Contents

Phase 1: Initial Assessment in GBV Programs in Pilot Countries

A number of key issues emerged in the initial assessment that should be considered when designing or adapting GBV programs to include persons with disabilities and caregivers. These include findings about the types of GBV experienced by women and girls with disabilities, as well as violence experienced by men and boys with disabilities; the factors that contribute to this violence; and the barriers persons with disabilities face in accessing GBV programming and services in humanitarian contexts. The findings in this section are drawn from the analysis of data from Jordan, Burundi and Ethiopia.

Violence experienced by persons with disabilities and caregivers

Persons with disabilities, caregivers and community leaders in project sites in Burundi, Ethiopia and Jordan reported that persons with disabilities experienced GBV in their displaced communities, and that women and girls with disabilities and female caregivers were perceived to be most at risk. Data from Ethiopia and Burundi showed that approximately 6 percent of survivors reporting GBV to the IRC have a disability. 34 The most common type of GBV reported in group discussions in all countries was sexual violence, including rape and sexual assault, followed by emotional violence and exploitation. Similarly, GBVIMS data from Ethiopia and Burundi show that the most common type of GBV for which persons with disabilities sought assistance from the IRC (men and women combined) was rape (51 percent of reporting survivors with disabilities 35 ) followed by psychological/ emotional abuse (27 percent of reporting survivors with disabilities 36 ). Among survivors with disabilities reporting any type of GBV to the IRC, GBVIMS data showed that the most common alleged perpetrator was an intimate partner or former partner, at 36 percent, 37 followed by strangers, at 27 percent. 38

GBV against women and girls

GBVIMS data from Burundi and Ethiopia showed that 83 percent of survivors with disabilities reporting to IRC services are women. 39

Sexual violence

Sexual violence was reported in all countries, with rape most often discussed in Burundi, where some women reported being sexually abused on a regular basis and by multiple perpetrators. 40 In all three countries, focus group participants expressed the perception that women and girls with intellectual disabilities were most at risk of sexual violence, followed by those with physical and mental disabilities. Participants noted that rape of women and girls with mental and intellectual disabilities is often identified by family or service providers only when the survivor becomes pregnant, and that there may be many survivors of rape who bear perpetrators' children without ever having disclosed violence.

“Women and girls are more vulnerable to sexual violence, but many times they don't want to disclose. There are many unmarried women who have children every year, but never tell who the father is.”

(Participant in group discussion with men with disabilities — Bwagiriza camp, Burundi)

Sexual abuse perpetrated by strangers against adolescents with intellectual disabilities was reported in Jordan (girls and boys alike), leading some caregivers of young persons with disabilities to lock them inside the home to protect them from further violence.

“Her daughter is super active and likes to go out even when it is dark. One night she went to her neighbors' house, and when she came back, she looked different. She asked her what happened, and she explained that some boys took off her underpants.”

(Interpreted from a mother of an adolescent girl with Down syndrome in a group discussion in Zaatari refugee camp, Jordan)

The most common type of sexual violence reported in urban centers in Jordan was sexual harassment and exploitation by male community members targeting the wives of men with disabilities when they moved around the community unaccompanied by a male, since women going out alone was not considered appropriate behavior.

“One day I was coming back from my brother's house. A taxi stopped and I asked do you know where I can get money for rent. He said come with me and we will look after you. I was scared that he would take me.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities and female caregivers in Mafraq, Jordan)

Intimate partner violence

It is widely recognized that intimate partner violence (IPV) is the most common type of GBV that women experience, and women with disabilities may experience it at higher rates than non-disabled women. 41 Women with disabilities and female caregivers in Burundi and Jordan testified to experiencing sexual, physical and emotional violence perpetrated by their intimate partners.

Women with disabilities in Burundi reported that their male partners do not “value” them the same as non-disabled women, and are less likely to perceive them as suitable partners for marriage. Men with disabilities corroborated this point in their focus groups, reporting a preference for a wife without disabilities. Both women and men reported that women with disabilities commonly experience rape in their relationships.

“For a woman with a disability it is even harder for her to get married. People don't want to marry her, but rather take advantage of her (“se soulager” literally means relieve themselves...) and she can't defend herself. 16 So now, she is no longer a virgin and they will want to marry her even less.”

