An Exploratory Study on Application of Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Guidelines in Borno State, Northeastern Nigeria

Abstract

Persons with disabilities (PWDs) face disproportionate risks during humanitarian crises, yet their inclusion in aid delivery remains limited. To address this, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) introduced the Guidelines on the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action in 2019. The IASC guidelines provide a global framework for mainstreaming disability inclusion. This exploratory study examines how these guidelines are applied in Borno State, Northeastern Nigeria, a region marked by protracted conflict, displacement and insecurity. Using a qualitative phenomenological approach, data were gathered through in-depth interviews from 20 humanitarian practitioners and supplemented with secondary sources. Thematic analysis revealed that while organisations adopted strategies such as data disaggregation, door-to-door outreach and local committee representation, implementation was inconsistent and constrained by cultural beliefs about disability, political interference, population displacement and weak monitoring standards. The findings also highlighted that although the IASC Guidelines are good in principle, the guidelines require context-specific adaptation, stronger organisational commitment and active inclusive engagement with PWDs and their representative organisations. The study recommends incorporating disability inclusion through mandatory organisational policies, dedicated funding, community-based advocacy and improved data systems to ensure that humanitarian responses are both inclusive and sustainable.

1. Introduction

Globally, an estimated 1.3 billion people, approximately 16% of the world’s population, live with some form of disability (The World Bank and World Health Organisation (WB and WHO 2011)). This figure is projected to increase due to ageing populations, armed conflicts, natural disasters and rising non-communicable diseases (WB and WHO 2011). In humanitarian crises, persons with disabilities face disproportionate barriers to essential services, exacerbated by resource scarcity, systemic exclusion and socio-cultural beliefs (Handicap International 2015; Shakespeare et al. 2021; Odo 2023). Despite international commitments to inclusion, persons with disabilities remain among the most marginalised in humanitarian settings (Barbelet et al. 2021).

To address the marginalisation of persons with disabilities, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) in 2019 launched the IASC guidelines for mainstreaming disability inclusion across humanitarian programming. The guidelines stressed advocating for accessible services, participation in decision-making and the removal of environmental and institutional barriers faced by persons with disabilities (IASC 2019). Although globally influential, the implementation of IASC guidelines remains uneven, particularly in conflict zones due to context-specific challenges. Such challenges in conflict contexts include inadequate evacuation services, inaccessible environment and buildings, funding, lack of effective monitoring strategies and cultural differences (Twigg et al. 2018; Funke 2023).

Amidst the context-specific challenges, this study examined the application of the IASC guidelines in Borno State, Northeastern Nigeria. Borno is the centre of over 13 years humanitarian crisis caused by the Boko Haram insurgency. The conflict has displaced millions and the impact of the conflict has been complicated by food insecurity, restricted humanitarian access, the herders-farmers’ conflict and the growth of multiple factions of Boko Haram (UNOCHA 2023). In this complex emergency, persons with disabilities encounter more risks, mobility constraints, inaccessible aid and exclusion from programming (Handicap International 2015).

As a result, this exploratory study investigates how humanitarian organisations implement the IASC guidelines, identifying strategies, challenges and successful practices in promoting disability inclusion. Conducting this study in Borno State was important as, besides a rise in conflict, different contexts require different programmes for the application of the IASC guidelines for disability inclusion (UNOCHA 2023; Hodzic 2023). Other factors that may determine the success of IASC guidelines may include organisational dynamics, tools for capacity building, as well as monitoring and accountability strategies in a conflict context (Barbelet and Palmer 2020). By studying Borno State using the IASC guidelines as the framework of analysis, this research contributes to global discourse on disability-inclusive humanitarian action, offering insights into context-specific barriers and successful practices.

1.1. Borno State Humanitarian Context

Borno State is located at the intersection of international borders with Niger, Chad, and Cameroon, as well as local boundaries, with Adamawa, Gombe and Yobe States (Olisah et al. 2022). Borno has been the epicentre of protracted armed conflict for over 13 years, primarily driven by Boko Haram and other Non-State Armed Groups (NSAGs). Boko Haram is an Islamic movement that originated in the early 2000s as a response to perceived poor governance and corruption. As of 2024, what began as a movement in the early 2000s has expanded into border countries, including Chad, Cameroon, and Niger and evolved into distinct factions (Bøås et al. 2025). A clash in 2009 between Boko Haram and the Nigerian security forces led to the death of the leader, Mohammed Yusuf. The outcome of the clash has been blamed for the insurgency, which has dealt a big blow to Northeastern Nigeria (Bøås et al. 2025). Figure 1 below shows the impact of the Boko Haram insurgency as of 2025.

