Helpdesk Report: Universal design of schools and classrooms

Date: 19th July 2013

Query: What evidence exists to support investment in universal design of schools and
classrooms? Include studies that look at benefits, costs, and specific elements of
universal design (toilets, windows, ramps etc).

Content

1. Overview
2. Universal design in the education context
3. Cost and benefits
4. Universal design recommendations/guidelines
5. Additional information

1. Overview

Universal design is about access and also creating a more inclusive and learning-friendly
environment in school. Schools that are built based on universal design principles will be
more effective because they will enable children to learn, develop, and participate, instead of
―disable‖ children by creating barriers to their development and participation. Space, light,
materials, and even colour affect the way education is experienced. Schools can make
excellent use of these elements in creating buildings and grounds which reflect the needs
and desires of their students and staff.

Considerations for universal design in education include:

 Getting to school
 Selecting an accessible school site
 Planning a school site
 Designing and building
 Creating a learning environment
 Hygiene—toilet, shower and sink facilities
 School playground and physical education
 The cost of providing accessible schools for inclusive education

The cost of including access features to a school latrine in Ethiopia was found to be under
3% of the total cost (Jones, 2011). Accessibility incorporated into the design of a school in
South Africa was found to be 0.78% of the school’s total costs (Metts, 2000).

World Bank (2008) notes that the cost of making adaptations after a building is completed is
far greater than providing full access from the outset. It can rise up to 5% or more of total cost
depending on the modification of the architectural features of the building. Participation of
local stakeholders is critical for cost effective universal design because it helps identify locally
available products and construction techniques. The cost of not incorporating universal

1
design can be significant, taking into account human cost and opportunity cost incurred due
to inaccessibility. When buildings are inaccessible, the human cost of having people to
provide assistance would be greater. World Bank (2005) provides some strategies for
keeping school accessibility costs to a minimum.

Benefits include:
 Universal design of schools will make them easier to maintain because the buildings
will have fewer stairs, wider door openings, less obstacles to circulation and more
durable walking surfaces.
 Improved lighting and elimination of hazards will lead to fewer accidents.
 Schools are often the largest civic facility in rural villages, therefore, accessible
school buildings are likely to increase participation in civic life for all people. This
participation may reinforce the value of school attendance and help to ensure that
facilities keep their children in classes.
 In case of emergency, school buildings are often used as temporary shelters. Not
making them accessible may exclude people with disabilities and others with limited
mobility.

Section 4 includes universal design recommendations from outside of the education context.

It was not possible to identify concrete impact studies within the limitations of this report.

2. Universal design in the education context

Teaching Children with Disabilities in Inclusive Settings

Haddad, C. 2009. Embracing Diversity: Toolkit for Creating Inclusive, Learning-Friendly
Environments, Specialized Booklet 3. UNESCO Bangkok.
http://www2.unescobkk.org/elib/publications/243_244/Teaching_children.pdf

According to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, universal design
means the design of products, environments, programmes, and services to be usable by all
people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialised design.
―Universal design‖ shall not exclude assistive devices for particular groups of persons with
disabilities where this is needed.

The first thing that meets us in most public buildings is stairs. These must be climbed before
we can enter the building. Stairs are often the first barrier for many children and adults to
access schools or other public buildings and enjoy the services these facilities have to offer.
Sometimes there are just two or three steps; other times, there are many more. Some stairs
have hand railings on the side to give support, but most do not.

All public buildings should therefore offer alternative ways to enter. Ramps are in most cases
easy and relatively inexpensive to build (at least in 1-story buildings) and will benefit many.
Ramps should therefore be added on to all existing schools and other public buildings. When
new school buildings are being planned, and designs are being developed, we need to make
sure that they are equally accessible for all. Ramps and walkways should be incorporated
into the design, in such a way that they do not become separate features for children/
teachers/ parents with disabilities, women who are pregnant, and the elderly, but will present
attractive, alternative access-ways for all users.

Space, light, materials, and even colour affect the way we experience education. Schools can
make excellent use of these elements in creating buildings and grounds which reflect the
needs and desires of their students and staff, but unfortunately, schools are often designed
and built without fully considering the needs of the community who uses them.

