First comprehensive review into PIP finds it is “not fit for purpose”
|
Millions of disabled people are being failed by a benefit that is
no longer working, the first ever full review into Personal
Independence Payment has found The largest co-produced
review ever undertaken by government at a national level has
heard from nearly 40,000 people and organisations across
the country Publication of interim report finds that while
PIP is a lifeline for many claimants, it can create barriers to
work,...Request free trial
Personal Independence Payment is no longer fit for purpose and is failing to keep pace with how disability, health and work have changed over the past decade, the Timms Review has found. The interim report published today (Thursday 9 July) comes as part of the first comprehensive review of PIP since the benefit was introduced in 2013 and sets out the evidence gathered so far to inform recommendations for reform due this autumn. Drawing on findings from more than 38,000 responses to the Review's Call for Evidence, alongside workshops and engagement with disabled people, their organisations and experts, it is one of the largest co-produced reviews delivered by the government. The report has revealed that while PIP is widely valued as a cash benefit, it is not working as intended for disabled people or wider society. While many disabled people say that PIP is vital in helping them meet the extra costs of disability and participate in everyday life, others stated PIP creates barriers to participating fully in work, social and community life. This is particularly true for people with fluctuating conditions, less visible conditions or multiple conditions. The process of claiming, under assessment criteria designed more than a decade ago, was viewed negatively by 90% of respondents, and described as at times dehumanising, degrading and stressful and the use of supporting evidence too often inconsistent. Only 5% of responses about the process were positive. The Report also reports low levels of trust in the system and the need for it to be built back both for disabled people and those with long-term conditions, as well as for the taxpayer. PIP was introduced in 2013 to contribute towards the extra costs of disability and support independent living but has never been fully reviewed despite shifting trends in health and disability, and changes in wider society and the workplace. The Review launched last October with the aim of making sure PIP is fair and fit for the future in a changing world and helps support disabled people to achieve better health, higher living standards and greater independence including through employment. It will also take account of related work underway across the wider health and social care system, including the Milburn Review into the increase in the number of young people who are not in education, employment or training (NEET). Both reviews are due to conclude later this year, providing a foundation for effective and sustainable reform. The steering group will now continue to gather evidence through evidence sessions with experts and workshops around the country, while moving into the next phase: designing and testing recommendations for change, with the final recommendations due to be published this autumn. Around 10 million working-age people report living with a disability equivalent to 24% of the working-age population, compared with under 17% in 2013/14. There have been greater increases in the prevalence of disability among young people and a rise in mental health conditions. The Review must consider how PIP can remain sustainable within fixed financial limits and support future generations. The report draws on findings from over 38,000 responses to a Call for Evidence, which describe an assessment process that fails to reflect real-life impacts, particularly for those with multiple or fluctuating conditions. Yet the report also found that disabled people consistently describe PIP as a vital lifeline, allowing independence. Without it, many say they would become housebound, dependent on family, or in need of residential care. Sharon Brennan, co-chair of the Review, said: Improving trust in the system both from the public and those going through the system is vital if PIP is to be fit and fair for the future. Of those that responded to the steering group's Call for Evidence, over 90% described negative experiences of the process of claiming PIP, with concerns raised around all aspects of the process from application through to assessment and appeals. We are immensely grateful to the tens of thousands of people who have taken the time to share their lived experience and make a valuable contribution to this Review. We've heard loud and clear: PIP is highly valued as a benefit but is not fit for purpose. We are committed to making changes so that PIP can fulfil its purpose. Dr Clenton Farquharson CBE, co-chair of the Review, said: PIP should contribute to disabled people meeting the extra costs of disability and participate in everyday life. What we have heard through this Review is that, while PIP is a lifeline for many people, the system too often fails to understand the reality of people's lives. Disabled people have told us about a process that can feel stressful, dehumanising and hard to navigate, especially for people with fluctuating conditions, less visible or multiple conditions. That matters, because a system that does not feel fair or humane will not command trust from disabled people or from the wider public. This Review is significant because disabled people, Disabled People's Organisations and experts are helping and supporting to shape the work from the inside, not simply being consulted from the outside. As we move towards final recommendations, we need to be bold in our ambition, practical in our proposals, and focused on making PIP fair, trusted and fit for the future. Sir Stephen Timms, Minister for Social Security and Disability and co-chair of the Review, said: This interim report delivers a clear message: while PIP is widely valued as a benefit, it is not working as intended and needs fundamental change. Our work so far has been informed by a wide range of evidence, expertise, and insight to ensure we hear from as many disabled people as possible across the country, including through workshops, engagement and a call for evidence which attracted more than 38,000 responses. I'm grateful to my fellow co-chairs and the steering group for their intensive work and look forward to the Review's final report being delivered in the autumn. Charlotte Gill, Head of Campaigns at the MS Society, said:
Today's interim report confirms what disabled people have
been saying for many years - that the current PIP system is
stressful and exhausting. We've been supporting people
with MS to share their experiences as part of the Review, and
they are clear in their call for a new approach based
on fairness, dignity and respect. Sarah Hughes, CEO of Mind, said: The report echoes what we hear every day: that the PIP system is dehumanising, stressful and damages trust. PIP is a lifeline for people who, through no fault of their own, live with the additional costs of mental illness. So as this work progresses, it's vital that, alongside improving the process, we also recognise that in a decent society we must support those facing additional need. This is a line-in-the sand moment for how we treat people, that improves lives for those who are unwell and reduces the impacts on families and communities. Jon Sparkes, OBE, Chief Executive of learning disability Mencap, said: It's groundbreaking to see proper co-production in action. Disabled people are shaping the way that PIP works, and their lived experience is essential to making the right decisions on its future. This report shows clearly that that the current claims process is not fit for purpose and places an unfair administrative and emotional burden on people with a learning disability and their families. This chimes with our experience: the application process is not accessible, assessments end up being a needless fight and unnecessary re-assessments create distrust in the decision-making process. This approach should continue so that future recommendations are practical, deliverable and do not harm disabled people. I hope that the process of co-production will help to restore trust in the welfare systems that many of us rely on. The Call for Evidence forms just one part of a wider programme of engagement and evidence gathering. Last month, the group launched a toolkit to gather organisations' insights on people's experiences of PIP. Feedback from these sessions, combined with existing research, has helped ensure the report reflects a broad range of views and evidence. The steering group is clear that co-production is central to the Review, putting disabled people at its heart. Co-production is a new undertaking for the UK government, and this is the first time it has been used on this scale. It includes disabled people, representatives from Disabled People's Organisations and experts - bringing together lived experience, policy knowledge and practical expertise to develop recommendations based on real lives. ENDS Notes to editors
|