UNIVERSITY OF GOROKA
Institute of technical education & training
DIVISION OF applied science
Taf 431: social policy
ASSIGMENT TASK#1: CRITICAL EVALUATION ON DISABILITY SERVICES IN PNG
Student Detail
Name
ID#
PROGRAM
Course Code
COURSE TITLE
TUTOR/LECTURE
LENNITHA NAPA
2022316028
BACHELOR EDUCATION APPLIED SCIENCE
431
SOCIAL POLICY
Mr. HAMENA
TOPIC: Disability Services in Papua New Guinea
Introduction
 The name of the work, the date of its creation and the name of the creator.
Disability services in Papua New Guinea (PNG) continue to face serious challenges, including
limited access to support, poor infrastructure, lack of trained staff, and strong social stigma
against people with disabilities. Many people living with disabilities in PNG do not receive the
help they need, especially in rural areas where services are almost non-existent. There are also
very few schools or workplaces that are inclusive, making it hard for people with disabilities to
participate fully in society.
In 2015, Roger Stanhope wrote a detailed report titled "Disability in Papua New Guinea: A
Review of the Literature", for the Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs and
Trade (DFAT). His report looks at what has been written and reported about disability in PNG
and helps us understand the major problems in this area. It shows that people with disabilities are
often forgotten in national planning and decision-making. It also points out that the government
has not fully followed through on its promises, even though PNG signed the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2013.
Stanhope’s work is important because it brings together useful information and gives clear
recommendations for improvement. It highlights the need for stronger laws, better data
collection, more community awareness, and greater inclusion of people with disabilities in all
parts of life. This critical evaluation will look closely at what the report gets right, where it could
be improved, and what it means for the future of disability services in PNG.
 Summary of the work being critiqued.
Roger Stanhope’s 2015 report, "Disability in Papua New Guinea: A Review of the Literature",
gives a clear overview of the problems faced by people with disabilities in PNG. The report
looks at different types of research and information available at the time to understand how
people with disabilities live, what services are available to them, and what challenges they face
every day. Stanhope points out that there is not enough reliable data or statistics on disability in
PNG, which makes it difficult to plan proper services or support. Many people with disabilities
live in poverty, have limited education opportunities, and struggle to access healthcare or jobs.
The report also talks about the role of the government and non-government organizations
(NGOs) in providing support. While there are some efforts being made such as policies and
partnerships with international donors the report shows that these efforts are often poorly funded,
not well-organized, and do not reach everyone who needs them. Rural areas are especially left
out, with most disability services being available only in urban centers like Port Moresby.
Stanhope also highlights cultural attitudes in PNG, where disability is sometimes misunderstood
or seen as a result of bad luck or punishment. These negative beliefs lead to people with
disabilities being hidden away or excluded from community life. The report stresses the
importance of raising awareness and educating communities to change these views.
Another important part of the report is its focus on PNG's agreement to follow international
disability rights, especially the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (CRPD). Although PNG signed this agreement, the report shows that there is still a
big gap between what the country promised and what is actually being done.
Finally, Stanhope gives several recommendations for how to improve disability services in PNG.
These include collecting better data, increasing funding, training more disability workers,
improving access to schools and health services, and making sure that people with disabilities are
included in all levels of planning and decision-making.
Critical Evaluation
 Outline evaluation of each element of the work to achieve the overall purpose used
evidence, from the work itself as well as other sources.
Roger Stanhope's 2015 report provides a comprehensive review of existing literature on
disability in Papua New Guinea (PNG). While the report offers valuable insights, several aspects
warrant critical examination to assess its effectiveness in guiding future disability services in
PNG.
1. Scope and Depth of Literature Review
Stanhope's report synthesizes a wide range of existing literature, offering a broad overview of the
challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in PNG. However, the reliance on secondary
sources may limit the depth of understanding regarding the lived experiences of people with
disabilities. Incorporating primary data through interviews or surveys could have enriched the
report's findings and provided a more nuanced perspective.
