Equity and Inclusion in Policy Processes (EquIPP)

B. Equity and Inclusion in Policy Processes (EquIPP)

EquIPP (Equity and Inclusion in Policy Processes) is a framework for an inclusive policy process to support public policies promoting equity and inclusion. An inclusive policy process creates experiences of inclusion for vulnerable groups who usually remain marginalised in policy processes; it does this by according them a more central role in policy processes, to ensure that their interests and concerns are adequately represented throughout such processes. EquIPP is an inventory of 17 Key Actions (KAs) and forms a blueprint for an equitable and inclusive policy process. It is concerned with the formulation, planning and budgeting, implementation, monitoring and evaluation as well as the dissemination of policies. All 17 Key Actions and a brief description for each are outlined in Appendix 6: Summary of Key Actions for an equitable and inclusive policy.

EquIPP also functions as an assessment tool to evaluate the inclusiveness of the policy process overall. We apply EquIPP to the National Action Plan for People with Disabilities (NAP), which was EquIPP also functions as an assessment tool to evaluate the inclusiveness of the policy process overall. We apply EquIPP to the National Action Plan for People with Disabilities (NAP), which was

i.

Scoring

An assessment matrix (checklist) was developed to measure the extent to which policy processes qualify as equitable and inclusive. A 7-point scale was developed to rate the level of engagement with the 17 Key Actions presented above. The assessment can

be conducted in ‘real time’ as processes unfold, or retrospectively. For the purpose of this analysis, the highest possible score is

5 as we did not perform Process and Outcome evaluations. Initial scores were assigned by an associate consultant (TCD) and were subsequently discussed with the NPWG until a consensus was reached.

Table 2: Policy Engagement Key Action Scale

Rating Absent – no evidence it has been considered 0 Recognition – evidence of awareness but no associated action 1 Minor action – evidence of token or minimal efforts to engage 2 Moderate action – evidence of clear but incomplete or partial engagement 3

Comprehensive action – evidence that all reasonable steps to engage have been taken 4

Policy evaluation

– reference to Key Action in core document(s) 1 5 Process Evaluation – evidence gathered from diverse stakeholders of satisfaction with

the process of engagement 1

Outcome Evaluation - evidence gathered from diverse stakeholders of satisfaction with

the outcomes of engagement 1

1 Score at a higher level assumes fulfillment of lower level requirements

The primary source of evidence was the NAP and the national policy. Where further evidence was required, interviews were conducted with staff at MSS on multiple occasions. Documentary evidence and government budget books were also consulted in order to create a comprehensive picture of the disability policy process in Timor-Leste.

ii.

EquIPP Findings

Key Action 1: Score 4

The National Action Plan (NAP) was the result of a consultative and participatory process. The Disability Working Group (DWG) coordinated the involvement of disability stakeholders in Timor- Leste and represented the interests of persons with disabilities (PwDs) in drafting the NAP. As

such, the DWG includes Disabled People’s Organizations (DPOs) as well as individual persons with disabilities. Altogether, the formulation of the NAP mobilized 13 organizations from civil society,

including DPOs, and representing different groups of persons with disabilities. Individuals with an intellectual disability were not represented in this process. MSS fully intends to involve the DWG and PwDs on a continuous basis further along in the process. For example, MSS engaged a variety of disability stakeholders across all 13 districts in an inclusive consultation process designed to inform the constitution (role and responsibilities) of a National Council on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CNDPD).

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 1:

Participation of PwDs in developing the National

Set up inclusive and participatory

Action Plan

mechanisms

The secretariat of the DWG “have coordinated and facilitated the active and effective participation of

the DWG, their members and people with a disability”

Key Action 2: Score 4

In drafting the NAP, participation occurred primarily at the national level. It is unclear to what extent the local level was consulted and to what extent representatives from various districts participated in the national policy and NAP development process. There is thus a concern that the level of inclusiveness surrounding the development of these two core documents may not have been optimal. Through the formation of the DWG, the interests of PwDs were represented at the national level. The role of the DWG was primarily advocacy based with no decision-making power delegated to the organization or its members. This, however, is likely to change with the establishment of the Council, as this will delegate decision-making power to the CNDPD. Nonetheless, it would appear that the policy formulation process and the development of the NAP generated a strong sense of ownership.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 2:

Level and quality of participation unclear for National

Comprehensive

Ensure the highest level of

Policy

action

participation

Evidence of joint decision-making and joint

Reference be found in

ownership; particularly by DWG and MSS

National Action Plan; MSS interviews; Draft

Were all organizations working with or for people

Decree Law for the

with different impairments systematically involved in

establishment of the

all sector discussions?