(Participant in group discussion with men with disabilities — Bujumbura, Burundi)

Married women with disabilities said their husbands prevent their participation in family activities out of shame and embarrassment. They also reported that their husbands often have extra-marital relationships, which was not only a source of “humiliation,” but also of fear of potential health consequences, since they felt unable to negotiate safe sex with their partners.

“You can't refuse him when he comes back and he may bring diseases.”

(Woman with disabilities — Bujumbura, Burundi)

Exploitation

Some women described experiencing extreme poverty, increasing their risk of sexual exploitation in future relationships and/or of engaging in survival sex. Women with disabilities reported concerns that their children are also at risk of this type of violence, with one woman in Bujumbura describing how her daughter has subsequently engaged in prostitution to support the family.

“A husband will give up a disabled wife after she has a child. They are discriminated against in all activities — you don't have any value. When men propose sex to her, she accepts because she needs money to provide food to her children.”

(Participant in group discussion with women survivors with disabilities and female caregivers of survivors — Bujumbura, Burundi)

Both men and women with disabilities in camp contexts reported paying people, with money or materials, to assist with daily activities and tasks, including transporting water and food distributions to their homes. In Burundi, this was reported to affect women more than men with disabilities. Furthermore, community workers and social workers in Ethiopia described how some women with disabilities who need assistance with daily activities may be coerced into exploitative relationships with individuals who offer to assist.

“They profit from your economic vulnerability....Sometimes for things we can't do ourselves, [so] we will give money or flour. For example, fetching firewood, transferring stock to the house, repairing our houses, washing clothes and fetching water. Non-disabled women can do these things for themselves.”

(Participants in group discussion with women with disabilities — Musasa, Burundi)

Gendered violence against men and boys

GBVIMS data for Burundi and Ethiopia showed that there were proportionately more men among survivors with disabilities (17 percent of survivors with disabilities were men) compared to survivors without disabilities (5 percent were men). 42

Sexual violence

Participants in both Jordan (both urban and camp settings) and Burundi (urban settings) also mentioned sexual violence, including rape, against men and boys with disabilities, though to a much lesser extent than for women and girls. Focus group participants shared perceptions that men and boys with intellectual disabilities were most at risk of sexual violence. In Burundi, some participants suggested that this group may be targeted by perpetrators who believe myths that they will be cured of illness or amass wealth by having sex with boys.

“There is a traditional belief that they practice sodomy to cure illness, like HIV, or to become rich. So men will rape boys. Boys with mental disabilities are more at risk than non-disabled boys, because they believe everything people tell them.”

(Caregiver of male survivor in Burundi)

Emotional and psychological violence

Men with disabilities reported emotional and psychological violence perpetrated by family and community members as a result of being perceived as “weak,” “dependent” and unable to live up to conventional norms of masculinity. For example, focus group participants 17 in Jordan reported that men with disabilities were called a “half man” by other men in the community. In Burundi and Jordan, men with disabilities reported being ridiculed if, as a result of their disability, they could not work and provide income for their family. The inability to secure gainful employment (a challenge faced by men and women in many humanitarian settings, and often exacerbated for those with disabilities) resulted in the perception among family and community members that these men have “no value.” Men with disabilities reported feeling shame and humiliation as a result of these attitudes toward them.

“They don't have any other role. If he is unable to work, he is despised. When you are disabled in a family you are not considered as a person in the family.”

(Participant in group discussion with men with disabilities — Kinama refugee camp, Burundi)

Participants in Burundi also reported that men with disabilities faced emotional violence as a result of being perceived as inappropriate partners for marriage and relationships by their own and their partners' families.

“For example, a man who is disabled and wants to marry a normal girl — the family won't accept this and the couple will be marginalized.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities and female caregivers — Kinama refugee camp, Burundi)

This kind of violence against men and boys is harmful, but is different from the continuum of violence that women and girls experience in humanitarian contexts. It does not exist within a structural system of violence and oppression and is not perpetrated at the same level of violence against women and girls.