2. Data Availability and Reliability
The report highlights the scarcity of reliable data on disability in PNG, which hampers effective
planning and service delivery. While this observation is accurate, the report could have further
explored potential strategies for improving data collection methods and the establishment of
comprehensive disability databases. Collaborating with local organizations and stakeholders
could enhance data accuracy and reliability.
3. Policy Analysis and Recommendations
Stanhope discusses existing policies and frameworks, such as the National Policy on Disability
2015–2025. While the report acknowledges these initiatives, it could have provided a more
detailed analysis of their implementation status and effectiveness. Evaluating the impact of these
policies through case studies or assessments would offer a clearer picture of their success and
areas needing improvement.
4. Cultural Considerations
The report touches upon cultural attitudes towards disability in PNG but does not delve deeply
into how these attitudes influence service delivery. Understanding cultural perceptions is crucial
for designing interventions that are culturally sensitive and widely accepted. Engaging with local
communities to explore these perceptions could inform more effective strategies for promoting
inclusion.
5. Stakeholder Involvement
Stanhope emphasizes the importance of involving various stakeholders, including government
agencies, NGOs, and communities, in disability service provision. However, the report could
have provided more concrete examples of successful collaborations or partnerships. Highlighting
such examples would demonstrate practical applications of stakeholder involvement and
encourage replication of successful models.
6. Implementation Challenges
The report identifies several challenges in implementing disability services, such as inadequate
funding and infrastructure. While these challenges are acknowledged, the report could have
offered more detailed solutions or best practices to address them. Providing actionable
recommendations would assist policymakers and practitioners in overcoming these barriers.
7. Monitoring and Evaluation
Stanhope's report outlines the need for effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to assess
the impact of disability services. However, it lacks a detailed framework for monitoring and
evaluating these services. Developing a clear and systematic approach to monitoring would
ensure accountability and continuous improvement in service delivery.
 To back ad illustrate assessment of element of the work.
1. Review of Existing Information – Good Start but Missing Voices of Real People
In his report, Stanhope talks about different studies and reports written by groups like the World
Health Organization (WHO) and the PNG government. This gives a big picture of the situation.
But he mostly uses reports written by other people and doesn’t include the real stories of people
with disabilities. For example, a 2017 report by CBM Australia involved people with disabilities
directly in the research, asking them what problems they face. This gave a better understanding
of real-life experiences. Stanhope’s report could have been stronger if it included voices from the
community.
2. Lack of Good Data – Clearly Shown, but No Plan to Fix It
Stanhope says one of the biggest problems is that PNG doesn’t have good data about how many
people have disabilities or what services they need. This matches what the UN said in 2019:
PNG doesn’t collect enough useful information about disability. But Stanhope doesn’t suggest
how to solve this. Other groups, like the UN and CBM, suggest using simple disability questions
(called the Washington Group Questions) in the national census to collect better data. This is
something Stanhope could have included as a solution.
3. Government Policies – Good Ideas, But Not Working Well
Stanhope talks about the National Disability Policy (2015–2025) and says it has good goals, like
helping people with disabilities go to school and get jobs. But he also says these plans are not
really happening. Human Rights Watch (2021) agrees, saying that many children with
disabilities still can’t go to school, even though the policy says they should be included.
Stanhope could have looked more closely at what parts of the policy are working and what parts
are not.
4. Cultural Beliefs – Important Point, But Needs More Detail
Stanhope explains that in some communities in PNG, disability is seen as a curse or punishment.
This leads to people with disabilities being hidden or treated badly. A 2018 report from Light for
the World found the same thing—some families feel ashamed and don’t let disabled relatives
take part in normal life. Stanhope mentions this, but he could have talked more about what’s
being done to change these beliefs. For example, Callan Services runs community programs to
teach people that disability is not a curse. Sharing success stories like this would help show how
to change attitudes.