CNDPD; NPWG

Unclear if consultation/participation occurred at district level

Key Action 3: Score 5

The National Action Plan is a cross-sectoral policy framework for disability. Ten line ministries contributed to the development of the NAP, thereby demonstrating good will to priorities disability related activities. Each line ministry nominated a disability focal point as well as three technical staff to work on the implementation of their respective action plans. The NAP has not yet been approved by the Council of Ministers, which diminishes its authority to engage ministries in performing disability related activities.

Though line ministries are supposed to include disability related activities in their annual plans, MSS has no way of ensuring that this occurs. Furthermore, it is unclear whether disability focal points are active and to what extent they are able to promote disability within their respective ministries. Little information is provided on the roles and responsibilities of the disability focal points. The tasks of disability focal points are taken on as ad-hoc commitments by ministry staff. As such, there is no guarantee that focal points will be able to priorities disability related activities on top of their usual workload. Not all focal points are active and there appears to be a high turnover amongst focal points. Furthermore, staff nominated as focal points tend to be lower level officials with less clout in their respective ministries.

The national policy foresees the establishment of the CNDPD, which would act as the coordinator of the national disability policy. Currently still in draft format, the establishment of the CNDPD would allow for a more comprehensive and authoritative coordination of the implementation of the policy.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 3: Strengthen

“This action planning process has been developed,

Comprehensive

coordinated and supported by the Ministry of Social

action +policy

cross-sectoral cooperation Solidarity specifically the Vice Minister; and the department

evaluation

of people with disabilities an d elderly people within the National Division of Social Assistance and Cohesion (DNACS)

Reference can be

… 10 ministries and institutions participated … other

found in National

government institutions …. Civil society DPOs and NGOs …

Action Plan and

International NGOs and Funders (NAP, 7);

National Disability Policy; NPWG

Unclear how cross-sectoral cooperation will occur at the level of implementation

Key Action 4: Score 3

The roles and contributions of lower levels of government are not detailed. While much variation exists, it is unclear how line ministries maintain a local presence for their disability related activities. Furthermore, the NAP does not include any detail on how existing local initiatives could

be aligned to initiatives developed in the NAP. At the local level, some ministries are better represented than others, MSS being a notable example. As part of the decentralization process, MSS works through the National Program for Village Development (PNDS) to establish a local presence and to provide services.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 4: Strengthen inter-

Different for individual line ministries

Moderate action

governmental cooperation

Decentralization process is still in the process of

Reference an be found in

being implemented

National Action Plan and National Disability Policy; MSS interviews

Key Action 5: Score 3

Overall, it would appear that the NAP is the outcome of a participatory planning process in which PwDs were able to express their needs. It remains, however, unclear to what extent members of the DWG and PwDs were able to input into individual ministerial plans. Evidence from the budget 2016 suggests that disability stakeholders were only somewhat successful in including disability related activities (as outlined in NAP) in annual ministerial plans. MSS, the Ministry of Health (MoH) and the Ministry of Education (MoE) included disability related activities in their annual plans, including corresponding funding allocations. Some proposed activities go beyond activities outlined in the NAP.

