158
Ajeromi 5.263158
Alimosho 3.759398
Amuwo
Odofin
4.511278
Apapa 3.759398
Badagry 5.263158
Epe 4.511278
Eti-Osa 4.511278
Ifako Ijaye 5.263158
Ikeja 6.015038
Ikorodu 6.766917
Island 5.263158
Kosofe 6.015038
Mainland 5.263158
Mushin 3.007519
Ojo 5.263158
Oshodi 5.263158
Somolu 5.263158
Surulere 4.511278
Total 100
Category of Employer:
Seventy three percent of the respondents were employers in the private sector, while 26% of the
respondents were employers in the public sector.
0 50 100
yes
dont know
Toilets for Women with
Disabilites

50 | P a g e
Figure 34
Does your organization have employees with disability?
Fifty three percent of the respondents do not have employees with disability, while 44% of
the respondents have employees with disability.
Figure 35
Is information freely available on employment opportunities for PWDs?
Sixty two percent of the respondents say that information is not freely available on
employment opportunities for PWDs, while 26% of the respondents say that such
information is freely available.
Figure 36
Is reasonable accommodation (services and physical adaptations) provided in places of
employment of persons with disabilities?
Not
Stipulat
ed
1%
Public
26%
Private
73%
Category
0 20 40 60
Yes
No
Don't know
Not applicable
PWD Employees
0 20 40 60 80
Yes
Don't know
Information on Employment
Opportunities

51 | P a g e
Eighty four percent of the respondents do not have reasonable accommodation (services
and physical adaptations) provided for PWDs, while 11% say such accommodation is
provided.
Figure 37
Is there disability awareness training for employees and employers?
Eighty two percent of the respondents do not have any disability awareness training for
employees and employers, while 8% say they have such training.
Figure 38
Government incentives for the private sector
Do local authorities provide incentives to employers to encourage employment equity?
Fifty two percent of the respondents state that local authorities do not provide incentives
to employers to encourage employment equity, while 4% of the respondents state that
such incentives from local authorities are available. Twenty eight percent of the
respondents do not know of such incentives, while 16% of the respondents said the
question was not applicable to them.
Yes
11%
No
84%
Don't
know
5%
Accomodation for
Employed PWDs
Yes
8%
No
82%
Don't
know
10%
Disability Awareness
Training

52 | P a g e
Figure 39
Tax incentives:
Sixty percent of the respondents state that there are no tax incentives for employers to
encourage employment equity, while 5% of the respondents state that such tax incentives
are available. Fourteen percent of the respondents do not know of such tax incentives,
while 22% of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them.
Figure 40
Support and funding:
Fifty eight percent of the respondents state that local authorities do not provide support
and funding to employers to encourage employment equity, while 5% of the respondents
state that such support and funding from local authorities are available. Fourteen percent
of the respondents do not know of such support and funding, while 23% of the respondents
said the question was not applicable to them.
Figure 41
Yes
4%
No
52%
Don't
know
28%
Not
applica
ble
16%
Local Incentives
0
100
Tax Incentives
0 20 40 60
Yes
No
Don't know
Not applicable
Support & Funding

53 | P a g e
Sixty five percent of the respondents state that there is no support and funding available
for business, while 8% of the respondents state that there is such support and funding
available for business. Twenty six percent of the respondents do not know of such
incentives, while 2% of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them.
Figure 42
Housing:
LGA
Percent
Not
Stipulated
1.626016
Agege 5.691057
Ajeromi 6.504065
Alimosho 2.439024
Amuwo
Odofin
4.878049
Apapa 4.065041
Badagry 6.504065
Eti-Osa 4.065041
Ikeja 5.691057
Ikorodu 8.943089
Island 5.691057
Kosofe 1.626016
Lekki Ibeju 5.691057
Mainland 6.504065
Mushin 2.439024
Ojo 5.691057
Oshodi 4.878049
0
100
Yes NoDon't knowNot applicable
Support & Funding
for Business

