Top Banner
7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008 http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 1/74 Disability poverty in the UK Guy Parckar, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2008 Contents Executive Summary 3 Key findings 5 Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Context and Methodoloy !! Conte"t #ethodology $ Defining %o&erty #ethodology $ Defining disability #ethodology $ 'he additional costs of disability Chapter !: Disability poverty in the UK !5 "inancial poverty and household income !( )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ inco*e and financial %o&erty Savins 2! )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ sa&ings Employment rates 2+ )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ e*%loy*ent rates #ypes o$ %or& 2 )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ ty%es of ork 'ene$it ta&e(up 32 )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ benefit take-u% )ccommodation 38 )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ acco**odation Educational attainment +! )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ educational attain*ent *uality o$ +i$e ++ )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ .uality of life )ccess to services +8 )ackground and %ro%osed indicators Policy reco**endations $ access to ser&ices
74

Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

Mar 05, 2016

Download

Documents

Alvaro Diaz

disability
poverty
uk
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 1/74

Disability poverty in the UKGuy Parckar, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2008

Contents

Executive Summary 3Key findings 5

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Context and Methodoloy !!Conte"t#ethodology $ Defining %o&erty#ethodology $ Defining disability#ethodology $ 'he additional costs of disability

Chapter !: Disability poverty in the UK !5

"inancial poverty and household income !()ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ inco*e and financial %o&ertySavins 2!)ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ sa&ingsEmployment rates 2+)ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ e*%loy*ent rates

#ypes o$ %or& 2)ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ ty%es of ork'ene$it ta&e(up 32)ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ benefit take-u%)ccommodation 38)ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ acco**odationEducational attainment +!)ackground and %ro%osed indicators

Policy reco**endations $ educational attain*ent*uality o$ +i$e ++)ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ .uality of life)ccess to services +8)ackground and %ro%osed indicatorsPolicy reco**endations $ access to ser&ices

Page 2: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 2/74

Chapter ,: Conclusion 55

)nnex ): -roposed disability poverty indicators 5/Current infor*ation on indicators

)nnex ' . Summary o$ /ecommendations ((

)nnex C . 'iblioraphy (

Page 3: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 3/74

"ecuti&e 1u**ary

Introduction

Disabled %eo%le are tice as likely to li&e in %o&erty as non-disabled %eo%le ! ethile the %rofile of issues such as child %o&erty and older %eo%le4s %o&erty ha&erisen considerably in recent years, and the K has .uite rightly ado%ted astrategy that ai*s to try to end child %o&erty, little has been done to s%ecificallytackle disability %o&erty )ut the links beteen disability and %o&erty re*ain sostrong that unless s%ecific action is taken to tackle disability %o&erty, the goal ofending child %o&erty ill si*%ly not be *et $ *ore than one third of children li&ingith a disabled adult li&e in lo inco*e households Disability %o&erty is the*issing link in efforts to tackle relati&e %o&erty in the K, and e belie&e thataction *ust be taken to address it

'he %ri*ary reco**endations of this re%ort are that the go&ern*ent co**its to6

10 End disability poverty by developin and implementin a speci$icstratey $or tac&lin the issue20 Measure disability poverty as a uni3ue $orm o$ poverty throuh the useo$ a series o$ indicators0

'he fact that disabled %eo%le are so *uch *ore likely than non-disabled %eo%leto li&e in relati&e %o&erty is an issue that society *ust stri&e to challenge )utdisability %o&erty is about e&en *ore than 7ust lo inco*e Po&erty of o%%ortunityand %o&erty of e"%ectations can ste* fro* so*ething as broad as %ublicattitudes, to so*ething as s%ecific as an indi&idual4s as%irations hat is clear isthat a concerted and strategic effort fro* %olicy *akers is needed first to fully

understand, and then to challenge, disability %o&erty

'he case for addressing disability %o&erty is not only one of basic social 7ustice,there is also an econo*ic case nding disability %o&erty ould al*ost certainly*ean *ore disabled %eo%le *o&ing into the ork%lace, increasing netcontributions to the 'reasury through the ta" syste*, and reduced e"%enditureon out-of-ork benefits sing &ery broad esti*ates if a *illion disabled %eo%le*o&ed in to ork, the 'reasury could e"%ect to gain ell o&er 95 billion2 ininco*e ta" alone

'he re%ort *akes reco**endations both for indicators for *onitoring the *any

different facets of disability %o&erty, and also a series of social %olicyreco**endations to challenge it Key findings and reco**endations are belo,

1 )ased on the 4relati&e %o&erty line4 in the K, hich e.uates to li&ing in a household ith inco*e of less than (0: of

*edian national inco*e ;ecent esti*ates suggest that around 30: of disabled %eo%le li&e belo this inco*e line,co*%ared to around !(: of non-disabled %eo%le2 )ased on a calculation that *edian annual inco*e is roughly 92+,000 %er year <see 4=nnual 1ur&ey of >ours and

arnings, ?ational 1tatistics@, and that basic rate inco*e ta" at this le&el is 22:, if one *illion %eo%le ere to *o&e intoork at this a&erage le&el then the e"tra inco*e ta" recei%ts for the "che.uer ould be 95,280,000,000 %er year

Page 4: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 4/74

ith the full list of %ro%osed indicators and current infor*ation in )nnex ), andthe full list of %olicy reco**endations in )nnex '

'he links beteen disability and %o&erty are *aintained by continuing barriers insociety, not only %hysical barriers to accessibility, but also barriers for*ed fro*

negati&e attitudes and a lack of understanding, and barriers for*ed fro* loe"%ectations about hat disabled %eo%le can achie&e

Aur ob7ecti&e is to end the link beteen disability and %o&erty e ho%e that thisre%ort ill start this debate and raise disability %o&erty on the %ublic %olicyagenda e belie&e that the go&ern*ent should *onitor disability %o&erty as adistinct for* of %o&erty, and should also ado%t the key %olicy reco**endations inthis re%ort as a first crucial ste% toards ending disability %o&erty

Page 5: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 5/74

"ecuti&e 1u**ary

Key $indins

Income and costs

B Disabled %eo%le are around tice as likely to li&e in %o&erty 3 as non-disabled%eo%le $ ith figures suggesting that around !(: of non-disabled %eo%le li&e inrelati&e %o&erty, as o%%osed to around 30: of disabled %eo%le+B Disabled %eo%le face e"tra costs related to *anaging their i*%air*ent thata*ount, on a&erage, to a%%ro"i*ately an e"tra .uarter abo&e nor*ale"%enditure, co*%ared to non disabled %eo%le 'he e"tra costs can result, fore"a*%le, fro* %aying for ada%tations to their ho*e, social care su%%ort, *obilityaids or co**unication aidsB )ecause of the e"tra costs of disability the real %o&erty line could actually be*uch higher for disabled %eo%le $ hen the e"tra costs of disability are factored

in, ell o&er half of disabled %eo%le5 li&e on less than (0: of *edian nationalinco*e, as o%%osed to the unad7usted figure of around 30:

Key recommendations

B De&elo% an acce%ted esti*ate for the e"tra costs of disability and use it to%roduce 4disability ad7usted4 %o&erty statisticsB "tend inter uel =lloance to disabled adults under the age of (0 ligibilitycould be deter*ined through recei%t of certain %arts of Disability Li&ing =lloance<DL=@

Savins

B Disabled %eo%le face barriers to sa&ing *oney, ith nearly half <+:@ ofres%ondents to Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 ( saying thatthey had no sa&ings at all 'his is in stark contrast to figures fro* a recent?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents 41a&ings 1ur&ey4 found that !2: of thegeneral %o%ulation had no sa&ings/B 'he social care charging syste* can %ro&ide an acti&e disincenti&e to sa&ingfor *any disabled %eo%le $ a disincenti&e that can be %resent throughout theirentire li&es

3 )ased on the 4relati&e %o&erty line4 in the K, hich e.uates to li&ing in a household ith inco*e of less than (0: of

*edian national inco*e4 4#onitoring %o&erty and social e"clusion 200(4, Pal*er, #acnnes and Kenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e

Policynstitute, 200(5 4Co*%aring inco*es hen needs differ6 .ui&alisation for the e"tra costs of disability in the K4, =shgar Faidi and 'ania

)urchardt, L1 C=1 ;e%ort (+, 20036 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber 200/

7 ?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents, 4uarterly sa&ings sur&ey, 1u**er 200/4

Page 6: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 6/74

Key recommendations

B ;e&ie the i*%act of social care charging %olicy on disability %o&erty, includingreco**endations for tackling the sa&ings disincenti&eB ntroduce a 4Disability 1a&ings Gateay4, and ensure that disabled %eo%le are

fully included in any future de&elo%*ent of the 1a&ings Gateay sche*e

Disability and employment

B 'he e*%loy*ent rate a*ong disabled %eo%le re*ains far belo that of non-disabled %eo%le, ith around 50: of disabled %eo%le not in ork, co*%ared toaround 20: of non-disabled %eo%le8B Disabled %eo%le ho are in ork are at a substantially higher risk of in-ork%o&erty, on a&erage earning less than their non-disabled %eers and being *orelikely to ork in lo skill, lo %aid 7obs

Key recommendations

B nsure that e*%loyers are adhering to their legal obligations under the DD=,and e"tend the antici%atory duty to *ake reasonable ad7ust*ents to e*%loy*entB ;aise aareness of, and increase funding for, the =ccess to ork sche*eB ntroduce a syste* of 4rehabilitation lea&e4 to hel% %eo%le ho ac.uire ani*%air*ent to re*ain in e*%loy*entB 1trengthen residential care charging guidance to re*o&e any disincenti&e toork for users of residential care su%%ort

'ene$its and %el$are

B #any disabled %eo%le are tra%%ed in inesca%able %o&erty $ those furthest fro*the labour *arket ith little i**ediate chance of getting in to ork fre.uently relyon benefits that are si*%ly not sufficient to lift the* out of %o&erty 'his lea&es%eo%le ith little or no chance of esca%ing %o&erty other than through charity, orsu%%ort fro* fa*ily and friendsB Poor decision- *aking in the benefit syste* can dri&e %eo%le into %roble*debt, and %ush %eo%le into financial %o&erty

Key recommendations

B ;e&ie 4benefit %o&erty4 and ho the elfare syste* functions for long-ter*clai*ants ho are not e"%ected to return to orkB stablish a 4elfare co**ission4 to o&ersee de&elo%*ents in elfare benefit%olicy

8 ro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, as %resented in the Disability ;ights Co**ission 4Disability )riefing #ay 200/4, D;C,

#ay 200/9 bid

Page 7: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 7/74

B Pro&ide a 4benefit check4 for reci%ients to establish their full entitle*ents, andan acti&e ca*%aign to engage ith those ho need, but currently do not clai*,their entitle*ents