Other forms of violence against persons with disabilities

Persons with disabilities may be subjected to other forms of violence in humanitarian settings, including as a result of discrimination based on their disability, which may intersect with or compound gender-related discrimination. 43 For example, in Jordan, emotional and physical violence by caregivers against persons with disabilities was reported and even observed in some focus group discussions between female caregivers and young adults with disabilities. The verbal abuse observed was largely based on expectations about how the individual with a disability should behave and/or the role expected of them as men or women.

Denial of services was frequently mentioned as a form of violence against persons with disabilities across all countries and contexts. While comments suggest that most of these examples are likely to be discrimination on the basis of disability, there were a disproportionate number of comments relating to access to education for children with disabilities (both boys and girls) across the three countries. This has important implications for GBV prevention and risk mitigation, as schools provide a critical safe space for children and adolescents in displacement settings, and are often a forum for GBV and life skills activities. Education also increases economic and social opportunities, fostering empowerment for women and girls and other at-risk groups to overcome oppression and inequality. 44

Participants in group discussions in Ethiopia and Burundi also mentioned that men and boys with intellectual disabilities may be particularly vulnerable to “labor exploitation,” as they have the physical capacity to undertake these tasks, but few skills in negotiation. They may take on disproportionately large numbers of chores in a household or jobs in the community with less compensation than others.

“Labor exploitation. For example, if there is a disabled person — they are expected to collect water, etc., for their caregiver. Men 18 with intellectual disabilities are instructed to do chores.”

(Participant in group discussion with community and social workers — My'Ani camp, Ethiopia)

Finally, participants also reported high rates of physical and emotional violence perpetrated by community members against men and boys with intellectual disabilities in Jordan when compared with other contexts. Hence, men and boys with disabilities may be at heightened risk of different forms of violence in new displacement contexts, where few protection mechanisms have been established to monitor and address this.

“People are out to get us. People call me a retard, they hit me and they say bad names. Some people call us crazy....The other day I was attacked by a guy who ran away in a car....You need to help us and keep them from beating us. Give us the opportunity to make complaints and deal with these people.”

(Man with an intellectual disability — Zaatari refugee camp, Jordan)

Key factors that make persons with disabilities more vulnerable to GBV

There is evidence to support the premise that GBV against persons with disabilities in humanitarian settings is intentional, systematic and happens within the context of power and control. The root causes of GBV against persons with disabilities remain inequality based on the power imbalance that exists between men and women in the community, and within these groups. The risk of GBV, however, is exacerbated in humanitarian settings when paired with the inequalities and oppression associated with disability, particularly for women and girls. The following factors have been identified as adding to the vulnerability of women, girls, boys and men with different types of disabilities to GBV in humanitarian contexts.

Changing gender roles

Women and men with disabilities and female caregivers are at heightened risk of GBV in humanitarian settings due to changes in gender roles that may occur in a household and the gender stereotypes that accompany this. This dynamic is particularly evident in households and communities where persons have acquired new disabilities. If a man acquires a new disability (for example, as a result of conflict), female family members may be required to find employment outside of the home, replacing the male as the household breadwinner. Insofar as this is not excepted behavior within the family or community at large, these women may be exposed to violence, especially if their work requires them to move about the community alone.

“The husband usually becomes dependent on the wife. If he needs to pay for something, the wife has to go out to work....It becomes more work for the wife. There are more risks for the wives of men with disabilities because people will take advantage of her. She may become a maid for another family or have to come home late when it is dark. Sometimes society's perception of these wives will change because they don't know why she is going out and this is not normal here. She may become stigmatized by the community.”

(Man with disabilities in group discussion — Zaatari camp, Jordan)

Focus group participants also disclosed that when men have a disability, their wives and children may be exposed to increased risk of violence because perpetrators perceive that men with disabilities will be unable to serve in the traditional role as “protector.”

“Their children are discriminated [against] at school, and even beaten because the other children say your father won't come here to defend you. They lose their honor and dignity as the head of family because they cannot provide for the family's needs.”

(Group discussion with men with disabilities — Bwagirizia camp, Burundi)

Although not unique to humanitarian settings, gender stereotypes can increase the risk of IPV for women and girls with disabilities if they do not meet the expectations of their male partners as suitable wives and mothers, which can exacerbate power imbalances in these relationships, increasing vulnerability to GBV. Men, both with and without disabilities, have little incentive to take on other roles, such as caregiving of children, as it is so undervalued in society and further reduces their status among men. The complex interaction of societal norms and expectations placed on both women and men, combined with the perceived failure of women with disabilities to fulfill the roles expected of them in a household, exposes them to heightened risk of physical violence from their male partners.