This violence has displaced millions, restricted humanitarian access, and left vast rural populations at risk of famine and exclusion. As of 2025, approximately 7.8 million people in Nigeria require humanitarian assistance (UNOCHA 2025). Figure 1 above shows that out of the 3.5 million displaced persons, over two million have been displaced in the North-East, with 92% of the displacements linked to insurgency (UNHCR 2025). While the map (Figure 1) is current, it may not accurately represent the actual population due to the increase in clashes between farmers and herders, which has led to increased insecurity in Nigeria. Borno remains the most affected State in Nigeria’s humanitarian crisis, further complicated by environmental factors such as recurrent flooding (UNOCHA 2023). In this State, famine has affected the local government areas of Bama, Damboa, Gwoza, Konduga, Kukawa, and Magumeri (UNOCHA 2023). On a scale of 0–5 (0 indicating good and 5 indicating the worst context access situation), ACAPS ranked Nigeria on a scale of five (5) in July 2023, with the situation that the denial of humanitarian access has deteriorated (ACAPS 2023).

Persons with disabilities, who constitute a significant proportion of the displaced population, are particularly vulnerable due to systemic exclusion, mobility barriers and social discrimination. Various governmental, military and humanitarian initiatives have been implemented to promote inclusion (UNOCHA 2023). These initiatives include rehabilitation centres and grants to women’s participation projects, but challenges persist. Such challenges include insecurity, camp closures, access restrictions, food insecurity, and insufficient disability-inclusive programming (UNOCHA 2023; SIDA 2024, 2025). Against this backdrop, the study aims to investigate how humanitarian organisations in Borno State adapt their interventions to ensure inclusive disability services, using the IASC guidelines as the guiding framework.

1.2. Disability and Legal Frameworks: Offshoots of Human Rights Model

In line with the concept of the International Classification of Functioning, the World Health Organisation and the World Bank (WB and WHO 2011) define disability as a combination of impairment, activity limitation, and participation restriction. According to the WHO, impairments are conditions that affect the body or mind; such impairments can make it difficult for an individual to engage in various activities (activity limitation) and interact with society (participation restriction) (Centre for Disease and Control and Prevention 2025). Persons with disabilities include individuals who have long-term physical, psychosocial, intellectual, or sensory impairments, which, when interacting with various barriers, may restrict their full and effective participation and access to humanitarian programmes (Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities [CRPD 2006]). According to Article 1 of the CRPD preamble, disability is an “evolving concept which results from the interaction between impairment, attitudinal and environmental barriers” (CRPD 2006, p. 1).

The efforts to promote the inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian contexts have led to the establishment of different legal frameworks. These frameworks are based on the human rights approach and aim to enhance the understanding of disability, ensuring the safety, rights, and well-being of persons with disabilities (Funke and Dijkzeul 2025). These frameworks were further discussed in the remaining paragraphs of this section.

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is an international treaty that was adopted in 2006. The Convention came into force in 2008 with 164 signatories and 186 parties (CRPD 2006). This Convention places on the signatories and parties the responsibility to protect persons with disabilities in policies, laws and practices both in national and international relations. Article 11 of the Convention obliges state parties to protect and ensure the safety of persons with disabilities in humanitarian crises (CRPD 2006, p. 10). While Article 5 promotes equality and prohibits all forms of discrimination, Articles 6 and 7 recognise that women and children with disabilities, respectively, face multiple forms of discrimination and should be provided with the necessary conditions for equality and the enjoyment of human rights. Nigeria ratified and acceded to this Convention in 2007, and the Optional Protocol in 2010 (Ewang 2019).

Similarly, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction was adopted at the 2015 World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (Stough and Kang 2015). This framework was a remarkable effort to ensure that persons with disabilities are not left out in the design and implementation of programmes in emergency contexts. It referenced persons with disabilities in various sections of the documents, including the preamble, guiding principles, priorities for action, and roles in disaster response (Stough and Kang 2015).

In Preamble 7, the framework advocates for a “people-centred approach” to disaster risk management (UNISDR 2015, p. 10). Furthermore, the framework calls for partnership among public and private institutions to include and incorporate disaster management into their practices. In this section of the preamble, persons with disabilities are recognised as one of the key stakeholders in disaster risk management planning and implementation (UNISDR 2015). Similarly, persons with disabilities, as identified by principle (d), should have the opportunity to express their views on disaster risk reduction and management. According to the framework, this will provide room for inclusive decision-making, as stated in Guiding Principle (g). Also, it is important to include the views of persons with disabilities in policies and actions regarding disaster planning and implementation” (UNISDR 2015).

In the priority areas of action, Priority 1 (24a) of the framework calls for data that is need-specific, based on the categories of people affected in a given context. It also implies disability inclusion, as persons with disabilities have their own needs based on different types of disabilities (UNISDR 2015). Priority 4 (32) also calls for leadership and the empowerment of persons with disabilities to fight inequality and promote accessible response for all, as well as “recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction” (UNISDR 2015).

Furthermore, the Charter on the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action was developed in advance of the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit. The summit, held in Istanbul, Turkey, brought together over 70 stakeholders and provided an opportunity for the launch of the Charter on Disability Inclusion in Humanitarian Action (Humanitarian Disability Charter 2016). The Charter aims to ensure that humanitarian organisations include persons with disabilities in all emergencies. Particularly, the Charter prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities, encourages participation in emergency planning and response, promotes inclusive policies, and emphasises the need for inclusive cooperation and coordination (Humanitarian Disability Charter 2016). This Charter paved the way for increased efforts in disability-inclusive humanitarian action.

