Disability Inclusion Assessment - Yambio

A Report on Barriers and Facilitators in accessing food and livelihood

opportunities for persons with disabilities Yambio
September 2021
 Table of Contents

Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... 2

Acknowledgement .........................................................................................................3
Acronyms .......................................................................................................................3
Terminologies ................................................................................................................4
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................5
Objectives of Assessment ............................................................................................ 8
Overall objective of the assessment............................................................................. 8
Specific objectives........................................................................................................8
Expected Output of Assessment .................................................................................. 9
Methodology ..................................................................................................................9
Overview of Food security services provided ............................................................. 10
Demographics ............................................................................................................ 10
Findings of the Assessment ....................................................................................... 11
Gaps/Barriers ............................................................................................................. 11
Access to services ..................................................................................................... 11
Good practices, opportunities and entry points .......................................................... 17
Key Recommendations ............................................................................................... 19
Main barriers to address in the short term .................................................................. 19
Longer Term Recommendations ................................................................................ 20
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 22
Annex 01: Assessment tools ...................................................................................... 22
Annex 02 Pictures of assessment .............................................................................. 23

2
Acknowledgement

This report presents the findings of an assessment on access to World Food Programme (WFP)
and cooperating partners’ food assistance programmes (including through in kind and cash
modalities) by persons with disabilities and older persons in Yambio- Western Equatoria state
South Sudan. The assessment was carried out by Humanity & Inclusion (HI) during September
2021. HI is grateful for the support provided by WFP staff in Juba- Gender & Protection unit as
well as Yambio field office under the leadership of Rose Ejuru, who coordinated much of the field
work for this assessment. We would also like to thank WFP co-operating partners that participated
in this assessment- Rural Development Action Aid (RDAA), Star Trust Organization (STO), World
Vision International and Christian Medical Missions Board (CMMB). Special recognition goes to
the Director General- Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Gender child and social welfare as
well as RRC county coordinator. We would also like to thank organizations of persons with
disabilities in Yambio for their important inputs. We would like to express particular appreciation
for the invaluable input provided by communities in Yambio who took time out of their day to share
with us their experiences and perspectives. This assessment was led by Christina Wanjohi- HI
Inclusion Technical Specialist, in coordination with Ulrike Last who provided technical inputs, with
assistance from entire HI MEAL and Inclusion teams. HI teams in Juba and Yambio provided
important information and logistical support. The assessment was overseen by Deborah Siango-
HI Head of Programmes South Sudan.

Acronyms
AAP Accountability to Affected Populations

CMMB Christian Medical Missions Board

FDPs Food Distribution Points

FGDs Focus Group Discussions

FSL Food Security & Livelihoods

HI HI Humanity & Inclusion (new name for Handicap International)

iPCM Inclusive Project Cycle Management

KIIs Key-Informant Interviews

OPD Organization of persons with disabilities

RRC Refugee Rehabilitation Committee

RDAA Rural Development Action Aid

STO Star Trust Organization

WVI World Vision International

WFP World Food Programe

3
 Terminologies

Barriers: Barriers are factors that prevent a person from having full and equal access and
participation in society. For persons with disabilities, barriers limit access to and inclusion in
society. Barriers may be attitudinal, environmental or institutional (referenced from the IASC
guidelines on Inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian action).

Capacities: The combination of all the strengths, attributes and resources available within an
organization, a community, the society or at individual level to manage and reduce disaster risks
and strengthen resilience. Capacity may include infrastructure, institutions, human knowledge
and skills, and collective attributes such as social relationships, leadership and management
(adapted from the Humanitarian Inclusion Standards for Older People and People with
Disabilities/UNISDR)

Disability: Disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal
and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal
basis with others (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006). In
this report some of the disabling factors identified have been environmental barriers like distance,
attitudinal barriers like stigma and discrimination that prevent persons with functional limitations
from accessing services equally to others.

Enablers/facilitators are measures that remove barriers, or reduce their effects, and improve the
resilience or protection of persons with disabilities.

Impairment: A significant deviation or loss in body functioning or structure (World Health

Organization towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health, 2002).
Impairments may be either temporary or permanent, and people may have multiple impairments.
Impairments can be physical, sensory (visual, auditory, speech), intellectual,
mental/psychosocial. In some cases, impairments may be invisible, meaning that they are not
immediately apparent.

Inclusion: Inclusion means a rights-based approach to programming, aiming to ensure persons

with disabilities have equal access to basic services and have a voice in the development and
implementation of those services. At the same time, it requires that mainstream organization
make dedicated efforts to address and remove barriers.

Meaningful participation: Corresponds to the meaningful involvement of boys, girls, women and
men of different age groups (from children to older people), including people with different
disabilities within the humanitarian program cycle including in the design, implementation,
monitoring and evaluation of humanitarian actions or policies.

4
Executive Summary

This report presents finding of an assessment on food security and access to livelihood
opportunities for persons with disabilities in Western Equatoria State, Yambio. The assessment
used a mixed methodology approach of quantitative interviews with persons with disabilities and
persons without disabilities, and a qualitative survey involving focus groups discussions, key
informant interviews and key observation techniques.

