evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

AT-Info-Map — Mapping Assistive Technology Suppliers Across Southern Africa

Botswana · Gaborone · See the Botswana profile · See the Gaborone profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 55% 72/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

SAFOD, the University of Washington, Stellenbosch University and Dimagi piloted AT-Info-Map, an offline mobile directory of assistive-technology suppliers, training 352 stakeholders across Botswana, Zambia, Malawi and Lesotho before simplifying the design for sustainability.

352
Stakeholders trained across four countries
717,728 USD
Grant funding
AT-Info-Map — Mapping Assistive Technology Suppliers Across Southern Africa

Details

Maturity
Discontinued
Promoter
Southern Africa Federation of the Disabled (SAFOD)
Period
2016-2019
Keywords
assistive technology, disability inclusion, mobile mapping, mHealth

Context

In Sub-Saharan Africa, an estimated 85-95% of people who need assistive technology (AT) do not have access to it, largely because they cannot find out where it is available. The Southern Africa Federation of the Disabled (SAFOD), representing ten national disability federations, set out to close that gap.

Activities

With a $717,728 Google.org Impact Challenge: Disabilities grant, SAFOD worked with the University of Washington, Stellenbosch University and Dimagi to build AT-Info-Map, an offline-capable mobile app on the CommCare/Open Data Kit platform mapping AT suppliers.

Results

The pilot launched in Botswana in 2016 and expanded regionally; SAFOD's national affiliates identified and trained 352 individuals in total — 112 in Zambia, 87 in Lesotho, 86 in Malawi and 67 in Botswana — simplifying the original 23-category AT taxonomy to 18 plain-language categories.

Conclusions

High mobile-data costs and difficulty accessing public health-sector information restricted uptake among the poorest users who needed AT most; the team scaled back the app's ambition from real-time product tracking to a simpler, more sustainable supplier directory, and no public record was found of the app continuing beyond the Google.org grant period (through April 2019).

Implementation
Indicative cost
Low (< €50k) — $717,728 Google.org grant.
Time to results
Medium (1–3 years) — Piloted 2016-2019.
Staffing & skills
SAFOD national affiliates, University of Washington, Stellenbosch University, Dimagi

Conditions for success

  • Offline-capable design for low-connectivity settings
  • Simplifying the taxonomy from 23 to 18 plain-language categories after pilot feedback

Common failure modes

  • High mobile-data costs restricted uptake among the poorest, most in-need users
  • App ambition scaled back, and no evidence of continuation beyond the grant period (April 2019)

Commonly funded by

Philanthropic / foundation funding

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful