INDEX OF PARTICIPATION

OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

IN DECISION-MAKING
GEORGIA

Table of Contents
1.

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Contextual Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 4

2.

3.

Methodology......................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.

Aims and Objectives of the Study ................................................................................................. 5

2.2.

Design of the Study ....................................................................................................................... 5

Analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 7
3.1.1.

Analysis of Interviews with the PWDs................................................................................... 7

3.1.2.

Personal Independence and the Family ................................................................................ 8

3.1.3.

Inclusion and Barriers Associated to It.................................................................................. 8

3.1.4.

Involvement in Decision Making Processes According to Gender ........................................ 9

3.1.5.

Participation in Elections..................................................................................................... 10

3.2. Analysis of Interviews with DPO Representatives ........................................................................... 11

3.2.1. Inclusiveness of the Decision Making Process .......................................................................... 11
3.2.2. Cooperation between the Government and the DPOs............................................................. 12
3.2.3. Communication with the Media ............................................................................................... 12
3.3. Analysis of Interviews with Decision Makers ................................................................................... 13
3.3.1. Cooperation between Public Authorities and PWDs ................................................................ 13
3.3.2. Employment at the State Agencies ........................................................................................... 13
3.3.3. Stereotypes about PWDs .......................................................................................................... 13
4. Comparative Analysis of the Results of Interviews with the Target Groups .......................................... 14
4.1. The Importance of Non-Formal Education ...................................................................................... 14
4.2. The Changes in Recent Years in Decision Making Processes ........................................................... 15
4.3 General Involvement in Public Life ................................................................................................... 16
5.

Physical Accessibility ........................................................................................................................... 16

5.1.

The Monitoring Methodology of the Physical Accessibility ........................................................ 16

5.2.

Accessible Environment .............................................................................................................. 17

5.3.

Accessibility of Polling Stations ................................................................................................... 19

6. Main Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 20

7. Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 20
8. Final Remarks .......................................................................................................................................... 21
Appendix 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 23

1. Introduction
The present study was conducted in the framework of the project "From Inclusion to
Participation in Decision-making. Research is one of the directions of the project; its aims
are to evaluate the level of involvement of persons with disabilities (PWDs) in decision
making processes and then to increase the involvement through advocacy. The project is
supported by the EU and is carried out simultaneously in Georgia, Armenia, and Moldova. In
Georgia it is implemented by the Coalition for Independent Living.
The present study aims to study the involvement of people with disabilities in the decision
making processes, to analyze perceptions of decision makers, of PWDs, and of Disabled
Peoples Organizations DPOs.
The final analysis was prepared on the basis of qualitative data that had been collected for
the study. The study analyzes the differences that exist between decision makers, PWDs
and DPO representatives regarding the issue.
The study shows that stereotypical attitudes towards people with disabilities are still strong
in Georgia. Such views are common not only among society and state, but also among the
people with disabilities. Discriminatory attitudes in society are strong, which, in the best
case are revealed through pitying PWDs or offering assistance to them.
Overall, the results of this study replicate results and of previous studies on this matter, and
demonstrates that Georgia is still a country where there is no inclusive environment and the
level of involvement in decision making processes is very low.
The study also showed that the opinions of PWDs and decision-makers about the same
issue are often incompatible with each other; this was anticipated and even considered as
one of the hypotheses of the study. More precisely, different government officials
emphasize their past or current activities about the involvement of PWDs in the decision
making processes, while the members of the community are not satisfied with the
cooperation and its efficiency with local or central governments.
The results of the present study will enable state agencies, as well as local and international
non-governmental organizations to take into account the problems and obstacles that
disabled persons face in the decision making process and to plan their activities accordingly
in order to contribute to a more inclusive process.
The results will be useful and interesting for following target groups:
o State agencies;

o International organizations in Georgia;

o Local non-governmental organizations;
o PWDs and DPOs.

Contextual Analysis
According to the information of the Social Service Agency of Ministry of Labour, Health and
Social Affiars of Georgia, by September, 2016 there are registered 125 0221 people with
disabilities in Georgia, who receive social benefits from the state. They make approximately
3.3% of the general population (3 720.4 thousands).
Despite the fact that the recent years important steps were taken to improve country's political
and social environment for the disabled people's involvement there is the still slow pace of
progress. The physical environment, the negative social attitudes, legislation and many other
factors continue to pose barriers to their full participation in social, political, economic and
cultural life. As a result, people with disabilities remain the one of the marginalized groups, who
are rarely allowed on equal terms of going to school, finding a job, use of public transport and
live independently.
In 2014, the Parliament of Georgia has ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities. The government has approved the Action Plan for the Provision of Equal Rights for
Persons with Disabilities for the years 2014-2016. While ratification of UNCRPD an enormous
societal and legal step forward, the question is how the Government and society will live up to
their UNCRPD and national law obligations.
In order to properly protect the rights of persons with disabilities it is important that the
community itself was actively involved in ongoing socio-political processes, especially when the
issues relate to them. Through involvement they will have more responsibility and motivation
to require protection of their rights from the decision-makers. It is a commonly known fact that
the people with disabilities can be the best advocates of their issues.

http://ssa.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=GEO&sec_id=1191, 2016

2. Methodology
2.1. Aims and Objectives of the Study
The aim of the study was to examine the PWDs involvement in decision making processes.
Following topics were outlined:
o Involvement of the disabled persons in family and social life;
o Understanding of involvement among the disabled persons and decision makers;
o Main reasons hindering the involvement;
o Cooperation strategies between PWDs, their organizations, and the decision making
authorities.

2.2.

Design of the Study

People with various disabilities, representatives of the DPOs, and decision-making bodies on
local and central levels were interviewed for this study. The in-depth interview technique
was used for the study. It involved 30 respondents.
Three categories of respondents were selected as the main target groups of the study: (1)
PWDs, (2) DPOs, and (3) Decision-making persons. Selection of these categories was due to
the fact that all three categories represent concerned parties directly involved in the
process.
Methodology
Method
Technique
Target group
Sample size
Sample technique
Research area
Length of interviews

Qualitative study
Face-to-face interview
Disabled population of Georgia 18+
30 participants
Snow-ball
Georgia
50-60 minutes

Number of interviewed respondents are given on the diagram:

3. Analysis
3.1.1. Analysis of Interviews with the PWDs
Fifteen PWDs were interviewed for this study (11 male and 4 female) in Tbilisi and in the
regions. The age range of the participants is 25-50 years.
Types of disabilities:

3.1.2. Personal Independence and the Family

Interviewed people with disabilities feel themselves as strong, independent individuals and
therefore, their involvement in the decision-making process is high. However, according to the
Wheelchair-user
participants, physical obstacles and non-accessible infrastructure in the country
considerably
impede their level of independence: I would be much more independent, if not Georgias level
of development and infrastructure.
11 participants out of 15 rate their independence level as 7-10 at a 10-point scale, while the
remaining 4 participants rate as 3-6 points.

3.1.3. Inclusion and Barriers Associated to It

Interviewed PWDs consider that their desire to be actively involved in decision making
processes is high. However, according to them, this involvement is almost never initiated by the
authorities.
We do not face many obstacles in case we take initiative. But there is no initiative from their
side.
PWDs talk about the factors that hinder their participation in public life. First of all, these
factors are mistakes that local or central governments make in the process of creating
accessible infrastructure. More precisely, due to the fact that PWDs are not consulted in the
planning stage, buildings often violate internationally required standards.

One of the listed problems is the fact that in case the authorities ignore recommendations, the
recommenders and organizations do not possess any other leverage than the Court to demand
the implementation of the recommendations. Litigating is costly, which is an obstacle not only
for individuals, but also for organizations.
Interviews with persons with disabilities show that in many cases cooperation with various
state agencies is narrowed down to cooperation with specific individuals:
It is on the level of specific individuals: there works some good guy who thinks that this should
be done and is actually doing the work; but if tomorrow this guy moves to other position that is
less connected to such activities then these activities will be suspended too, nothing will happen
anymore.
Even those people, who try to get you involved, ask advice, are under so much bureaucratic
and other kinds of pressure that they might believe you and genuinely want to take your advice
into consideration, but there are so many people above them, who control and filter all these
processes that final decision is still taken without PWDs involvement.
Some disabled individuals are not satisfied with the work of non-governmental organizations
and consider their work ineffective.
They are not pushy enough, they are not demanding They are compromising too much with
the state, as usual.
According to them, DPOs do not work in a coordinated manner. The participants talked about
the discordances between the NGOs in the field as the main hindering factors for determining
important and priority issues for the community.
Organizations that work on this issue do not communicate with each other, or constantly fight
with each other, they do not cooperate.