4ousin and accommodation

B 'he .uality of acco**odation for disabled %eo%le continues to be under*inedby a dearth of both affordable and accessible housing, and %roble*s stillcontinue ith effecti&ely *atching accessible acco**odation to those that needitB = .uarter of those disabled %eo%le ho re.uire ada%ted housing in ngland arecurrently li&ing in acco**odation that is unsuitable for their needs!0

Key recommendations

B nsure that the need to increase a&ailability of ada%ted and accessible social

housing is integral to all future housing %olicy de&elo%*entB stablish a duty on local authorities to create and *aintain an accessiblehousing register B "tend Part # building regulations to include all the Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards

Education

B Disabled %eo%le still face substantial disad&antage in the education syste* $25: of disabled %eo%le ha&e no .ualifications co*%ared to !!: a*ong thehole %o%ulation!! )arriers to educational attain*ent can ha&e a direct i*%acton future life chances

B =t !( young disabled %eo%le are tice as likely not to be in any for* ofeducation, e*%loy*ent or training as their non-disabled %eers <!5: as o%%osedto /:@!2, and at the sa*e ti*e the %ercentage of 7obs re.uiring no .ualificationsis decreasing 'he nstitute for Public Policy ;esearch %redicts that by 2020al*ost half of all e*%loy*ent ill be in occu%ations re.uiring degree le&el.ualifications!3

Key recommendations

B nsure that all le&els of education $ and %articularly higher education, heredisabled %eo%le4s inclusion is notably lo $ are fully accessible to disabled%eo%leB nsure that all education %rofessionals recei&e full disability e.uality training

10 4>ousing in ngland 2005H0( $ a re%ort %rinci%ally fro* the 2005H0( 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing4, DCLG, Actober 200/

11 ro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, as %resented in the Disability ;ights Co**ission 4Disability )riefing #ay 200/4, D;C,

#ay 200/12

 4Disability, skills and ork6 raising our a*bitions4 1te%hen &ans, 1ocial #arket oundation, Eune 200/13

 4Disability 20206 o%%ortunities for full and e.ual citiIenshi% of disabled %eo%le in )ritain in 20204 Pillai et al, PP;, #arch

200/

Page 8: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 8/74

B nsure that disability e.uality issues are integrated into citiIenshi% classes as%art of the ?ational Curriculu* to change attitudes about disability

*uality o$ li$e and social exclusion

B Disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of cri*e ill i*%act u%on their e"%eriences ofsocial inclusion and e"clusion, ith around one in tel&e res%ondents to LeonardCheshire Disability4s 4Disability;e&ie 200/4 re%orting that they had been the &icti* of a cri*e *oti&ated bytheir i*%air*ent!+B 8: of disabled %eo%le in Leonard Cheshire4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4!5 feltthat there as discri*ination and %re7udice toards disabled %eo%le in the K'his is a key factor in the %o&erty of e"%ectation, and %o&erty of o%%ortunity thatdisabled %eo%le can e"%erienceB Disabled %eo%le4s access to ser&ices like sho%s, %ublic trans%ort or leisurefacilities is steadily i*%ro&ing, but there is still ides%read inaccessibility, hich

can acti&ely restrict disabled %eo%le4s o%%ortunities and is a critical factor indisabled %eo%le4s social e"clusion and %o&erty

Key recommendations

B *%ro&e *onitoring and enforce*ent of cri*e related to i*%air*ent, andensure that disabled %eo%le ha&e full access to the cri*inal 7ustice syste*B nsure that disabled %eo%le4s access to aero%lanes and ferries is i*%ro&ed bye"tendingPart 3 of the DD= to include these *ethods of trans%ortB nable tribunals to ad7udicate on Part 3 DD= cases as o%%osed to the current

syste* hich re.uires indi&idual disabled %eo%le to take %otentially lengthy ande"%ensi&e court casesB Conduct a re&ie of the effecti&eness of the DD= ith a &ie to *aking the laeasier to enforce and easier to understand

Conclusion

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *ake tackling disability%o&erty one of its key %riorities 'o do so ill first re.uire a co**it*ent tounderstand and *onitor disability %o&erty and its causes, and then the strategicde&elo%*ent of social %olicy initiati&es to eradicate it

'o end disability %o&erty is not only a *eans to dri&e don %o&erty throughoutthe K, and to i*%ro&e the econo*ic health of the nation, it is also an absolutenecessity of social 7ustice and inclusion in a ci&ilised society

14 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber 200/

15 bid

Page 9: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 9/74

Chapter 1

ntroduction

#uch ork has been undertaken in recent years to redefine our understanding of 

4%o&erty4, in both a national K conte"t, and in the conte"t of %o&erty orld ide'his ork has seen the de&elo%*ent of s%ecific go&ern*ent targets and*easures to tackle child %o&erty in the K, alongside %o%ular *ass *o&e*entsto tackle international %o&erty such as #ake Po&erty >istory

;elati&e %o&erty is no *onitored by &arious agencies across the globe, and inthe K anti%o&erty %olicies should be able to res%ond to any fluctuations in aseries of established indicators =t the heart of any successful %olicy initiati&e totackle %o&erty should be the understanding that it is essential to challenge%o&erty at its roots t is not enough si*%ly to identify that an indi&idual li&es in%o&erty6 it is necessary to understand the i*%act of that %o&erty on the indi&idual,

to challenge all the syste*ic failures that ha&e led to it $ and ulti*ately tode&elo% a %olitical and social fra*eork to hel% lift that indi&idual out of %o&erty

ithin this de&elo%ing understanding of hat %o&erty is and ho to tackle it thereha&e already been so*e *o&es to dra the link beteen disability and %o&ertyAn an international stage it is already clear that the to are often substantiallyinter-related or e"a*%le, research has suggested that globally around +3: ofdisabled %eo%le can be categorised as 4e"tre*ely %oor4!(, and it has beensuggested that 20: of the instances of disability in the orld ste* fro**alnutrition!/ t is clear that on a global scale %o&erty and disability are causallylinked

'his is e.ually true in the K 'he Eose%h ;ontree oundation <E;@ and ?ePolicy nstitute4s <?P@ ongoing *onitoring of %o&erty and social e"clusion hasidentified that disabled adults are no *ore likely to li&e in %o&erty than eitherchildren or older %eo%le 'he E;4s research has also found that disabled adultsare tice as likely to li&e in %o&erty as non-disabledadults!8 An al*ost any recognised indicator of %o&erty, disabled %eo%le arefound to be significantly o&er-re%resented

'his re%ort focuses broadly on disabled %eo%le of orking age 'here are alreadyell established %olicy %ositions in the K around *easures to tackle child

%o&erty and %ensioner %o&erty $ e belie&e that disability %o&erty is such a%ressing and critical issue that it de*ands the sa*e le&el of attention e ould

16 4act 1heet on Po&erty and Disability4, nclusion nternational, data dran fro* 4Po&erty and Disability4, =nn lan,

orld )ank, Actober !17

 4A&erco*ing Abstacles to the ntegration of Disabled Peo%le4, ?1CA, D==, #arch !518

 4#onitoring %o&erty and social e"clusion 200(4, Pal*er, #acnnes and Kenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e

Policynstitute, 200(

Page 10: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 10/74

also argue that to tackle child %o&erty and %ensioner %o&erty successfullynecessitates a far greater %olicy focus on disabled %eo%le'he confluence of households li&ing in %o&erty and fa*ilies ith at least onedisabled *e*ber is far too great to ignore =s the Disability ;ights Co**ission<D;C@ has stated, if anti%o&erty targets are to be *et across the board then it ill

be essential to focus energy on tackling disabled %eo%le4s %o&erty!

et, hilst the correlation beteen disability and %o&erty is ell established, therehas been relati&ely little %ublic %olicy ork identifying e"actly hat 4disability%o&erty4 *eans in real ter*s, and hat the root causes behind it are 'he %o&ertyindicators used in go&ern*ent docu*ents such as the De%art*ent for ork andPensions4 4A%%ortunity for =ll4 re%ort de*onstrate that *easuring %o&erty *eans*ore than 7ust *easuring inco*e ducation, e*%loy*ent, housing, assets,health ine.ualities and access to ser&ices can all be an indicator of %o&erty, asell as the le&el of an indi&idual4s inco*e n all of these areas e&idencesuggests that disabled %eo%le traditionally face disad&antage

#any disabled %eo%le also face additional costs of li&ing, for e"a*%le %aying forsocial care su%%ort or ha&ing to %ay for ta"is because %ublic trans%ort isinaccessible inancial %o&erty de&elo%s hen inco*e cannot *atch essentialoutgoingsJ accordingly, for an indi&idual ho has to s%end a greater %ro%ortion of their inco*e on the necessities of life it is clear that the %o&erty line can behigher et, des%ite the established and recognised connections that often e"istbeteen disability and %o&erty, there is little strategic %lanning s%ecifically fortackling disability %o&erty in the K

'his re%ort ai*s to establish a orking definition of disability %o&erty in the K,

along ith a set of broad indicators ith hich to *onitor ho the situation ischanging and de&elo%ing t ai*s to e"a*ine the links beteen disability and%o&erty and the causes of this connection, and to set out hy urgent action isneeded fro* across society Disability %o&erty is a uni.ue and co*%le" issue,and tackling it is both a crucial end in itself, as ell as a critical factor in reachingother key go&ern*ent targets for the ell-being of the nation

Disability %o&erty is the *issing link in the K4s otherise good record inchallenging children4s, older %eo%le4s and international %o&erty t is also a*assi&e social in7ustice hich *ust be challenged ?o is the ti*e to begin thischallenge and to end disability %o&erty

19 4Child %o&erty targets need disability at their heart4, %ress release fro* Disability ;ights Co**ission, #arch 200/

Page 11: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 11/74

Chapter 2

Conte"t #ethodology

Context

t is of course i*%ortant to state at the outset that disability and %o&erty are notthe sa*e thing, nor does one follo as an auto*atic conse.uence of the otheret on al*ost any e"isting indicator of %o&erty it is %ossible to deter*ine that acorrelation all too co**only e"ists beteen the to

'his correlation *eans that in&estigating and challenging disability %o&ertyshould be an integral %art of any ider anti-%o&erty %olicy #eeting e"isting%o&erty targets re.uires a far greater focus on addressing disabled %eo%le4s%o&erty than has yet ha%%ened

'his re%ort ai*s to hel% reach a orking understanding of disability %o&erty, tosuggest %ossible indicators for *easuring it and to %ro%ose %olicy de&elo%*entsthat ill hel% to end it Leonard Cheshire Disability &ery *uch ho%es that this illbe 7ust an early %oint in a *uch longer dri&e to end disability %o&erty

Methodoloy . De$inin poverty

hilst there has been considerable ork in looking to define and understandboth %o&erty and disability in recent years, there are still a nu*ber of differentdefinitions of both