The existence of significant data gaps (i.e. absence of administrative data and over-reliance on census data) prevent a more objective identification of needs, and therefore impedes evidence- based policymaking. The lack of adequate date sources is acknowledged in the NAP, and individual action plans contained therein propose to engage in data collection efforts.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 5: Plan according to

“The task force meetings enabled people with disabilities

Moderate action

need

to explain their needs and recommendations” (NAP)

Reference can be

Significant data gaps make this difficult

found in National Action Plan; Budget 2016 (book No. 2); MSS interviews; NPWG

Key Action 6: Score 3

The NAP specifies actions by which the needs of PwDs will be addressed and it explicitly references intentions to contribute to greater equity. However, the NAP fails to provide detailed programme level information. As such, it remains vague on what certain activities entail. The action plans included in the NAP appear to address major themes, and the lack of detail may have been intentional. Furthermore, the NAP fails to specify timeframes within which these actions are to be carried out. Timeframes are also absent for disability related activities included in annual plans of the 2016 budget. However, disability related activities listed in the annual exemplars of a few line ministries include detail on indicators, baseline data sources and key implementers.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 6: Specify actions by

Needs and priority problems identified and outlined for

Moderate action

which social needs will be

each issue area in the National Action Plan

addressed

Programmes, activities and expected results outlined to operationalize each objective/strategy of the National

Reference can be

Disability Policy (Action Plan for each of the 10 Ministries)

found in National Action Plan and

Programmes are explicit about intention to level the

National Disability

playing field

Policy; Budget 2016 (book No. 2); NPWG

Programme level information is not very detailed

Key Action 7: Score 3

In Timor-Leste the annual government budget was a line item budget until 2016. In the 2016 government budget (Decree-Law 22/2015), annual plans were costed for the first time. This will permit future assessments of budget execution for disability related activities for individual line ministries.

The format of the NAP was purposefully designed to allow line ministries to use it for their planning and budgeting exercises. Line ministries, however, have been slow to include disability related activities in their annual plans, thus suggesting a lack of prioritization of this issue.

The 2016 budget overview (Budget 1) affirms a commitment by the government to engage with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in which equity features as a cross cutting consideration. A more thorough assessment would be needed to determine the adequacy of government programmes in realizing the SDG agenda. In the budget overview, “disability” is mentioned only once, and there is no mention of “social inclusion”. It is thus difficult to gauge to what extent equity is a guiding principle of the government budget, particularly as a pre-budget statement was not issued for the 2016 edition of the budget.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 7:

“Although there are costs associated with including people

Moderate action

Build equity considerations

with a disability, these are far outweighed by the long-term

into budgets

financial benefits to individuals, families and society” (NAP,

Reference can be

p.60)

found in National Action Plan; Budget

All sectors should cost their disability related activities, using 2016 (Book No. 1

the Ministry of Finance planning template. As such, “the

and 2); MSS

National Disability Action Plan can be used within the

interviews; NPWG

planning and budgeting cycle” (NAP, p.61)

Key Action 8: NA

As information on budget execution is currently not available, engagement with this KA could not

be determined.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 8: Minimize gaps between

NA real and planned budgets

NA

Key Action 9: Score 3

The NAP constitutes the roadmap for the implementation of the national policy for inclusion and promotion of the rights of people with disabilities. The national policy was approved by the Council of Ministers, whereas the NAP has not yet been approved. While 10 line ministries have contributed to the development of this roadmap for implementation, it should be noted that the document lacks authority. As of now, the implementation of the NAP is contingent on the level of priority accorded to disability issues by individual ministries. MSS is the coordinator of the policy but it does not own a mandate to plan disability related activities on behalf of other line ministries. While disability focal points were instated in line ministries, they were unsuccessful in prioritizing disability programmes in their annual action plans.

The plan does not outline detailed implementation architecture: timeframes for implementation are not specified; progress reporting is not streamlined; lead entities are not specified (especially in instances where cooperation between line ministries is required).

