Since October 2010, Demos has been exploring the impact of the Coalition Government’s welfare reform agenda on disabled people through the Destination Unknown series. This series of publications has reported twice a year on how 6 disabled households have been faring, tracking the changes they were seeing to their benefits income and quality of life as a result of cuts to public services and local budgets. These 6 case studies comprise: a young disabled child cared for by her parents; a disabled man and his wife; a single disabled man; a single disabled woman; a middle-aged, disabled man who is a social care service user; and a disabled mother caring for her disabled child. The report is the 4th and final instalment of the project. It reveals that the worst is yet to come. Since the previous report, the Welfare Reform Act has gained Royal Assent and contains a number of measures that will reduce the material income of disabled people and their families over the next 2 years. By speaking to families themselves, this report reveals the human cost of this loss in income; from increasing isolation and mental health problems to a greater burden on informal carers. It concludes that the Government must change impact assessments so that they do not just consider the aggregate impact of one cut, but assess the cumulative impact of several cuts on individual households.
Since October 2010, Demos has been exploring the impact of the Coalition Government’s welfare reform agenda on disabled people through the Destination Unknown series. This series of publications has reported twice a year on how 6 disabled households have been faring, tracking the changes they were seeing to their benefits income and quality of life as a result of cuts to public services and local budgets. These 6 case studies comprise: a young disabled child cared for by her parents; a disabled man and his wife; a single disabled man; a single disabled woman; a middle-aged, disabled man who is a social care service user; and a disabled mother caring for her disabled child. The report is the 4th and final instalment of the project. It reveals that the worst is yet to come. Since the previous report, the Welfare Reform Act has gained Royal Assent and contains a number of measures that will reduce the material income of disabled people and their families over the next 2 years. By speaking to families themselves, this report reveals the human cost of this loss in income; from increasing isolation and mental health problems to a greater burden on informal carers. It concludes that the Government must change impact assessments so that they do not just consider the aggregate impact of one cut, but assess the cumulative impact of several cuts on individual households.
Subject terms:
quality of life, benefits, cutbacks, disabilities, government policy;
The UK’s 7 million disabled people experience entrenched inequality and disadvantage, in the form of poorer educational attainment, lower employment and earnings potential, and restricted access to good and services. Far more disabled people live in poverty than the rest of the population and as a result they are more reliant on benefits for their income. This report examines the reforms to welfare benefits announced in the emergency budget and in the forthcoming spending review and concludes that the impact on disabled people has not been fully considered. Rather than simply incentivising work, cutting benefits will have unintended consequences on households where finding and keeping work is only achievable with personalised welfare to work support. Through original analysis, this report estimates that the losses in income over the course of the current parliament will amount to over £9 billion. Case studies are presented to model the level of benefits income over 5 years in 4 typical disabled households. The report recommends alternative reforms designed to introduce a greater focus on capability-building and supporting the move into employment. These would render the Government’s welfare reform strategy more inclusive and appropriate for disabled people, more effective in achieving sustainable employment and social engagement, and will mitigate some of the very worst effects of these reforms.
The UK’s 7 million disabled people experience entrenched inequality and disadvantage, in the form of poorer educational attainment, lower employment and earnings potential, and restricted access to good and services. Far more disabled people live in poverty than the rest of the population and as a result they are more reliant on benefits for their income. This report examines the reforms to welfare benefits announced in the emergency budget and in the forthcoming spending review and concludes that the impact on disabled people has not been fully considered. Rather than simply incentivising work, cutting benefits will have unintended consequences on households where finding and keeping work is only achievable with personalised welfare to work support. Through original analysis, this report estimates that the losses in income over the course of the current parliament will amount to over £9 billion. Case studies are presented to model the level of benefits income over 5 years in 4 typical disabled households. The report recommends alternative reforms designed to introduce a greater focus on capability-building and supporting the move into employment. These would render the Government’s welfare reform strategy more inclusive and appropriate for disabled people, more effective in achieving sustainable employment and social engagement, and will mitigate some of the very worst effects of these reforms.
Subject terms:
social welfare, benefits, capacity building, cutbacks, disabilities, employment, government policy;
Personal budgets in social care give care users more control over their care by enabling them to purchase their own support according to their needs. The national roll-out of personal budgets was set as a priority for local authorities in 2007, and ‘Putting People First’ set a target that by April 2011 30% of council funded care users across the country would be using a personal budget. The Coalition government has left this target in place. As around 13% of people currently have one, this represents a major shift in a very short space of time, requiring both local authorities and care providers to adjust to rapid change. Yet the intelligence on personal budget spending remains limited. The research presented in this report provides some insight into how commissioners and providers will need to go about these responsibilities. It summarises the findings from a survey of 770 care users across 10 local authorities, which focused on what people wanted to change about their lives and the care and support they might like to use. It includes information from personal budget and direct payment users, council funded care users and self funders. The findings represent a significant challenge for providers and commissioners. Potential issues of affordability, lack of consumer information and hands on guidance, and providers unprepared for significant shifts in demand could all create a highly ‘imperfect market’, where care users cannot secure the services they want and need and where some providers may be driven from the market unnecessarily.
