Disability is defined in many ways, which creates confusion and makes it difficult to develop effective policies. Tools like the Washington Group’s measures and the 6 disability types covered in the American Community Survey (ACS) help clarify the picture, but each serves different purposes. New research, published in Health Affairs, When Designing Disability Survey Questions, Align Measurement To Purpose: A Response To Landes et al., highlights how the Washington Group focuses on identifying those at risk of exclusion, using scaled responses to capture varying levels of difficulty. This nuanced approach offers a more accurate understanding of disability, helping policymakers tailor interventions and resources to those who need them most, ultimately improving inclusivity and accessibility.
Coauthors include Daniel Mont and Jennifer Madans of the Center for Inclusive Policy, Nanette Goodman of the Burton Blatt Institute at Syracuse University, Sophie Mitra of Fordham University, Zachary Morris of the School of Social Welfare at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, Ari Ne’eman of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and David Wittenburg of Westat.
“With clearer, purpose-driven data collection—guided by the disability community—we can better address barriers and tailor policies to meet the real needs of people with disabilities,” notes Wittenburg.