2
Universal design is therefore not ―just‖ about access, but also about creating a more inclusive
and learning-friendly environment in school. Schools that are built based on universal design
principles will therefore be more effective because these schools will enable children to learn,
develop, and participate, instead of ―disable‖ children by creating barriers to their
development and participation.

Case Study
Thnoeng Sokha from Samlot District in Cambodia has been paraplegic since she was five
years old. She never thought she would be able to go to school because she could not walk
to school on her own. Her house is 3 km from school and the condition of the road to school
was very bad. However, she got two wheelchairs from an international organisation - one is
kept at her home and the other is kept at school. The wheelchairs have given Sokha
freedom. Her younger sister or friends help to push her to school. At first, she had to cross a
stream that didn’t have a bridge. This was especially difficult with all the slip and mud during
the rainy season. Now her journey to school is made easier because the community has built
a basic wooden bridge to cross that stream and the road to her school has also been
repaired.

Her primary school facilities have improved recently because a ramp has been added to
improve access to the classrooms. A new toilet block with ramp has also been built. Sokha is
much more confident now and hopes to continue her education at lower secondary school. A
new secondary school is being built closer to her house – this should be fully accessible
according to the new Ministry of Education standards.

(From: Sophal, K. / Fox, S. (2006) ―Physical Accessibility & Education,‖ in EENET Asia
Newsletter No. 4, Jakarta, Indonesia: EENET Asia, pp. 14-15
http://unesco.org.pk/education/icfe/resources/res4.pdf)

Further examples:

The design for latrines in schools participating in the WASH (Water, Sanitation and Health
Education) programme in Tajikistan is currently being redesigned to ensure improved
accessibility for children with disabilities. The new design will make the latrines more user-
friendly for all the children in the school as they are more spacious, there will continue to be
separate spaces (and entrances) for girls and boys, and the new design will continue to be
based on the same low cost philosophy as previous designs.
(From: UNICEF. (2008) ―Guidelines for Universal and Energy Efficient Design,‖ Dushanbe:
UNICEF)

A new school building with access ramps, colour coding on walls and doors, colour marking
and tactile patterns on the floors was constructed in Lombok (Indonesia). The building was
planned and designed by the teachers in the school and the headmaster monitored the
construction process to ensure that the work was done according to specifications and
remained within the budget, which was developed according to Indonesian government
standards for school buildings.
(From: Kaplan, I. (2007) ―Inclusive School Design: Lombok, Indonesia,‖ in EENET Asia
Newsletter No. 4, Jakarta, Indonesia: EENET Asia, pp. 18-19
http://www.idp-europe.org/eenet-asia/eenet-asia-4-EN/page18.php)

In the O.B. Montessori School in Manila (Philippines) crafts, and health education is taught in
a ―Bahay Kubo‖ a traditional Filipino village house. The traditional environment reduces the
barriers to learning and participation for all the children, but especially for children and youth
with disabilities and other special educational needs. Because they are taught in a traditional
(and familiar) environment children find it easier to link what they learn in school with what
they experience at home.
(From: Soliven, P. (2008) ―Helping People, Help Themselves‖ in EENET Asia Newsletter

3
No. 5. Jakarta: EENET Asia, pp. 8-9
http://www.idp-europe.org/docs/EENET_Asia_5_EN.pdf)

Accessibility Design Guide: Universal design principles for Australia’s aid program
A companion volume to Development for All: Towards a disability-inclusive Australian
aid program 2009–2014
AusAID, 2013
http://www.addc.org.au/documents/resources/accessibility-design-guide-ausaid-
2013_971.pdf

Universal design – means the design of products, environments, programmes and services to
be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or
specialised design. Universal design does not exclude assistive devices for particular groups
of people with disabilities where this is needed. For example, the use of Braille for blind
people is still needed, although universal design could be employed to make public signs and
symbols to accommodate the majority of the population.

