Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Putting Children First: Session 1.4 Nora Groce - Reaching the hardest to reach [23-Oct-17]

83 views

Published on

Putting Children First: Identifying solutions and taking action to tackle poverty and inequality in Africa.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 23-25 October 2017

This three-day international conference aimed to engage policy makers, practitioners and researchers in identifying solutions for fighting child poverty and inequality in Africa, and in inspiring action towards change. The conference offered a platform for bridging divides across sectors, disciplines and policy, practice and research.

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Putting Children First: Session 1.4 Nora Groce - Reaching the hardest to reach [23-Oct-17]

  1. 1. The Hardest to Reach: Examples Based on work with Children with Disabilities Professor Nora Groce, PhD Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre, University College London Nora.groce@ucl.ac.uk @LCDIDC Putting Children First: October 23, 2017
  2. 2. Excluded Groups  Among vulnerable population – a group of particularly ‘at risk’ – poorer/ more vulnerable/  More likely to be excluded – harder to reach  Gender/ ethnicity/ rural verses urban/ refugee children CROSS-CUTTING – simplify rather than complicate Here I will ask – (using children with disabilities as an example)  What questions aren’t we asking  How can we better develop initiatives that have frameworks/models to be inclusive from the outset -
  3. 3. Children with Disabilities - Example of an ‘at risk’ population  UNICEF estimates 150 million children with disabilities worldwide  Significantly more likely to face multidimensional poverty through a causal pathway of  Social isolation for them and their families  Lack of access to health care and rehabilitative care (where needed)  Less likely to attend school - (with attendant benefits –i.e. nutrition programs/ vaccinations  Lack of preparation for employment  Lack of social protection benefits – or where available lack of adequate social benefits Intra-household distribution of resources
  4. 4. Bridging the Gap: Disability and Development in Four African Countries ESRC/DFID Funded Poverty Alleviation Grant  Researching interface between Disability and Development – (Health/ Education/ Livelihoods/Social Projection in 4 African countries – (Sierra Leone, Zambia, Uganda, Kenya)  Partners – 6 African Universities and 4 National Disabled Peoples Organizations (DPOs)  Research included policy analysis/ secondary data analysis, HH Survey (4800), qualitative (interview/focus groups)  Looked specifically at the Disability and Development Gap –  Hypothesis based on previous research that in situations of extreme poverty, economic status of people with disabilities may not be markedly different in poverty terms than non-disabled members of their household  Unless children and adults with disabilities are included in mainstream development efforts, however their situation remains the stationary while the lives of those around them improve – (School in village for example) RESULTS – thus far – Gap does exist – but findings are more NUANCED– which raises a series of questions: U.of Nairobi; Centre for Science and Technology; United Disabled Persons Kenya; Makerere University National Union of Disabled Persons of Uganda; Institute of Economic and Social Research, University of Zambia; Zambia Agency for Persons with Disabilities; University of Sierra Leone, Department of Sociology and Social Work; Sierra Leone Union of People with Disabilities; Stellenbosch University ESRC/DFID Funded Project - http://www.ucl.ac.uk/leonard-cheshire-research/research/active-research-programmes/esrc-bridging-the-gaped Poverty Alleviation Project -
  5. 5. What Questions are we not asking – particularly in relation to the most vulnerable groups of children ?  Law and policy important – but particularly for vulnerable children – is there funding/budgeting to ensure policy implementation –  How can we better mainstream issues related to at risk groups of children  Twin Track approach from disability may be worth considering  Compounded vulnerabilities – not just listing but how do they intersect – are they all equally important? Can we prioritize where to intervene?  Hearing the voices of children – ALL children – important – but how do we turn this information into action?  How can we better measure progress to make sure we’re going in the right direction – (For example: Washington Group on Disability Statistics: www.washingtongroup-disability.com) Conclusion: Evidence needed on nuances of most vulnerable - but in responding - keep it as simple and mainstreamed as possible
  6. 6. THANK YOU Professor Nora Groce, PhD Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre, University College London  Nora.groce@ucl.ac.uk @LCDIDC  www.ucl.ac.uk/leonard-Cheshire-research

×