3.1.4. Involvement in Decision Making Processes According to Gender

Eleven male and four female participants were interviewed for the study. Based on these
interviews, we can conclude that gender is not a decisive factor in determining public
participation. The study revealed that during the decision making processes both males and
females are equally active or/and passive. All of female participants lead active social life. They
also mention cases of double-discrimination.

10

Although among state institutions employees with disabilities men are relatively more than
women, this may not be directly related to disabilities, because generally more men are
employed in the state agencies than women.
Employment field for PWDs:

3.1.5. Participation in Elections

The study shows that the interviewed PWDs actively participate in elections despite the fact
that most of the polling stations are not accessible. I have not missed any elections, this is the
only leverage. Some of them, though, prefer home delivery of the ballot box in order to vote.
The majority or the participants manage to go to the polling station. Only a low number vote by
home delivery of the ballot box.

11

3.2. Analysis of Interviews with DPO Representatives

3.2.1. Inclusiveness of the Decision Making Process
The study shows that the organizations working with PWDs are not satisfied with the level of
involvement of the community.
Legislation more or less guarantees the involvement in the decision making process which, is
not used actively by citizens and especially, by the PWDs. Even the issues discussed at the City
Council meetings we have attended many such discussions and we have not seen community
discussing budget or such matters. And then they complain about it Legislation provides
engagement, but they dont engage themselves. We think that society has to be more mobilized
in this direction as they do not have motivation.
Organizations also mention governments unresponsiveness and their responsibilities:
The local authorities are to blame here: when the civil society is weak, the authorities take
advantage of it. If the society were stronger, they wouldnt dare this. They would either monitor
regularly or prepare reports or something and then they would not be able to be inactive.
Based on the study, we can conclude that a significantly low number of DPOs is active in the
regions outside of Tbilisi. Besides, in the regions stereotypes are prevalent among the
community itself (organizations only eat grants, they only work for themselves). However,
despite these remarks, their work with the community is still positively evaluated. In addition,
one of the major problems named was the lack of qualified PWDs who would be employed for
local DPOs. Direct involvement in DPOs work is difficult as the majority of PWDs do not have
the proper education due to schools inaccessibility for people with physical or other
impairment.

12

DPOs believe that raising awareness among the community is the most important issue, as their
indifference in most cases is due to the fact that they are not aware of their rights.
All surveyed DPOs noted that one of the decision-making authorities should involve at least one
disabled individual as they have the highest competence and know the needs of the
community. According to the interviews, the cooperation between the PWDs, DPOs and
decision making authorities will be successful and efficient only when individuals are directly
involved in all stages of decision making processes rather than the organizations being limited
to issuing only recommendations.
3.2.2. Cooperation between the Government and the DPOs
According to the representatives of the DPOs, they work in coordination with local and central
governments; however, they are not involved in the budget management process. Some of
them explain this by not being properly competent. They are confident that in case of
appropriate qualifications, local government will not create barriers for them in the financial
planning process.
Usually, organizations working with persons with disabilities give recommendations to local and
central governments. Some of the organizations call this cooperation not very efficient or
unsatisfactory and note that it takes very long for recommendations to be reflected (in case
of incorporating at all) in the agenda of the government. DPOs explain this by incompetence or
indifference from the side of government officials.
They have no knowledge about these issues. They cannot even endorse our recommendations
due to either incompetence or indifference. For example, we have been discussing the same
issue, the issue of accessible environment with the City Hall for more than three years now. They
incorporate some of the accessibility elements in their calls for tenders, yet, most of the
recently-finished work are not accessible or do not meet the standards.