54 | P a g e
Somolu 4.878049
Surulere 5.691057
Total 100
Categories of Respondents:
Twenty four percent of the respondents were landlords, while 24% also were estate agents.
Eighteen percent of the respondents were residents, while 7% were builders and town planners
respectively. Six percent of the respondents were architects, while 5% were remand homes. Old
peoples’ Homes, Orphanages and Rehabilitation centers each constituted 2% of the respondents.
Figure 43
Are accessible homes, apartments, flats, shared units and boarding houses available for
persons with disabilities
Sixty seven percent of the respondents state that there are no accessible homes,
apartments, flats, shared units and boarding houses available for persons with disabilities,
while 12% of the respondents state that accessible homes are available.
Figure 44
Are easily accessible rehabilitation services, halfway-houses and shelter homes available
for persons with disabilities?
Fifty four percent of the respondents state that there are no easily accessible rehabilitation
services, halfway-houses and shelter homes for persons with disabilities, while 7% of the
0
10
20
30
Not…
Landlord
Rehabilit…
Estate…
Builders
Architect
Town…
Residents
Old…
Remand…
Orphana…
Respondent
0
100
Accessible Homes

55 | P a g e
respondents state that such accessible rehabilitation services, halfway-houses and shelter
homes are available.
Figure 45
Does LASG provide incentives to developers to meet building accessibility standards?
Fifty percent of the respondents state that LASG do not provide incentives to developers to
meet building accessibility standards, while 4% of the respondents state that such
incentives from LASG are available. Thirty three percent of the respondents do not know of
such incentives, while 13% of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them
or did not stipulate any response.
Figure 46
Is funding support for access refurbishment available?
Fifty one percent of the respondents state that funding support for access refurbishment
are not available, while 4% of the respondents state that such funding support are
available. Thirty one percent of the respondents do not know of such funding support,
while 13% of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them or did not
stipulate any response.
0 20 40 60
Not Stipulated
Accessible
shelters/rehabilitation…
Not
Stipulat
ed
2%
Yes
4%
No
50%
Don't
know
33%
Not
applicab
le
11%
Building Incentives

56 | P a g e
Figure 47
Is information regarding this funding easily available to persons with disabilities?
Fifty three percent of the respondents state that information regarding this funding are not
easily available to PWDs, while less than 1% of the respondents state that such information
is available. Twenty four percent of the respondents do not know of such funding support,
while 21% of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them or did not
stipulate any response
Figure 48
Is inclusive access building design information readily available?
Fifty percent of the respondents state that inclusive access building design information are
not easily available to PWDs, while 7% of the respondents state that such information is
available. Twenty eight percent of the respondents do not know of such inclusive access
building design information, while 15% of the respondents said the question was not
applicable to them or did not stipulate any response.
0
100
FundingSupport
Refurbishment
0 20 40 60
Not Stipulated
Information Funding for
refurbishment

57 | P a g e
Figure 49
Transportation:
LGA
Percent
Not
Stipulated
2.727273
Agege 6.363636
Ajeromi 5.454545
Alimosho 4.545455
Amuwo
Odofin
5.454545
Apapa 4.545455
Badagry 2.727273
Eti-Osa 6.363636
Ikeja 7.272727
Ikorodu 5.454545
Island 5.454545
Kosofe 5.454545
Mainland 5.454545
Mushin 2.727273
Ojo 2.727273
Oshodi 4.545455
Somolu 5.454545
Surulere 7.272727
Total 100
0 20 40 60
Not Stipulated
Inclusive Building
Design Availability

58 | P a g e
Accessibility of the following transportation services to PWDs-
BRT/LAGBUS
Fifty five percent of the respondents state that BRT/LAGBUS are not accessible for PWDS,
while 4% of the respondents state that the BRT/LAGBUS are accessible. Thirty five percent
of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them, while 7% of the
respondents do not know if the BRT/LAGBUS are accessible to PWDs, or did not stipulate
any response.
Figure 50
Mini-buses/vans
Sixty six percent of the respondents state that Mini-buses/vans are not accessible for
PWDS, while 7% of the respondents state that the Mini-buses/vans are accessible. Nineteen
percent of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them, while 7% of the
respondents do not know if the Mini-buses/vans are accessible to PWDs, or did not
stipulate any response.
Figure 51
Trains (inter-state)
Thirteen percent of the respondents state that the trains are not accessible for PWDS, while
less than 1% of the respondents state that the trains are accessible. Seventy three percent
respondents do not know if the trains are accessible to PWDs, or did not stipulate any
response.
0
100
Not StipulatedYes NoDon't knowNot applicable
BRT/LAGBUS Accessible
0
100
Minibuses/Vans
Accessible