5. Role of Organizations – Mentioned, But Not Explained in Full
Stanhope says that groups like NGOs (for example, Cheshire Disability Services and Callan
Services) are helping provide services. But he doesn’t give examples of what these organizations
have done. For instance, CBM worked with Callan Services to train teachers on how to support
students with disabilities. This led to more children with disabilities going to school. Stanhope’s
report would be stronger if it included real examples like this to show what works.
 Overall evaluation based on the critical reading
Overall, Roger Stanhope’s 2015 report, "Disability in Papua New Guinea: A Review of the
Literature", makes an important contribution by pulling together information on the situation of
people with disabilities in Papua New Guinea (PNG). It successfully shows that disability is a
serious issue in the country, and that many people with disabilities face big challenges in areas
such as education, health, transport, and employment. The report also highlights that there are
very few services available in rural areas, where most of PNG’s population lives.
One of the report’s strongest points is how clearly it explains the lack of good data. Without
knowing how many people have disabilities or what kind of support they need, it is very hard for
the government or organizations to plan and provide services. Stanhope also does well in
showing that there is a big gap between what PNG has promised by signing international
agreements like the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and what
is actually happening on the ground. He makes it clear that more action is needed.
However, the report also has some weaknesses. First, it mostly uses information from other
reports and does not include much input from people with disabilities themselves. This means we
hear a lot about people with disabilities, but not much from them. Including real-life experiences
would have made the report more powerful and helped decision-makers understand the daily
struggles people face.
Second, while the report points out many problems, it does not give enough detailed solutions.
For example, it says that disability data is poor, but it does not suggest tools or methods for how
to improve it. Other organizations, like CBM and the United Nations, have recommended tools
like the Washington Group Questions that are easy to use and could be added to PNG’s national
surveys. These kinds of solutions could have made the report more helpful for policy and
planning.
Third, Stanhope talks about the role of cultural beliefs and stigma in PNG but could have gone
further by giving examples of how these beliefs have been challenged through awareness
programs. In places where local organizations, like Callan Services, have worked with
communities, people have started to understand disability in more positive ways. Including these
real stories would have shown that change is possible and already happening in some areas.
Lastly, the report talks about the role of NGOs and international partners but does not explore
how these partnerships actually work or how successful they have been. A closer look at working
models of inclusive education, healthcare access, or community-based rehabilitation would have
added value to the report.
Overall Conclusion
The critical evaluation of Roger Stanhope’s 2015 report, "Disability in Papua New Guinea: A
Review of the Literature", shows that while the report is a valuable starting point for
understanding disability issues in Papua New Guinea (PNG), it has both strengths and
weaknesses. The report does a good job of showing the serious problems faced by people with
disabilities, such as lack of access to services, negative cultural attitudes, and poor government
planning. It also correctly highlights the lack of reliable data, which makes it hard to create
effective disability programs (Stanhope, 2015).
However, the report mostly uses information from other sources and lacks the voices and
experiences of people with disabilities themselves. This limits its ability to truly represent the
lived realities of those it talks about. More recent work by CBM Australia (2017) shows how
involving people with disabilities directly in research gives better and more useful results. In
addition, the report talks about problems but does not provide clear, practical solutions. For
example, it does not mention helpful tools like the Washington Group Questions, which are now
used around the world to improve disability data (UNESCAP, 2019).
The report also talks briefly about stigma and traditional beliefs, but it could have given
examples of local success stories, such as the work done by Callan Services in changing public
attitudes (Light for the World, 2018). Real-life case studies would have made the report more
helpful for organizations and policymakers.
In summary, Stanhope’s report plays an important role in raising awareness, but it needs more
practical ideas, stronger examples, and real voices from the disability community. With these
improvements, future work can better support disability inclusion in PNG.
References

Stanhope, R. (2015). Disability in Papua New Guinea: A Review of the Literature.
Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).

CBM Australia. (2017). Disability-Inclusive Development in Papua New Guinea. CBM
Australia.

UNESCAP. (2019). Building Disability-Inclusive Societies in Asia and the Pacific.
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific.

Light for the World. (2018). Understanding Disability Stigma in Papua New Guinea: A
Community-Based Study.