3.2.3. Communication with the Media

Interviewed persons with disabilities, as well as those working for non-governmental
organizations and civil society representatives actively use different media and social networks
in order to raise an issue and discuss. In this regard, the most popular way of receiving or
disseminating the information is internet. The analysis of the interviews shows that persons
with disabilities as well as organizations are not satisfied with the work of media, mostly of
television. Apart from the fact that media is passive, they fail to cover this issue properly. They
always emphasize that someone is pitiful if s/he is disabled, that s/he needs help, charity. But, if
we look at it objectively, s/he is an ordinary member of society with full rights. But in most cases
media do not cover the issue from the human rights perspective.

13

3.3. Analysis of Interviews with Decision Makers

3.3.1. Cooperation between Public Authorities and PWDs
The study revealed several state agencies that work intensively with PWDs and their
organizations throughout all stages of decision making.
We plan our projects ahead, but we always ask them. We never plan a project without taking
their needs into consideration.
We are only decision makers, everything else is done according to their interests. We are very
open in this regard. Our deputy minister meets everyone.
We meet them regularly. Every month we meet at least 20-15 people, some of the issues are
related to personal well-being, such as providing wheelchair or similar issues Human rights
proposals are also put forward, lets say, what kind of underpass there should be in order to be
fully accessible; what kind of projects are more important: for example, in the case of blind
people, they ask for more help rather than rights.
3.3.2. Employment at the State Agencies
The study shows that employment is a huge problem for PWDs. despite the fact that every
state agency (except for one) that were interviewed has employed PWDs, the vast majority of
them do not take decision-making positions.

3.3.3. Stereotypes about PWDs

Based on the study we can say that despite the recent changes in terms of accessibility of
environment and awareness-raising, attitudes towards PWDs remain prejudiced. This attitude
was especially evident during the interviews with decision-makers. They often use phrases such
as we try to help, PWDs are ordinary people too, etc.
We help, provide annual subsidies and the rest according to the needs; if anything more is
required, we are helping there too and will continue doing so in the future with pleasure.
Society perceives us as people who need fish to be fed for a day; however we try to prove that
we prefer a fishing rod to catch fish on our own. We are in this process and it is still very difficult
to move forward. If you approach any legislator, they would ask how can I help you they
start a conversation with this phrase; what kind of humanitarian aid shall I give you, or what
kind of food should I send you (PWD).

14

However, a special case is the Ministry of Education and Science, which does not differentiate
and single out PWDs. This means that every pupil, regardless of disability, counts as a person in
need of education: No school would say that we have this number of PWDs, they will say that
they have pupils with educational needs.
The study reveals that the participants that represent different state agencies cannot recall
specific cases of discrimination. Yet, they admit that generally such facts exist.

4. Comparative Analysis of the Results of Interviews with the

Target Groups
The study shows that the involvement in the decision making process is perceived differently by
different target groups. In particular, the majority of PWDs believe, that the community is quite
active. However, the interviews with DPOs reveal that the level of engagement, especially in
the elections, is quite low. There are only a very few of PWDs who participate in the elections.
They always abstain for some reason; they do not consider it necessary to express their
preference.
This is due to three main reasons: 1. the general distrust towards elections; 2. the lack of
information (they do not know that it is possible to deliver the ballot box at home); 3.
Unwillingness of communication with larger society among the PWDs.
However, the main difference between the target groups was not the lack of cooperation
between PWDs, DPOs, and state agencies, but rather the fact that this cooperation is not
efficient. The fact that the recommendations from PWDS or DPOs are not taken into
consideration or are incorrectly adopted is the main reason for the inefficiency of
communication. The decision making authorities, however, deny this:
No one can name any fact that during the state program developing process anybody
expressed their will of participation and they did not manage to get involved; that somebody
presented a well-argued proposal why it will be good to get funding from the state for this
program and they got rejected.

