evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Disability-Inclusive Graduation (DIG) Programme — Northern Uganda

Uganda · Gulu · See the Uganda profile

Evidence: Randomised controlled trial Top 67% 52/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

DIG adapted BRAC's Ultra-Poor Graduation model for 2,700 ultra-poor participants (70% women) in Northern Uganda. A cluster-RCT found no significant drop in overall illness, but a significant gain in met healthcare needs, with gender-differentiated effects.

370
Trial participants with disabilities (intervention arm) (2020–2023)
321
Trial participants with disabilities (control arm) (2020–2023)
0.4 adjusted odds ratio, p=0.002
Reduction in unmet health needs (adjusted odds ratio, 16 months) (16-month follow-up)
2,700
Total programme participants (2017–2023)

Details

Maturity
Pilot
Promoter
BRAC, with Humanity & Inclusion and the National Union of Women with Disabilities of Uganda (NUWODU)
Period
2017–2023
Keywords
disability inclusion, economic empowerment, ultra-poverty graduation, gender-disaggregated evaluation

Context

Northern Uganda faces intersecting challenges of ultra-poverty and disability exclusion; BRAC's long-running Ultra-Poor Graduation model — already replicated in 10+ countries — had not previously been explicitly adapted for people with disabilities.

Objectives

Co-designed in 2017 by BRAC, Humanity & Inclusion (HI) and the National Union of Women with Disabilities of Uganda (NUWODU), the Disability-Inclusive Graduation (DIG) programme set out to adapt BRAC's Ultra-Poor Graduation model to explicitly include people with disabilities, testing whether disability-specific supports could improve health and economic outcomes for this population.

Activities

Across the Northern Ugandan districts of Kiryandongo, Gulu, Nwoya and Oyam, the 18-month programme combined unconditional cash transfers, livelihood asset transfers and training, savings-group access, and disability-specific supports (occupational, physical and psychosocial therapy; bi-monthly home visits; and community sensitisation) for 2,700 people living in ultra-poverty, at least 15% of whom had disabilities and 70% of whom were women.

Results

A cluster-randomised controlled trial (370 intervention vs 321 control participants with disabilities, delivered December 2020–June 2022, followed up through October–November 2023) found no statistically significant reduction in overall illness or injury prevalence at either follow-up. It did find a statistically significant, progressively larger reduction in unmet health needs (adjusted odds ratio 0.4, p=0.002, at 16 months), alongside gender-differentiated effects: women in the intervention arm reported fewer injuries but more pain-related conditions than men.

Conclusions

The trial and its honest, mixed results have been published in a peer-reviewed journal, and BRAC has used the experience to produce a public 'Considerations for Implementing Best Practices' guide intended to help other organisations replicate or adapt the disability-inclusive approach elsewhere.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k)
Time to results
Medium (1–3 years) — 18-month intervention delivered December 2020–June 2022, with follow-up surveys through October–November 2023; overall programme co-design began 2017.
Staffing & skills
Co-designed and delivered by BRAC, Humanity & Inclusion (HI) and the National Union of Women with Disabilities of Uganda (NUWODU); disability-specific components delivered by occupational, physical and psychosocial therapy staff conducting bi-monthly home visits.

Conditions for success

  • Combined cash and asset transfers with disability-specific therapeutic support and community sensitisation, rather than economic support alone.
  • Direct involvement of a disabled-persons' organisation (NUWODU) in co-design.

Common failure modes

  • The trial found no statistically significant reduction in overall illness or injury prevalence, meaning the programme's broader health-improvement goal was not demonstrated despite the significant gain in met healthcare needs.

Where it fits

Governance type
NGO-led, disability-inclusive design
Scale
sub-national (4 districts, Northern Uganda)
Income level
low-income

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.

Similar practices you may find useful