“Making disability information accessible to individuals from Black & Minority Ethnic groups”
A review of current findings and thinking
June 2008
SID (Social Information on Disability)
as part of an
EHRC (Equality & Human Rights Commission)
funded project
Conclusions
A common theme of this literature
review seems to be summed up in the words of one respondent -
‘I just never thought the service was for me or my family’
This may be due to a lack of expectation regarding the quality of life and health with old age, uncertainties about rights and eligibility or a lack of awareness about the ways that both information and services can and are adapted to meet the needs of specific groups of individuals. Whatever the root cause, the result is the same – isolation and lack of life choices.
This is central to our work at SID, and confirms that this is an area in which there is much work to be done within Surrey, as elsewhere.
Specific issues for specific groups
The issues are complex, and the presenting barriers tend to be specific to a particular group. For example, one piece of research found that 91% of Bangladeshi respondents thought that written information would be useful, compared to, just 48% of Pakistani individuals. A blanket response in terms of either service provision or resource development would therefore be inappropriate.
As the review of literature has grown, we have become aware of the breadth of the issues to address, and the fact that we will need to select specific groups on which to focus our work, if we are to do more than just touch the surface.
We are aware that this report has focused on the different disabilities, and has not gone down the more detailed route of looking at the impact of these disabilities on specific ethnic groups.
Key issues
The BME groups interviewed in the 2005 research ‘Consultation with BME Communities’ for Surrey Supporting People Team, Surrey County Council, carried out by PS Consultants, (17 respondents) felt that two issues were the most serious – frail elderly people or older people with support needs, and people with mental health needs.
The BME individuals (191 respondents) agreed with this, but also perceived learning difficulties to be a quite serious problem too.
Examples of good practice
In the course of the literature review we have found considerable information on the potential barriers to accessing both information and services, but few examples of good practice. While there are references to work that has been undertaken, it would seem that these are seldom written up, so that the experiences and outcomes are often not shared.
From the point of view of the next stage of SID’s EHRC funded project this means that more research will be needed at a grassroots level if we are to be able to build on the work of others (as well as developing our own initiatives). It also indicates the importance to us in writing up the work at the conclusion of our one year project, so that others can learn from our experience.
Next stage of the project
The research report revealed the importance of tailoring information to the needs of specific groups. This has led us to reconsider the way in which the work – both in terms of identifying needs and developing resources - would be approached.
We have realised that, while initially we saw disability combined with BME issues in Surrey to be a specific area of work in itself, it actually constitutes an amorphous grouping for which it would be inappropriate to seek a single response. We have therefore identified five areas (see Appendix 2) which, on the basis of the initial desk-based research, we feel both warrant further investigation and are areas in which we might be able to have a positive impact.
The research report also highlighted the important role of the specialist Voluntary and Community Sector organisations working with each particular group in delivering services aimed at their client group. We therefore recognised that our success in engaging these groups in this project work will be key to its success. This may not always be possible, for a variety of reasons, within the one year timeframe of this project, so we anticipate that we may only be able to take forward work in a maximum of three of the identified focus areas.
This does not affect the principle activities of the project already agreed, but provides a more specific focus for both activities and monitoring as the project develops.
<< Previous Page Contents Page Next Page >>
The full document is available to download as a PDF.
For further information fill in the form on our contact page.