The findings of these assessment show that women and girls with disability are more at risk of
food insecurity than any other persons due to multiple intersecting factors including physical
access barriers, negative attitudes and institutional barriers. Persons with multiple difficulties also
reported facing more challenges to access food than those with single impairments.

Another key finding is that persons with disabilities reported being less able to voice their concerns
in humanitarian programming. They noted that despite participation structures being available in
community, their participation is not meaningful. This was attributed to the fact that very little action
is taken on their views and concerns, and very little feedback is given to them on concerns raised.

There was a notable lack of disability disaggregated data, or data on protection risks and needs
faced by persons with disabilities to access food, thus highlighting a gap in addressing issues of
access to food and livelihood opportunities for persons with disabilities.

A number of barriers were identified during the assessment: -

• Attitudinal barriers
o Non-involvement in decision making processes - majority of the respondents with
disabilities - 57% - reported not being consulted in any decision-making processes
on food security and livelihood programmes and not being included as key
stakeholders to their own food security situation.
o Persons with disabilities were left out in the project management committees or
amongst community leaders’ meetings to disseminate information on food and
seed distribution exercises. They reported they felt left out as they are thought not
to be able to make any decisions related to food security or to perform any
agricultural activities.
• Institutional barriers
o Criteria for selection of beneficiaries are often too hard to be met by persons with
disabilities as they have faced long term exclusion and sometimes expulsion from
their communities, and denial of resources or opportunities for advancement. This
includes disqualification from projects that require people to have land ownership
already or pre-existing businesses/enterprises.
o No specific budget and resources are allocated to address disability specific
related protection risks, and no budget flexibility to accommodate and make
accessibility adjustments for more Inclusive practices.

5
 o Some of key informants interviewed noted that program staff had limited
knowledge and experience working with persons with disabilities and on disability
inclusion in a systemic manner, hence not able to be fully Inclusive.
As a result of this assessment some key recommendations have been made which can be used
to scale up Inclusive food security programming across different states in South Sudan as follows:
• There is need for adoption of inclusive data collection process by integration of the
Washington Group Sets of Questions in data collection tools. This should be combined
with more frequent qualitative assessments which collect specific data related to
heightened risks and specific needs to persons to inform adapted and Inclusive
programming. There is also need to integrate disability in existing identification, targeting
and monitoring tools and adapt existing process guidance tools. Having disability
disaggregated data is one of the pre-conditions needed for proper planning and budgeting
for persons with disability.

• There is need for involvement of persons with disabilities in decision making processes
and as part of key stakeholders to their own food security situation, including working with
Organizations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs).This can be achieved through ensuring
persons with disabilities are represented in the different decision making structures and
support them to meaningfully participate in these processes.

• There is need to adapt a twin track approach to food security that combines inclusive
mainstream programmes (food security programmes are designed and adapted to ensure
they include and are accessible to everyone) with targeted interventions based on specific
requirements for persons with disabilities needs (food security programmes accommodate
the individual requirements of persons with disabilities)1.This will go a long way in ensuring
that the environment including policies within which FSL programmes are delivered, are
disability sensitive while directly responding to the individual specific needs of persons
with disability.

• There is need for continued awareness sessions and dialogues for community leaders,
religious leaders, community mobilizers, frontline staff and communities as a whole on
disability Inclusion. This is aimed at reducing the stigma and discrimination associated
with the attitudinal barriers faced by persons with disability.

• There is need to strengthen the capacity and awareness of humanitarian partners and
frontline staff on disability inclusive programming within all stages of the project cycle.
There is also a need to support them to adapt methodologies and environment so as to
ensure access to food, livelihood opportunities and other humanitarian services for
persons with disabilities

IASC Guidelines on Inclusion of Persons with disabilities in Humanitarian Action, July 2019

6
Context
Globally, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was adopted in
2006 and currently has 177 ratifications (South Sudan has not yet ratified this convention). Its
adoption marked a shift from viewing persons with disabilities as objects of charity, medical
treatment and social protection, to subjects with rights. The CRPD specifies ways in which
persons with disabilities can enjoy equal access to all fundamental rights and freedoms set out in
other instruments. Article 3 sets out general principles, which apply to all areas of WFP’s work.
Provisions of particular relevance to food assistance include: Article 9: “take appropriate
measures to ensure persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical
environment, to transportation, to information and communications and to other facilities.
UNCRPD principles also call on respect for inherent dignity, autonomy and independence; non-
discrimination; full and effective participation and inclusion; respect for difference; equality of
opportunity; accessibility; equality between men and women; respect for the evolving capacities
of children with disabilities. These measures, which shall include the identification and elimination
of barriers and obstacles to accessibility. Key to humanitarian situations is Article 11 which says
that humanitarian actors should take “all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety
of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian
emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters” and Article 28: “recognize the right of
persons with disabilities to an adequate standard of living for themselves and their families,
including adequate food, clothing and housing”

The Charter on Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action (‘the Charter’) was
launched at the World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul in 2016 and has been endorsed by over
100 states, regional bodies, UN Agencies (including WFP) and other international and non-
government organizations, including organizations of persons with disabilities. The charter sets
out commitments of signatories to make humanitarian action inclusive of persons with disabilities,
to meet their essential needs and promote the protection, safety and respect for the dignity of
persons with disabilities in humanitarian emergencies. The Charter recognizes the barriers
persons with disabilities face to accessing humanitarian assistance and sets out specific
commitments related to access to assistance; collection of data disaggregated by disability;
sensitization of humanitarian staff; and participation by persons with disabilities in programming
decisions.