Additionally, the Global Compact for Migration (2018) provides some important disability-inclusive objectives. For instance, Objective 7 (23a) specifies a response to the needs of migrants without discrimination of any kind, such as disability, gender, or race (Global Compact for Migration 2018, p. 14). Furthermore, Objective 15 (31a) maintains the provision of services without discrimination on any grounds, including gender, sex, origin or disability. This section also highlights the importance of grassroots service accessibility, such as inclusive information and other essential services (Global Compact for Migration 2018, p. 22).

Apart from being a signatory to many international legal provisions for persons with disabilities, such as the ones mentioned, Nigeria has two main documents that provide different support for persons with disabilities. First is the Nigerian Constitution, which provides for the rights of all citizens of the country. However, it does not make specific provisions for persons living with disabilities (Etieyibo 2020). Due to a lack of specific provisions for persons with disabilities, the Disability Act was introduced in 2009. However, it neither obtained presidential assent from the Late Umaru Musa Yar’Adua (2009–2011) nor President Goodluck Jonathan (2011–2014), when it was again raised in parliament (Etieyibo 2020). On 23 January 2019, the bill was passed into law (Ewang 2019). The Disability Act seeks to ensure that people with disabilities are fully included in Nigeria. It also established the National Commission for Persons with Disabilities, which oversees the education, healthcare, social, economic, and civil rights of persons with disabilities. Part V (25) made a particular provision which obligates the State to protect persons with disabilities in situations of humanitarian emergencies (Federal Republic of Nigeria 2018).

Out of these documents and frameworks relevant to disability inclusion, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD 2006) is legally binding for signatory countries, while the Nigerian Constitution and the Disability Prohibition Act are legally binding for actors, organisations, and institutions in Nigeria. Additionally, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (Stough and Kang 2015), the Charter on the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action (Humanitarian Disability Charter 2016), the Global Compact for Migration (2018), and the IASC Guidelines on Disabilities inclusion are non-binding. The non-legally binding instruments serve as guidelines, frameworks or agreements that encourage inclusive practices but do not carry legal enforceability.

1.3. Framework of Analysis: The IASC Guidelines on Disability Inclusion in Humanitarian Action

Evidence of challenges faced by persons with disabilities drives the IASC guidelines aimed at promoting disability inclusion during humanitarian emergencies. Handicap International (2015) documented that 54% of persons with disabilities face inaccessible services in crises. This finding was corroborated by Shakespeare, Ndagire, and Seketi, who, in their research, “Triple jeopardy,” described the challenges faced by persons with disabilities in emergencies (Shakespeare et al. 2021).

The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) is the highest United Nations humanitarian coordination forum, which was established at the United Nations General Assembly resolution 46/182 in 1991. The agency sets priorities and also mobilises resources to respond to humanitarian emergencies. IASC has four main priority areas: accountability to the affected population, centrality to protection, preserving the humanitarian space and making efforts to mitigate and respond to climate shock (IASC 2013). The IASC forum is chaired by the Emergency Relief Coordinator and the members include representatives from key UN humanitarian agencies such as UNDP, UNICEF, UNHCR, WFP, FAO, WHO, UN-HABITAT, OCHA and IOM. Organisations such as ICRC, IFRC, OHCHR, UNFPA, Special Rapporteur on IDPs and the World Bank are based on a standing invitation. Other members include major NGO consortia such as ICVA, InterAction and SCHR (see list of abbreviations in abbreviations section) (IASC 2013).

In 2019, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) launched guidelines on the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action, which represent a landmark effort to integrate disability inclusion into humanitarian response frameworks. The guideline is an outcome of consultations among humanitarian actors and organisations of persons with disabilities. The IASC guidelines are designed for Governments, humanitarian leadership (including Emergency, Refugee, and Resident Coordinators, as well as humanitarian country teams), sector leads, programmers (in both humanitarian and development organisations), donors, and local, national, regional, and international organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) (IASC 2019).

The guideline is an upgrade to different frameworks aimed at promoting quality programming (Barbelet and Palmer 2020). Some of the frameworks include IASC guidelines on mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) (IASC 2007), gender-based violence (GBV) (IASC 2015), disability-inclusive shelter (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) 2015), as well as Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) and the Humanitarian Inclusion Standards for Older People and People with Disabilities (HIS) (CBM International et al. 2018). The IASC guidelines adopted the human rights model for disability inclusion, placing persons with disabilities at the centre of humanitarian action, both as actors and as part of the affected population (IASC 2019).

These guidelines serve a crucial purpose for humanitarian actors during humanitarian coordination, policy-making, programming and funding decisions. Similarly, they are “must-do actions” in the practice of disability inclusion in humanitarian action (IASC 2019). Considering that persons with disabilities face challenges due to environmental, attitudinal, or institutional factors, IASC provides approaches to promote disability inclusion amidst these challenges (Funke and Dijkzeul 2022). According to IASC (2019), the approaches include:

• Encouraging the involvement of individuals with disabilities and their groups in decision-making processes.
• Eliminating obstacles faced by persons with disabilities.
• Enabling people with disabilities to gain independence and build their skills.
• Collecting data to track the progress of inclusivity.

