Fostering Inclusion and Intersectionality in SRHR: Lessons from my Coaching Programme
Since 2023, I have supported an International Non-Government Organisation (INGO) to strengthen inclusion and intersectionality within sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) programming across six countries. With a focus on ensuring that children, adolescents, and youth can exercise control over their bodies and futures, the initiative sought to address deep-rooted gender inequalities while prioritising disability inclusion and the rights of individuals with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities.
One of my activities was to develop and implement a social inclusion and intersectionality coaching program, offering about 32 staff and folks from partner organisations a space for critical reflection, professional development, and practical application of inclusion strategies. The initiative was designed to move beyond traditional training models by helping participants align their personal values with broader commitments to inclusion and develop practical strategies for embedding intersectionality into their work.
Challenges in Embedding Inclusion
It became clear that, like every other programme I have worked in, some practitioners struggled with concepts like intersectionality, the social model of disability, and the dignity of risk — terms inherently connected to a human rights approach were not yet embedded in everyday programming practices.
Logistical challenges such as time constraints, unstable internet access, and a preference for traditional training methods initially led to low engagement in the structured coaching sessions. Recognising these obstacles, I pivoted the programme to a more flexible “drop-in” model, holding online coaching drop-in sessions twice a week, significantly improving participation. Participants were more likely to ‘drop in’ if they had a question or concern, wanted to work through it with their colleagues and me, or had time to listen, reflect, and contribute.
A striking observation emerged: practitioners overwhelmingly prioritised disability inclusion, particularly focusing on mobility, hearing, and vision disabilities. However, psycho-social and cognitive disabilities remained largely unaddressed. Even more notably, in countries where legal restrictions did not prohibit discussions on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, Expression and Sex Characteristics (SOGIESC), there was little to no engagement on the inclusion of LGBTQIA+ individuals — a reflection of both internal biases and the socio-political challenges faced in these regions.
Unpacking Social Norms and Power Structures
One of the programme’s most transformative moments occurred during deep reflections on social norms and power structures. Many participants had never critically examined how their personal values shaped their professional practice — some assumed that inclusion was simply about helping marginalised groups, rather than recognising how power, privilege, and systemic barriers influenced access to services.
For instance, in one coaching session, a participant realised that community leaders responded negatively when they began treating people with disabilities with equal respect. This revealed deep-seated norms about who is valued and who is not — prompting conversations about how inclusion efforts can disrupt existing hierarchies, and what types of responses are appropriate in that context, which doesn’t do harm.
In another discussion, participants from different countries reflected on how the same core value — “care for young women” — led to two vastly different approaches to SRHR. One participant advocated for comprehensive SRHR education and abortion access, while another supported abstinence and opposed abortion, citing personal beliefs. This conversation highlighted how deeply personal values interact with professional obligations — and how navigating these tensions is crucial for truly transformative inclusion work.
Rethinking Partnerships for Lasting Change
Beyond individual reflections, the coaching process shed light on a critical structural issue: the nature of partnerships in SRHR programming. Many participants acknowledged that partnerships with civil society organisations (CSOs) and organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs) were often transactional rather than truly collaborative. Instead of co-designing projects, these partnerships frequently operated on a top-down consultation model, reinforcing existing power imbalances.
Programme practitioners proposed a radical shift: moving towards shared leadership, mutual learning, and equitable resource distribution. Ideas such as spending time in each other’s office spaces, prioritising long-term relationships over short-term project goals, and rethinking funding structures emerged as key strategies for fostering more inclusive and meaningful partnerships.
The Path Forward: Recommendations for Systemic Change
The experience of facilitating this coaching programme highlighted that building inclusion is not just about individual behaviour change — it requires systemic shifts. Reflecting on the experience, I have several key recommendations:
· Institutionalise Professional Development: Make social inclusion training mandatory for all staff — not just those in technical roles — and provide locally relevant training on disability and SOGIESC inclusion.
· Foster a Culture of Reflexivity & Accountability: Move beyond one-off training sessions and embed continuous learning and reflection into everyday work.
· Strengthen Implementation of Disability Inclusion: Budget for accessibility, support services, and dedicated inclusion staff to ensure meaningful participation of people with disabilities.
· Move Towards Transformative Partnerships: Shift from transactional to collaborative partnerships, ensuring that local organisations co-lead programme design and implementation.
· Prioritise Participatory Research & Evaluation: Ensure that marginalised voices shape programme assessments through participatory methods.
· From Learning to Action: The coaching initiative revealed both promising steps forward and persistent gaps. While many participants engaged deeply with the principles of inclusion and intersectionality, the real test lies in whether these reflections translate into sustained change.
The success of all development programming — no matter who you are, where your programme is, and what types of issues it works on- will depend on its ability to embed inclusion within all levels of work — structurally, culturally, and operationally. The shift from a charity-based approach to a truly transformative one requires rethinking power, embracing discomfort, and committing to continuous learning.
By centring the lived experiences of marginalised groups, fostering more equitable partnerships, and ensuring systemic accountability, there is potential to advance your programme outcomes and set a new standard for inclusive development practice.