Statistics or comprehensive information on the number and situation of people with disabilities in
South Sudan is lacking. However, most estimates suggest that it is likely to be as high as the
global estimate of 15%1 or even higher due to the protracted crisis situation. In South Sudan,
persons with disabilities especially women and their family members are facing significant
environmental, physical and institutional barriers in timely and meaningful access to food security
and to secure an income to meet daily expenditure and reduce dependency on humanitarian aid,
family and kinship structures for basic needs.

1
https://fscluster.org/sites/default/files/documents/fslc_-ssd-hno_2021.pdf

7
Annex 02 Pictures of assessment
8
Acting within the various frameworks, WFP partnered with HI to improve the access of persons
with disabilities and other vulnerable populations to improved food security and to build their
resilience to mitigate shocks. The project was launched at the end of August 2021 in Yambio and
was welcomed with a lot of enthusiasm especially from the union of persons with disability and
the state authorities. Specifically, the project has 4 objectives;
 Increase capacity and awareness raising to WFP teams, Food Security stakeholders,
partners and community members on Disability Mainstreaming & Inclusive Project Cycle
Management (iPCM), Inclusive cash programming, disability data collection in FS
programming, inclusive FS to mitigate current vulnerability to food insecurity and reduce
barriers and exclusion of persons with disabilities
 Increase capacity of Organizations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) and advocacy
activities to foster support for implementation of disability inclusive policies, services and
assistance related to food security and livelihoods at local & national-levels.
 Increase community awareness on disability
 Collection and documentation of good practices on disability and Inclusion in food security.

To enhance technical support and capacity development on inclusive humanitarian action and
with an extra focus on food security and livelihoods programming, HI partnered with World Food
Programme (WFP) in Yambio through an initial gaps assessment and analysis to inform practical
interventions to promote Inclusive humanitarian action thereafter. This assessment accompanied
HI and partners to identify gaps and opportunities, define and analyse priorities, necessary
resources and method of capacity development and technical support and thus feed into the
project’s strategy, tools development, partner’s support plans etc.

The technical support for inclusion is a fully collaborative approach of HI in order to reinforce
inclusive practices in responses, build on available resources and reinforce the capacities of
humanitarian stakeholders to better include the most vulnerable at risk of exclusion and cover
their needs. The technical support is provided to actors who commit to enhance their level of
inclusion within the organizations practices and interventions as WFP has done.

Objectives of Assessment

Overall objective of the assessment

HI aimed to assess the current level of disability inclusive service provision of WFP and
cooperating partners at program and service level as well as identify good practices and
resources to build on, identify challenges experienced/expected and priorities for support.

Specific objectives
The Specific Objectives were to Identify;
• Barriers hindering persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups from accessing
food and livelihood opportunities
• Capacities of staff at different levels of the organization to ensure non-discriminative
service provision according to the organization’s ambition, program and policies
• Explore potential entry points, resources and facilitating factors to enhance the
engagements of WFP and their cooperating partners in Western Equatoria State Yambio.
• To define methods and modality of capacity development and technical support.

9
Expected Output of Assessment
- Assessment report
- Action plan to enhance inclusive food security and livelihood interventions for WFP and
partners in Yambio Western Equatoria State
- Follow up (Monitoring and evaluation) plan to assess the level of implementation of action
plans

Methodology

The assessment was conducted and coordinated by HI- South Sudan Inclusion team led by the
Inclusion Technical Specialists in collaboration with the MEAL team. The assessment combined
both qualitative and quantitative data collection methodologies with the use of the Washington
Group Short set questions to enable data disaggregation by disability. The simple random
sampling method was used for quantitative data collection. The assessment focused on
vulnerable persons with & without disability. The target sample was 100 persons at the targeted
location. Data was also collected from key strategic project staff, MEAL staff as well as within the
community at the service delivery level and directly with persons with disabilities. Information was
collected on WFP partners’ food security programming activities, current level of inclusion
mainstreaming, and the challenges and priorities in order to commit to inclusive humanitarian
service provision. The methodology specifically included the following approaches:

• Quantitative approach:
Household surveys were conducted to gather information on barriers and enablers to
access services related to food security. This data was collected through door-to-door
interviews and recorded on smartphones/tablets. A total of eighty-four (84) consenting
individuals were interviewed during the household survey (42 Female, 42 Male and 43 (18
Male & 25 Female) were persons with disabilities).
• Qualitative approach:
The assessment conducted Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), Key-Informant Interviews
(KIIs) and observation while ensuring safety for all participants to compliment the
quantitative data. In total, 6 Focus Group Discussions including persons with and without
disabilities, 8 key informant interviews with service providers from WFP, World Vision
International, Star Trust Organization (STO), Christian Medical Missions Board (CMMB)
and Rural Development Action Aid (RDAA), Director General- Ministry of Agriculture,
Director General- Ministry of Gender child and social welfare, RRC county coordinator.
Other data collection methods included case studies with persons with disabilities, a
participatory workshop with partner’s staffs in Yambio, Staff capacity assessments,
Literature, Document and policy review of partners’ documents.

