Pathway 3: Impact on social assistance spending and tax revenue – Inclusion of people with disabilities in work/employment can lead to greater economic self-sufficiency. Consequently, fewer individuals may require social assistance (in countries where it is available), decreasing overall demand on often financially-strapped programmes. Additionally, increasing labour force participation of both people with disabilities and their caregivers increases a country’s potential tax base, which could increase government revenue. For example: In the Philippines, it was estimated that excess unemployment among individuals with unrepaired cleft lip and palate cost the government between US$8-9.8 million dollars in lost tax revenue. Although other studies in LMICs are lacking, data from supported employment projects in Scotland suggest that every £1 spent on the programme led to a savings of £5.87 due in large part to decreased need for disability/welfare benefits and increased tax income. Pathway 4: Profitability for businesses – While empirical evidence in LMICs is lacking, companies in high income countries have found that employees with disabilities have greater retention rates, higher attendance and better safety records and matched productivity compared to employees without a disability. These savings can generate substantial gains: In the US, concerted efforts by major companies Walgreens and Verizon to employ significant numbers of people with disabilities saw gains such as a 20% increase in productivity and a 67% return on investment, respectively. Health Although empirical or modelling data on the economic impact of exclusion of people with disabilities in health is particularly lacking, the following represent theoretical pathways through which costs or gains may be realised: Pathway 1: Spiralling medical costs and the poverty cycle – Inability to access and receive appropriate timely health care may result in continuously poor or worsening levels of functioning among people with disabilities – including the development of additional disabling conditions – that lead to higher personal and societal medical and productivity costs in the long term. Pathway 2: Impact on public health interventions – Failure to include people with disabilities in public health interventions can impede the effectiveness and efficiency of these programmes. Further, as a result of exclusion, people with disabilities may experience avoidable medical/productivity costs and governments may end up spending more in parallel care and treatment programmes for preventable health conditions. Pathway 3: Downstream effects of poor health – Poor health can have negative consequences for both education and employment. For example, consistently poor health can lead to low educational attainment, which in turn is strongly linked to lower lifetime
Pathway 3: Impact on social assistance spending and tax revenue – Inclusion of people with disabilities in work/employment can lead to greater economic self-sufficiency. Consequently, fewer individuals may require social assistance (in countries where it is available), decreasing overall demand on often financially-strapped programmes. Additionally, increasing labour force participation of both people with disabilities and their caregivers increases a country’s potential tax base, which could increase government revenue. For example: In the Philippines, it was estimated that excess unemployment among individuals with unrepaired cleft lip and palate cost the government between US$8-9.8 million dollars in lost tax revenue. Although other studies in LMICs are lacking, data from supported employment projects in Scotland suggest that every £1 spent on the programme led to a savings of £5.87 due in large part to decreased need for disability/welfare benefits and increased tax income. Pathway 4: Profitability for businesses – While empirical evidence in LMICs is lacking, companies in high income countries have found that employees with disabilities have greater retention rates, higher attendance and better safety records and matched productivity compared to employees without a disability. These savings can generate substantial gains: In the US, concerted efforts by major companies Walgreens and Verizon to employ significant numbers of people with disabilities saw gains such as a 20% increase in productivity and a 67% return on investment, respectively. Health Although empirical or modelling data on the economic impact of exclusion of people with disabilities in health is particularly lacking, the following represent theoretical pathways through which costs or gains may be realised: Pathway 1: Spiralling medical costs and the poverty cycle – Inability to access and receive appropriate timely health care may result in continuously poor or worsening levels of functioning among people with disabilities – including the development of additional disabling conditions – that lead to higher personal and societal medical and productivity costs in the long term. Pathway 2: Impact on public health interventions – Failure to include people with disabilities in public health interventions can impede the effectiveness and efficiency of these programmes. Further, as a result of exclusion, people with disabilities may experience avoidable medical/productivity costs and governments may end up spending more in parallel care and treatment programmes for preventable health conditions. Pathway 3: Downstream effects of poor health – Poor health can have negative consequences for both education and employment. For example, consistently poor health can lead to low educational attainment, which in turn is strongly linked to lower lifetime
Summary-Report_Costs-of-Exclusion.docx