Annex F provides guidance development practitioners can consider when applying universal
design principles in the education sector. While based on good practice and successful
implementation of universal design, this guide is not meant to be prescriptive. It is based on
the reality that the barriers people with disability face vary between developing countries and
between locations in-country. It is also based on the reality that development projects are
unique and face their own challenges, locally or otherwise, relating to education.

The annex is designed to assist ministries of education to meet the universal design
requirements in their national standards for all educational facilities, specifically those relating
to providing accessible environments. It is of benefit to principals, teaching staff and others
involved in school communities. It is also of benefit to architects, building contractors and
others involved in planning the organisation of schools and school grounds to facilitate
movement and participation of children with disability.

Schools in this annex refers to pre-schools and daycare facilities, early childhood centres, as
well as primary, high and secondary schools (unless otherwise stated).

The annex starts with a general description of how universal design principles support
inclusive education through planning and designing new schools and refurbishing existing
schools. It then explores what inclusive education is and how universal design principles can
be applied in education and provides a list of resources.

Guidelines for consideration are given for the following areas:

 Getting to school
 Selecting an accessible school site
 Planning a school site
 Designing and building
 Creating a learning environment
 Hygiene—toilet, shower and sink facilities
 School playground and physical education
 The cost of providing accessible schools for inclusive education

Centre for Excellence in Universal Design. 7 Principles.

http://www.universaldesign.ie/exploreampdiscover/the7principles

These are not specific to the education context but underpins universal design in all contexts.

4
The 7 Principles of Universal Design were developed in 1997 by a working group of
architects, product designers, engineers and environmental design researchers, led by the
late Ronald Mace in the North Carolina State University. The purpose of the Principles is to
guide the design of environments, products and communications. According to the Center for
Universal Design in NCSU, the Principles "may be applied to evaluate existing designs, guide
the design process and educate both designers and consumers about the characteristics of
more usable products and environments."

The 7 principles of universal Design:

1. Equitable use
The design is useful and marketable to people with diverse abilities (people both with
and without disabilities). Equal access for all children to schools and school facilities
can be implemented with simple and relatively inexpensive solutions.

2. Flexibility in use
The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities.

3. Simple and intuitive use

Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user's experience,
knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level.

4. Perceptible information
The design effectively communicates necessary information to the user, regardless of
ambient conditions or the user's sensory abilities. It is important that school books
are made available in regular ink print as well as in Braille. The ink print should be of
good quality and with good contrast colours. A minimum font size of 12 should be
used. If books are printed with smaller font sizes, they need to be made available in
large print for children with low vision.

5. Tolerance for error

The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or
unintended actions.

6. Low physical effort

The design can be used efficiently and comfortably, with a minimum of fatigue.

7. Appropriate size and space

Appropriate size and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation, and use
regardless of user's body size, posture, or mobility.

3. Cost and benefits

Inclusive design of school latrines – how much does it cost and who benefits?
Jones, H. 2011. WEDC.
http://wedc.lboro.ac.uk/resources/briefnotes/BN001_School_Latrines.pdf

Limited data from WaterAid estimates that it costs 8% extra to make a school latrine
accessible. Research carried out by WEDC in collaboration with World Vision and WaterAid
in Ethiopia found the additional cost of making a school latrine accessible to be under 3% of
total costs (Table 1).

5
Benefits were identified during primary school visits. Users were asked for their views on the
inclusive latrines compared with the conventional latrines. The key benefits they identified
were:
 Users on crutches or in wheelchairs could use the latrine more easily and no longer
had to go home to use the latrine.
 Blind users found the access ramp enabled them to walk with ease and confidence,
and could use their white stick to easily locate the toilet seat.
 Young children could hold the support rails to better aim at the toilet hole.
 School directors concluded that the latrines benefitted all schoolchildren from grade 1
to 8, including disabled children, as they were safer and more secure than the old
latrines. They also reduced soiling of the latrine and, since they were popular with the
children, reduced open defecation. Some parents have promised to enrol their
disabled children in school.

Disability Issues, Trends and Recommendations for the World Bank

Metts, R.L. 2000. World Bank.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/280658-
1172606907476/DisabilityIssuesMetts.pdf

This report includes five South African case studies illustrating that accessibility provision can
be cost effectively accomplished in a variety of settings.