Examining different empirical research and reports on the importance and benefits of the IASC guidelines reveals fruitful outcomes in various contexts. For instance, a qualitative study conducted by the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) (2023) examined “progress towards the inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian action” in 2023. The study examined the application of IASC guidelines on disability inclusion in three regions: Asia, Africa, and the MENA region, involving over 70 participants. Some of the benefits of the guidelines include providing structure and roles for different stakeholders in attaining inclusion as well as bridging the gap between policy and practice (International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) 2023).

Additionally, International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) (2023) found that while larger organisations indicated a significant positive impact of the IASC guidelines, locally based organisations mentioned that there is a lack of awareness of the guidelines and disability inclusion is often an afterthought or not included at all. Humanitarian organisations differ significantly in their attention to disability inclusion, and they lack a standardised way of reporting and providing information on disability inclusion. According to Funke and Dijkzeul (2025), humanitarian organisations differ significantly in their commitment to disability inclusion and do not follow a consistent method for reporting or disseminating information on disability inclusion, making it challenging to assess the extent of disability inclusion.

While the IASC Guidelines have spurred global discourse and contributions on disability inclusion, significant research gaps remain regarding the implementation of the guidelines in specific contexts, such as Borno, Nigeria (International Organization for Migration (IOM) 2025). The region’s complex emergency, marked by violence, food insecurity and limited infrastructure, offers a critical case for studying disability inclusion (UNOCHA 2023). Nevertheless, empirical studies on the application of these guidelines are scarce. In 2017, Nwanegwo examined the need for a legal framework to empower the inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian action in Nigeria (Nwanegwo 2017). Although the Nigerian Disability Act was enacted in 2019, a wide gap remains in its practical implementation.

2. Methodology

This study employed a qualitative research approach guided by a descriptive phenomenological design to investigate the lived experiences of project managers of organisations in Borno State. The primary focus is on the organisation’s application of the IASC guidelines in humanitarian programming; the strategies, challenges, and practices that have been successfully implemented in Borno State.

2.1. Participants Selection

Initially, a purposive sampling strategy was employed to select participants from organisations actively engaged in disability-inclusive programming or mainstreaming disability inclusion across various sectors. The initial 10 organisations were recruited. To broaden sectoral representation and address potential gaps, snowball sampling was utilised through referrals from key informants of the first participants, enabling the inclusion of perspectives from underrepresented sectors, such as women-led organisations.

From an initial pool of 25 organisations contacted, 23 expressed willingness to participate. However, due to logistical challenges, including network service connectivity issues that affected the availability of participants from various organisations, 20 participants were ultimately interviewed for this study. Participants were selected based on their direct involvement in designing or implementing disability-inclusive programs and their willingness was determined by signed informed consent. Furthermore, the interview was paused when it became clear that meaning saturation had been attained. Meaning saturation implies the collection of qualitative data until a detailed understanding of the topic is achieved (Hennink et al. 2017).

2.2. Data Collection and Ethical Considerations

Data was collected through semi-structured In-Depth Interviews conducted online via Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, or Zoom, depending on the participants’ preferences, supplemented by a review of secondary sources such as organisational reports, UNOCHA situation reports and peer-reviewed literature on disability inclusion in humanitarian contexts. As shown in Appendix A, the interview guide covers four key areas: challenges faced by humanitarian actors, the application of IASC guidelines, impediments to the application of IASC guidelines, and approaches to resolving the challenges in applying IASC guidelines. Each interview lasted 45–60 min and was audio-recorded with participants’ consent.

Ethical approval was obtained from the respondents with the aid of a consent form prior to data collection. Participants also received detailed information about the study’s purpose and were assured of the confidentiality of their data. To ensure confidentiality, all participants’ data were anonymised.

2.3. Data Analysis

Thematic analysis framework was employed to identify patterns in the data (Ahmed et al. 2025). Transcripts were first colour-coded and categorised into themes as shown in the sample codebook in Appendix B. These codes were then mapped deductively to the IASC pillars to assess alignment with the guideline’s objectives. For instance, inclusion strategies were compared to the “must-do actions” of disability inclusion as outlined in the IASC guidelines. Finally, findings were discussed in relation to secondary data and existing literature to contextualise local practices within the global discourse on disability inclusion.

3. Findings and Discussion

Given the protracted crisis in Borno State driven by the Boko Haram insurgency, this study leverages qualitative data to explore the practical application of IASC guidelines. An in-depth interview was conducted among 20 project managers in humanitarian organisations in Borno State, and the data analysis was thematic (Ahmed et al. 2025). The analysis was structured into two parts: strategies for applying the IASC guidelines on disability inclusion and challenges in implementing these guidelines.

Although classified into two main subheadings, each was not exclusive of the other. Additionally, successful practices amidst the challenges faced by organisations were also discussed: the strengths and weaknesses of each of the strategies applied by humanitarian organisations. The findings helped to reveal the lived realities among humanitarian organisations in Borno State and the extent of IASC guideline implementation, thereby contributing actionable insights to global efforts for disability-inclusive humanitarian action.