4.1. The Importance of Non-Formal Education

Non-formal education is the issue the necessity of which is underlined by all three target groups
of the study. This type of education is especially relevant and useful for people with physical
disability. Since the majority of PWDs cannot get high education, non-formal education

15

methods trainings, camps, seminars are the only way to develop different skills that might
be useful in the future for employment or for integration in the society.
The participants of the study talked about their personal experiences related to the camps,
which played a key role in the process of their social integration.
"Non-formal education is very very important, in my opinion. It can do a lot of good; it can
develop a persons skills and help a lot of people. I am very actively involved, too and participate
in a lot of trainings and not only trainings: different conferences, seminars, camps, excursions, I
have attended and participated and also I have organized as well. The amount one learns and
takes in 2-3 days through non-formal education, the skills one develops, it might take a year or
more in a formal education setting. It is very efficient and it is important to develop this field.
Non-formal education is most effective for people with intellectual disabilities. Their 8090%
might not be able to get high education and even vocational training and get a diploma.. And
through non-formal education a lot of people may be employed, i.e. they may develop those
skills that are useful for the labor market. This might not be necessarily a university diploma, but
this will help to support them financially.
Non-formal education is very important to give them (PWDs) right directions; they will at least
learn basics of their rights. (DPO representative)
Non-formal education was listed as an important precondition to enhance employment:
Manual labor is not used anymore. So we are left with intellectual requirements that require
a basic level of non-formal education. It is particularly important for people over age 35. It will
help them gain the skills required for their employment. (PWD)
Sport is also said to be crucial from the side of the community as well as from the side of the
state. The state organizes different sports activities. As revealed in the study, the most popular
sport among the wheelchair-users is paragliding.

4.2. The Changes in Recent Years in Decision Making Processes

The study demonstrates that all target groups agree that the situation regarding the
inclusiveness of decision making process has significantly improved in recent years. One of the
major confirmations of this is the existence of coordinating councils, the members of which
represent DPOs and local government officials. The Council discusses a variety of issues, based
on which the city administration gives instructions to various services.
This is a participation in the decision making process. Because, formally, the council is merely
and advisory body, that has to issue recommendations, but technically the Council not only gives

16

recommendation, but is also actively involved in the whole process and even monitors how
purposeful the implementation is.
Some participants noted that the communication with the government also improved and that
they do not feel any obstacles when they want to meet state officials and share their initiatives
with them.

4.3 General Involvement in Public Life

The study shows that general involvement is not very high either in the work of municipality, or
in public life. Out of 125 022 officially registered PWDs, only several dozen are active.
The majority of the participants noted that general involvement and participation is partially
defined by personal character and by attitude of an individual. All three categories of the
participants of the study say that the most efficient way to get the people more active would be
to create examples that would inspire and motivate them to get involved in the processes. One
of the major factors is non-formal education, such as educational camps and seminars where
the PWDs get opportunity to acquire basic skills that are required for independent living.

5. Physical Accessibility
5.1. The Monitoring Methodology of the Physical Accessibility
In order to evaluate the inclusiveness of decision-making processes, it is essential to study the
physical accessibility of the buildings that are of strategic importance for the decision making
process. For this purpose, a special questionnaire was developed, which consists of the
following parts:
o access from the street to the building;
o main entrance to the building;
o situation on the ground floor of the buildings;
o situation on upper floors of the building
o about elevator (in case of any)
o general service window (in case of any)

17

o sanitary facilities.
The data received as a result of the monitoring process was then divided and analyzed
according to the following 4-point system:
o accessible persons with mobility disability can enter, move around and use all services
independently, without assistance.
o mostly accessible persons with mobility disability can enter, move around and use all
services with minor assistance.
o difficult to access persons with persons with mobility disability can enter, move
around and use all services with major assistance.
o inaccessible (technically impermeable) - persons with persons with mobility disability
can enter, move around and use all services only though taking additional serious
measures.

5.2. Accessible Environment

Based on the study we can say that inaccessible environment and infrastructure is the major
obstacle to participation in decision-making processes. It hinders proper communication and
prevents persons with disabilities from active public participation. The study showed that
problems related with accessible environment are far greater. In the regions outside of Tbilisi
such problems are even more serious. There persons with disabilities face communication and
accessibility problems while interacting with local authorities:
Communication is very difficult. Although we have communication with the council, the PWDs
on the phone. But face-to-face meetings; discussions on specific issues; making decisions
together all these are very difficult, because I live in the outskirts of Tkibuli and in order to get
to the council I have to take a lot of downhills, or in the best case I need to go in a car.
Inaccessible buildings make the meetings and discussions almost impossible for PWDs. Due to
the fact that there is no such space where even basic sanitary conditions will be guaranteed,
people prefer to stay at home and apply online forms of work and interaction.
The monitoring of the accessibility of buildings revealed that the majority of the buildings
where decision making process is taking place are either difficult to access or partially
accessible.