“Women with disabilities are despised because they can't do work like other people — like carry water and make meals. Husbands have to do this and some of the other men will tease them saying ‘Why did you marry this disabled woman?’ and this may cause violence in the family between husband and wife. When the husband comes home and is drunk, he can talk to you bad and start beating you — you can't defend yourself and he knows this.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities — Musasa refugee camp, Burundi)

Family stress

The extreme stress experienced by families during conflict and displacement can create environments where violence is more likely to be perpetrated, placing persons with disabilities who are dependent on family caregivers at greater risk. For example, women and girls with disabilities may rely on family members to assist them with daily care. This dependence can contribute to family members' stress and anxiety, leading to resentment taken out on persons with disabilities in the form of emotional, physical or other forms of violence.

Group discussions with adolescent girls with disabilities — Burundi

Perceptions about the capacity of persons with disabilities

Community members' perceptions — and misperceptions — of persons with disabilities can contribute to their vulnerability to GBV. For example, perpetrators of violence may be more likely to target persons with disabilities if they perceive them as less able to defend themselves than people without disabilities. In fact, some incidents recounted by women with disabilities in urban settings in Burundi suggest that perpetrators are targeting those with physical disabilities, and at times when they will be unable to fight them off or even identify the perpetrator.

“My illness happens sometimes — I have ‘attacks’ [in French ‘crises’] — and people take advantage of me during these attacks. 20 This is when men come to rape me — / don't know any of the fathers of my children.”

(Woman with disabilities — Bujumbura, Burundi)

People with intellectual disabilities are often assumed to be incapable of learning the same concepts or participating in the same activities as others, and thus are excluded from opportunities to learn about violence, sex and healthy relationships, and to develop new skills and strengthen peer networks. As such, they may be more easily manipulated and targeted by perpetrators for rape, abuse and exploitation, or have less capacity to negotiate power in intimate relationships.

Finally, survivors of GBV with disabilities may be perceived as unreliable informants about their own lives and experiences, and thus may not be believed when they report violence. Hence, perpetrators are even more likely to anticipate going unpunished for their actions, which can make persons with disabilities even more vulnerable to violence.

“Persons with mental or intellectual disabilities are also prone [to GBV]. Even if they experience sexual violence, people think they are crazy and don't believe them.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities and female caregivers — Zaatari camp, Jordan)

Loss of community support and protection mechanisms

The separation of families and neighbors, and the weakening or rupture of traditional community support structures and protection mechanisms, was highlighted among project participants as increasing the risk of violence for persons with disabilities. This is particularly relevant in new displacement contexts, such as Jordan, where individuals and families have not yet established relationships and trust with others in the community or rebuilt their support systems. Participants in this setting described high levels of violence in the community and expressed fear that persons with disabilities would be targeted when outside the home. This sometimes led to negative coping strategies, such as locking people with intellectual disabilities in their home. Similarly, in urban settings in Burundi, parents reported isolated examples when they had relied on less familiar neighbors and community members to assist with caregiving and later discovered that abuse had occurred.

“In Syria, everyone knew each other and would look after each other. Here we are surrounded by people from different towns. If something happened to my neighbor, I wouldn't care about them.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities and female caregivers — Zaatari camp, Jordan)

Social isolation

A lack of contact with community networks, friends and service providers also increases vulnerability to violence for persons with disabilities. Women with physical disabilities who are isolated in their homes due to environmental and physical barriers find it difficult to move outside of their home and meet other people. Adolescent girls with disabilities may be excluded from peer networks and education, as well as asset-based programming activities, which have been demonstrated to promote protection from GBV. Some persons with disabilities, particularly those with intellectual and mental disabilities, may be hidden by family members “so much that neighbors don't even know they exist.” A lack of community support and friendships can mean that they do not acquire the information and skills they need, or have people that they trust to go to when they experience violence.

“When we are disabled, even our friends don't want to see us with them. We are left alone, like we have no value. Only my family can support me — all my friends have run away from me.”