All collected data was systematically recorded, analysed and reported to the partner for validation
through a presentation of findings meeting held on 26th October 2021 and attended by WFP

10
Cooperating Partner staff, State Ministry of Agriculture team and representatives from the Union
of Persons with disabilities Yambio.

Overview of Food security services provided

The five organizations WFP, CMMB, RDAA, STO, and WVI conduct activities in various sectors
mainly Protection, Health, Food Security & Livelihood. The focus for this assessment was on food
security, nutrition and livelihood programmes majorly supported by WFP. These include: Food
For Asset (FFA), cash and voucher assistance CVA, Small agriculture market support (SAMS –
for local purchase), general food distribution during lean season, school feeding program, nutrition
programmes including capacity building for local organizations, economic empowerment and skill
training programmes, farming, animal raising & sustainable agriculture.

Demographics
The assessment took place in Western Equatoria State in the payams of Bazungua, Gangura,
Rirangu and Yambio. Among the respondents interviewed, 75% were the head of household while
25% were representatives of the head of household since the head was not present at home
during the survey. In terms of gender disaggregation, the number of respondents was equal for
both males and females i.e. 50%. Regarding, age 26% of the respondents were 60 years and
above, 70% were between 18 to 59 years of age and 4% were below 18. In relation to disability,
49% of respondents reported functional difficulties, seeing and walking difficulties are the most
prevalent i.e. 15% had difficulty in walking or climbing, 22% had multiple functional difficulties, 7%
had difficulty in seeing, 5% had difficulties in remembering or concentrating and 2% had difficulties
in hearing. In comparison, more males interviewed had functional difficulties than females.

11
 Findings of the Assessment

Gaps/Barriers
In relation to the first objective of the assessment of identifying the type of barriers that hinder
persons with disabilities from accessing food and livelihood opportunities, the following were
identified;

Access to services
• 64% of persons with disabilities reported that they were unable to access basic services
and attributed it to mainly lack of information and physical barriers.
• 49% of respondents reported that they do not have equal access to services. Feedback
from FGDs showed that more female respondents than male reported that they do not
have equal access to services.
• 10% of persons with disabilities perceive access to services being unsafe and 20%
reported incidents of past verbal and physical violence as they attempted to access
services.
• Others cited corruption, discrimination from community leaders and lack of access to
services location.

Key barriers and protection concerns accessing General Food Distribution (GFD):

The main modality of food distribution is through general food distribution at distribution points.

• Persons with seeing and mobility difficulties reported being targeted by thieves after they
receive their food.
“Sometimes your food is stolen from you right at the distribution point…and when you ask
everyone says they have not seen it...” Explains a respondent with visual impairment.

The persons with disabilities also pointed out exploitation by the community members who
accompany them to access the GFD centres. It was stated that on many occasions,

“It’s always better to get someone who can help you but once the food is received, it has
to be shared equally with them, so we end up with less food due to this disability” a 70
year old respondent with physical disability.

12
13
 • the food rations are shared with the community members who accompany them as a
mode of payment.
• It was reported that sometimes the community members and community leaders
discriminate different groups of people such as persons with psychosocial disabilities.
Similarly, decision making is perceived as a man’s role and cash receiving is for men,
and women are seen as only supposed to collect food but not cash. Women with no
husbands are not usually selected during community based participatory process as
they are considered useless hence sometimes left out and not enrolled to participate.

• Biometric registration required for food was viewed as additional burden on persons with
disabilities especially those with mobility difficulties. This was especially for those who
are bedridden hence cannot move to GFD centers. Secondly, the eyelid registration has
locked out some people with visual impairment. It was stated that even the staff did not
know how to proceed with registration for a person with visual impairment hence
excluding them out of the registration exercise.
The table below summarised the main barriers to accessing basic services (% of respondents with disability)

The category of other barriers included lack of mobility devices and non-availability of needed
services such as functional rehabilitation.

When asked, what could be done to improve safety when accessing services, respondents gave
the following feedback: -

• 37% said one thing would be to clarify to them where to report protection incidents or
human rights violations.
• 15% requested for the service hours to change.
• 12% said that the location of service should be changed.
• 8% felt safe hence no need for adjustments,

• 48% had no changes in mind

• 12% said other. Those who said other cited support for transport to get to the service
delivery points, provision of mobility devices and clearer and more transparent registration
and follow-up processes.
14
 Access to information & Complaint and Feedback mechanisms

In order to ascertain how WFP and partners communicated to the community, the assessment
inquired methods of information sharing and the following were mentioned; through community
leaders including church leaders and the Project Management Committees, Feedback
mechanisms (It was reported that each location has a feedback mechanism team) Other
communication channels were government officials such as members of RRC as well as notice
boards, posters and radios especially in Mvolo.