Case 2: An Accessible Community Centre

East of Cape Town, informal settlements are in the process of being transformed from
―townships‖ into formal urban neighbourhoods. Community centres are being developed to
provide multifunctional space for a range of activities from adult education to sports. One of
these, the Ikwezi Community Center in Gugulethu was designed to provide nearly complete
environmental accessibility (with the single exception of an inaccessible viewing gallery in the
Main Hall). The complex consists of a large multipurpose hall with ancillary accommodation,
a smaller subdividable hall with adjacent storage space for equipment and furniture, a

6
gymnasium with sports offices, a small open amphitheater, a computer centre and an
administration centre. The complex, completed in 1998, was built with direct community
participation by an emerging contractor.

The site is flat, which eliminated the cost of ramping. Accessibility provision included
dedicated parking bays, access to all components of the complex (with the one exception
mentioned), strong colour contrasts around doors and entrances and other way finding
support, teletext facilities and the standard unisex accessible toilet. Limited signage was
provided in the complex, as the strong colour contrasts of the buildings were used to orient
building users. By applying Universal Design principles in the design of the majority of the
project’s spaces and facilities, accessibility related expenses were limited to the following
costs for an accessible unisex toilet, teletext facilities and articulated paintwork:
Unisex accessible toilet facility R 5,500
Integral teletext equipment R 1,200
Articulated paintwork R 1,600
TOTAL COSTS R 8,300

Though paving slabs created a step into one building in the complex, and though the gallery
in the Main Hall was not accessible, the Ikwezi Community centre was largely accessible and
had all the facilities necessary to make it an appropriate facility for the full social integration of
people with disabilities into the Gugulethu Community. The final cost of construction was
R1,768,700, and the cost of providing accessibility was R 8,300. Thus the proportional cost of
incorporating accessibility into the project was only 0.47% of the cost of the project.

Case 4: Accessibility Incorporated into the Original Design of a School

The Gamalake Lower Primary School, located on the South Coast of the area now known as
the province of KwaZulu Natal, is a standard design format school developed within the
framework of the reduced norms and standards introduced by the KwaZulu Government. It
consists of twenty four classrooms, an administrative building, one multipurpose classroom
and toilet facilities. Accessibility was incorporated into the original design of the school, which
was completed in 1997.

The only additional expenditures identified were the costs of an entrance ramp between the
parking level and the school, two unisex accessible toilets and larger signage. Under the
South African Code 0400 it is possible to reduce the number of toilet fittings by the number of
accessible unisex toilet facilities provided in the building. The net cost of an accessible toilet
is thus the additional cost of providing the larger separate cubicle, grab rails and other
requisite fittings. Since the school had been designed for accessibility from the outset, all
access ways, entrances and circulation systems had been ramped and graded appropriately.

The costs of the additional accessibility items were as follows:

Entrance ramp from the parking area R 23,000
Additional cost for unisex accessible toilets R 9,800
Enlarging signage to facilitate way finding R 3,200
TOTAL COST R 36,000

The cost of incorporating accessibility into this school’s original design (R 36,000) was only
0.78% of the school’s total cost (R 4,603,700).

Design for All: Implications for Bank Operations

Snider, H. & Takeda, N. 2008. World Bank
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Universal_Design.pdf

The major cost incurred in incorporating universal design is the cost to retrofit various
features to accommodate specific needs. When managed appropriately, however, this

7
retrofitting cost can be minimised. Good practices of cost-effective universal design include
the early incorporation of universal design and local stakeholder participation in it.

Research has shown that providing full access facilities from the outset has additional costs
of approximately one percent. However, the cost of making adaptations after a building is
completed is far greater; it can rise up to five percent or more of total cost depending on the
modification of the architectural features of the building. For example, universal design is
often considered to require much more space to accommodate wheelchairs. Two design
research studies showed, however, that redesigning non-accessible buildings required no
additional space, but just rearrangement of the existing plan. These findings imply that
universal design would not require many additions if introduced before drawing the blue prints
of a building.