59 | P a g e
Figure 52
Boats/ Ferries /Ships
Nine percent of the respondents state that the Boats/ Ferries /Ships are not accessible for
PWDS, while none of the respondents stated that Boats/ Ferries /Ships are accessible.
Seventy six percent of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them, while
14% of the respondents do not know if the Boats/ Ferries /Ships are accessible to PWDs, or
did not stipulate any response.
Figure 53
Airplanes (domestic)
Two percent of the respondents state that the Airplanes are not accessible for PWDS, while
none of the respondents stated that the Airplanes are accessible. Eighty eight percent of the
respondents said the question was not applicable to them, while 10% of the respondents
do not know if the Airplanes are accessible to PWDs, or did not stipulate any response.
Figure 54
0
100
Trains Accessible
0
50
100
Boats/Ferries Accessibe
0
100
Airplanes Accessible

60 | P a g e
Are the following locations easily accessible to PWDs?
Bus stops
Seventy three percent of the respondents state that the Bus stops are not accessible for
PWDS, while 15% of the respondents state that the Bus stops are accessible. Six percent of
the respondents said the question was not applicable to them, while 5% of the respondents
do not know if the Bus stops are accessible to PWDs, or did not stipulate any response.
Figure 55
Train stations
Fifteen percent of the respondents state that the train stations are not accessible for PWDS,
while none of the respondents stated that the train stations are accessible. Sixty nine
percent of the respondents said the question was not applicable to them, while 16% of the
respondents do not know if the train stations are accessible to PWDs, or did not stipulate
any response.
Figure 56
Seaports
Six percent of the respondents state that the Seaports are not accessible for PWDS, while
less than 1% of the respondents state that the Seaports are accessible. Seventy six percent
Not
Stipulate
d
4%
Yes
15%
No
73%
Don't
know
2%
Not
applicabl
e
6%
Bus Stop Accessible
0 50 100
Not Stipulated
Don't know
Train Stations
Accessible

61 | P a g e
respondents do not know if the Seaports are accessible to PWDs, or did not stipulate any
response.
Figure 57
Airports
Four percent of the respondents state that the Airports are not accessible for PWDS, while
none of the respondents stated that the Airports are accessible. Eighty Seven percent of the
respondents said the question was not applicable to them, while 9% of the respondents do
not know if the Airports are accessible to PWDs, or did not stipulate any response.
Figure 58
Is there any disability awareness training for drivers and conductors on the public
transport system?
Sixty eight percent of the respondents state that there is no disability awareness training
for drivers and conductors on the public transport system, while 23% of the respondents
state that such disability training are accessible. Four percent of the respondents said the
question was not applicable to them, while 6% of the respondents do not know if there is
any disability awareness training, or did not stipulate any response.
0 50 100
Not Stipulated
Seaports
Accessible
0 50 100
Not Stipulated
No
Don't know
Not applicable
Airports Accessible

62 | P a g e
Figure 59
Commercial Motorbikes (Okada):
Six percent of the respondents state that the commercial motorbikes are not accessible for
PWDS, while 2% of the respondents state that the commercial motorbikes are accessible.
Eighty five percent of the respondents said they do not know if the commercial motorbikes
are accessible to PWDs, while 7% of the respondents said the question was not applicable
to them or did not stipulate any response.
Figure 60
0 20 40 60 80
Not Stipulated
No
Not applicable
Disability Awareness
Training
4% 2%6%
85%
3%
Motorbicycle
Accessibility
Not Stipulated yes no
dont know not applicable

63 | P a g e
ANNEXES
FGD arrangements and participants
Tables, ZY table ….
List of survey tool development and field supervisors
List of Enumerators
List of survey supervisors