Most respondents interviewed reported lack of access to information. Hence, they are unaware
of the available food and livelihood opportunities and are not engaged in consultative
mechanisms, or needs assessments. The biggest challenge in accessing information as
mentioned was distance to information centres and lack of economic resources to reach the
centres where information is shared from.

Regarding access to information, beneficiaries said they get information mainly through public
announcements and through the local chiefs. Most persons with disability and the older persons
preferred to receive information from the chiefs and church leaders, they found them the most
trustworthy source of information. Other sources of information were inaccessible for them. During
FGDs, persons with disabilities reiterated that they mostly report complaints and give feedback
through community leaders even if they don’t always get a response to their complaints or
feedback.

Respondents also reported difficulties in accessing information due to difficulties in understanding

the spoken and written language used to pass the information.

15
 • Language spoken-- 100% respondents speak Zande, 41% indicated they spoke Arabic
while 14% spoke English. More males than females spoke both English and Arabic.
• Reading and writing, 71% said they do not know how to read or write, 23% said they know
how to read and write and 6% they only read.
• For persons with hearing impairments, there is no provision made for sign-language
interpretation when accessing services hence they reported barriers accessing
information and support services and other basic needs and services.
• Nearly half of the respondents- 49% reported being aware of the complaint and
feedback mechanism instituted by WFP and partners. However, a significant number-
53% reported not utilizing the complaints and feedback. 22% of respondents reported that
they do not know how to use the complaint feedback mechanism.

When asked whether they felt their community feedback and complaint are taken into account,
62% said never/not at all, 35% said sometimes, 2% said they are taken serious always and 1%
yes, most of the times. Both males and females felt that they are not taken into account.

Even if we air out our views, nothing is done about that- we as people with disability have been
complaining about the mistreatment we get in the communities, it’s the same things year in year
out…what have you done? Stated one 6year old person with physical disability

16
Involvement in decision making

In terms of Involvement in the decision-making process regarding services delivered in the

community, 57% of respondents said they are never/not at all consulted, 23% they are sometimes
involved, 12% said they are always involved and 8% reported that they are most of the times
involved in decision making. The majority of the women and persons with disabilities reported
never being consulted.
“We never know what’s happening in this community… we just see them as when people come to
the communities to carry out activities” explained a female person with disability

Staff Capacities

Key informants from the partners interviewed noted that program staff had limited knowledge and
experience working with persons with disabilities and on disability inclusion in a systemic manner.
They also mentioned lacking access to technical or financial resources to address identified
barriers in their programs and services and would want to have more knowledge and skills on
ways to include persons with disabilities in programming (recognising that they have been
neglected and excluded before) and to have a better understanding on how to engage/support
persons with disabilities.

Similarly, the assessment showed that from amongst the 5 organizations, staff had willingness
and positive attitude towards promoting disability inclusion but that disability and equality trainings
were in fact not systematically integrated into their policies. This signals that perhaps disability
awareness is not as widespread across all levels of the organizations as may be perceived and
that there is need to better underpin efforts to promote disability awareness within organizations
with their training modules and within their institutionalized policies

Findings also showed that the Monitoring and Evaluation teams are not collecting disability
disaggregated data for their programmes or data on risks and needs of persons with disabilities
in accessing food and nutrition services. For those who were collecting disability disaggregated
data i.e. the Nutrition centers, the methodology of collecting that data was through use of binary
questions e.g. Do you have a disability Yes/No? No partner was using the recommended
Washington Group Questions to collect data. Similarly, it was noted that MEAL teams did not
consult persons with disabilities during MEAL processes and did not know how to meaningfully
engage persons with different types of disabilities.

The assessment revealed that there is no budget for reasonable accommodation and accessibility
works at the service delivery points within the 5 organizations interviewed. It’s highly
recommended that such a budget line is factored in during the planning process in future to enable
adaptations for persons with different specific needs.

The HR teams are not yet trained on employment of persons with different types of disabilities
and how to ensure they can access recruitment advertisements and participate equally in the

17
Figure 1: Participatory workshop with
partners and stakeholders

18
recruitment process. It should be noted that lack of information on how to accommodate persons
with disabilities is one of the leading causes of exclusion. The assessment showed that there is
no specific expertise or training conducted for making adaptations for people with disabilities if
employed within the organizations. This means the staff are unaware of the practical steps they
can take to ensure that fellow staff with disabilities can be accommodated in the workplace. The
IT and communication section also needs adaptation to ensure persons with visual and hearing
impairments can equally participate and work. This includes among others, provision for braille
materials, software and sign language interpretation

Results from Observations, FGDs and KII’s

Observation, FGDs and KII techniques were also employed to collect data to supplement the
other sources of data. These were conducted in three different locations for three different
partners i.e. in Makpandu refugee camp, in Riimenze and Yambio state hospital respectively. The
observation teams included persons with disabilities from Yambio Union of persons with
disabilities.