In addition to the early incorporation of universal design, local stakeholder participation in the
designing process is a key to cost effective universal design. Appropriate universal design
varies according to local conditions. Best practice in one region is not necessarily workable in
another context. For example, in a country where wheelchairs are prevalent and Braille or
hearing aids are available, it is straightforward to design the building with ramps specifically
graded for the wheelchairs, Braille signage, or induction loops for hearing aids. In a country
where these are not readily available, the building would be designed differently because
end-users would be less independent without wheelchairs or Braille or hearing aids.

The goal of universal design is to benefit the entire population, not just people with
disabilities. Therefore, consultations with a variety of potential users (e.g. elders, caregivers
with children, etc.) are crucial in order to maximise usability of Bank-funded facilities, as these
people are the most knowledgeable about their own needs. In this process, it is helpful to
educate designers, builders and citizens about the purpose and benefits of universal design
for the whole community so that they understand its value and work to find good solutions to
problems.

Participation of local stakeholders is also critical for cost effective universal design because it
helps identify locally available products and construction techniques. With resource
restrictions, project designers are required to use local materials or techniques as much as
possible to avoid significant cost impacts. This is also an important consideration to ensure
that such facilities are maintained by local communities afterwards.

While cost of universal design could remain low with its incorporation from the outset and
local participation, the cost of not incorporating universal design can be significant, taking into
account human cost and opportunity cost incurred due to inaccessibility. When buildings are
inaccessible, the human cost of having people to provide assistance would be greater. When
someone does not have easy access, the time and effort of other helping individuals will have
to make up the difference of the lack of universal design, although the whole scale of this cost
cannot be easily calculated.

Furthermore, cost of inaccessible infrastructure would be sharply increased by eliminating

economic opportunity for a number of individuals. Physical barriers reduce the economic and
social output of persons with disabilities and elders, and investments in the removal and
prevention of architectural and design barriers are increasingly being justified on economic
grounds.

The cost of not incorporating universal design could be particularly significant for some types
of countries: For example, countries affected by conflicts or natural disasters may have a high
prevalence of impairments and disability. Failing to incorporate these people into economic,
social, political and cultural activities will guarantee a cycle of poverty for survivors and their
families, and prevent vigorous economic and social development in the long run.

8
In general, universal design of schools will make them easier to maintain because the
buildings will have fewer stairs, wider door openings, less obstacles to circulation and more
durable walking surfaces. Improved lighting and elimination of hazards will lead to fewer
accidents. When there are clear benefits for all users, controversies about cost will give way
to creative problem solving and providing the best environment for learning possible.

It is desirable that school buildings be usable for all members of the community since they
can provide public space for various community activities. Since schools are probably the
largest civic facility in rural villages, many community activities will take place in these
buildings. Therefore, accessible school buildings are likely to increase participation in civic life
for all people throughout the life cycle. This participation may reinforce the value of school
attendance and help to ensure that facilities keep their children in classes. Furthermore, in
case of emergency, school buildings are often used as temporary shelters. Not making them
accessible may exclude people with disabilities and others with limited mobility.

Education for All: the Cost of Accessibility

Steinfeld, E. 2005. World Bank.
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/03/01/000310607_20
070301144941/Rendered/PDF/388640EdNotes1August2005CostOfAccess12.pdf

Many strategies can be used to keep the cost of accessibility at a minimum. For instance,
sites where buildings must be raised well above grade to mitigate against flooding should be
avoided as should sites so small that a two story building will be required.

When revising existing standard designs to make them accessible, it is important to revise
the overall designs and not just add accessibility features. Usually, making the plan of
another part of the building more efficient can compensate for the added space needed for
wheelchair access. When a ramp is added, a stairway can often be eliminated.

In countries where accessibility is a new idea, changes to customary methods of construction

may be needed to provide accessibility. For example toilets may be traditionally located
between floor levels in two story schools to make them more accessible to each floor.

Simply relocating the toilet rooms to the first floor eliminates any additional cost to make them
accessible. Perhaps the most important reason for unnecessary increased costs is not taking
accessibility into consideration from the start of a design project. For example, if a school is
on a sloping site and the entrance is at the downhill end, adding a second entrance at the
uphill end may make a ramp unnecessary. Or, changing the location of the entrance by
moving it to the uphill end may not only eliminate the need for a ramp but also for stairs,
thereby saving money overall.