'he go&ern*ent currently looks at indicators of relati&e %o&erty and absolute%o&erty and also considers the ider issues of social e"clusion ;elati&e %o&ertyrefers to co*%arati&e circu*stances $ looking at those ho, in a relati&elyealthy country like the K, li&e on reduced *eans co*%ared to the a&erage ofthe %o%ulation =bsolute %o&erty is a *ore uni&ersal *easure, defined by thenited ?ations in the Co%enhagen Declaration <!5@ as 4a conditioncharacterised by se&ere de%ri&ation of basic hu*an needs4 1ocial e"clusion is abroader ter*, considering the reduction of life chances that can often ste* fro*disad&antage and de%ri&ation =ll of these different ays of considering %o&ertyin the K are &ery rele&ant for our understanding of disability %o&erty as as%ecific issue

n the K the figure used for the 4relati&e financial %o&erty line4 is usually (0: of*edian national inco*e )ut the K has also established a *uch broader set of4%o&erty indicators4 <set out in the annual 4A%%ortunity for =ll4 %a%er %roduced bythe De%art*ent for ork and Pensions@ that are regularly *onitored 1o*e ofthese indicators do link to disability, but by and large they are not broken dons%ecifically into *easures for disabled %eo%le Leonard Cheshire Disability ouldargue that *easuring %o&erty through the use of a series of indicators is a *ore

Page 12: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 12/74

holistic a%%roach than si*%ly using the broad and blunt instru*ent of assessingagainst (0: of *edian household inco*e 1uch a *easure is crucial forin&estigating lo inco*e and financial %o&erty, but it is not the only *easure of%o&erty

 =ccordingly, Leonard Cheshire Disability has used a&ailable data, together ithdata fro* our on sur&ey of *ore than !000 disabled %eo%le 20, to *onitor the%osition of disabled %eo%le, in co*%arison to the broader %o%ulation, on a seriesof indicators 'his is intended to %roduce a broad assess*ent of the le&el of4disability %o&erty4 in the K at %resent and hel% ork toards a useable set of4disability %o&erty indicators4

Methodoloy . De$inin disability

'here are a great *any differing definitions of 4disability4 and of 4disabled %eo%le4 = si*%le .uestion such as 4ho *any disabled %eo%le are there in the K4 ill

%ro*%t a *yriad of res%onses, de%ending largely on hich definitions of disabilityare ado%ted ndeed, gi&en an increasing and elco*e shift toards a social*odel of disability, as ell as the &ast differences beteen %articular ty%es ofi*%air*ent, it is all but i*%ossible to arri&e at a uni&ersally acce%ted definition of4disabled %eo%le4 or statistical, de*ogra%hic and %olicy setting %ur%oses,hoe&er, it is i*%ortant that a general understanding on this issue is reached

ithin the K the *ost broadly used definition of disability is that set out in theDisability Discri*ination =ct <DD=@ 'he =ct defines a disabled %erson asso*eone ho has a %hysical or *ental i*%air*ent that has a substantial andlong-ter* ad&erse effect on his or her ability to carry out nor*al day-to-day

acti&itiesM Current esti*ates deter*ine that there are likely to be around !!*illion %eo%le in the K ho fall under this definition $ the go&ern*ent4s recent4*%ro&ing the Life Chances of Disabled Peo%le42! re%ort reached a figure of !!*illion disabled adults and //0,000 disabled children

hilst the DD= definition is no the *ost co**only used, it has not alays beenused in statistical analyses, hether fro* go&ern*ent sources or elsehere#uch research relies on so*e degree of self-definition, hich can so*eti*eslead to those ho ha&e an i*%air*ent hich is *ore usually considered to be a4disability4 being o&er-re%resented in sa*%lesAften, for e"a*%le, older %eo%le ho ould certainly fall ithin the DD= definitionof disability ill not self-define the*sel&es as a 4disabled %erson4 'his can *eanthat so*e statistics are orking fro* a slightly different control grou% than others,and accordingly throughout this re%ort e ha&e endea&oured to highlight thesource of statistics

20 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber 200/

21 4*%ro&ing the life chances of disabled %eo%le4, Pri*e #inister4s 1trategy nit, Cabinet Affice, 2005

Page 13: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 13/74

'he huge &ariety of i*%air*ent ty%es and the huge &ariety of ays in hichindi&iduals ill res%ond to i*%air*ents are also added co*%lications = return toork solution for an indi&idual ith a *ental health condition, for e"a*%le, *ayell be &ery different to one for an indi&idual ith a &isual i*%air*ent 'hus itould often be useful to break don al*ost all disability statistics by i*%air*ent

ty%e, gi&en that there are likely to be ide dis%arities ithin categories $ but to doso is i*%ractical, gi&en the sheer breadth of different i*%air*ents &en iththese ca&eats, hoe&er, it is clear that using self-definition broadly ithin theDD= definition as a baseline it is %ossible to discern clear trends ithin this broadgrou% Clear and .uantifiable social, de*ogra%hic and statistical differences arediscernible in certain areas hen e co*%are this grou% ith the 4general%o%ulation4 'his *akes it clear that to *ake such co*%arisons is orthhile andthat there are underlying trends and issues that *ust be addressed by %olicy-setting ai*ed at 4disabled %eo%le4 as a de*ogra%hic grou%

or the %ur%oses of this research, therefore, hen the ter* 4disabled %eo%le4 is

used, it can generally be understood to refer to the grou% of adults co&ered bythe definition of disability ithin the DD=

Methodoloy . #he additional costs o$ disability

t is no generally acce%ted that *any disabled %eo%le ill face additional coststhat arise fro* *anaging their i*%air*ent 1uch costs can take the for* of e"trae"%enditure on general ite*s, for e"a*%le ha&ing to s%end e"tra on heating, ore"%enditure on disability related ite*s, such as *obility or sensory aids

'he i*%ortance of the additional costs of disability to the debate about disability

%o&erty should not be underesti*ated t is clear that if an indi&idual has to s%end*ore each *onth to achie&e the sa*e basic standard of li&ing, then the %o&ertyle&el for that indi&idual is different

n order, therefore, to *ake reasoned 7udg*ents about the nu*bers of disabled%eo%le li&ing belo the relati&e %o&erty line it is i*%ortant to account for the%otential e"tra costs that *any disabled %eo%le face = &ery broad e.ui&alencea%%roach has been ado%ted in this %a%er to hel% gi&e an indication of here thetrue %o&erty line lies for *any disabled %eo%le, and the *ethodology for this isset out belo

'here ha&e been a nu*ber of studies looking into the issue of the additionalcosts of li&ing ith an i*%air*ent22, all deter*ining that on a&erage disabled%eo%le do face additional costs = great difficulty i**ediately arises in this area,hoe&er, fro* the fact that such costs can &ary hugely fro* indi&idual toindi&idual and o&er ti*e 1o*e disabled %eo%le ill clearly face no greatadditional e"%enditure arising fro* the *anage*ent of their i*%air*ent, hilst

22 or a su**ary of so*e of the e"isting findings into the e"tra costs of disability see 4;e&ie of e"isting research into the

e"tra costs of disability4, #ike 'ibble, De%art*ent for ork and Pensions, 2005

Page 14: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 14/74

others ill face hugely significant outlay 1o*e ho do face siIeable e"tra costsill find that these costs are offset by the recei%t of certain elfare benefits, or bye"isting resources or su%%ort fro* friends and fa*ily 'here is also an inherentsub7ecti&ity in such *easures $ hat one %erson *ight consider an acce%tablestandard of li&ing *ight be &ery different fro* another4s inter%retation, and so*e

%eo%le *ay already ha&e li*ited their horiIons in order to li&e ithin their *eans,e&en to the detri*ent of their health 1o*e costs can be irregular and *ight onlyi*%act once e&ery fe years, such as the cost of a ne heelchair, hilst others*ight recur regularly, such as the cost of %hysiothera%y

)ut, des%ite the *any difficulties in accurately defining the e"tra costs thatdisabled %eo%le *ay face, it is hugely i*%ortant to atte*%t to find a reasoneda&erage a*ount that can be factored into calculations Leonard CheshireDisability has reached a broad esti*ate figure for the %ur%oses of this research,but ould argue that a definiti&e, scientific atte*%t to deter*ine the e"tra costs of disability should be a %riority for go&ern*ent

'o %roduce our a%%ro"i*ate *easure Leonard Cheshire Disability has usedinfor*ation fro* a nu*ber of statistical sources, but %articularly relied u%onso*e e"isting studies, *ost notably 4Co*%aring inco*es hen needs differ6.ui&alisation for the e"tra costs of disability in the K4 <Faidi and )urchardt,2003@23 Leonard Cheshire Disability has ado%ted the a%%roach suggested in that%a%er, and, through %ersonal co**unication ith the authors, has generalised itto allo for an easily understandable and transferable *echanis* tode*onstrate the i*%act of the e"tra costs of an i*%air*ent

Faidi and )urchardt deter*ined that, in broad ter*s, it is %ossible to suggest that

as the se&erity of i*%air*ent rises so do the e"tra costs of disability 1o*enational sur&eys ha&e used the 4Affice of Po%ulation, Censuses and 1ur&eys4<APC1@ gradation syste* for *easuring the se&erity of i*%air*ents 'he syste*used a %oints scoring a%%roach to *ark the functional i*%act of i*%air*ents,and then %laced the scores ithin a scale of se&erity n their research Faidi and)urchardt deter*ined a figure for the le&el of e"tra costs that disabled %eo%lefaced on to% of nor*al e"%enditure )ased on the fact that as the se&erity ofi*%air*ent increased so did the e"tra costs it as %ossible to deter*ine that foreach %oint scored the e"tra cost of disability for a orking age adult e.uated tobeteen 3: and +5: of inco*e, %er %erson, de%ending on hether they ereli&ing on their on, or as %art of a cou%le =ccordingly an indi&idual scoring to%oints on this scale *ight e"%ect increased costs of beteen (: and :, and anindi&idual scoring three %oints on the scale beteen : and !35: increasedcosts, de%endent on household circu*stances

sing this %oints scoring syste* the *edian se&erity score for disabled %eo%le of orking age as calculated at /85 =ccordingly it is %ossible to conclude that a

23 4Co*%aring inco*es hen needs differ6 .ui&alisation for the e"tra costs of disability in the K4, =shgar Faidi and 'ania

)urchardt, L1 C=1 ;e%ort (+, 2003

Page 15: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 15/74

*edian %ercentage for the e"tra costs faced by disabled %eo%le of orking ageould range beteen 2+: and 35: on to% of nor*al e"%enditure hilst this isnot a definiti&e *easure of additional costs, and is based on a nu*ber of broadassu*%tions, it is useful as a tool for e"a*ining the e"tent to hich e"isting%o&erty indicators underesti*ate the le&els of lo inco*e a*ong disabled

%eo%le

n short, it is %ossible to say that, on a&erage, disabled %eo%le of orking ageface additional costs on to% of nor*al e"%enditure of *ore than a .uarter abo&ee"%enditure for non-disabled %eo%le

Chapter !