The following were noted during this exercise;

• Physical barriers
• People with and without disabilities all line up together, there is a lot of pushing in
the lines that makes it difficult for persons with disabilities, and the older persons
to access food or nutrition services.
• At two of the distribution sites, the ground was not even, scattered with a lot of
stones among other obstacles that makes movement for the persons with disability
especially those with physical and visual difficulties very problematic when using
their assistive mobility devices
• Communication barrier
• Limited awareness by persons with disabilities of the programs implemented by
WFP and partners because of communication barriers and lack of empowerment
& capacity development opportunities. i.e. communication not done in multiple
formats hence some groups miss out on communication, or sometimes information
sharing is centralized in distant places which are not easily accessible for all.
• Partners also reported that sometimes the distribution points are too far when
conducting outreach services. – One partner shared an experience where they had
to go drop 30kms away and may not always have the resources to do so.
• Attitudinal barriers
• Limited understanding on the rights of persons with disabilities either by family
members or program implementers and community leaders and focal persons.
• Some groups of persons with disabilities are more discriminated compared to other
persons without disabilities for example persons with psychosocial disabilities
• Persons with disabilities are only prioritized and served first unless they present
some illness/medical forms even if they explained different challenges. This points
to the perception of disability as a medical condition as opposed the social and
multi-dimensional aspects of disability.

19
 • Institutional barriers
• There was an attempt by staff to identify persons with disabilities to enable them
access services faster but it was not systematic and was dependent on few staff
to identify. The identification process was similarly inadequate as it relied on
observation yet that some disabilities are not visible.
• In Riimenze, it was observed that the distribution started on time unlike the other
two locations, where distribution started in the afternoon despite people
assembling since morning. The delayed distribution was reported as a challenge
for women with disabilities who then take longer to get home and are exposed to
violence along the way including rape.
• Seed distribution was done and the beneficiaries reported that they received good
quality food and seeds but not tools and they requested for provision of agricultural
tools as well, tools adapted to their specific needs for those who have different
specific needs e.g. those with physical disabilities.
• Most data available is disaggregated by gender but not by disability and partners
do not use Washington Group Sets of Questions in data collection.
• Limited institutional resources, efforts and technical know-how to include persons
with disabilities in their programming for partners and stakeholders.
• Non-existence of organizations of persons with disabilities in some parts of
Western Equatoria State or lack of enough capacity of those organizations where
they exist on issues of food security and livelihoods.
• Lack of adaptation of activities and services for people with disabilities.

Good practices, opportunities and entry points

The assessment also aimed at identifying some of the good practices, opportunities as well as
entry points for disability inclusive programming.

Good Practices

• Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in the Food for Assets (FFA) program:
o Families with a person with disabilities are prioritised. Where a person with
disability is not able to work one member of their family is proposed by them, to
work on their behalf. This means that the person with disability makes the
decision and proposes who is to work on their behalf.

• Trainings: Food monitors are trained on equality and non-discrimination. They are
encouraged to prioritize vulnerable groups - they observe from the line and identify people
that need to be served first. They also organize ‘do fast’ queues during general food
distribution for certain beneficiaries so as to prioritize them to enable them get enough time
to return home. In the camps, UNHCR has personal assistants who also support persons
with disabilities and the elderly to access their food.

• Information Sharing: Help desks and toll-free hotlines have been provided for feedback
sharing by beneficiaries. Each GFD site has a help desk. Information about hotline is
passed through the help desk and banners. Persons with disabilities who can physically
access the GFD sites are able to use the help desks

20
 • Pre-distribution meetings are held with community leaders to inform them about distribution
plans (dates, place, etc.) for them to pass information to the rest of the community. FGDs
findings revealed that church leaders and community leaders are the most preferred channel
for information sharing by persons with disabilities. It is however good to note that FGDs and
Informant interviews with persons with disabilities highlighted some people still left out of com
communication by community leaders (persons with psychosocial disabilities)

• It was noted amongst some of the partners that during Post distribution monitoring, partners
ask if beneficiaries felt discriminated, safe, mistreated, etc. (only if it is one of the indicators).
They make changes/adjustments based on this where possible.

• Acting on feedback shared - Persons with disabilities in Makpandu camp complained about
not being able to reach the distribution site due to mobility difficulties, now UNHCR has a
specific person to takes the rations to the person’s house.

• Internally some of the partners have integrated programs for persons with disabilities into their
mainstream programmes even if they have no specific adaptations in place when needed
- One of the organizations had one group of farmers comprised of People with Disabilities
in the IO controlled area who had expressed interest to farm and had been issued with
farm inputs – (unfortunately it didn’t last until end of the season due to insecurity). Also
there are 2 farmers with visual impairments who are able to farm and produce food for
themselves and their families and have been integrated into the agricultural programmes.