3.1. Strategies of Disability Inclusion

3.1.1. Data Disaggregation

A recurring strategy for persons with disabilities among participants’ organisations was the deliberate integration of disability inclusion into program design and monitoring through data disaggregation. Several organisations reported that they routinely set disability-specific targets during the design or implementation of their programmes. This action ensures that persons with disabilities (PWDs) are explicitly considered in the selection of beneficiaries. For example, one participant explained:

In our target groups, we include a specific percentage for people with disabilities that we will reach. Moreover, uh, we disaggregate data even for each activity that we implement. So if we say that a specific activity reaches 500 people, we indicate female, male, disability and age.

(Participant B: Female, 35)

This practice aligns with the IASC guidelines’ emphasis on the collection and use of disaggregated data to identify and address barriers faced by persons with disabilities (IASC 2019). By disaggregating data by disability, organisations in Borno demonstrate a shift from a “one-size-fits-all” model to more tailored programming. However, while this approach indicates progress, its effectiveness depends on whether the data collected informs programmatic adjustments rather than serving a merely reporting function (Funke and Dijkzeul 2022). In regard to this, the study also showed that some organisations do not include persons with disabilities from the onset, especially in mainstreamed projects. As such, persons with disabilities were not involved in the planning stage but were incorporated at the implementation stage. By implication, inclusion of persons with disabilities is more of a strategy for visibility by some humanitarian organisations rather than an implementation based on the needs of the affected population. Due to this observed approach, one of the respondents referred to it as a marketing strategy employed by some humanitarian organisations.

Since drawing a percentage of affected persons with disabilities in the Borno context is done at the implementation stage, it does not necessarily meet the requirements of the “must do actions” as outlined in the IASC guidelines. Where data are absent on persons with disabilities, the IASC guidelines require data collection on sex, age and disability (IASC 2019). Similarly, some tools that can be useful in obtaining disability disaggregated data include the Washington Group of questions on disability or the UNICEF-Washington Group Child Functioning Module-Humanitarian Version (Washington Group on Disability Statistics 2025). Nevertheless, the study revealed that the majority of participants were unaware of any other tools that could help address the challenges of data disaggregation. Lack of quality data on the needs of persons with disabilities not only affects the quality of inclusive planning but also leads to restricted participation for persons with disabilities. A lack of quality data, in turn, limits the programme’s impact. In this, many organisations still require in-depth training on the tools available for disability-inclusive programming to inform evidence-based designs.

3.1.2. Individual Outreach to Persons with Disabilities

To mitigate the impact of data inadequacy on disability-inclusive programmes, some participants reported adopting individual outreach mechanisms to ensure that persons with disabilities were not excluded from essential information and awareness activities necessary for programme planning and implementation. Aside from getting persons with disabilities to participate in the decision-making, which this approach enhances, it is also considered useful due to insecurity and mobility constraints. These constraints often limit persons with disabilities from participating in group sessions or long-distance travel. In support, a participant opined:

When we discover we have one or two people with disabilities, we tend to go for awareness, one-on-one to discuss with them because they cannot be able to move far distances or it will expose them to more harm. So we ensure that we go for one-on-one awareness sessions so that we can pass those key messages that will enhance and equip them with knowledge to be able to respond to some of the challenges they experience.

(Participant E: Male, 32)

This practice reflects the IASC guidelines’ principle of eliminating barriers to participation by adapting communication methods to specific needs (IASC 2019). It also demonstrates sensitivity to the protection risks that persons with disabilities face in conflict-affected settings, where movement can heighten exposure to violence or exploitation. Nonetheless, such practices appear reactive rather and hardly proactive. Organisations rely heavily on staff initiative and awareness, which may vary across organisations. Individual advocacy brings an inclusion campaign to the doorsteps of persons with disabilities and also incorporates the family members in learning about the need for inclusion. Including family members and relatives is beneficial, as one of the respondents pointed out that disability issues are often perceived to bring shame to the family members.

One-on-one advocacy could be useful in influencing attitudes and traditional beliefs on what constitutes disability, disability rights and empowerment in Borno State. However, it does rule out the option of group advocacy, which may also reduce inter-group discrimination among persons with disabilities (Meyers 2016). The findings from Meyers (2016) in Nicaragua revealed that inter-group discrimination among persons with disabilities can impede the common goal of disability inclusion.

To avoid bringing shame to the family members in Borno, most persons with disabilities prefer to stay indoors rather than being publicly seen. A participant also reported the perspective that disability is from God and there is nothing that can be done to avoid the situation or get better. This religious believe was often reported as an excuse by some persons with disabilities who wish not to be engaged in empowerment programmes or stay off the street as a beggar. It may be difficult to convince an individual with disability when their definition of disability is enshrined in a belief system or charity model of disability. A respondent stated:

Basically, I would say that it still boils down to people’s attitude, right? And there’s this mindset that everybody with disability is a beggar, right? And so, automatically, they will say Oh! This beggar is here. But like I said, attitudinal change or social behavioural change, if I will put it that way, is not something that happens overnight.