18

The chart gives the numbers of the buildings (Appendix 1) that has been monitored during the
study. The numbers are given according to the regions.

Out of 45 monitored buildings throughout Tbilisi and the regions 0% is fully accessible; 20% is
mostly accessible; 58% is difficult to access, and 22% is absolutely inaccessible (See the chart).

19

The following graph shows what percentage of the buildings from a specific region are
identified as one of the categories of the 4-point system.

The graph based on our study shows that the largest number of "Mostly Accessible" buildings
can be found in Tbilisi (67%); while in regions "Mostly Accessible" buildings having suitable
infrastructure, were identified only in Imereti (22%) and Adjara (11%).
Majority of "Difficult to Access" category buildings are in Tbilisi (58%). The buildings were
identified in almost all other regions though, with the exception of Kakheti. Majority of such
buildings are functioning in Imereti and Adjara regions (15% -15%).
As for the "Absolutely Inaccessible" category of institutions, 70% of them are located in regions,
while 30% comes on Tbilisi territory; among the regions the highest percentage of inaccessible
buildings were found in Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti region.

5.3. Accessibility of Polling Stations

The study shows that accessibility of polling stations has been increased lately. However, the
DPOs note that the majority of polling stations do not meet the international criteria. In this

20

regard, blind people and people with visual impairment are more vulnerable, than wheelchair
users. They do not have special pass, with the help of which they would be able to vote. In
addition, polling stations are not equipped with magnifying glasses for the visually impaired.
As for the wheelchair users, they face obstacles mainly at the entrance of the stations due to
stairs or thresholds and, therefore, cannot move independently with a wheelchair. One of the
listed problems was the lack of special polling booths. Despite the fact that administrative
authorities are obliged to make the stations accessible, the study shows that PWDs still cannot
vote independently.

6. Main Conclusions

In general, all participants agree that the community participation level is low. So is the
awareness on this topic both in the society and in the community itself;

The study shows that gender is not the decisive factor for participation in decisionmaking processes.

According to the persons with disabilities and the DPOs, in order to enhance inclusion
active and direct involvement of PWDs is necessary. Moreover, the involvement should
be ensured from the initial planning stage throughout the whole process of
implementation of a project.

Participants from all three categories agree that non-formal education is an essential
prerequisite for increasing the level of participation of PWDs in public life.

Participants from all three categories agree that the situation regarding PWDss
involvement in decision-making processes has considerably improved since 2012.

7. Recommendations

Active involvement of PWDs in the initial stages of planning is required. This should be
done through systematic and coordinated communication and not only through
receiving recommendations from them, most of which remain unfulfilled.

Preferably PWDs should be appointed or elected to decision-making positions.

21

Opportunities of receiving non-formal education should be increased. This includes

trainings, seminars, and, especially, camps where PWDs will be able to raise their
awareness about their rights and, alongside, master basic skills required for
independent living.

Inclusion should be guaranteed through actively employing persons with disabilities.

State agencies should have information about the issues related to employment of
PWDs and should support the process.

The state should take care of infrastructure and making the environment accessible,
which is one of the main preconditions for the engagement.

The state and civil societies should ensure rising of public awareness, that will help
community members learn more about their own rights on the one hand, and will
reduce the discrimination against PWDs, on the other hand.

8. Final Remarks

The interviewed PWDs rated their independence level as high. However, they noted that
this is not the general picture and that the majority of PWDs are deprived of
independent decision making conditions;

Public attitude towards PWDs is often discriminatory, which further humpers the
integration process.

PWDs and DPOs are only engaged in the decision making processes as recommendationgiving bodies.

Recommendations that are received from PWDs are not perceived as effective
mechanisms (by the decision-makers)

Being an NGO member is considered to be one of the most efficient mechanisms in

bringing change in the processes of inclusion and in making the environment more
accessible. Therefore, the majority of PWDs interviewed throughout the study is a
member of an NGO, or is a founder of one, through which they are lobbying different
issues.