Process

Level of policy consideration

Description of engagement

engagement

Key Action 9: Devise a Action plans for all government departments/sectors gathered into

Moderate action

responsive and flexible

one overarching action plan

implementation plan Reference can be

Sectoral action plans were developed in a participatory manner by

found in National

ministerial officials and technical staff, representatives of the

Action Plan; MSS

disability working group and people with disabilities with technical

interviews; NPWG input from international and national NGOs, coordinated by DNACS within the MSS

Coordinating body is MSS (interim) Lead entities: not identified Key implementers: identified Barrier assessment (Education, NAP, p. 12). And Provisions for

updating and modifying the plan are not described

Key Action 10 4 : Score 3

In matters of social assistance, and the various grants and benefit schemes, which fall under this rubric, the NAP would benefit from specifying how individuals are selected to participate in programmes offered. Beyond the NAP, little information is available on how ‘beneficiaries’ are selected to participate in individual programmes. Effective participation in programmes and uptake of services and benefits is contingent upon effective and non-discriminatory selection methodologies, as well as registration support. Though it would appear that MSS deploy elements of community based targeting in their various schemes. This is important in instances where

4 N.B.: This KA does not apply to all sectoral strategies; it is most relevant in the instance of social assistance grants and benefits.

eligible beneficiaries are not aware of their entitlement or face difficulties in registering for or accessing benefits.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 10: Adopt the most

Not relevant for all sectoral programmes and

Moderate action

inclusive selection methodology

activities

MSS interviews; evidence

For social assistance: no selection methodology

of awareness but no

outlined

associated action

Awareness that increased uptake must be promoted

Additional evidence required beyond National Action Plan; NPWG

Key Action 11: Score 4

The National Action Plan adopts the principle of “complementarity” as a guiding principle. While the NAP commits itself to “multi-sectoral and multidisciplinary coordination” involving a variety of implementation partners, the plan provides very little additional information on its implementation architecture. As such it is unclear whom relevant ministries propose to work with in order to implement their strategies.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 11: Select the most

Complementarity in implementation as one of the guiding

Comprehensive

appropriate implementation

principles of the National Disability Policy: “multi-sectoral

action

partners

and multidisciplinary coordination involving public and private entities, non government organizations,

Reference can be

governmental organizations and representatives of

found in National

associations of people with disabilities”

Action Plan; NPWG

No discussion of potential key implementers Little discussion of implementation architecture

Key Action 12: Score 3

In general, the NAP provides very little information on the architecture and coordination of the implementation process. As such, very little information exists in relation to partnerships between In general, the NAP provides very little information on the architecture and coordination of the implementation process. As such, very little information exists in relation to partnerships between

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 12: Encourage

Little information/description on architecture of

Moderate action

cooperation between agencies

implementation

and service providers MSS interviews; NPWG

Key Action 13: Score 3

The National Action Plan was devised on the basis of the most up to date snapshot of the situation for PwDs in Timor-Leste. Unfortunately, this snapshot is not comprehensive enough and relies entirely on census data from 2010, the accuracy of which remains debated. Concerns have been raised that the Census did not capture the true number of PwDs. The policy is currently not monitored or evaluated. None of the line ministries collect administrative data for PwDs. While many of the activities outlined in the plan propose to “collect data”, it should be noted that such propositions lack specification and therefore appear ambiguous. Nonetheless, it is apparent from the NAP that relevant government ministries recognize and value the importance of sound data collection and administration. Similarly, Article 6 of the national policy and the NAP specify that as an independent body, the CNDPD will be tasked “to monitor and evaluate the development of this policy development and the strategies defined for each area of intervention towards harmonization and coordination of measures adopted”.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 13: Collect

Limited data availability

Moderate action

qualitative and quantitative data

Activities scheduled to “collect data” in various sectors

Reference can be found in

– unclear what kind of data and for what purpose

National Action Plan; NPWG

No intention to collect quantitative data Census data available

Health Sector: no information collected on people with disabilities in DHS or administrative data

Key Action 14: Score 3

Individual ministries are aware of the importance of routine data collection for administrative purposes. Yet, as already noted in the evaluation of Key Action 13, insufficient detail is provided in relation to how databases will be created and what information will be recorded. While data gaps are identified as a problem, the NAP does not specify how these will be addressed.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 14: Integrate,

Collect data for persons with disabilities for Vocational

Moderate Action

aggregate, disaggregate and

Training and Employment

share data Limited recognition from

Creation of a health data base

National Action Plan

Data gaps are identified as a problem, yet minimizing

Additional evidence

those gaps is not identified as a priority in individual

required; MSS interviews;

action plans

NPWG

Key Action 15: Score 1

The National Action Plan does not include an indicator framework, which would allow a measurement of progress towards disability related objectives. (see UNESCAP report for a more in-depth discussion on data needs for the monitoring of the national disability policy).