(Participant E: Male, 32)

Applying a door-to-door visit is beneficial in advocacy and participation of persons with disabilities in the Borno emergency context. The door-to-door approach provides organisations with the opportunity to obtain in-depth information on the needs of persons with disabilities (Somalia Humanitarian Fund 2021). In support of this finding, Somalia Humanitarian Fund (2021) found that 23% of persons with disabilities in Kismayo IDP camp preferred a door-to-door approach to information dissemination and awareness. However, organisations may not always adopt these strategies due to factors such as the time required to visit all households of persons with disabilities and resource constraints, especially during a shift in donor attention to other conflict contexts. Another important factor is restricted access due to security challenges. Organisations always try to restrict movement into areas with high risks, thereby leaving some persons with disabilities behind in programme planning, implementation and evaluation.

3.1.3. Community Committee Approach

In addition to individual outreach, several organisations sought to promote inclusive participation and representation by embedding the voices of persons with disability in community governance structures. One organisation said they often establish “community committees” with defined criteria to ensure diversity and representation of marginalised groups, including persons with disabilities:

We set up a committee at every location; we have community committee members. In setting up the members of the community committee, we designed criteria that included representatives of people with disabilities, ethnic groups, community leaders, youth leaders and women leaders. So we ensure that people with disabilities are also represented, so that during meetings with our organisation, we can get more issues related to people with disabilities through their representatives.

(Participant E, Male, 32)

The IASC guidelines require humanitarian actors to facilitate the active participation of persons with disabilities and their representative organisations (OPDs) in coordination, planning and decision-making processes (IASC 2019). By institutionalising disability representation in community committees, organisations create formal channels for raising disability-specific concerns, enhancing accountability and responsiveness. The community committee approach could supplement door-to-door or one-on-one advocacy, since one person represents a group of persons with disabilities in the target community. A committee approach could also be more effective in access-restricted areas, as not all persons with disabilities are expected to meet as a group, thereby reducing the exposure of persons with disabilities to security risk. Organisations could also adopt a committee approach in combination with remote management to guide committee members and avoid security risks in this context.

However, the level of actual influence that representatives of persons with disabilities have in such committees remains uncertain. In some cases, representation risks being symbolic or tokenistic (representation without power or influence) if it is not backed by capacity-building, resources, and sustained engagement (Barbelet and Palmer 2020). After studying nine representatives of self-advocacy organisations of persons with disabilities and service provider organisations in Romania, Safta-Zecheria et al. (2024) found similar outcomes: symbolic inclusion without influence in making decisions. In essence, having a committee is relevant and useful in promoting participation, but organisations need to monitor participation by paying attention to attitudinal barriers and power relations within the groups.

3.1.4. Including IASC in the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)

Some organisations saw the IASC guidelines as a turning point in institutionalising disability inclusion. While disability mainstreaming had not always been prioritised, the guidelines provided a framework that translated into the development of better Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Such integration aims to guide the consistent practice of disability inclusion in humanitarian programming, implementation, and evaluation. In line with this, a participant expressed the following opinion:

The guidelines have affected our program. We have not always been an organisation that mainstreams disability inclusion, you understand. But with the guidelines, we understand better how these things should be done. We have standard operating procedures for our activities with it…the guidelines.

(Participant D: Female, 30)

This excerpt illustrates the normative power of the IASC guidelines: they serve not only as a technical tool but also as a reference point for organisational accountability and learning (International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) 2023). The creation of a standard operating procedure with guides from IASC is a significant step towards disability inclusion across program cycles, rather than relying on project-level inclusion. However, the extent to which these operating procedures are implemented, monitored and resourced remains a challenge, especially in contexts like Borno, where humanitarian organisations face high insecurity and competing priorities. Without persistent effort, adoption of IASC guidelines in organisational standard procedures risks remaining a procedure rather than a life-changing one (Funke and Dijkzeul 2022). A theme emerging from the interviews suggests that, although guidelines exist for disability inclusion, donor agencies still influence the level of resources allocated to disability-inclusive projects. In this case, organisations tend to prioritise the demands of donors over the realities in a state like Borno. This attitude makes it more difficult to apply the procedures together with the IASC guidelines.

3.2. Challenges in the Application of IASC Guidelines

The IASC guidelines offer a valuable guide, but participants reported some constraints in their application within Borno State. The complexity of the humanitarian context has shaped the extent to which organisations interpret and apply the guidelines. Its global adoption is increasing even though the guidelines lack sufficient flexibility to respond to the dynamics of conflict in Borno State (Twigg et al. 2018; Funke 2023). Some of the challenges identified are discussed below.