Page 16: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 16/74

Disability Po&erty in the K

'he %ri*ary reco**endations of this %a%er are that the go&ern*ent co**it to6

10 End disability poverty by developin and implementin a speci$ic

stratey $or tac&lin the issue

20 Measure disability poverty as a uni3ue $orm o$ poverty throuh the useo$ a series o$ indicators0

n order for disability %o&erty to be for*ally *onitored this re%ort sets out a seriesof %ro%osed indicators, broken don into broad %olicy areas #onitoring theseindicators o&er ti*e ill hel% i*%ro&e the understanding of disability %o&erty as as%ecific and distinct for* of 4%o&erty4, rather than disabled %eo%le only being agrou% re%resented ithin broader %o&erty statistics Leonard Cheshire Disabilitybelie&es that this *onitoring should, in turn, lead to the go&ern*ent draing u% a

clear strategy to tackle disability %o&erty in the K =s a starting %oint in this%rocess, e ha&e also therefore %roduced a series of %olicy reco**endations toacco*%any the indicators that ould ork toards ending disability %o&erty inthe K

#any of the indicators that e ha&e suggested to hel% better define disability%o&erty are based on data already collected through national sur&eys such as theLabour orce 1ur&ey or the a*ily ;esources 1ur&ey Ather data is %ut togetherfro* e"isting research Leonard Cheshire Disability4s on 4Disability ;e&ie200/42+ of disabled %eo%le has been used in so*e areas here national data isnot collected 'he 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 co*%iled the &ies of *ore than !,000

disabled %eo%le in the K to gi&e a sna%shot of disabled %eo%le4s as%irations,social situation and &ies on key issues 'he regular research undertaken by theEose%h ;ontree oundation <E;@ and the ?e Policy nstitute <?P@in&estigating %o&erty and social e"clusion also %ro&ides a bedrock of infor*ationon disabled %eo%le4s %o&erty

'he *a7ority of indicators %ro%osed can already be *onitored through e"istingsur&eys, hilst others ould si*%ly re.uire e"isting sur&eys to include a .uestionto allo the breakdon of the data beteen disabled and non-disabled %eo%le1o*e of the %ro%osed indicators ould rely on a ide-scale sur&ey of disabled%eo%le to gather infor*ation on their current life e"%eriences 1uch a sur&ey

ould re%resent a &aluable chance to i*%ro&e the a&ailable data on disability anddisabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences, and could be carried out by the Affice forDisability ssues <AD@ 1uch an a%%roach is not unusual $ data on *any e"isting%o&erty indicators is currently tracked through large scale sur&eys, and the4sub7ecti&e ell-being .uestionnaire4 that for*s %art of the De%art*ent for ork

24 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability 200/

Page 17: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 17/74

and Pensions 4A%%ortunity =ge425 indicators is a good e"a*%le of ho this sort ofdata *ight be collected Leonard CheshireDisability ould argue that tracking %eo%le4s e"%eriences o&er ti*e, co*binedith the collection of a base of ra data, ill %ro&e the *ost effecti&e ay to*onitor shifts and changes in disability %o&erty

 =ll our %ro%osed indicators are listed in )nnex ) of this re%ort, along ith currentinfor*ation about le&els of disability %o&erty, and *ore infor*ation on ho theindicators are currently *onitored, or could be *onitored in the future

"inancial poverty and household income'ac&round and proposed indicators

'he *ost co**only acce%ted *easure of relati&e lo inco*e in the K is to beli&ing on less than (0: of *edian household inco*e 'his figure ill &aryde%ending on household circu*stances, but for the *ost recently a&ailable

figures the threshold for lo inco*e as a%%ro"i*ately6

'he Nlo inco*e lineO for a household of one adult is 95,200 %er annu*'he Nlo inco*e lineO for a household of to adults is 9,5!( %er annu*'he Nlo inco*e lineO for a household of to adults, one child is 9!3,3( %erannu*

'he 4lo inco*e line4 is (0: of *edian household inco*e2(

t is i*%ortant to note that these figures are calculated after inco*e ta", councilta" and housing costs ha&e been deducted, here housing costs include rents,

*ortgage interest, buildings insurance and ater chargesM

2/

'his *eans that thefigures re%resent the a*ount that a household has left to s%end to su%%ort itselfo&er the course of a year = household here inco*es fall belo these le&els isclassed a lo inco*e household hilst this should not be considered the only*easure of %o&erty, it is %erha%s the single strongest indicator of the *eans thatany indi&idual has to su%%ort the*sel&es

n *easuring disability %o&erty, hoe&er, this 4relati&e %o&erty line4 has oneserious fla $ it takes no account of the fact that *any disabled %eo%le ill faceadditional costs because of their i*%air*ent = degree of ork has beenundertaken to assess the le&el of the e"tra costs of disability <as *entioned in theearlier section on the *ethodology of 4additional costs of disability4@, but there arestill no uni&ersally acce%ted figures for the le&els of additional costs that disabled%eo%le face igures can, of course, &ary hugely for different indi&iduals atdifferent ti*es et to reach a genuine understanding of disability %o&erty, and

25 4A%%ortunity =ge $ #eeting the challenges of ageing in the 2!st century4 De%art*ent for ork and Pensions, 2005

26 4#onitoring %o&erty and social e"clusion 200(4, Pal*er, #acnnes and Kenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e

Policynstitute, 200(, as shon at htt%6HH%o&ertyorgukH2+Hinde"sht*l+27

 bid

Page 18: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 18/74

here it is uni.ue fro* the %o&erty e"%erienced in the rest of the %o%ulation, it isessential to atte*%t to build so*e *easure*ent of these e"tra costs into %o&ertyindicators

sing the fra*eork set out in the *ethodology %re&iously outlined, Leonard

Cheshire Disability has endea&oured to de&elo% a basic *ethod for factoringe"tra costs into so*e %o&erty indicators hilst this is not a definiti&e *ethod forincor%orating e"tra costs, it ill hel% to de*onstrate another uni.ue as%ect ofdisability %o&erty, and another reason hy it is an issue that re.uires s%ecificaction fro* go&ern*ent and other key decision-*akers

sing the loer figure of an a&erage additional e"%enditure of 2+:, the tableshoing the 4lo inco*e line4 for different households can be re-calculated tosho a figure that takes into account the fact that disabled %eo%le can faceuna&oidable e"tra e"%enditure 'his re%resents a *ore accurate ad7usted figure,shoing here the %o&erty line actually falls for disabled %eo%le 'he data is

based on an assu*%tion that there is one disabled adult in each household6

 =d7usted Nlo inco*e lineO for households of containing one disabled adult for oneadults is 9(,++8 %er annu*

 =d7usted Nlo inco*e lineO for households of containing one disabled adult for toadults is 9!!,800 %er annu*

 =d7usted Nlo inco*e lineO for households of containing one disabled adult for toadults, one child 9!/,28! %er annu*

'his *eans that, for e"a*%le, if 95,200 %er annu* is the %oint belo hich a one%erson household is considered 4lo inco*e4, then for disabled %eo%le the

e.ui&alent %oint, taking into account an a%%ro"i*ation of the e"tra costs ofdisability, is actually 9(,++8 %er annu* n essence, Leonard Cheshire Disabilityould argue that e"isting %o&erty figures and *easures consistentlyunderesti*ate the le&els of disability %o&erty

1uch underesti*ates beco*e e&en *ore stark hen considered alongsidee"isting figures about disabled %eo%le li&ing in lo inco*e households $ figureshich do not e&en take account of any additional costs 'he folloing tableshos the %ercentage of disabled and non-disabled adults li&ing in lo inco*ehouseholds 'he figures, dran fro* the a*ily ;esources 1ur&ey, andre%roduced in the E; and ?P %o&erty re%orts, starkly illustrate the %re&alenceof lo inco*e a*ong disabled %eo%le in 2005H0(

• Percentage of disabled adults aged 25 to retire*ent li&ing in aged 25 to

retire*ent li&ing in lo inco*e households is 30:

• Percentage of non-disabled adults aged 25 to retire*ent li&ing in aged 25

to retire*ent li&ing in lo inco*e households is !(:

Page 19: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 19/74

t is also i*%ortant to note that the 4%o&erty ga%4 beteen disabled and non-disabled %eo%le has actually been groing in recent years hilst the lo inco*erates for non-disabled %eo%le ha&e shon a steady donards trend, the ratesfor disabled %eo%le ha&e actually risen 'his 4%o&erty ga%4 is one of the starkestindicators of hy s%ecific action at go&ern*ental le&el is re.uired to tackle

disability %o&erty

 =s stated %re&iously, these lo inco*e rates do not take any account of the factthat *any disabled %eo%le face e"tra costs on account of their i*%air*ent $ afact acknoledged in the De%art*ent for ork and Pensions4 *ost recent4>ouseholds )elo =&erage nco*e re%ort428 n 4Co*%aring inco*e hen needsdiffer4 <Faidi and )urchardt, 2003@ hen the additional costs of disability erefactored into a calculation of the %ercentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing belo the%o&erty line a staggering figure of (!: as reached Pro%erly *onitoringdisability %o&erty re.uires the go&ern*ent to %roduce for*al 4ad7usted4 figuresthat sho the genuine le&el of lo inco*e a*ong disabled %eo%le

 =s ell as reco**ending that the go&ern*ent %roduce ad7usted figures,Leonard Cheshire Disability ould also reco**end that go&ern*ent *onitor thedirect i*%act of financial circu*stances 'his *eans asking %eo%le hether theyha&e e"%erienced %articular difficulties in certain key areas such as %aying bills,heating their ho*e or ha&ing to seek financial hel% fro* friends or fa*ily 1uch*easures offer the ad&antage of i*%licitly building in the e"tra costs of disabilityby e"a*ining the i*%act of lo inco*e, rather than si*%ly the e"tent of loinco*e 1uch data is not for*ally collected at %resent so Leonard CheshireDisability ould suggest so*e %ossible indicators in this area as follos6

B Could not afford to %ay a utility bill on ti*eJB ;egularly ent ithout *ealsJB 1ought financial hel% fro* friends or fa*ily

'hese are broad indicators of financial hardshi%, and ould %ro&ide a sense ofho disabled %eo%le4s financial ell-being is changing o&er ti*e Co*%aringres%onses for disabled and non-disabled %eo%le *ight also hel% to gi&e anindication of the i*%act of lo inco*e on different grou%s 1eeking financial hel%fro* friends or fa*ily *ay not be an o%tion for all, and so *onitoring trends inthis category *ay not be an effecti&e *easure of disability %o&erty in itself t*ight be the case that those in the greatest need are those ho are not able toseek assistance = co*%arison of data on this indicator beteen disabled andnon-disabled %eo%le ould, hoe&er, gi&e a strong indication of the e"tent tohich disabled %eo%le are forced to rely on su%%ort fro* others Collecting thisdata ould *ost easily be achie&ed through adding .uestions to the a*ily;esources 1ur&ey, or an e.ui&alent go&ern*ent sur&ey