64 | P a g e
FOCUSED GROUP DISCUSSION
Citizens’ Assessment of the Position of Lagos State on Access and Integration of Persons with
Disabilities
Preamble:
1. Participants were selected based on their residence and/or place of work.
2. There are six major disability groups including blind, deaf, intelectual-disability, leprosy, physical-disability and the spinal cord
injured. However, only the blind, deaf and physical responded to the survey invitation
3. It was not possible to balance the number of participants per disability cluster and gender as sellection was based on available
respondents
FGD MEETING SCHEDULES
DATE SENATOR
IA
DISTRICT
LGA FGD
LOCATION
ENUMERATOR PARTICIPANTS
TUESDAY
11TH
SEPTEMBE
R, 2012
LAGOS
EAST
IKOROD
U
No. 6, Wale
Ajegoriogb
on STR, Off
Cash
Avenue,
Igbogbo
Taxy Park,
Mrs. Emanuella Akinola
Heroes Media
08027252709
heroes2media@gmail.com
(i) Kolawole Oni (blind)
(ii) Akib Sulaiman 08028984173 (blind)
(iii) Ojo Oluwole 08038609649 (physical)
(iv) Taiwo Oluwo 08027118785 (physical)

65 | P a g e
Sabo
Ikorodu,
Lagos
(v) Teresa Mathews 08023054831 (blind)
(vi) Adejuyigbe Daniel 07038576032 (deaf)
(vii) Tinubu Bunmi 08165963992 (interpriter)
(viii) Kudirat Amuda 08063191196 (blind
LAGOS
CENTRAL
SURULE
RE
Nigeria
Association
of the Blind
Secretariat,
No. 55
Akintan
STR,
Ojuelegba,
Lagos
Bisi Mekwuye JDPC,
jdpcarchlag@yahoo.co.uk,bisimek
wuye@yahoo.com,
08023287261;
(i) Adeola Aina, 08036285187,
adeola.aina@yahoo.com (blind)
(ii) Lukman Agbabiaka 08034344775 (deaf)
(iii) Tunde Muhammed (Captain, Team Lagos)
08035181860 (physical)
(iv) Barrister Lanre K. Adebayo
08085063911,08034381709
larrykambay@gmail.com (blind)
(v) Yekini Salau 08034754438 (physical)
(vi) Ejiro Okotie (NAB-Lagos office) (blind)
(vii) Iherobiem Ijeoma 08035682843 (physical)
(viii) Babatunde Abiodun 08054167584
(interpriter)
LAGOS
WEST
BADAGR
I
Badagri
Central
LGA
Secretariat,
Vivian Emesowum,
ify1vivian@yahoo.com,
08033871502
(i) Kenny Adams 08034805512 (blind)
(ii) kehinde Akowusola 08037383848,
08027173000 (deaf)

66 | P a g e
Badagri
Round
about.
(iii) Ayodele Olatubora 07030068653
(interpriter)
(iv) Anita Itebise 08130167709 (deaf)
(v) Juliana Temiyi 08038335287 (blind)
(vi) Funmilayo Adodemate 08062532916 (blind)
(vii) Kenhide Fayemi 08035559351 (blind)
WEDNESD
AY, 12TH
SEPTEMBE
R, 2012
LAGOS
EAST
KOSOFE Mr. Biggs
Fast Food,
Ikosi Road,
Ketu, Lagos
Emmanuella Akinola, Heroes
Media, heroes2media@gmail.com
08027252709
(i) Salami Lukman Abolore 08034968521
08023733774 (blind)
(ii) Efunbote Mayokunle 08056252227 (blind)
(Iii) Cajetan Duru, 07031001688,
cjtduru@yahoo.com (blind)
(iv) Isaac Adegbola 08030748290 08051987744
(blind)
(v) Amaka Ekeji (blind)
(vi) Taye Titus Oloye 08060428202 (deaf)
(vii) Bangbola Bukola 07088694481 (physical)
(viii) (Interpriter)
LAGOS
CENTRAL
ETI-OSA Church of
Assumptio
n,
Bisi Mekwuye JDPC,
jdpcarchlag@yahoo.co.uk,bisimek
wuye@yahoo.com,08023287261
(i) Ayola Efukoya, 08029449441,
ayokoya2009@gmail.com (blind)
(ii) Tunde Muhammed, 08033227353

