Washington Group Short Set
Also known as: WG Short Set, WG-SS Disability Questions, Washington Group Census Questions, Six-Domain Functional Difficulty Set
The Washington Group Short Set on Functioning is a brief, standardized set of six survey questions designed to identify people at risk of participation restrictions because of difficulty in basic functional domains. Developed by the Washington Group on Disability Statistics under United Nations auspices, the short set asks about difficulty in seeing, hearing, walking or climbing steps, remembering or concentrating, self-care, and communicating, each answered on a common four-level scale running from no difficulty to cannot do at all. Its purpose, as set out by Madans and colleagues in 2011, is to produce internationally comparable disability statistics that can be collected even in a population census and that support monitoring of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The questions are grounded in the functioning perspective of the WHO ICF, deliberately measuring difficulty in carrying out basic actions rather than diagnoses or impairments. A simple cut-off on the difficulty scale converts the answers into a disability classification used to estimate prevalence and to disaggregate other indicators.
Key highlights
- Produces internationally comparable disability statistics by standardizing six functioning questions and a common four-level scale across countries.
- Short enough to embed in a population census or any survey with severe space constraints, closing long-standing data gaps.
- Grounded in the ICF functioning perspective, asking about difficulty in basic actions rather than contested disability labels or diagnoses.
- Enables disaggregation of other indicators by disability, directly supporting CRPD monitoring and leave-no-one-behind reporting.
Intuition
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
How it works
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
When to use it
Use the Washington Group Short Set when you need internationally comparable, low-burden disability data within a census or general household survey, particularly for estimating prevalence and for disaggregating development and rights indicators between disabled and non-disabled populations. It is the appropriate tool for national statistical offices, for monitoring the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and disability-related Sustainable Development Goal indicators, and for any setting where only a handful of questions can be added. It is less suitable when you need detailed clinical assessment, when you must capture domains the short set omits (such as mental health, pain, or fatigue, for which the extended set or the Model Disability Survey is more appropriate), or when the goal is to measure functioning as a graded continuum rather than to classify difficulty against a cut-off. It identifies people at risk of participation restriction from basic functional difficulty; it is not a diagnostic instrument and does not measure all aspects of disability.
Strengths & limitations
- Produces internationally comparable disability statistics by standardizing six functioning questions and a common four-level scale across countries.
- Short enough to embed in a population census or any survey with severe space constraints, closing long-standing data gaps.
- Grounded in the ICF functioning perspective, asking about difficulty in basic actions rather than contested disability labels or diagnoses.
- Enables disaggregation of other indicators by disability, directly supporting CRPD monitoring and leave-no-one-behind reporting.
- Six basic domains deliberately omit important dimensions such as mental health, pain, fatigue, and detailed communication, undercounting some disabled people.
- A single binary cut-off discards severity gradations and can make prevalence estimates sensitive to the threshold chosen.
- Self- and proxy-report of difficulty is influenced by awareness, stigma, and the availability of assistive devices and accommodations.
- Identifies risk of participation restriction at the functioning level but does not capture environmental barriers or actual participation outcomes.
Common pitfalls
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Applications
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Frequently asked
What are the six domains in the short set?
The Washington Group Short Set covers six basic functional domains: seeing (even when wearing glasses), hearing (even when using a hearing aid), walking or climbing steps, remembering or concentrating, self-care such as washing all over or dressing, and communicating or being understood. Each is asked with the same wording and the same four response options. These domains were chosen because they are universal across cultures, are linked to risk of participation restriction, and fit the tight space of a census while remaining comparable internationally.
How is someone classified as having a disability?
Responses use a four-level scale — no difficulty, some difficulty, a lot of difficulty, and cannot do at all. The recommended cut-off classifies a person as having a disability if they report at least a lot of difficulty, or cannot do at all, in any one of the six domains. Effectively the highest level of difficulty across the six domains is compared to this threshold. Other thresholds can be used for sensitivity analysis, but reporting which cut-off was applied is essential for comparability.
Does the short set capture all disability?
No, and it is not meant to. The short set deliberately covers only six basic functioning domains so it can fit in a census, and it omits dimensions such as mental health, pain, fatigue, and finer aspects of communication. It identifies people at risk of participation restriction due to basic functional difficulty and supports comparable prevalence and disaggregation, but for fuller measurement the Washington Group extended set or the Model Disability Survey is more appropriate. It is a minimal core, not a comprehensive assessment.
Sources
- 1.Madans, J. H., Loeb, M. E., & Altman, B. M. (2011). Measuring disability and monitoring the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: the work of the Washington Group on Disability Statistics. BMC Public Health, 11(Suppl 4), S4.
- 2.World Health Organization. (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva: WHO.ISBN 9789241545426
You have read it. What now?
Cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 23). Washington Group Short Set. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/disability-studies/washington-group-short-set