(Woman with disabilities — Bujumbura, Burundi)

Isolation also increases the vulnerability of female caregivers who may be unable to leave their homes, generate income or to attend community events and activities with other women. In most situations, these individuals will be 21 the wives or mothers of children and adults with more severe disabilities. In some situations, however, they will also rely on adolescent girls as secondary caregivers, reducing girls' opportunities to access education and other services in the community.

Poverty and lack of income

Poverty was raised as a vulnerability factor, particularly for women with disabilities in female-headed households. Extreme poverty and lack of resources to meet their most basic needs increase the risk that women and girls with disabilities and female family members may be abused and exploited, or resort to survival sex and prostitution.

“Some of my children are the age to go to school and I have no means of sending them to school. I have to seek men to even pay for sugar in the tea, and they can do whatever they want to me. My children can't even have books for school.”

(Woman with disabilities — Bujumbura, Burundi)

Environmental barriers

Environmental barriers, including inadequate transportation in all contexts, add to isolation, but also mean that persons with disabilities must rely on other community members to access services and assistance, including food and non-food item distributions. This increases their vulnerability to exploitation and abuse, and makes it more difficult for them to access GBV response services in a confidential way.

Barriers to accessing GBV services and programming

Data for Burundi and Ethiopia show that approximately 32 percent of survivors with disabilities who reported violence to the IRC did so within three days of the incident, compared to 44 percent of survivors without disabilities who reported within three days. 45 Forty-one percent of survivors with disabilities waited over one month to report violence. 46 More work needs to be done to eliminate barriers and facilitate access to GBV services and programs for all survivors, including and especially for persons with disabilities.

Barriers to access to GBV programs and activities in humanitarian contexts identified by persons with disabilities and caregivers include attitudinal, physical, communication and other barriers. Attitudinal barriers were the most commonly cited barriers to GBV survivors with disabilities accessing services, whereas physical barriers were more frequently mentioned in relation to prevention activities, such as community awareness raising, income generation and women's center activities.

Attitudinal barriers

Discrimination and stigmatization by family members, service providers and the wider community were the most frequently mentioned barriers to accessing services faced by survivors with disabilities. Participants reported that additional stigmatization makes persons with disabilities reluctant to disclose sexual violence, even to service providers, who often assume that they are not at risk because of their disability.

“Family members will take them to service providers, but they don't treat them correctly — they may say things like ‘You are a disabled person, how did you get raped and pregnant?’”

(Participant in group discussion with community workers and social workers — My'Ani refugee camp, Ethiopia)

It is often assumed that persons with intellectual or mental disabilities do not understand what has happened to them. Participants reported that people may not listen to or believe individuals with disabilities, especially when it is a survivor with mental or intellectual disabilities; this, in turn, reduces their access to services. Many persons with mental or intellectual disabilities are also excluded from GBV awareness-raising activities, as parents, community leaders and others assume that they are not at risk or are incapable of learning new things. This presents further barriers to them staying safe in communities, recognizing violence appropriately and/or seeking assistance 22 from trusted individuals if violence happens.

Some survivors with disabilities may need support to access services, but will fear disclosing this violence to family members, who may already carry negative attitudes about disability. Hence, many survivors choose not to disclose this violence or to access services in case it further heightens their marginalization in the family and community. In Bujumbura, some women with disabilities experienced violence so frequently that they preferred not to disclose it, even to supportive family members.

“Families will reject and hate her [a survivor] — they see her not really as a person. She lives with disabilities and now this sexual violence makes her of even less value. They will reject her and think that she is the cause of her own situation.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities — Musasa refugee camp, Burundi)

Discrimination and prejudice also pose significant barriers to the participation of persons with disabilities in GBV prevention activities and related programs. In Ethiopia, community workers and social workers reported that other community members will often ridicule individuals with mental and/or intellectual disabilities if they try to participate in community activities. This stigmatization means that parents will sometimes prevent staff from speaking to these individuals when undertaking home visits to share information about available services.

“They had a person with disabilities attending a coffee discussion, but the community rejected her and eventually she stopped coming. She is mentally ill and sometimes she doesn't know what she is talking about, so the participants neglected her.”