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 15: Select appropriate

No indicators

Recognition

indicator dimensions

Key Action 16: Score 3

The NAP references the need to raise awareness about disability amongst the general population, whilst also informing PwDs about their rights in a bid to enhance the uptake of services and benefits. However, the NAP does not provide additional information on how awareness raising and information dissemination will occur. Information gathered from MSS and other ministries indicates that regular socialization events are organized at the local level to inform PwDs about disability related activities. As part of this socialization process, MSS also seeks to include an awareness-raising component in a bid to change attitudes towards PwDs, which still experience high levels of stigma.

Process consideration Description of engagement Level of policy engagement

Key Action 16: Share Information as a guiding principle of the National Disability Policy:

Moderate action

information with policy “the dissemination of information through various communication beneficiaries

channels allows greater awareness from the community to the

issues of disability and promotion of the rights of people with disabilities” (NAP, p.11) Reference can be

found in National

The Action Plan entails significant actions to share information,

Action Plan; MSS

raise awareness on the situation of people with disabilities and

interviews; NPWG

their rights, which is critical for people to start accessing and claiming them.

Aspects of dissemination strategies are unknown; unclear how context appropriate dissemination will be

Key Action 17: Score 3

Information and knowledge sharing is a central element of participatory governance and constitutes the fundamental building block of an inclusive process and a vital first step in involving the public in policy processes. The National Action Plan does not include an information dissemination strategy. As such it is unclear how policy relevant information will be shared with PwDs. There is no indication through what channels or mediums such information would be distributed. A dissemination strategy should seek to rectify an information divides that may further disadvantage PwDs from fully participation in society.

Two notable examples of inclusive dissemination are the development of a citizen budget in Tetum (2016) and the local consultation supporting the preparation for the establishment of the National Disability Council.

Process consideration

Description of engagement

Level of policy engagement

Key Action 17: Share information

Moderate action -Regional with the policy community

No indication that information produced will be

shared with the wider policy community

consultation for the establishment of a National Disability Council; NPWG

Mapping the inclusiveness of the National Action Plan

Figure 1: Graph of the Inclusiveness of the Process

Discussion of EquIPP Finding

The average score across all applicable Key Actions is 3, suggesting an overall moderate engagement with KAs. No KA received a scored of 0 which indicates that all elements of inclusion were present in the process so far. KA 3 received a score of 5, indicating the coordination mechanism of the national policy is conducive to collaboration amongst various ministries. In this analysis, the highest score, which could possibly be awarded, is 5, given that stakeholder satisfaction was not measured. Higher scores of 6 or 7 can only be awarded if vulnerable groups are asked to indicate their level of satisfaction of engagement with the process and any outcomes thereof (i.e. the national policy, or the NAP).

It would be interesting to repeat this assessment once the CNDPD has been established, as the functions of this body are likely to improve the scores for various KAs. The draft decree law for the establishment of the Council is pending approval by the Council of Ministers. There are reasons to believe that the Council will be able to address many of the coordination issues currently apparent in the implementation of this policy. The NAP has not been approved by the Council of Ministers and therefore does not constitute a government document. As such, line ministries are not required to implement the action plan. The Council, however, will be in a stronger position to push for the inclusion of disability related activities to be included in annual plans of specific ministries. Just as with focal point nominations, it is crucial that higher-level public servants are appointed to the Council, who would be in a stronger position to advocate for the inclusion of disability related activities in their annual plans.

A further concern raised by the NPWG in the assessment exercise, made reference to the miscommunication between CSOs, DPOs and ministries which currently impedes effective collaboration and coordination of disability stakeholders in Timor-Leste. The Council is likely to provide disability stakeholders with a new and more authoritative forum to coordinate disability related activities. As the Council will also be mandated to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the policy, related KAs would also be likely to score higher in subsequent assessments.

Key Action

Score

Key Action