-roposed disability poverty indicators . $inancial poverty and

28 1ee >ouseholds )elo =&erage nco*e re%ort 2005H0(, Cha%ter 5, %age 58

Page 20: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 20/74

household income:

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in lo inco*e households <belo (0: of

*edian household inco*e@, ith co*%arison data for the non-disabled%o%ulationJB Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in lo inco*e households, ad7usted toincor%orate a&erage esti*ates of additional costs of li&ingJB Percentage of disabled %eo%le ho6-$ Could not afford to %ay a utility bill on ti*eJ-$ ;egularly ent ithout *ealsJ-$ 1ought financial hel% fro* friends or fa*ily

-olicy recommendations . income and $inancial poverty

#any of the *echanis*s that ill hel% tackle disability %o&erty are the sa*e asthose that ill hel% tackle %o&erty *ore broadly or e"a*%le, i*%ro&ing le&els ofe*%loy*ent and educational attain*ent across the K are uni&ersal targets forhel%ing to reduce relati&e %o&erty, and ould clearly also hel% to tackle disability%o&erty )ut the sheer scale of the ga% beteen disabled %eo%le and non-disabled %eo%le in ter*s of the likelihood of li&ing in financial %o&erty $ disabled%eo%le are tice as likely to li&e in lo inco*e households $ *eans that s%ecificaction to tackle disability %o&erty is des%erately needed

hilst there is already considerable e&idence to start this %rocess, there is also aclear need for e"tra infor*ation on disability %o&erty = first urgent ste% should be

for the go&ern*ent to establish a clear and functioning *echanis* for assessingthe e"tra costs that disabled %eo%le face 'his re%ort has used e"isting researchand current data to build toards an a%%ro"i*ation of the current situation, butthe go&ern*ent has the resources, and the urgent need, to reach a definiti&e*easure that can be built into its atte*%ts to tackle disability %o&ertyLeonard Cheshire Disability ould reco**end that the Affice of Disability ssues<AD@ should be charged ith researching and %roducing an acce%tedgo&ern*ent esti*ate for the e"tra costs of disability 'his in turn should be usedto de&elo% accurate *easure*ents of the true e"tent of disability %o&erty in theK by %roducing both standardised figures for the %ercentage of disabled %eo%leli&ing in lo inco*e and ad7usted figures that fully reflect the e"tra costs ofdisabilityDisability Li&ing =lloance <DL=@ is the %rinci%al benefit ai*ed at *eetingdisabled %eo%le4s e"tra costs of li&ing t is clear, hoe&er, fro* LeonardCheshire Disability4s research into debt and disabled %eo%le4s financialcircu*stances that for *any %eo%le the e"tra costs of disability are currently notfully *et by DL= DL= %ro&ides absolutely essential su%%ort for *any disabled%eo%le, but it needs to be strengthened to ensure that it is fit for %ur%ose and fully*eets the needs of all those that it is designed to su%%ort Gi&en this, Leonard

Page 21: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 21/74

Cheshire Disability ould reco**end a full scale re&ie of Disability Li&ing =lloance to ensure that it still *eets the %ur%oses for hich it as intended1uch a re&ie should be %redicated on clear %rinci%les that no e"isting clai*antshould be disad&antaged by any changes, and on a clear, e&idence-basedunderstanding of the e"tra costs of disability

n 2005 Leonard Cheshire Disability %roduced a re%ort entitled 4n the balance42 hich e"a*ined disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of debt 'he re%ort found that for*any disabled %eo%le debt %roble*s de&elo%ed not as the result of e"cessi&es%ending on lu"ury ite*s, but through the si*%le fact that essential outgoingsere not *atched by inco*e 'his left *any %eo%le facing i*%ossible choices onessential e"%enditure, ha&ing to deter*ine hether to %ay for %hysiothera%y to*anage an i*%air*ent, or heating or other utility bills 4n the balance4 *ade anu*ber of key reco**endations to hel% address una&oidable debt a*ongstdisabled %eo%le = nu*ber of these reco**endations are also rele&ant in abroader effort to hel% end disability %o&erty

Leonard Cheshire Disability ould su%%ort the e"tension of the inter uel =lloance to disabled %eo%le under the age of (0 ho recei&e *iddle or higherrate care co*%onent, or higher rate *obility co*%onent, of DL= n the course ofthe research for the 4n the balance4 re%ort Leonard Cheshire Disability s%oke to anu*ber of %eo%le ho re%orted that they faced increased heating e"%ensesrelated to their i*%air*ent $ either because they ere *ore likely to be at ho*efor longer %eriods, or because their i*%air*ent re.uired the* to *aintain aconsistent te*%erature in their ho*e 'he follo-u% sur&ey to the !0 a*ily"%enditure 1ur&ey30 also su%%orts this %oint, finding that across the boarddisabled %eo%le face higher fuel costs than their non-disabled %eers, across

different inco*e brackets and e&en different degrees of se&erity of i*%air*ent"tending the inter uel =lloance ill hel% to *eet this need $ thego&ern*ent has esti*ated that the cost of such a change ould be around 9235*illion3! Leonard Cheshire Disability ould also %ress the case for refor* of the1ocial und to ensure that it better *eets the needs of disabled %eo%le li&ing ona lo inco*e 1uch refor* should include a broadening of eligibility criteria,refor* of re%ay*ent rates and an e"%ansion of both the Co**unity Care Grantsche*e and the discretionary fund

t ill also be i*%ortant to ensure that sche*es de&ised to enhance financialca%acity and hel% de&elo% financial inclusion are ade.uately targeted andaccessible for disabled %eo%le nitiati&es such as the inancial nclusion und*ust be effecti&ely targeted to reach disabled %eo%le $ this should include the%ro&ision of free debt ad&ice through ho*e &isits, here a%%ro%riate, to ensure afully accessible ser&ice

29 4n the balance6 disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of debt4, Claire Kober, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2005

30 4Disability, household inco*e and e"%enditure6 a follo u% sur&ey of disabled adults in the a*ily "%enditure 1ur&ey4,

De%art*ent of 1ocial 1ecurity, ;esearch ;e%ort ?o 2, !031

 ;es%onse to a Parlia*entary uestion, >ouse of Co**ons Afficial ;e%ort, !!th ?o&e*ber 200+, Colu*n //

Page 22: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 22/74

Summary o$ recommendations:

B De&elo% an acce%ted standard calculation for the e"tra costs of disability, andsubse.uent Ndisability ad7usted4 %o&erty statisticsJB ;e&ie the effecti&eness of DL= %redicated on continuing and enhanced

su%%ort for current reci%ients, and a clear e&idence base of e"tra costs andneedsJB "tend inter uel =lloance to disabled adults under the age of (0 in recei%tof certain %arts of DL=JB ;efor* the 1ocial und to ensure that it effecti&ely su%%orts disabled %eo%leon a lo inco*eJB De&elo% financial ca%acity and ad&ice %rogra**es to ensure the accessibilityof financial ser&ices to disabled %eo%le

Savins'ac&round and proposed indicators:

ncreasingly sa&ings and assets are considered to be an i*%ortant *onitor of thefinancial ellbeing of a household =ssets %ro&ide an i*%ortant fall-back shouldhousehold inco*e dro% at any %oint, as ell as offering stable and long-ter*financial security that inco*e alone does not guarantee

'here has already been recognition of the need to encourage sa&ing and asset-building a*ong lo inco*e households through go&ern*ent initiati&es like the41a&ings Gateay4 and there is a no ell established body of e&idence that%oints to the i*%ortance of assets as a *eans to lift %eo%le out of %o&erty

1o*e infor*ation on the le&els of sa&ings in the general %o%ulation is collated by?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents <?1@ $ the go&ern*ent agency that runs thePre*iu* )onds sche*e and other sa&ings initiati&es Data collected by ?1found that !2: of %eo%le in the K ha&e no sa&ings32, and that the a&eragea*ount held in sa&ings, e"cluding %ensions, in autu*n 200( as 9!/,0M 33'here is also infor*ation on sa&ings collected through the a*ily ;esources1ur&ey n Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 3+ +: ofres%ondents said that they had no sa&ings hilst there as a general trendsuggesting that older disabled %eo%le ere *ore likely to ha&e sa&ings, it asnotable that the nu*bers of those ithout any sa&ings as consistently loacross the entire sa*%le

'o find such high nu*bers of res%ondents ith no sa&ings is dee%ly concerning'he %rinci%al reason for lo le&els of sa&ing as lo inco*e $ res%ondents tothe sur&ey re%orted annual household inco*e far belo national a&erages )utthere *ay also be other factors that s%ecifically *itigate against disabled %eo%lebuilding u% assets and sa&ings =s ell as lo inco*e and lo le&els of32

 ?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents, 4uarterly sa&ings sur&ey, 1u**er 200/433

 ?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents, 4uarterly sa&ings sur&ey, =utu*n 200(434

 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber 200/

Page 23: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 23/74

e*%loy*ent hich can restrict both sa&ing and ho*e onershi%, those disabled%eo%le ho recei&e social care *ight be dissuaded fro* sa&ing by charging%olicies that can see assets taken to %ay for social care costs hate&er thereasons behind lo le&els of sa&ing, the figures re%resent an i*%ortant indicatorof disability %o&erty

f the safety net of sa&ings is not a&ailable for such large sathes of the disabled%o%ulation, then urgent action is re.uired to encourage sa&ing a*ong disabled%eo%le, and to ensure that any societal or %olicy barriers to sa&ing that e"ist arere*o&ed

nco*e is a %rinci%al indicator of both relati&e and absolute %o&erty $ it featureshigh a*ong the resources that an indi&idual has to su%%ort the*sel&es )utsa&ings also re%resent a critical %art of those resources = lack of sa&ings is astrong *easure of enduring %o&erty and, con&ersely, ha&ing a fir* base ofassets is a good indicator of relati&e financial security =ssets tend to %ro&ide a

le&el of %rotection fro* the *ost e"tre*e degrees of %o&erty and sociale"clusion 'herefore, Leonard Cheshire Disability ould reco**end that?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents, or another a%%ro%riate agency, s%ecificallycollect data on disabled %eo%le4s sa&ings and assets, or that a%%ro%riateinfor*ation gathered through the a*ily ;esources 1ur&ey be s%ecificallyanalysed by i*%air*ent

-roposed disability poverty indicators . savins:

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6

B Percentage of disabled %eo%le ith sa&ingsJB Percentage of disabled %eo%le ith bank accountsJB =&erage a*ount held as sa&ings by disabled %eo%le

