Alternative Responses to the Human Resource Challenge for CBR

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Ethics and Community-Based Rehabilitation: Eight Ethical Questions from a Review of the Literature

“…Through this process, we associated texts with partnerships among stakeholders, 3,5,6,16–29 respect for culture and local experience, 7,9,18,25,26,28,30–38 empowerment, 5,7–9,17–19,23,25,28,30,37,39–43 accountability, 2,5,8,9,17,20,21,23,24,27,30,34,36,40,42,44–47 and fairness in programme design. 10,11,17,18,20,27,28,30,40,48–58 During our analysis we also considered each topic area in relation to all of the collected texts.…”

Training Needs of Community-based Rehabilitation Workers for the Effective Implementation of CBR Programmes

“…CBR workers also need training in facilitating development at the community level rather than focusing only on individual interventions (Chappell and Johannsmeier, 2009;Magallona and Datangel, 2011). Technical skills in each of the CBR domains is necessary; however, training must develop reflective, critical thinkers who demonstrate compassion and creativity in their approach to empowering persons with disabilities and their communities (Magallona and Datangel, 2011;Kuipers and Cornielje, 2012;Rule, 2013).…”

“…In line with CBR's principles of participation and empowerment, the inclusion of persons with disabilities in developing and delivering training appears to be widely acknowledged; however, limited details are provided with respect to the actual implementation of this (Deepak, 2011;Kuipers and Cornielje, 2012;O'Dowd et al, 2015;Gilmore et al, 2017). Kuipers and Cornielje (2012) argue that CBR should not only be concerned with the "supply" of human personnel but also with meeting the "demand"; i.e., that persons with disabilities and their communities should identify the competencies/training requirements of CBR workers in accordance with their support needs. The active involvement of persons with disabilities and their communities in all aspects of CBR, including training, fosters ownership which leads to commitment, empowerment and sustainability, with less dependence on external aid and direction (Brandsma et al, 2008;Pollard and Sakellariou, 2008;Morrison et al, 2017).…”

“…Government leadership and support is also important in establishing credible and sustainable training programmes to ensure both national and international commitment to pursue inclusive development through CBR (Lehmann, 2008;Hartley et al, 2009;Kuipers and Cornielje, 2012;Lewis Gargett et al, 2016;M'kumbuzi and Myezwa, 2016). Since governments are responsible for developing and implementing policies as well as for the coordination and provision of resources (M'kumbuzi and Myezwa, 2016), CBR programmes need to maintain effective collaboration with governmental bodies when developing comprehensive policies on training and the role of mid-level CBR workers (Chappell and Johannsmeier, 2009).…”

“…Many authors are strongly in favour of developing a baseline level of competency standards and consistency to ensure quality services; however, several caution against a generic approach to training that ignores the context and uniqueness of each CBR programme (Rule et al, 2006;Mullan and Frehywot, 2007;Lehmann, 2008;Chappell and Johannsmeier, 2009;Kendall et al, 2011;MacLachlan et al, 2011;O'Dowd et al, 2015;Gilmore et al, 2017). Kuipers and Cornielje (2012) argue that uniform protocols and competencies do not allow for reflexivity and creativity, whilst asserting that varying approaches regarding staffing and training are inadequate, and that comprehensive policies on training and the role of midlevel workers are required. Although seemingly contradictory, perhaps some standardised approach to training of CBR workers does not necessarily negate local, contextually-relevant training.…”