67 | P a g e
JDPC Office,
Falomo,
Ikoyi,
Lagos.
davglad68@yahoo.com (blind)
(iii) Rita Boyo 08055417818
mayoboyo@yahoo.com (blind)
(iv) AbdulWahab Matepo 08027382429
(physical)
(v) Clement winful 08020523514 (blind)
(vi) Olatunde Jelili Raimi 08037951329 (deaf)
(vii) Oluchi Onoka 08064350232 (physical)
(viii) Anifowoshe Shola 08054545558
(Interpriter)
LAGOS
WEST
IKEJA SAVI Office,
No. 9,
Sadiku STR,
Off
Amaraolu
STR,
Agidingbi,
Ikeja, Lagos
Vitus Nwanafio, Accident Victims
Support Association (AVSA),
avsa_vict@yahoo.com
08033324794
(i) Angela Nebo Ifesinachi 08034373553,
08058317331 (physical)
(ii)Daredairo daredairo@hotmail.com
08062173614 (physical)
(iii) Afolabi Adebayo 08023711441
parc.africa@gmail.com (blind)
(iv) Folakemi Aje 08023815453 (physical)
(v) Teller Bukola 07026415088 (physical)
(vi) Bankole Tosin 08060664977 (physical)
(vii) Amuda Yusuf Ibrahim (Sports Sec.

68 | P a g e
JONAPWD-Lagos) 07034528542 (deaf)
(viii) Shodehinde Olubowale Olugbenga
07039811844 (interpriter)

69 | P a g e
 NOTES AND REFERENCES
Adebayo A.S. (2010); “Impact of Climate Change on the Disability Community; Need for Proactive and Inclusive Policy.” In Policy Brief (II) A
Sensitization and Information Material for Policy Stakeholders in Lagos, Prepared by Policy Advocacy Partnership on Climate Change in Lagos
State December, 2010
Adebayo A.S. (2010); “Concerns for People with Disabilities in Lagos State.” in Strengthening Voice, Transparency and Accountability in Lagos
State; The Imparative for Colaboration of the Legislature, the Media and Civil Society. Position Papers Prepared by Lagos State Civil Society
Partnership (LACSOP)
Ben Akabwueze, HON. Commissioner for Economic Planning and Budget (2011); Presentation at the Stakeholders Meeting on the 2012 Budget
Olufemi Bero Hall, State Secretariat, Alausa, Lagos, August, 2011.
Definitions of The Models of Disability" http://www.disabled-world.com/definitions/disability-models.php
Global Partnership for Disability and Development (GPDD) Report for OHCHR on Article 32 of the UNCRPD, www.gpdd-online.org/ - Cached
Olanrewaju A.A. (2010); “Mainstreaming Disability in the Millennium Development Goals (MDG); Towards 2015 and Beyond.” Paper presented
at the Workshop for Integrating PWDs into All Inclusive Society. At the Wives of Governors’ Forum, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria.
Social model of disability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability
Paul D. Wolfowwitz Disability and the Millennium Development Goals web.worldbank.org/.../EXTDISABILITY/0,,print:Y~isCURL:Y~contentMD...
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities - www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml -
WHO World report on disability, (2011); www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/en/index.html -
The first ever World report on disability, produced jointly by WHO and the World Bank, suggests that more than a billion people in the world
today experience disability.

CITIZENS ASSESSMENT ON INCLUSION AND ACCESS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES TO BASIC SERVICES IN LAGOS STATE

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (11)

Similar to CITIZENS ASSESSMENT ON INCLUSION AND ACCESS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES TO BASIC SERVICES IN LAGOS STATE

Similar to CITIZENS ASSESSMENT ON INCLUSION AND ACCESS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES TO BASIC SERVICES IN LAGOS STATE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

CITIZENS ASSESSMENT ON INCLUSION AND ACCESS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES TO BASIC SERVICES IN LAGOS STATE