IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i21p11143-d663214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of the Washington Group Questions in Non-Government Programming

Author

Listed:
  • Alex Robinson

    (Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia)

  • Liem Nguyen

    (Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia)

  • Fleur Smith

    (Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia)

Abstract

The Washington Group questions (WGQ) on functioning have been widely promoted as the go-to tool for disability data collection. Designed for use by government, the WGQ have been adopted by non-government organizations (NGOs) for use in programming. However, little is known about how the WGQs are being used by NGOs or how use may be contributing to disability inclusion. Method: This paper describes exploratory research on the use of the WGQ in NGO programming. An online survey provided an overview of adoption followed by semi-structured interviews from a purposive sample to explore data collection, analysis, and use. Results: Thematic analysis showed limited inclusion outcomes directly attributable to use of the WGQ, adoption driven by individual champions rather than systematically across organizations, and challenges in data collection resulting in a wide range of prevalence rates. What information the WGQ can realistically contribute to programs was also overestimated. However, the process of using the WGQ was raising awareness on disability inclusion within program teams and communities. Conclusion: Acknowledging differences in emerging use by NGOs beyond the WGQ’s intended purpose, alongside promoting a flexible and staged approach to adoption and use in programming, may improve utility and disability inclusion outcomes over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Alex Robinson & Liem Nguyen & Fleur Smith, 2021. "Use of the Washington Group Questions in Non-Government Programming," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11143-:d:663214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11143/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11143/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beth Sprunt & Barbara McPake & Manjula Marella, 2019. "The UNICEF/Washington Group Child Functioning Module—Accuracy, Inter-Rater Reliability and Cut-Off Level for Disability Disaggregation of Fiji’s Education Management Information System," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Manfred Mörchen & Olmedo Zambrano & Alexander Páez & Paola Salgado & Jason Penniecook & Andrea Brandt von Lindau & David Lewis, 2019. "Disability-Disaggregated Data Collection: Hospital-Based Application of the Washington Group Questions in an Eye Hospital in Paraguay," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-16, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Inge Debrouwere & Pedro Celestino Álvarez Vera & Ximena del Carmen Pavón Benítez & Celia Katherine Rosero Arboleda & Peter Prinzie & Jo Lebeer, 2021. "Lessons from Disability Counting in Ecuador, with a Contribution from Primary Health Care," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Beth Sprunt & Manjula Marella, 2021. "Combining Child Functioning Data with Learning and Support Needs Data to Create Disability-Identification Algorithms in Fiji’s Education Management Information System," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Ruth Sanders & Ben Gascoyne & Paul Appleby & Syeda Asma Rashida & Emma Jolley, 2021. "Eye Health Service Uptake among People with Visual Impairment and Other Functional Difficulties in Bangladesh: A Cross-Sectional Study with Short-Term Follow Up," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-12, August.
    4. Dorothy Boggs & Hannah Kuper & Islay Mactaggart & Tess Bright & GVS Murthy & Abba Hydara & Ian McCormick & Natalia Tamblay & Matias L. Alvarez & Oluwarantimi Atijosan-Ayodele & Hisem Yonso & Allen Fos, 2022. "Exploring the Use of Washington Group Questions to Identify People with Clinical Impairments Who Need Services including Assistive Products: Results from Five Population-Based Surveys," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Kwok Ng & Piritta Asunta & Niko Leppä & Pauli Rintala, 2020. "Intra-Rater Test-Retest Reliability of a Modified Child Functioning Module, Self-Report Version," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-11, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11143-:d:663214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.