Development Policy and Evaluations in the Maze of Terms Persons with disabilities / People with reduced ability to work / Impaired persons in development policy and evaluations - Orsolya Prókai–Zita Éva Nagy Revita Foundation (2. Lot)

Framework There were no evaluations horizontally directed to (the) target group Related evaluations: „Problem-focused” (physical and complex obstacle clearing) : - Evaluation of health care developments - Evaluation of tourism developments with respect to territorial cohesion - Evaluation of NSRF developments aimed at providing the post accessibility of public buildings „Target group-focused": - Evaluation of Measures Targeting Social Inclusion (Basic rehabilitation for visually impaired people; representation of persons with disabilities in development projects) - Evaluation of Measures Targeting the Improvement of Employment (People with reduced ability to work, NGOS )

Conceptual base of „target group- focused development policy and evaluation There’s still much confusion (concepts used in legal practice, development policy practice, policy practice): Terminology varies according to fields of specialization Variation appears in three fields: -Direction of classification (self-assessment, „unofficial” classification of the environment, „official” classification) -Determination of the level of disadvantage (focus on status or on functional and/or social disadvantages deriving from the status) -Responsibility of the individual and society in creating and managing the situation

Conceptual base of „target group- focused development policy and evaluation Scientific thinking on disabilities (disability studies), as well as international reasoning and human rights approach moves in the direction of: Self-assessment Particular importance of societal disadvantages Emphasizing society’s responsibility But to what extent has social thinking (both on individual and institutional level) and self-assessment advanced?

Conceptual base of „target group- focused development policy and evaluation Examples Persons with disabilities: XCII. Law of 2007 „ Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others ” Public opinion refers to something different… People with reduced ability to work: Central Statistical Office, labor force survey 2011 – „self-assessment”: „Whose presence in the labor market is to some extent adversely affected by their health” CXCI. Law of 2011: „Extent of impairment is at least 40%”

Observations / lessons learnt from using concepts (related to evaluations) There are still many uncertainties (and confusion) in nominating and „targeting” these social groups, although: Different definitions identify distinct social groups characterized by different features, and These different social groups possess distinct internal and external resources

… Different definitions identify distinct social groups characterized by different features… Persons with disabilities Labor-force survey 2011 („Definition of CRPD) persons (in the population aged 15-64) NCSSZI-TÁRKI 2010 („self-assessment”: people assessing themselves as living with a disability) Approx (in the population aged 18-64) Census of 2011 („self-assessment”: people assessing themselves as living with a disability) persons (in the entire population, besides persons are chronically ill!) People with reduced ability to work/ Impaired persons Labor-force survey 2011 („self- assessment”: people with reduced ability to work ) persons (in the population aged 15-64) Official statistics (Central Administration of National Pension Insurance) (Receiving cash benefits due to impairment) persons (in the population aged 18-64) and persons (in retired population )

… Different definitions identify distinct social groups characterized by different features… Source: NCSSZI – TÁRKI 2010) Persons with disabilities (Definition of CRPD) People with reduced ability to work („officially documented”) Proportion of 40+ (total population: 50%) 78%90% Proportion of economically active (employed+ unemployed) (total population: 60,7% + 10,3%) 47,6% (39,6% + 8%)17,8% (15% + 2,8%) Proportion of those affected by EU 2020 poverty goals (total population: 42,1%) 58,9%71,8% Proportion of those living in households not having an employee (total population: 20,6%) 37,9%52,4% Belonging to the given group based on self- assessment 20,1%Two-thirds

… different social groups possess distinct internal and external resources … Evaluation of Measures Targeting the Improvement of Employment: „Role of NGOs in employment of people with reduced abilitiy to work – special focus on SROP 1 and 2 priorities” Results: - Among most professional NGOs, the proportion of organizations providing services exclusively to people having „classical” disabilities is 75% (no services ensured for people with reduced ability to work / impaired persons!) - ”Monocultural organizations”: rigidity regarding target groups

Lessons to learn NOMINATION OF TARGET GROUPS IN CALL FOR PROPOSALS HAS MAJOR EFFECTS! Using correct (deliberate!) terminology in activities and documents of development policy regarding persons with disabilities / people with reduced ability to work / impaired persons is a priority issue: a term not properly (not deliberately) used may result in different targeting!

Thank you for your attention! Orsolya Prókai–Zita Éva Nagy Revita Foundation (