(Community worker — My'Ani camp, Ethiopia)

Community leadership groups, including refugee and women's associations, rarely have representatives with disabilities; disability associations, where they exist, are often male dominated and may actively exclude people with mental and intellectual disabilities. These organizations often play a central role in communicating information in the community and may even appoint representatives to participate in trainings and other activities. Hence, persons with disabilities, but particularly women and girls with disabilities, may be less likely to be included in these activities.

“Persons with disabilities generally lack consideration....Sometimes the community doesn't consider them as people for trainings and other activities.”

(Participant in group discussion with community leaders — My'Ani camp, Ethiopia)

Physical barriers

Physical barriers inhibit persons with disabilities from accessing GBV services and activities in humanitarian settings. Women with disabilities in urban centers and in the sprawling Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan reported that the lack or high cost of transportation was a barrier to accessing GBV service centers, as well as to their participation in awareness-raising and other prevention activities.

“There is no transport, so even if you know where services are, you still can't get there.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities and female caregivers — Bujumbura, Burundi)

In all countries, female caregivers living in camp settings were unable to attend community awareness-raising and/or women's activities, as they must remain at home caring for their family member. They attend community meetings and social activities less frequently, and so miss out on campaigns, SASA! (a comprehensive approach to preventing violence against women and girls developed by Raising Voices (www.raisingvoices.org)) and other forms of awareness raising.

Communication barriers

Communication barriers were most frequently mentioned in relation to community-based prevention activities. People who are deaf were mentioned as being most affected by this type of barrier, as sign language interpreters are rarely available in refugee settings and many individuals use unofficial sign language. Some community mobilizers and GBV staff have attempted to communicate with those who are deaf through SASA! materials and simple gestures, but this is not consistently implemented by all staff. GBV practitioners also expressed challenges in communicating effectively with people with intellectual and mental disabilities, who are often not invited to participate in GBV activities, and/or the information is not conveyed in formats that they can understand. Participants noted that outreach and education materials rarely depict persons with disabilities, and persons with disabilities are not employed on outreach and community mobilization teams. A variety of communications approaches, including simple messages, pictures, dramas and role plays that include persons with disabilities, would more effectively engage persons with disabilities, while also increasing the awareness of the general community of persons with disabilities.

“To see a picture of a person with disabilities, we will feel more involved with normal people. It also educates people that persons with disabilities should be involved in everything.”

(Participant in group discussions with women with disabilities — Bwagirizia camp, Burundi)

Other barriers

Lack of confidentiality and resulting stigmatization by community members were raised as important issues in both urban and camp contexts in Burundi, and in the camp context in Ethiopia. Participants reported that it is harder to maintain confidentiality when a survivor has a disability, as others may have come to their assistance during the incident, and the news will often spread quickly throughout the community. They may need to disclose to others in order to access services, and GBV staff also report needing to involve a wider range of actors in case management processes. Hence, survivors with disabilities may be less likely to access services and assistance after such incidents of violence due to issues of confidentiality and fear of added stigmatization.

“The community will know if a woman with disabilities has been raped. There are no secrets in the camp. People tend to disclose information more when it is women with disabilities. They have to shout for help and so everyone finds out what has happened to them.”

(Participant in group discussion with women with disabilities — Musasa refugee camp, Burundi)

Women and girls with disabilities in Bujumbura, Burundi, also reported that they may not be attended to immediately 24 when presenting to health services after an incident of sexual violence and may be asked to return at another time to receive services, or may be refused services pending a lengthy administrative process related to their refugee status. Survivors with disabilities may face greater disadvantages insofar as it may be more difficult for them to return to the facility, as they may have fewer financial resources to pay for transportation and need to rely on others for assistance to travel.

“They can keep giving you another appointment — come back tomorrow...but this is a problem after rape because you need the medications. She spent all day and night in the hospital with no services, so the next day she went for her own HIV test.”

(Group discussion with women with disabilities — Bujumbura, Burundi)

GBV programming, in humanitarian contexts and elsewhere, is largely focused on women and girls, as they are the most at risk of GBV. Men and boys, however, are also at risk of sexual violence, particularly during conflict and displacement. While GBV practitioners do provide support to male survivors with and without disabilities, this is not always known, and some men with disabilities in this project demonstrated gaps in knowledge about where to get case management support if they are survivors of sexual violence.