-olicy recommendations . savins

'he i*%ortance of the financial security that can be offered by assets has beenrecognised in go&ern*ent initiati&es on asset-based elfare, such as the Child'rust und, hich su%%ort %eo%le through the long-ter* build u% of assets, rather than through i**ediate res%onses to lo inco*e Gi&en that disabled %eo%le aretice as likely to li&e in lo inco*e households, land that so*e can face s%ecificdisincenti&es to sa&ing <outlined later in this section@, the need s%ecifically toaddress assets and sa&ings in the conte"t of disability %o&erty is clear

n the course of Leonard Cheshire Disability4s %re&ious ork on disability anddebt35 e s%oke to a nu*ber of %eo%le hose financial circu*stances hadchanged irre&ocably ith the onset of their i*%air*ent or those %eo%le forcedto lea&e ork hen they ac.uire an i*%air*ent, or their i*%air*ent orsens,

35 4n the balance6 disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of debt4, Claire Kober, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2005

Page 24: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 24/74

there is al*ost alays an acco*%anying dro% in inco*e Aften %artners are alsoforced to lea&e e*%loy*ent to beco*e carers, leading to a further dro% ininco*e #itigating against the *assi&e i*%acts of such changes re.uires aelfare benefit syste* that ill offer a suitable safety net and long-ter* su%%ort,as ell as a syste* that encourages and assists e&eryone to build a strong asset

base

Leonard Cheshire Disability ould ad&ocate the de&elo%*ent of a 4Disability1a&ings Gateay4 as an asset-based elfare initiati&e to hel% %ro&ide this alli*%ortant safety net

'he 1a&ings Gateay sche*e is an ># 'reasury initiati&e that %ro&ides, for ali*ited %eriod, *atched funding to encourage %eo%le to sa&e 'hus far thesche*e has o%erated in to %ilots, hich ha&e offered either a %ound for %oundsa&ings contribution fro* the go&ern*ent, or a *eans-tested &ariable *atchingrate 'he sche*e has been based on need, offering *atched sa&ings only for

those on lo inco*es for ho* accruing assets is *ore difficult

hether further ork is undertaken on the 1a&ings Gateay %ro7ect at a nationalle&el or not, Leonard Cheshire Disability ould *ake the case for a s%ecific4Disability 1a&ings Gateay4 1uch a sche*e ould su%%ort and encouragedisabled %eo%le on lo inco*es to sa&e, through the tangible benefit of *atchedfunding fro* the go&ern*ent ligibility for the gateay could be deter*inedthrough recei%t of Disability Li&ing =lloance, and could also, if the go&ern*entdee*ed it necessary, be *eans-tested to focus on those li&ing on the loestinco*es

 =t the &ery least any further de&elo%*ent of the 1a&ings Gateay %ro7ect shouldbe undertaken ith a clear intention to *ake the %ro7ect fully accessible todisabled %eo%le 'his ould *ean orking ith local organisations of disabled%eo%le, financial ad&ice organisations and others to ensure that infor*ation andser&ices related to the 1a&ings Gateay %ro7ect are fully accessible to alldisabled %eo%le

 =ny such sa&ings sche*e, hoe&er, could %otentially face difficulties ino&erco*ing the disincenti&es to sa&e that are %resent in the current social carecharging syste*

1ocial care, unlike health care through the ?ational >ealth 1er&ice, is *eans-tested 'his *eans that disabled %eo%le ho do recei&e so*e for* of assessedsocial care su%%ort fro* their local authority ill ha&e their inco*e and assetstaken into account hen ho *uch they ill ha&e to %ay toards their care isdeter*ined $ by and large, the greater their sa&ings, the *ore they ha&e to %ay'he anless ;e&ie of social care undertaken by the King4s und identified thisdisincenti&e to sa&e as one of the key %roble*s ith the current social carecharging syste*, and %ro%osed a nu*ber of different charging solutions to

Page 25: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 25/74

re*o&e it3( )ut, hilst the %ros%ect of losing the assets accrued o&er life to %ayfor care in old age could dissuade so*e fro* sa&ing, for younger disabled adultsho recei&e social care su%%ort throughout life there is a risk that the chargingsyste* can be a %er*anent barrier to sa&ing

'ackling this disincenti&e and ensuring that disabled %eo%le ho re.uire socialcare throughout life do not face a barrier to sa&ing re.uire a holesale re-e"a*ination of the ay in hich social care is funded 'he anless ;e&ieoffered a nu*ber of alternati&e funding syste*s, including free %ersonal care forolder %eo%le, as in 1cotland, and the 4%artnershi% a%%roach offering a basic le&elof su%%ort free, ith the %ossibility of 4to%%ing u%4 care %ackages LeonardCheshire Disability ould su%%ort the e"tension of free %ersonal care for alldisabled %eo%le across the hole K as a crucial *eans of hel%ing to tackledisability %o&erty e recognise, hoe&er, that in the current funding cli*atethere see*s little %ros%ect of this ha%%ening 'his *eans that the go&ern*ent4sannounce*ent, in the Co*%rehensi&e 1%ending ;e&ie 200/, of a consultation

on the future funding structure of social care could not be *ore ti*ely 'here&ie should be %redicated on the %rinci%le that this disincenti&e to sa&e *ustbe re*o&ed, to ensure that users of social care en7oy the sa*e rights to sa&e asthe rest of the %o%ulation

Leonard Cheshire Disability also belie&es that there is a role for banks andlenders in facilitating sa&ing and asset-building a*ongst disabled %eo%le on loinco*es inancial institutions *ust *ake their facilities fully accessible, both inter*s of access to %re*ises and in ter*s of co**unication and direct interactionith custo*ers Leonard Cheshire Disability4s recent 41%ending %oer4 re%ortfound a nu*ber of obstacles that still confront disabled %eo%le trying to access

financial ser&ices, fro* inaccessible cash *achines, to a reluctance to offeralternati&e Chi% and 1ignature cards for those ho cannot use Chi% and P? 3/Clear guidance for financial institutions on orking ith disabled custo*ers andensuring the accessibility of their ser&ices should be built into the )anking Code,or %roduced by o&er-arching grou%s ithin the financial sector such as the )ritish)ankers =ssociation and the inance and Leasing =ssociation

Summary o$ recommendations:

B ntroduce a 4Disability 1a&ings Gateay4, and de&elo% a s%ecific strategy toensure that disabled %eo%le are fully included in any future de&elo%*ent of the1a&ings Gateay sche*eJB ;e&ie the i*%act of social care charging %olicy on disability %o&erty, includingreco**endations for tackling the sa&ings disincenti&eJB De&elo% guidance for financial institutions to ensure that they are fully *eetingtheir obligations under the Disability Discri*ination =ct and are *aking theirser&ices fully accessible to disabled %eo%le

36 41ecuring good care for older %eo%le4, Derek anless, King4s und, 200(

37 1%ending Poer6 disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of accessing and s%ending their *oney4, Lee ebster, Leonard

Cheshire Disability, 200/

Page 26: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 26/74

Employment /ates'ac&round and proposed indicators

'he correlation beteen being out of ork and being in %o&erty is ell

established hilst the elfare benefits syste* orks to %ro&ide a safety net forthose out of ork, it does not %ro&ide a route out of %o&erty &en those benefitsintended for those ho cannot ork do not generally %ro&ide an inco*e to lift%eo%le abo&e the relati&e lo inco*e line Gi&en this, e*%loy*ent ratesre%resent an i*%ortant indicator of %o&erty

*%loy*ent rates re%resent a %articularly critical factor in understandingdisability %o&erty n their %o&erty re%ort in 200( the E; and ?P re%orted thatthe *ain reason that disabled orking-age adults are *ore likely to be in loinco*e households is because they are less likely to be in orkM 38 n otherords, the continuing disad&antage that disabled %eo%le face in the 7obs *arket

is a %rinci%al factor in the *assi&e dis%arity that sees disabled %eo%le tice aslikely to li&e in lo inco*e households as non-disabled %eo%le

'he e*%loy*ent rate a*ong disabled %eo%le currently stands at about 50:,and, hilst this has been rising sloly in recent years, it still falls far short of theo&erall e*%loy*ent rate in the K

Percentage in ork36 Long $ ter* disabled %eo%leJ 50+: ?on $ disabled%eo%leJ 802:

Challenging this huge dis%arity in le&els of e*%loy*ent, hilst also better

su%%orting those disabled %eo%le ho are not e"%ected to ork, ill be a criticalste% in ending disability %o&erty

'o hel% in&estigate the reasons behind the substantial dis%arity in e*%loy*entrates, Leonard Cheshire Disability research conducted in 1cotland looked atdiscri*ination in the recruit*ent %rocess or the 4Discri*ination doesn4t ork4 +0 re%ort Leonard Cheshire Disability researchers sub*itted to a%%lications toaround !00 7ob ad&ertise*ents at a range of large and s*all e*%loyers 'hea%%lications ere essentially identical in skills and e"%erience a%art fro* the factthat one declared an i*%air*ent at the outset, hilst the other did not 'heresults hel% highlight the ende*ic disad&antage that disabled %eo%le face in thelabour *arket, together ith the continuing %re7udice a*ongst e*%loyers, bothlarge and s*all

38 4#onitoring %o&erty and social e"clusion 200(4, Pal*er, #acnnes and Kenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e

Policy nstitute, 200(, as shon at htt%6HH%o&ertyorgukH2+Hinde"sht*l+39

 ro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, as %resented in the Disability ;ights Co**ission 4Disability )riefing #ay 200/4, D;C,

#ay 200/40

 4Discri*ination doesn4t ork4, #ac;ae and La&erty, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 200(

Page 27: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 27/74

'he 4non-disabled a%%licant4 recei&ed tice as *any res%onse letters as the4disabled a%%licant4 .ually, hen a res%onse as recei&ed the 4non-disableda%%licant4 as tice as likely to be in&ited to inter&ie as the 4disabled a%%licant4"a*%les of the res%onses gi&en included one here the non-disabled a%%licantas in&ited to inter&ie, hilst the disabled a%%licant as ad&ised that the %ost

had been filled internally

'he continuing barriers to ork for disabled %eo%le are clearly de*onstrated bydata fro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, as %resented by the E; and ?P, hichshos that the %ro%ortion of %eo%le ho are not in ork, but ant ork, isconsistently higher for disabled %eo%le than non- disabled %eo%le <see belo@+!6

Af those hose highest le&el of .ualification is higher education !+: areecono*ically inacti&e but ant ork <ith a ork $ li*iting disability@ and +: areecono*ically acti&e but ant ork <ithout a ork $ li*iting disability@

Af those hose highest le&el of .ualification is GC = Le&el or e.ui&alent 2!:are econo*ically inacti&e but ant ork <ith a ork $ li*iting disability@ and 5:are econo*ically acti&e but ant ork <ithout a ork $ li*iting disability@