Personal budgets in social care give care users more control over their care by enabling them to purchase their own support according to their needs. The national roll-out of personal budgets was set as a priority for local authorities in 2007, and ‘Putting People First’ set a target that by April 2011 30% of council funded care users across the country would be using a personal budget. The Coalition government has left this target in place. As around 13% of people currently have one, this represents a major shift in a very short space of time, requiring both local authorities and care providers to adjust to rapid change. Yet the intelligence on personal budget spending remains limited. The research presented in this report provides some insight into how commissioners and providers will need to go about these responsibilities. It summarises the findings from a survey of 770 care users across 10 local authorities, which focused on what people wanted to change about their lives and the care and support they might like to use. It includes information from personal budget and direct payment users, council funded care users and self funders. The findings represent a significant challenge for providers and commissioners. Potential issues of affordability, lack of consumer information and hands on guidance, and providers unprepared for significant shifts in demand could all create a highly ‘imperfect market’, where care users cannot secure the services they want and need and where some providers may be driven from the market unnecessarily.
Subject terms:
local authorities, personal budgets, social care provision, user views, change management, commissioning, government policy;
The use and potential of prepaid cards in local authorities as a means of distributing and administering direct payments to service users was explored in this project. The report describes the policy background, including coalition government welfare and public service reforms, personalisation and personal budgets, integration, benefits, and budgetary cuts. It draws on research involving interviews, desk research, freedom of information requests to local authorities in England and Wales, focus groups with service users, expert workshops with local authority and charity representatives, and case studies illustrating how prepaid cards are used in different contexts in the UK and the United States. It discusses how prepaid cards are currently being used. It considers possible changes to the way in which people purchase, consume and interact with services and benefits, and how prepaid cards might be used in the future as a tool for the distribution of universal credit, to bring together personal budgets and welfare benefits, and in wider applications.
The use and potential of prepaid cards in local authorities as a means of distributing and administering direct payments to service users was explored in this project. The report describes the policy background, including coalition government welfare and public service reforms, personalisation and personal budgets, integration, benefits, and budgetary cuts. It draws on research involving interviews, desk research, freedom of information requests to local authorities in England and Wales, focus groups with service users, expert workshops with local authority and charity representatives, and case studies illustrating how prepaid cards are used in different contexts in the UK and the United States. It discusses how prepaid cards are currently being used. It considers possible changes to the way in which people purchase, consume and interact with services and benefits, and how prepaid cards might be used in the future as a tool for the distribution of universal credit, to bring together personal budgets and welfare benefits, and in wider applications.
Subject terms:
information technology, local authorities, payments, personal budgets, personalisation, service users, universal credit, benefits, direct payments, government policy;
The link between disability and poverty is well established. High levels of unemployment and low paid employment mean that disabled people are more likely to live in poverty and be dependent on benefits. While disabled people have lower incomes, they also are likely to have higher costs than nondisabled people to achieve the same standard of living. This report considers the impact of the government’s reform to replace Disability Living Allowance with Personal Independence Payment. An online questionnaire, completed by 845 disabled people, asked the participants to estimate their daily costs in 19 separate areas related to their disability and also to estimate how much they spend relative to non-disabled families in 14 areas described as indirect disability costs, such as utilities and holidays. The participants were also asked how much extra care and support they needed, and about their housing, employment, transport and benefits. The findings show that the need for care and support does not correlate to disability-related costs. Only in the areas of specialist clothing and equipment was there a link; other important costs, such as transport and childcare, were unrelated. The report argues that the Government could reduce disability poverty more effectively by reducing costs rather than increasing income. Disability costs are not solely generated by factors government cannot change such as impairment, condition or age. They are driven by a range of environmental factors which, with the right intervention, could reduce disability costs significantly.
The link between disability and poverty is well established. High levels of unemployment and low paid employment mean that disabled people are more likely to live in poverty and be dependent on benefits. While disabled people have lower incomes, they also are likely to have higher costs than nondisabled people to achieve the same standard of living. This report considers the impact of the government’s reform to replace Disability Living Allowance with Personal Independence Payment. An online questionnaire, completed by 845 disabled people, asked the participants to estimate their daily costs in 19 separate areas related to their disability and also to estimate how much they spend relative to non-disabled families in 14 areas described as indirect disability costs, such as utilities and holidays. The participants were also asked how much extra care and support they needed, and about their housing, employment, transport and benefits. The findings show that the need for care and support does not correlate to disability-related costs. Only in the areas of specialist clothing and equipment was there a link; other important costs, such as transport and childcare, were unrelated. The report argues that the Government could reduce disability poverty more effectively by reducing costs rather than increasing income. Disability costs are not solely generated by factors government cannot change such as impairment, condition or age. They are driven by a range of environmental factors which, with the right intervention, could reduce disability costs significantly.
Subject terms:
housing, needs, poverty, transport, benefits, costs, disabilities, employment, government policy;