“She [a survivor with disabilities] has to go to the IRC to get help. But where should a man with disabilities go if he is raped?”

(Man with disabilities — Musasa refugee camp, Burundi)

Country	Activities
Ethiopia	Held “coffee discussions” with women in the homes of persons with disabilities so their caregivers could access information on GBV and to strengthen women's peer networks. Adapted existing GBV prevention community mobilization materials (SASA!) to depict persons with disabilities as part of the wider community. Conducted targeted home visits to disseminate information on GBV prevention and response to persons with disabilities who are isolated in their homes. Held training sessions for community mobilizers and social workers on GBV and disability. Made modifications to improve the physical accessibility of community buildings and latrines throughout the camp.
Burundi	Targeted Village Savings and Loan Associations (VSLAs) for persons with disabilities and their caregivers. Organized recreational and professional activities for persons with disabilities and caregivers. Conducted community awareness raising on the rights and inclusion of persons with disabilities. Prioritized home visits to provide more comprehensive GBV case management for persons with disabilities at risk. Recruited women with disabilities as community mobilizers for GBV activities.
Jordan	Integrated disability inclusion into inter-agency GBV and child protection case management training. Facilitated a one-day workshop on disability inclusion in sexual and GBV programming with the Inter-agency Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (SGBV) Sub-Working Group. Supported integration of disability into the messages and materials of an ongoing violence-prevention campaign * and into materials about IRC services. Held group discussions with female caregivers of persons with disabilities.
26
Northern Caucasus, Russian Federation	Ran training and action planning workshops for women's NGOs on disability and GBV, including on working with girls with disabilities and supporting their parents and caregivers. Held training and action-planning workshop with women from the All-Russia Society of Disabled People on disability inclusion in programs for women and girls. Designed a handbook for caregivers of children with disabilities that provides information on disability-related services and assistance. Organized a community awareness-raising concert where girls who are deaf performed with a Chechen singer. Held social events for girls with and without disabilities to strengthen peer networks.

Country	Operational context	Activities undertaken
Ethiopia	My'Ani — Protracted camp setting	Group discussions with Eritrean refugee with disabilities and their caregivers (25 participants); community leaders (11 participants); and community workers and social workers (13 participants). Interviews with persons with disabilities and caregivers (4 interviews — 7 people). Consultations with the Disability Association (32 people). Consultations with humanitarian actors (19 people).
Burundi	Bujumbura — Urban setting Kinama, Mussasa and Bwagiriza — Camp settings	Group discussions with Congolese refugees with disabilities and their caregivers (161 participants). Interview with a girl with disabilities and her caregiver (1 interview — 2 people). Consultations with humanitarian actors (13 people).
Jordan	Zaatari — Camp setting Irbid, Mafraq and Ramtha — Urban settings	Group discussions with Syrian refugees with disabilities and their caregivers (113 participants); and refugee community volunteers (11 participants). Interviews with girls with disabilities and their caregivers (2 interviews — 4 people). Consultations with humanitarian actors (30 people).
Northern Caucasus, Russian Federation	Grozny, Chechen Republic — Urban post-conflict reconstruction setting	Group discussion with caregivers of children with disabilities (12 participants). Interviews with women and girls with disabilities (11 interviews — 11 people). Consultations with staff from women's NGOs (16 people). These group discussions and interviews were conducted by NGO partners of the IRC in the Northern Caucasus.

Country	Activities undertaken
Ethiopia	Group discussions about stories of change with Eritrean refugees with disabilities and their caregivers (24 participants); and community leaders (11 participants). Stakeholder workshop (21 people).
Burundi	Group discussions about stories of change with refugees with disabilities and their caregivers (89 participants); and community leaders (10 participants). Participatory activities with GBV practitioners (18 participants). Stakeholder workshops (41 people).
Jordan	Group discussions and interviews about stories of change with Syrian refugees with disabilities and their caregivers (14 participants). Interviews with GBV practitioners (3 participants). Stories of change were conducted by WPE staff in Jordan and interviews with GBV practitioners were conducted over the phone.
Northern Caucasus, Russian Federation	Group discussions about stories of change with refugees with disabilities and their care-givers (26 participants). Participatory activities with GBV practitioners (7 participants). Stakeholder workshop (26 people).