Af those hose highest le&el of .ualification is GC1 Grades =-C or e.ui&alent25: are econo*ically inacti&e but ant ork <ith a ork $ li*iting disability@and /: are econo*ically acti&e but ant ork <ithout a ork $ li*itingdisability@

Af those ho had no .ualifications 2(: are econo*ically inacti&e but ant ork<ith a ork $ li*iting disability@ and !+: are econo*ically acti&e but ant ork

<ithout a ork $ li*iting disability@

*%loy*ent rates can also &ary drastically beteen i*%air*ent ty%es $ as setout belo, deri&ed fro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey+26

'he e*%loy*ent rate of all disabled %eo%le in Great )ritain is 50:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith %roble*s ith ar*s, hands <includingarthritis or rheu*atis*@ is 52:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith %roble*s ith legs or feet is +(:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith %roble*s ith back or neck is +:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith difficulty in seeing is +/:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith difficulty in hearing is (3:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith skin conditions or allergies is /2:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith chest or breathing %roble*s is (+:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith heart %roble*s or blood %ressure is 5:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith sto*ach, li&er, kidney or digestion %roble*sis (!:

41 #onitoring %o&erty and social e"clusion 200(4, Pal*er, #acnnes and Kenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e

Policy nstitute, 200(, as shon at htt%6HH%o&ertyorgukH2+Hinde"sht*l+42

 ro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, e"tracted fro* Disability ;ights Co**ission 4Disability )riefing4, D;C, #ay 200/

Page 28: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 28/74

'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith diabetes is (8:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith *ental illness is 22:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith e%ile%sy is ++:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith learning difficulties is 23:Progressi&e illnesses not elsehere classified <eg cancer, #1@ 3/:

'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith other %roble*s or disabilities is 5(:

;ecent ork on areas such as elfare refor* has targeted increasing thee*%loy*ent rate a*ongst disabled %eo%le f refor*s to the elfare benefitsyste* can genuinely su%%ort disabled %eo%le back into ork then they ill beelco*ed, but they *ust also focus on a%%ro%riate su%%ort for those ho cannotork and on the role of e*%loyers in tackling barriers to ork

t is i*%erati&e that the go&ern*ent, in addition to its co**it*ent to trying toincrease the e*%loy*ent rate a*ong disabled %eo%le, ensure that there is alsobetter su%%ort for those ho are not e"%ected to ork 'here is already a strong

base of statistics on disability and e*%loy*ent collected by go&ern*ent, notablythrough the Labour orce 1ur&ey, and Leonard Cheshire Disability ould e"%ectthis data collection to continue 'he s%ecific indicators for disability %o&erty thatLeonard Cheshire Disability ould suggest are listed belo

-roposed Disability -overty Indicators . employment rates:

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the olloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B *%loy*ent rate a*ong disabled %eo%le, broken don by i*%air*ent grou%JB Percentages of orking age disabled %eo%le $

a@ n orkJb@ ?ot in ork, but looking for orkJc@ ?ot in ork, and not looking for ork

-olicy recommendations . employment rates

'he E; and ?P studies into %o&erty in the K identified that disabled %eo%le4slo e*%loy*ent rte as the %ri*ary factor that contributed to disabled %eo%le4s%ro%ortionately loer inco*e+3 ncreasing the e*%loy*ent rate a*ong disabled%eo%le is, therefore, one of the *ost i*%ortant *easures in tackling disability%o&erty t is i*%ortant, hoe&er, to ensure that ork o%%ortunities are*eaningful, sustainable and a%%ro%riate, and that the right su%%ort is gi&en to allthose disabled %eo%le ho are not able to enter full-ti*e e*%loy*ent 1o*e ofthese issues are tackled in later sectionsJ this section ill focus s%ecifically on*easures to i*%ro&e the e*%loy*ent rate of disabled %eo%le

'he elfare ;efor* =ct 200/ is a central %art of the go&ern*ent4s dri&e toincrease the e*%loy*ent rate of disabled %eo%le n %articular the =ct ai*s to get43

 4#onitoring %o&erty and social e"clusion 200(4, Pal*er, #acnnes and Kenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e

Policy nstitute, 200(

Page 29: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 29/74

! *illion reci%ients of nca%acity )enefit back to ork 'he =ct ill re%lacenca%acity )enefit <)@ ith a ne *%loy*ent and 1u%%ort =lloance <1=@hich ill include a higher rate to hel% su%%ort those ho cannot ork, togetherith %otential sanctions for those ho refuse to %artake in return to ork acti&ityn tande* ith this ne benefit the Pathays to ork sche*e, hich currently

o%erates only in certain %arts of the K, ill be rolled out nationide

Leonard Cheshire Disability has alays argued that if the ne benefit syste* canacti&ely su%%ort disabled %eo%le to return to a%%ro%riate ork and thus challengedisability %o&erty, hilst also better su%%orting those ho cannot ork, then it illbe broadly su%%orted e do, hoe&er, re*ain concerned about a nu*ber of%otential issues in the =ct such as the %ro%osed sanction regi*e, changes to theassess*ent for the ne 1= that *ight further tighten eligibility criteria and thetraining, su%%ort and guidance a&ailable to Eobcentre Plus staffLeonard Cheshire Disability ould like to see the 4annual re&ie4 that as agreedto in the elfare ;efor* =ct gi&en a broad re*it, fro* a %osition of

inde%endence fro* go&ern*ent, to assess the i*%act and effecti&eness of thene syste*, ith a %articular focus on disability %o&erty

'here is also little in the elfare ;efor* =ct that deals ith the role of e*%loyersin i*%ro&ing the e*%loy*ent rate of disabled %eo%le et this re*ains anabsolutely crucial area, ith negati&e e*%loyer attitudes a significant factor inli*iting disabled %eo%le4s e*%loy*ent o%%ortunities++ Leonard CheshireDisability su%%orts current go&ern*ent initiati&es to engage *ore ith e*%loyerst is i*%ortant that e*%loyers of all siIes recognise not only the %ositi&e benefitsof e*%loying disabled %eo%le, but also their legal res%onsibilities under theDisability Discri*ination =ct #uch *ore ork is, hoe&er, still needed in this

area 'o hel% %ro*ote the acti&e duty of e*%loyers to *ake reasonablead7ust*ents for disabled e*%loyees or 7ob candidates, Leonard CheshireDisability ould like to see the antici%atory duty that a%%lies to the %ro&ision ofgoods and ser&ices e"tended to e*%loy*ent 'his ould re.uire e*%loyers toantici%ate disabled %eo%le4s re.uire*ents in ad&ance and ad7ust their %racticesaccordingly, rather than si*%ly reacting to %roble*s hen they occur

#any disabled %eo%le are forced to lea&e ork hen they ac.uire an i*%air*entor find that their i*%air*ent orsens 'his can lead not only to a significantorsening in their %ersonal circu*stances, and a %ossible drift into %o&erty, butalso a significant i*%act on the state through the loss in ta" re&enue and outlayin out-of-ork benefits n *any cases, hoe&er, a %eriod of rehabilitation,offering enough ti*e for both an indi&idual and an e*%loyer to ad7ust, could%re&ent %eo%le fro* ha&ing to gi&e u% ork 'he financial benefits of this, for theindi&idual, the e*%loyer and the state, are clear Leonard Cheshire Disabilityould, therefore, ad&ocate the introduction of a syste* of 4rehabilitation lea&e4 tobetter su%%ort those ho ac.uire an i*%air*ent to stay in ork = recent Pri&ate

44 Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Discri*ination doesn4t ork4 re%ort found that hen to near identical a%%lications ere

sub*itted in res%onse to a 7ob ad&ert, ith one fro* a candidate declaring a disability, and one not, the non-disabledcandidate as in&ited to around tice as *any inter&ies

Page 30: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 30/74

#e*bers )ill on this issue+5 as introduced into Parlia*ent by Eohn ;obertson#P and as ell recei&ed, although it as not ulti*ately %assed, and e ouldstrongly su%%ort *easures to introduce a syste* si*ilar to that outlined in this)ill e ould argue that the initial costs of su%%orting %eo%le to takerehabilitation lea&e ould be off-set in the long-ter* through the %otential to sa&e

costs in %aying longer-ter* out of ork benefits and *aintain ta" benefits

 =s ith the need to re&ie the social care charging syste* to understand andchallenge any disincenti&e to sa&e, any barriers to ork that e"ist in the currentcharging syste* *ust also be in&estigated Currently, for e"a*%le, those holi&e in residential care, %aid for by the state, can be acti&ely dissuaded fro*orking, as any inco*e they recei&e could %otentially be taken toards %ayingfor their care, lea&ing %eo%le orse off than if they had re*ained out of ork'he De%art*ent of >ealth4s Charging for ;esidential =cco**odation Guide doessuggest a route round this issue in section 5005, here it states that a %ersonale"%enses alloance can be &aried for6

5Someone %ho does not 3uali$y as a 6less dependent6 residentsolely because he lives in reistered private or voluntary sectoraccommodation or in local authority accommodation %hereboard is provided and there$ore cannot be assessed under therules described in Section 2 but %ho nonetheless needs toretain more o$ his income in order to help him lead a moreindependent li$e $or example i$ he is %or&in07,8

'his guidance is largely discretionary for local authorities, hoe&er, and is notidely recognised Leonard Cheshire Disability calls for this guidance to be

strengthened and a clearer duty %laced on local authorities to ensure that usersof residential care do not face an added disincenti&e to ork

Summary o$ recommendations:

B ;e&ie the long-ter* effecti&eness of *easures contained in the elfare;efor* =ct 200/ in tackling disability %o&ertyJB nsure that e*%loyers are adhering to their res%onsibilities under the DD=,and e"tend the antici%atory duty to *ake reasonable ad7ust*ents toe*%loy*entJB ntroduce a syste* of 4rehabilitation lea&e4 to hel% %eo%le ho ac.uire ani*%air*ent to re*ain in e*%loy*entJB 1trengthen residential care charging guidance to re*o&e any disincenti&e toork for users of residential care su%%ort

#ypes o$ %or&'ac&round and proposed indicators:

45 or *ore infor*ation see details at6 htt%6HH%ublications%arlia*entukH%aH%abillsH200(0/He*%loy*entQretentionht*

46 4Charging for ;esidential =cco**odation Guide4, 200/ edition, %age 2!, De%art*ent of >ealth

Page 31: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 31/74

'he barriers that can %re&ent disabled %eo%le fro* entering the ork%lace canalso ser&e to hold back disabled %eo%le looking for %ro*otion or ad&ance*ent inork An a&erage disabled %eo%le earn less %er hour than their non-disabled%eers, and are *ore likely to be in loer le&el and %art-ti*e %ositions 'his,

cou%led ith the additional costs of *anaging i*%air*ents that *any disabled%eo%le face, *eans that %articular attention *ust be gi&en to *onitoring the%re&alence of 4in-ork %o&erty4 a*ong disabled %eo%le