-One of the cooperating partners who also provides health services, has integrated their
programming to addressing specific needs for persons with disabilities for various other services
beyond the nutrition programme funded by WFP i.e.

o Assessment and Issuance of mobility assistive devices (e.g. wheelchairs and eye
glasses)
o Children with disabilities are considered more vulnerable and given specific
attention during nutrition support
o Community volunteers are trained on referral for persons with disabilities. -
Community volunteers do home visits and refer children who need assistance to
the facilities.

o Psychosocial support is provided for carers of persons with disabilities

Opportunities and entry points

• Partner trainings
o WFP conducts quarterly trainings with partners - These trainings are planned with
partners of each activity (sub-sector) one training module on disability and
Inclusion can be included into these trainings to enable staff to be more aware or
and a review of the other modules to ensure they are also disability Inclusive.
Discrimination and stigma is already covered in some trainings and capacity development
activities, these can be enhanced as well as covering vulnerability factors faced by women and
children with disabilities and others at heightened

21
 o risks and how barriers and risks can be identified & removed, as well as how to
improve targeting and inclusive accountability and information sharing.
• Monitoring evaluation and learning
o 2 types of monitoring are conducted by WFP and partners i.e. monthly for activity
progress (through KIIs, chosen by the community randomly, no specific target of
how many men/women/youth with and without disabilities,) and post-distribution
monitoring (about 2 months after distribution, through KII and FGDs, with specific
targets of men/women/youth,) – these could be an opportunity to track and monitor
Inclusion of persons with disabilities through purposive sampling and directly
engaging with them and getting feedback from them to contribute and enhance
disability inclusive programming

• Coordination and partnerships

o WFP and cooperating partners have good interaction with local NGOs in Western
Equatoria State.
o There is a willingness of stakeholders to work together to enhance inclusion of all
persons and especially persons with disabilities in accessing food. i.e. Ministry of
Agriculture, Ministry of Gender, WFP and cooperating partners and
representatives from the Union of persons with disabilities.
o WFP and partners have a good relationship with the State Ministry of Agriculture
and can enhance outreach work through the ministry’s extension workers. The
extension workers can also support awareness raising to reach wider
communities.
o Existing coordination group formed by State Ministry of Gender, Child and Social
welfare to coordinate issues and support for persons with disabilities – this working
group can be an avenue to enhance coordination amongst different actors in
Western Equatoria State

Key Recommendations

Main barriers to address in the short term

Through the study and during validation workshop, WFP, CPs, members of OPDs and HI jointly
identified and agreed on barriers that need to be addressed in the short run. The following were
highlighted as the main priorities during the project period and beyond.
Staff training Physical accessibility

• HI to provide sensitization of staff across • WFP & CPs with support from HI to re- assess
all programmes on non-discrimination, partners activities to identify the level of
disability inclusion, and reducing accessibility to persons with disabilities and
protection risks and on disability-inclusive provide direct advice/guidance on removal of
service delivery for food and nutrition identified barriers.
programmes and for livelihoods • One on one feedback meetings between HI,
programmes. representatives from the Union of persons with
• The training to focus on inclusive disabilities in Yambio and each partner to
communication, universal accessibility and develop concrete actions and way forward
reasonable accommodation which can towards reducing barriers for persons with
then be translated into adapting activities disabilities and enhancing existing good
and services to the specific needs of practices on inclusive humanitarian action for
people with different impairments. food security for persons with disabilities.

22
• Identification and training of disability focal Beneficiary Feedback
persons in WFP and CPs in Yambio for • WFP, CPs to evaluate their complaint
monitoring and tracking on inclusive feedback mechanisms and information
practices. This has been identified as a sharing platforms to enable them be more
good practice and is sustainable for inclusive and accessible for all to use. This
practical actions and change within the was highlighted as a key important area to
organization and can also be scaled up in enhance accountability to affected
other regions where WFP is operating. populations which is a key requirement for
WFP and partners.

HI to support/guide partners to conduct

• beneficiary feedback meetings which
include men women with disabilities and
provide reasonable accommodation. This
will enable partners to get feedback from
persons with disabilities in a dignified
manner.

Coordination
• Revamping and Strengthening the Western Capacity Building & Technical Support
Equatoria Inclusion working group and • Integrate disability inclusion as a topic, and
increasing participation to include food include persons with disabilities from the
security and livelihood actors. affected community in learning
opportunities during annual and bi annual
• Identify disability inclusion focal persons trainings. This was identified as a key entry
within the different partner organizations. point as it was an already existing platform
During emergencies, they should have a which could allow for frontline staff to have
focal person on disability to do follow up for awareness and training on inclusion
persons with disabilities, to prevent them techniques.
being left out of emergency food •
distribution. • Technical one on one support with M&E
Teams – to check on data collection, data
• WFP and partners to partner directly with disaggregation by age gender and also by
persons with disabilities for community disability, and disability Inclusion tracking
events and community awareness raising within their indicators
on stigma and discrimination with persons •
with disabilities as self-advocates. This can • Joint trainings for persons with disabilities
be further scaled up in other regions where on food security and livelihood components
WFP and CPs are operating. to enable them to participate to enhance
manner. their food security and be autonomous and
independent.