Stereotyped attitudes towards PWDs exist outside of the community as well as within
the community; PWDs do not believe in their own abilities.

22

According to PWDs, most of the community members are self-rejecting, which is caused
by not only public attitude but by the attitudes of family member towards them.
Participants listed cases when family members never take their disabled members out
of the house so that no one finds out about their existence.

General inactiveness was named as the main reason why PWDs are not involved in
public processes; it is partly caused by the fact that they have not received a proper
education;

An important problem is inaccessible or partly accessibly buildings and the

governments indifference towards this issue. In Nadzaladevi district the governor
squandered 37000 GEL on some quasi-ramps, this money was lost technically; I was even
on TV about this issue, but the mayor never reacted.

The study demonstrates that personal characteristics are important in participation in

public life;

The results indicate that PWDs put the main responsibility on themselves and other
PWDs to become more active in order to bring change and make the environment more
inclusive.

Inaccessible polling stations are one of the hindering factors from participating in
elections; however, the participants of the study noted that they still go to polling
stations;

Non-formal education is considered to be one of the essential ways to raise awareness

and to support active participation in decision making processes.

In recent years the governments attitude towards PWDs has improved and the
willingness to create a more inclusive environment is evident: coordinating and
consulting councils were established in local and central government bodies.

23

Appendix 1
List of Monitored Buildings

Tbilisi
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.

Tbilisi City Hall

Tbilisi City Assembly
Tbilisi City Hall Transport Municipal Department (separate building)
Tbilisi City Hall - Municipal Department of Culture (separate building)
Didube District Gamgeoba2
Chugureti District Gamgeoba
Gldani District Gamgeoba
Vake District Gamgeoba
Saburtalo District Gamgeoba
Mtatsminda District Gamgeoba
Samgori District Gamgeoba
Public Service Hall (Tbilisi)
Central Election Committee Building
Building of Parliament of Georgia in Tbilisi
Administration of Prime Minister of Georgia
Ministry of Labour Health and Social Affairs of Georgia
Ministry of Science and Education of Georgia
Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure of Georgia
Ministry of Finance of Georgia
Ministry of Culture and Monument Protection of Georgia
Ministry of Sport and Youth Affairs of Georgia
Georgian National Tourism Administration
Public Defender of Georgia (Tbilisi Office)
Ministry of Economics and Sustainable Development of Georgia

Kakheti
25.
2

Sagarejo Municipality Gamgeoba

Gamgeoba Local Administrative Body

24

26.

Telavi Municipality Gamgeoba

Mtskheta-Mtianeti
27.

Mtskheta Municipality Gamgeoba

Imereti
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.

Sachkhere Municipality Assembly

Sachkhere Municipality Gamgeoba
Building of Parliament of Georgia in Kutaisi
Kutaisi City Hall
Kutaisi Municipality Assembly
Public Service Hall (Kutaisi)

Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti
34.
35.
36.
37.

Zugdidi Municipality Gamgeoba

Public Defender of Georgia (Tbilisi Office)
Poti Municipality Gamgeoba
Senaki Municipality Gamgeoba

Adjara
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.

Batumi City Hall

Batumi City Assembly
Government of Autonomous Republic of Adjara
Public Service Hall (Batumi)
Kobuleti Municipality Gamgeoba

Guria
43.
44.

Lanchkhuti Municipality Gamgeoba

Chokhatauri Municipality Gamgeoba

Shida Kartli
45.

Gori Municipality Gamgeoba

25

Through its Re-granting Scheme, the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum supports projects of EaP CSF members with a regional dimension
that will contribute to achieving the mission and objectives of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum. The donors of the re-granting scheme are
the European Union, National Endowment for Democracy and Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The overall amount for the 2016 call for proposals
is 307.500 EUR. Grants are available for CSOs from the Eastern Partnership and EU countries. Key areas of support are democracy and human
rights, eco-nomic integration, environment and energy, contacts between people, social and labour policies.
This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the
Coalition for Independent Living and can in no way be taken to reect the views of the European Union.