3.2.1. Attitudes of Persons with Disabilities

One of the challenges identified by participants relates to attitudinal and cultural beliefs that influence how persons with disabilities engage with humanitarian organisations. Despite the availability of some livelihood support and empowerment initiatives, some individuals often resist participation in empowerment programmes for persons with disabilities. This resistance mostly occurs when a person with disability prefers begging, maintaining that disability is God’s will. Such preferences can be shaped by socio-cultural beliefs surrounding an individual’s circumstances. As one participant recounted:

Sometimes, you get resistance. For instance, you are trying to empower someone who has a disability, but the person, because of religion, prefers to go and beg for money on the street. But you set up a livelihood project for people with disabilities to make sure they are being empowered so they have a livelihood by catering for themselves and their families. You give him a start-up kit and the person sells the start-up kit, then goes back to the street to beg again. Or you are maybe doing a project implementation, you try to bring people into the program, but they refuse to come because they prefer the other way around. So, you have resistance.

(Participant A, Male, 37)

This excerpt indicates that aside from communities’ views on disability and persons with disabilities, the perspective of persons with disability also contributes to the extent of inclusivity that a programme can deliver. The finding also highlights the need for context-sensitive approaches that do not merely provide resources but also address behavioural and cultural dimensions of disability inclusion. Without complementary measures such as awareness-raising and the engagement of religious and community leaders, empowerment initiatives risk being undermined.

Although the IASC guidelines advocate for empowerment and self-reliance, their implementation is challenged when deep-seated social practices and survival strategies conflict with program objectives (Barbelet and Palmer 2020). In this circumstance, humanitarian organisations may lose interest and trust in persons with disability. In turn, a lack of trust can further lead to more exclusion in humanitarian programmes.

3.2.2. Political Interference

Participants also identified political interference as a significant barrier to implementing disability-inclusive programmes in line with the IASC guidelines. Participants reported instances where government authorities attempted to influence project priorities. Such political interference can undermine the principle of impartiality, independence and evidence-based targeting. For instance, one of the participants indicated:

A lot of political interference in humanitarian implementation; for instance, you imagine you will be shocked to see that, okay… the state government is telling the Nigerian Humanitarian community or a particular agency or partner that he is interested in a particular project. You see how that is a very big challenge for you to try to convince that person to understand that the government do not implement a project or the governor does not implement a project.

(Participant A: Male, 37)

This finding underscores the tensions between the government and the humanitarian organisations in Borno State. Political interference not only jeopardises humanitarian independence and accountability but also creates obstacles for systematic disability inclusion. Aside from influencing the projects of humanitarian organisations, the government can also influence the humanitarian agenda of donor agencies by determining the agenda, which may not necessarily be based on the needs of the affected population or persons with disabilities. As a result, when political actors prioritise visibility or personal interests over inclusive design, programmes risk sidelining persons with disabilities, who already face marginalisation in aid delivery.

Political interests can affect the independence and neutrality of humanitarian organisations (Abiodun et al. 2024). This finding also reflects broader concerns raised in the literature about how state-humanitarian relations can compromise inclusion when political agendas override humanitarian principles (Lough et al. 2022). Similarly, conflict can engulf political attention, making it difficult to discuss and allocate resources to other pressing issues, such as disability-inclusive programming (Young 2022).

3.2.3. Evidence and Monitoring Standards

Another recurrent theme in participants’ responses was the lack of reliable evidence and monitoring standards for disability inclusion in humanitarian action. Organisations acknowledged difficulties in designing successful strategies for persons with disabilities, partly due to limited documentation and the absence of standardised monitoring tools tailored to humanitarian contexts. One participant explained thus:

I think that, for example, one of the main factors that I can mention is related to the evidence and the information. We don’t know… sometimes it is difficult to know what works for people with disabilities in humanitarian response and based on the information that is available, it is difficult to estimate. Of course, when we are working on the project design, we are working on their standards, right? Monitoring standards: there are no very common monitoring standards, etcetera. But real information, like what kind of key activities or many frameworks we need to follow to implement projects that really benefit people with disabilities, I am not familiar with.

(Participant D: Female, 30)

This challenge reflects the broader global gap between disability inclusion frameworks and their practice (Funke and Dijkzeul 2022). IASC Guidelines outline “must-do actions”, but they do not provide sector-specific indicators or monitoring tools robust enough for conflict settings like Borno. As a result, organisations are often left to interpret the guidelines independently, leading to fragmented and inconsistent application (International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) 2023). Furthermore, the absence of shared monitoring standards undermines accountability and makes it difficult to assess whether inclusion efforts translate into tangible improvements in the lives of persons with disabilities.

3.2.4. Budgetary and Organisation’s Internal Restriction

Participants also identified internal budgetary and organisational restrictions as key obstacles to implementing the IASC guideline. While organisations generally acknowledged the IASC guidelines, mandatory internal procedures were compulsory, while the IASC guidelines are voluntary. In support of this, a participant stated:

We include, but we have some kind of restrictions in terms of budget, for example… of course, we have the IASC guideline, but I know that few organisation have their own specific guidelines related to disability. And so that means to me that …working with IASC guidelines is like a recommendation, but it is different when your own organisation have the guidelines because this step is like, okay, it is mandatory now that I follow these guidelines (by my organisation).