Longer Term Recommendations

Data collection: There is need for adoption of inclusive data collection process by using inclusive
language and the integration of the Washington Group Sets of Questions in data collection tools.

Additionally, Scaling up and conducting regular barriers and facilitators assessments integrated
in existing information collection, or standalone, and follow-up interventions across different
regions where WFP is working within South Sudan to enhance removal of barriers for persons
with disabilities in accessing food and livelihood opportunities.
Monitoring mechanisms:Monitoring mechanisms should be put in place to monitor the
implementation of inclusive standards across WFP and partners programmes including;

23
 o Firstly, ensuring that assessments, monitoring and evaluation include disability as
an evaluation criterion and in all aspects of project cycle.
o Secondly, mmodification of monitoring tools to better capture disability data.
o Thirdly, Include indicators to track inclusion – i.e. within the different stages of the
project cycle including participation in needs assessment, planning implementation
and targeting, monitoring and evaluation process and feedback sharing.
Consultation: There is need for more intentional processes to directly consult people with
disabilities during each phase of the program cycle – Wider range inclusion of persons with
disabilities in community leadership structures and in humanitarian needs assessments, project
design, planning, monitoring and evaluation
Awareness raising: There is need for creating additional awareness on the rights of persons
with disabilities backed by policies and institutional procedure both at organizational levels and at
community levels and to policy makers level at WES.
Inclusive Strategy: Adopting clear strategy for mainstreaming in our various programs including
programming that is adapted to suit specific needs. These include; Standard SOP to be applied
across WFP emergency food security programmes; increased outreach services, adapting work
tools and work environment,eensuring that construction works for GFD centers, nutrition centers
and other service delivery points adhere to the international accessibility standards to ensure
access for all. Consult guidelines that promote inclusive humanitarian action – IASC guidelines
now available
Staff capacity building on disability inclusion: Humanitarian staff should be trained and
sensitized on disability and accessibility. Appointing disability focal persons in each organization
is also essential as well as trainings and follow up support for frontline staff on disability Inclusion
strategies in their work.
Coordination: Creation of strong linkages between WFP, partners and staff with organizations
of persons with disabilities as key stakeholders in increasing access to food and livelihoods for
persons with disabilities. Also to provide people with disabilities with messages and tools to
address situations of discrimination in access to food and livelihood opportunities.Strengthening
the community watch groups and referral pathways to promote holistic support for persons with
disabilities and ensuring inclusive community-based protection mechanisms.
Accountability to affected population: Strengthening the complaint feedback mechanisms and
making it accessible for all, and ensuring all people are aware and able to use it.
Resource allocation : There is need for more equitable allocation of resources taking into
consideration the different ways disasters affect people. This includes consideration and
budgeting for mobility devices/ other assistive devices in programs to increase autonomy of
persons with disabilities to access food and livelihood opportunities directly.
Promote meaningful participation- Engage communities in all phases of the project cycle in a
meaningful way, ensuring that input and feedback from communities are acted upon.
Removing barriers for Persons with Disabilities - During discussions in all data collection
processes, it was clear that persons with disabilities and vulnerable groups were unable to identify
real needs, priorities and ongoing interventions. It is therefore prudent to identify all existing

24
barriers (attitudinal, physical and institutional) to Conclusion
access humanitarian assistance and services HI applauds WFP for supporting this initiative to
that exist in the target locations. improve access to food security and livelihood
Empowerment and ownership- Provides opportunities for some of the most marginalized
communities the opportunity to engage in the individuals and households specifically persons
project in various capacities e.g., project with disability. This assessment has provided an
implementing committees, monitoring important opportunity for learning and for initiating
committees etc. - with clear roles to enable them actions towards strengthening inclusion and
an opportunity to develop, enhance ownership protection in FSL programming for persons with
and offer exit road map. disability.WFP and CP staff generally acknowledge
Employment Services/Agencies need to create the need for more support to enable their staff
opportunities like apprenticeship, mentoring, program and deliver disability inclusive
internship and skill development for the skilled interventions. Similarly the OPDs expressed
People with Disabilities to contribute positively. willingness to work with partners and bridge the
Humanitarian actors need to broaden gap of under representation in different stages of
information and communication services and the project cycle .HI welcomes any future
encourage enterprises such as, Interventions for opportunities to collaborate with WFP to further the
Income Generating Activities (IGA) and small work initiated through this assessment In Yambio
businesses to benefit the unemployed People and other parts of South Sudan
with Disabilities to enhance self-reliance and
resilience.
Promote interventions that seek to strengthen
individualize inclusive livelihood support to
persons with disabilities through the restoring of
socio-economic capacities and development
plan.

Annex 01: Assessment tools

observation KII for Yambio Initial Interest II-KII Guide_Service FGD_Service USERS
checklist-FSA.pdf leaders .pdf Assessment - adapted.pdf
Providers (field).pdf .pdf

25
26