There are, of course, some unavoidable costs for accessibility. For example, Education For
All includes the provision of toilets or latrines in all school construction projects. Accessible
toilets and latrines have to be large enough for wheelchair use. Although this will require
more space than what would be needed for inaccessible facilities, the additional area
required is minimal, about one square meter in a toilet stall. This is insignificant in comparison
to the costs of adding the toilet or latrine itself.

Guidelines for cost control:

Design factors:
 Use topography to an advantage. Steeper ground often makes it easier to provide
access, not harder. Paths oriented parallel to the slope of land are easier to make
accessible than those that run perpendicular to the slope.

9
  Avoid level changes inside the building. This removes the need for ramps entirely. If
abrupt level changes are kept below 15 centimetres, railings are not needed on
ramps.
 Eliminate raised thresholds and steps at doorways. Thresholds are often used to
bridge the gap between different floor surface materials on each side of a wall. When
needed, thresholds should be recessed or kept low with a gradual transition from
exterior floor surface to interior floor surface. This will eliminate the need for ramps
and separate accessible entrances to classrooms.
 Avoid the use of elevators and lifts. They are the most costly items to build and may
be very hard to obtain, causing significant construction delays. They also create
significant maintenance costs and may take a long time to repair.
 Where no site is available that is large enough for a one-story school building, plan
the school using a split level design so that ramps can be used to connect levels. On
steep sites, an accessible entry can be provided to each level connected by an
accessible path of travel outside. In climates with extensive rainy seasons, it may be
possible to shelter the paths with overhanging roofs or galleries.
 Provide increased space for wheelchair access without increasing the overall size of
the building by careful design and efficient use of space everywhere.
 Run ramps in the direction of travel so that everyone will use them and stairs can be
eliminated. Use topography to an advantage.

Construction factors:
 Avoid specialty products. Find locally available alternatives when costs are
prohibitive. For example, make grab bars from steel bars, pipes or wood if it is
cheaper.
 Be creative in the use of available materials and products. For example, if wide doors
are not available, use double doors made from two narrow doors. Paved surfaces,
although desirable, are not absolutely necessary for wheelchair access if walking
materials are durable, even, stable and well drained.
 Educate builders about new practices before construction begins to avoid creating
problems in the field and institute quality control procedures to ensure things are
being built properly. Rebuilding projects that are already under construction increases
the cost of accessibility significantly.

Social factors:
 Invest resources in education and outreach during design to engage local builders
and product suppliers in identifying how to accomplish the goals of accessibility. This
will reduce lack of cooperation and reduce the need for quality control when
construction commences.
 Use culturally appropriate means to provide access. For example, trying to save
money by building one unisex accessible latrine instead of making the regular boy’s
and girl’s toilet facilities accessible may be unacceptable in a culture that maintains
strict separation between the sexes.

How to build an accessible environment in developing countries : Manual #2 - Access

to water and sanitation facilities, Part 1 – Toilets and closed showers
David, V. 2008. Handicap International.
http://www.handicap-
international.org.uk/Resources/Handicap%20International/PDF%20Documents/HI%20Associ
ations/AccessibleEnvironmentDev2_Part1_2008.pdf

How to build an accessible environment in developing countries: Manual #3 – Free

movement
David, V. 2008. Handicap International.

10
http://www.handicap-
international.org.uk/Resources/Handicap%20International/PDF%20Documents/HI%20Associ
ations/AccessibleEnvironmentDev3_2008.pdf

Not specific to schools but some costing in these documents might be useful for reference.

The State of the World’s Children 2013. Children with Disabilities.

UNICEF. 2013.
http://www.unicef.org/sowc2013/files/SWCR2013_ENG_Lo_res_24_Apr_2013.pdf

The cost of integrating accessibility into new buildings and infrastructure can be negligible,
amounting to less than 1 per cent of the capital development cost. However, the cost of
making adaptations to completed buildings can be much higher, especially for smaller
buildings, where it can reach 20 per cent of the original cost. It makes sense to integrate
accessibility considerations into projects at the early stages of the design process.
Accessibility should also be a consideration when funding development projects.