(Participant B: Female, 35)

As deduced from the above excerpt, organisational constraints affect disability inclusion in humanitarian contexts. Without dedicated budgets, internalised policies or favourable standards, disability inclusion may remain less of a priority. Furthermore, relying on individual staff commitment rather than being embedded in organisational strategy can make inclusion a trivial agenda (Barbelet and Palmer 2020). In the context of Borno, where humanitarian actors face high demand, insecurity, and resource scarcity, this limitation is particularly acute. It reinforces the need for mandatory organisational policies and funding to ensure consistent application of disability-inclusive practices in Borno state.

3.2.5. Population Displacement

A further challenge identified by participants relates to the high mobility and displacement of populations in Borno State. Constant movement of affected individuals, including persons with disabilities, complicates project planning, implementation and monitoring. As noted by a respondent:

…of course, the constant movement of population. This affects, of course, the project because sometimes we identify the people with disabilities and for example, in refugee camps and suddenly they move and we don’t know when and where we can find them or maybe they are now out of reach area of the project.

(Participant B: Female, 35)

This theme illustrates how displacement and insecurity affect the implementation of disability-inclusive interventions, even when organisations are aware of IASC guidelines, have internal strategies in place and are willing to work towards disability inclusion. It shows the dynamic and unpredictable conditions in Borno State, which require flexible programming, adaptive monitoring and contingency planning to ensure persons with disabilities are not excluded (UNOCHA 2023). Although flexible programming may be useful, it may still be difficult because persons with disabilities have to relocate once there is insecurity in their previous place of settlement.

Sometimes, the relocation in the Borno context was caused by state directives for people to move to state-established Internally Displaced Persons camps. Many a time, the needs of persons with disabilities are not considered during relocation planning (Haruna 2017). As of June 2024, there are approximately 215 IDP camps (62 formal and 153 informal sites) in Borno State (CCCM, Shelter/NFI SECTOR 2024). Many Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps, including the Bakassi, in Maiduguri, have been closed by the government due to inadequate resources (Ajiboye 2025). Similarly, between May 2021 and 30 June 2024, about 17 IDP camps have been closed, affecting 166,775 persons. Furthermore, the State has instructed the closure of all official IDP camps by 2027 (CCCM, Shelter/NFI SECTOR 2024). Camp closure by 2027 can affect persons with disabilities if proactive planning is not set aside for persons with disabilities in Borno State.

4. Implication of Findings and Conclusions

This exploratory study has demonstrated that while the IASC guidelines provide a vital global framework for disability inclusion in humanitarian action, their application in Borno State remains constrained. Borno state was chosen for this study as it has the majority of the Internally Displaced Population, including persons with disabilities. In-depth interviews were conducted among 20 participants who work with humanitarian organisations in Borno state. Furthermore, the data was analysed and presented in themes.

The findings from this study showed that humanitarian organisations employ adaptive strategies such as data disaggregation, individual outreach, community committees and the integration of IASC guidelines into Standard Operating Procedures. Despite partial alignment of the inclusion strategies with the “Must-Do-Actions” of the IASC, challenges abound in the application of IASC guidelines in Borno State. Some of the identified challenges include political interference, as well as cultural and resource limitations. The findings confirm that although the IASC guidelines offer direction, their effectiveness in Borno State depends heavily on organisational commitment, contextual adaptation and meaningful engagement with persons with disabilities, representative organisations and community members.

5. Recommendations

To strengthen disability-inclusive humanitarian action in Borno State, several measures are recommended. First, organisations should enforce disability inclusion through mandatory internal policies, budgetary allocations and context-specific monitoring standards. As a result, the rights-based inclusion of persons with disabilities can be made mandatory, rather than a voluntary action.

Second, state governments and donor agencies should incentivise and provide funding for disability-inclusive programming while supporting organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs). The incentives may empower OPDs to participate meaningfully in coordination and active decision-making processes.

Third, community-based advocacy, especially involving religious and traditional leaders, should be prioritised. Such advocacy will address cultural and attitudinal barriers that hinder the active participation of persons with disabilities in decision-making and inclusive programme design. Similarly, a depth reorientation to enhance a rights-based perspective on disability will reduce the association of disability with supernatural agencies, thereby welcoming empowerment for improved welfare and inclusive programming.

Finally, humanitarian actors must invest in stronger data systems, leveraging tools such as the Washington Group Questions and flexible programming approaches that account for high population mobility and displacement. By embedding these practices, the IASC guidelines can be transformed into actionable instruments that enhance the lived realities of persons with disabilities in the Borno State conflict context.

6. Limitations

Reliance on online interviews might have excluded practitioners and organisations without stable internet access, potentially skewing perspectives toward better-resourced organisations. These limitations were mitigated by prioritising depth and verifying responses from other respondents within the same humanitarian organisation. Similarly, the study focused on Borno State, a unique context affected by conflict. Focusing on one context may mean that the findings cannot be generalised to other humanitarian crises or even other states in Nigeria. However, the findings were reviewed in light of literature from other humanitarian contexts to strengthen the application of Borno’s case as thinkable practices in similar contexts. In addition, due to the consistent changes in displacement patterns in Borno State, security situation and funding priorities, the findings reflect a snapshot in time and may vary rapidly.