1. Measuring quality of life HI tools from Cambodia and India livelihood projects

2. “The quality of life is not only a result of income, but also a result of the capabilities a person has to influence her life, and the options among which the person had the opportunity to choose … » 1. Reference framework: capabilities approach to poverty

3. Cambodia Phase one of the project included a QoL assessment focused on basic needs and assets Monitor the improvements in the QoL of participants Allowed analysis of correlation between characteristics of the person and IGA and increase on QoL Phase two: updated the tool to include capacities and participation (process: FGD/field officers/QoL analysis/internal lessons learned/evaluation/national standards ID Poor/existing tools) All participants in the project 2. How it was designed and is being used

4. India Adapted from the HI Cambodia tool Used same categories, adapted criteria and scores Selected number of beneficiaries (50/300) Currently being tested UNESCAP: zoom out Basis for research questionnaires in 9 countries Asia Pacific : (income + assets, capacities, participation)

5. Area of assessment CategoryCriteriaScores 1234 Basic needs Capacities Participation General

6. Categor y CriteriaScores 1234 HH Budget Evolution of HH over a year Educatio n % children missed more than one month at school Food ability to access enough food all year Health access to quality medical care Housing general condition of the house E.Equip # owned by house Area of assessment: Basic needs CRPD Art 28

7. Area of assessment CategoryCriteriaScores 1234 Basic needs Capacities Participation General

8. CategoryCriteriaScores 1234 Technical and business skills to manage and IGA * Person’s assessment of her own skills Ability to invest in key areas of life * Person’s assessment of her own ability Self- confidence * Person’s assessment of her own capacity to find solution to problems Area of assessment: Capacities

9. Area of assessment CategoryCriteriaScores 1234 Basic needs Capacities Participation General

10. CategoryCriteriaScores 1234 Participation in family life * Participation in family events Social network * Counting on a network of persons Participation in community life * Participation in social, cultural, religious events, valued by the person Participation in political life * Participation in political life and decision- making Area of assessment: Participation CRPD Art 3, 4, 29, 30

11. Area of assessment CategoryCriteriaScores 1234 Basic needs Capacities Participation General Overall satisfaction with life Very dissastifi ed Dissatisfi ed SatisfiedVery satisfied

12. 3. Added value for HI Includes objective and subjective measures Is designed with the informed input of persons with disabilities, all while taking into account info important for HI and international standards Allows for some comparability Easily adaptable to the context Allows to monitor the progress of a person + elements to analyze the whole project Can link to CRPD specific articles / monitoring

13. 4. Limits / questions Nothing is disability-specific! Considered complex by some programs May be seen as “yet another monitoring tool” Need to plan for someone to carry out analysis of information + make sure that it is adapted to the context Includes change not necessarily linked to the project / so far has not included a witness group (other PwD or persons with no disabilities) Based more on interest of individuals than TRD position/recommendation /// Basic needs section: focused on family or individual? Participation: more participation or choice to participate? /// Generic tool finalization / other categories (eg water and sanitation?)

14. Exercise Are all these relevant? What is missing? Suggest some criteria for each category Report on ideas and discussion

15. Summary of tools HI Cambodia QoL tool HI India QoL tool Generic tool / UNESCAP Guideline for field officers (ongoing) Note on the shift from v1 to v2 HI Cambodia …. Way forward…?