World Disasters Report

Klynman, Y., Kouppari, N., & Mukhier, M. 2007. International Federation of Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies.
http://www.ifrc.org/Global/Publications/disasters/WDR/WDR2007-English.pdf

An important application for universal design is to provide for emergency evacuations from
buildings. Experience from major disasters has shown that people with disabilities are often
left behind.

Reaching the Unreached. Bridging the social divide in Cambodia through inclusive
education.
Vantha, C. 2010. VSO International.
http://www.vsointernational.org/Images/reaching-the-unreached-inclusive-education-
cambodia_tcm76-32441.pdf

The VSO Mainstreaming Inclusive Education Project in Cambodia had inclusion of children
with disabilities as part of the focus. The project supported the funding of small grants to
enable volunteers to provide, among other things, the building of access ramps and
functioning toilets. The overall project was evaluated as successful. Enrolment and
promotion rates of children with disabilities increased.

4. Universal design recommendations/guidelines

Water and sanitation for disabled people and other vulnerable groups: Designing
services to improve accessibility. Chapter 7: Toilets access and use
Jones, H. & Reed, B. 2005. WEDC Loughborough, UK.
http://wedc.lboro.ac.uk/resources/books/Water_and_Sanitation_for_Disabled_People_-
_Ch_07.pdf

This section considers a wide range of toilet facilities and their alternatives, from sanitary
water flush systems to open defecation which may be applicable to school design.

11
Promoting Universal Access to the Built Environment. Guidelines.
Christian Blind Mission, 2005
http://www.unicef.org/french/education/files/CBM-AccessibilityManual.pdf

This publication provides guidance for improving access to the built environment for people
with disabilities and reducing barriers. The publication includes information on the concept
and ways of implementing accessibility and inclusive design as well as technical
recommendations and good practises for the planning and design of accessible buildings and
facilities. It targets architects, planners, policy makers, government officials and NGOs,
decision makers in the construction sector and people with disabilities to enable them to
promote and improve architectural accessibility throughout the world.

Guidance is included on:

 Anthropometrics and measures of assistive devices
 Visual accessibility
 Vertical accessibility
 Horizontal accessibility

World Report on Disability

WHO, 2011
http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report.pdf

The World Report on Disability suggests steps for all stakeholders – including governments,
civil society organizations and disabled people’s organisations – to create enabling
environments, develop rehabilitation and support services, ensure adequate social protection,
create inclusive policies and programmes, and enforce new and existing standards and
legislation, to the benefit of people with disabilities and the wider community. People with
disabilities should be central to these endeavors.

This report includes some universal design examples and recommendations from outside of
school settings.

5. Additional information

Author
This query response was prepared by Laura Bolton

Contributors
Dan Jones, RESULTS UK
Jacqui Mattingly, CfBT Education Trust

12
About Helpdesk reports: The HEART Helpdesk is funded by the DFID Human
Development Group. Helpdesk reports are based on 2 days of desk-based research per
query and are designed to provide a brief overview of the key issues, and a summary of
some of the best literature available. Experts may be contacted during the course of the
research, and those able to provide input within the short time-frame are acknowledged.

For any further request or enquiry, contact info@heart-resources.org

HEART Helpdesk reports are published online at www.heart-resources.org

Disclaimer
The Health & Education Advice & Resource Team (HEART) provides technical assistance and knowledge services
to the British Government’s Department for International Development (DFID) and its partners in support of pro-poor
programmes in education, health and nutrition. The HEART services are provided by a consortium of leading
organisations in international development, health and education: Oxford Policy Management, CfBT, FHI360, HERA,
the Institute of Development Studies, IPACT, the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the Nuffield Centre for
International Health and Development at the University of Leeds. HEART cannot be held responsible for errors or
any consequences arising from the use of information contained in this report. Any views and opinions expressed do
not necessarily reflect those of DFID, HEART or any other contributing organisation.

13