 = non-disabled %erson4s inco*e fro* ork *ight *ean that their householdinco*e is abo&e the (0: of *edian inco*e threshold $ yet it is clear that ithonly a s*all ad7ust*ent for additional costs a disabled %erson ith the sa*einco*e could fall beneath this le&el 'his *eans that, ha&ing co&ered theiressential, una&oidable costs, there ould be an increased chance of a disabled%erson li&ing belo the %o&erty line des%ite being in ork ork can also be ani*%ortant factor in an indi&idual4s .uality of life, e&en lea&ing aside the financial

benefits of being in e*%loy*ent hilst recognising that for so*e disabled%eo%le ork *ay not be an a%%ro%riate or desirable outco*e, for *any %eo%le itcan %ro&ide social netorks, a strong sense of %ur%ose and engage*ent ithco**unities ork *ust not be considered the only *ark of contributing tosociety, but for *any %eo%le it does re%resent an i*%ortant &alidation and anend-result of education, skills and training )ut this %ositi&e i*%act is di*inishedby the fact that disabled %eo%le re*ain *ore likely than non-disabled %eo%le tobe in loer %aid 7obs, or to be in %art-ti*e ork

Current trends indicate that disabled %eo%le are both *ore likely to be out ofork e&en if they ha&e a high le&el of education, and also *ore likely to be in

loer %aid ork 'he Labour orce 1ur&ey collects data on both educationalattain*ent and e*%loy*ent rates for %eo%le of orking age, and the folloingdata sets out the e*%loy*ent rates for disabled and non-disabled %eo%le,according to the highest le&el of .ualification attained+/6

Af those hose highest .ualification is a degree or e.ui&alent, the e*%loy*entrate for disabled %eo%le is /5/:, and for non- disabled %eo%le is 88:

Af those hose highest .ualification is higher education, the e*%loy*ent rate for disabled %eo%le is (/2:, and for non- disabled %eo%le is 88(:

Af those hose highest .ualification is GC = Le&el or e.ui&alent, thee*%loy*ent rate for disabled %eo%le is 55:, and for non- disabled %eo%le is8!(:

47 Data dran fro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, as %resented in the Disability ;ights Co**ission4s 4Disability )riefing4,

D;C, #ay 200/

Page 32: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 32/74

Af those hose highest .ualification is GC1 grades =-C or e.ui&alent, thee*%loy*ent rate for disabled %eo%le is 5(:, and for non- disabled %eo%le is/8:

Af those hose highest .ualification is another .ualification, the e*%loy*ent rate

for disabled %eo%le is +8/:, and for non- disabled %eo%le is ///

Af those ho had no .ualifications, the e*%loy*ent rate for disabled %eo%le is232:, and for non- disabled %eo%le is (0!:

'he total e*%loy*ent rate for disabled %eo%le is 50+: and for non $ disabled%eo%le is 802:

;es%ondents to Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 ereasked about their current ork situation Des%ite a relati&ely high le&el ofeducational attain*ent a*ong res%ondents, le&els of e*%loy*ent ere &ery lo

Af those ho ere in ork, or had been in the last !2 *onths, (!: ofres%ondents stated that they re.uired a s%ecial ad7ust*ent in order to carry outtheir %resent 7ob !0: of these res%ondents said that their e*%loyers hadrefused to su%%ly such an ad7ust*ent, and, of those, 2+: said that they had tolea&e their e*%loy*ent as a result +!: of res%ondents ho ere ine*%loy*ent stated that they had e"%erienced discri*ination or %re7udice in theork%lace

 =chie&ing e.uality ithin the labour *arket re.uires ork to ensure thate*%loyers both understand and ork ithin the ter*s of the DisabilityDiscri*ination =ct and ensuring that >; and recruit*ent %ractices do not

routinely discri*inate .uality ithin the ork%lace is as i*%ortant for the long-ter* goal of i*%ro&ing disabled %eo%le4s life chances as increasing the o&eralle*%loy*ent rate a*ong disabled %eo%le

 =s ith o&erall e*%loy*ent rates, *uch infor*ation on disabled %eo%le4s %ositionithin the orkforce is collected through the go&ern*ent4s Labour orce 1ur&eyLeonard Cheshire Disability ould reco**end that *onitoring of the ty%e ofork undertaken by disabled %eo%le continues along ith *onitoring of disabled%eo%leOs a&erage inco*es fro* ork

-roposed disability poverty indicators . types o$ %or&:Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B Percentage of disabled %eo%le in %art-ti*e ork, together ith co*%arison fornon-disabled %eo%leB =&erage gross hourly %ay for disabled %eo%le, together ith co*%arison fornon-disabled %eo%le

-olicy recommendations . types o$ %or&:

Page 33: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 33/74

'he e"tra costs of disability and the subse.uent %otential for in-ork %o&erty*ean that it is essential to ensure that there is e.uity across the hole orld ofork, not si*%ly in initial recruit*ent 'ackling in-ork %o&erty ill re.uire actionfro* go&ern*ent both to challenge negati&e attitudes and to ensure that su%%ort

through benefits like Disability Li&ing =lloance ade.uately *eets disabled%eo%le4s needs 'here is also a crucial role for e*%loyers in i*%ro&ingrecruit*ent %ractices, building accessibility into the ork%lace and acting on their res%onsibilities under the la

'he =ccess to ork sche*e %ro&ides &ital su%%ort to disabled e*%loyees andtheir e*%loyers 'he go&ern*ent-funded sche*e can *eet the costs of theadditional su%%ort needed for eligible disabled e*%loyees to enter and re*ain ine*%loy*ent et, des%ite this, recent re%orts sho that /+: of e*%loyers ha&enot heard of the sche*e+8, and Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie200/4+ re%orted that al*ost half of those disabled %eo%le ho did not recei&e

 =ccess to ork su%%ort hilst in ork ere *issing out because they had ne&erheard of the sche*e

'here is a clear econo*ic case for the go&ern*ent to e"tend the sche*e $ fore&ery 9! s%ent on =ccess to ork an a&erage of 9!+8 is recou%ed in ta" and ?contributions50 Leonard Cheshire Disability belie&es that the go&ern*ent should,as a %riority, de&elo% an aareness raising ca*%aign ai*ed at e*%loyers toencourage the recruit*ent of disabled %eo%le, highlight the su%%ort a&ailablethrough =ccess to ork and de*onstrate the benefits to their business thatdisabled %eo%le bring

#echanis*s for *aking =ccess to ork su%%ort *ore %ortable, so that %ackagescan be transferred fro* 7ob to 7ob, should also be in&estigated as a %riority $ itshould be %ossible, for e"a*%le, for an indi&idual in recei%t of nca%acity )enefitto be able to look for ork in the certain knoledge that an =ccess to ork%ackage ill be a&ailable for the* hen they do get into ork

olloing the introduction of the Disability .uality Duty on %ublic authorities5!, =ccess to ork su%%ort has been ithdran fro* central go&ern*entde%art*ents, ith the long-ter* %olicy ai* of ithdraing the fund entirely fro*%ublic authority e*%loyers 1erious concerns re*ain, hoe&er, about hetherthe sa*e degree of su%%ort offered through =ccess to ork ill continue to be*ade a&ailable for all disabled e*%loyees in the %ublic sector 'he Disability.uality Duty <DD@ does not co**it %ublic sector e*%loyers to %ro&iding as%ecific le&el of su%%ort for disabled e*%loyees, so relying on the DD effecti&ely

48 )arriers to *%loy*ent for Disabled Peo%le4, Goldstone, #eager, ?AP Consu*er and the nstitute for *%loy*ent

1tudies,DP re%ort ?o 5, 200249

 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber 200/50

 4=ccess to ork for Disabled Peo%le4, Disability *%loy*ent Coalition, Actober 200+51

 'he Disability .uality Duty as introduced through the Disability Discri*ination =ct 2005 and %laces a duty on all

%ublic authorities to %ro*ote e.uality of o%%ortunity for disabled %eo%le

Page 34: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 34/74

to re%lace =ccess to ork su%%ort is dangerous Leonard Cheshire Disabilityould argue that it ould be far better si*%ly to e"%and the sche*e, gi&en theclear econo*ic benefits, rather than restrict the a&ailability of =ccess to ork inthe ho%e that it ill reach *ore %eo%le in the %ri&ate sector

ithin the syste* of out-of-ork benefits it ill also be i*%ortant to *onitor%ro%erly the ty%e and sustainability of ork into hich disabled %eo%le *o&ehen lea&ing benefits =t %resent the success of return to ork acti&ity in thebenefits syste* is essentially 7udged on hether an indi&idual lea&es benefitsand %rogresses into ork 'o %ro&ide a fair assess*ent of the success of a returnto ork, *onitoring should in&ol&e deter*ining the nature of the ork, and%articularly the long-ter* sustainability of the ork #o&ing a reci%ient off ) to a

 7ob that they are forced to lea&e after only a short ti*e because it is ina%%ro%riateshould not be considered a successful outco*e

Summary o$ recommendations:

B ;aise aareness of, and increase funding for, the =ccess to ork sche*e, andin&estigate routes for *aking =ccess to ork su%%ort *ore 4%ortable4JB #onitor the i*%act of the ithdraal of =ccess to ork fro* centralgo&ern*ent and re&erse the ithdraal if necessaryJB nsure that the *onitoring undertaken hen %eo%le *o&e fro* benefits in toork fully ca%tures the long-ter* sustainability and .uality of e*%loy*ent, not

 7ust the fact that an indi&idual has taken a 7ob

'ene$it ta&e(up'ac&round and proposed indicators:

elfare benefits re%resent both a ay to *easure and a %otential *echanis* for challenging disability %o&erty n the general %o%ulation the u%take of *eans-tested benefits such as nco*e 1u%%ort can be a &ery good indicator of le&els of%o&erty Care *ust be taken, hoe&er, hen using benefits to assess disability%o&erty, as there are a nu*ber of benefits for hich a disability is an integral.ualifying condition hich are not inco*e related 'herefore the u%take of thebenefit can re%resent an indicator of the nu*ber of disabled %eo%le *ore than as%ecific indicator of %o&ertyt is also i*%ortant to consider the o&erall le&els of 4take-u%4 of benefits =reas inhich there are large nu*bers of %eo%le eligible for benefits, but ho are notclai*ing the*, can also correlate ith areas of %articular %o&erty = deter*ineddri&e to ensure that %eo%le clai* their entitle*ents is one of the first and *ost%roducti&e *easures that should be undertaken in order to challenge disability%o&erty $ there are undoubtedly *any %eo%le ho could be su%%orted bybenefits, but ho are si*%ly not aare, or not *inded, to clai* 52

52 igures on take-u% rates are not collected for all benefits, but infor*ation on inco*e-related benefits can be found at6

htt%6HHd%go&ukHasdHirbas%

Page 35: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 35/74

t is i*%ortant also to note that di*inishing nu*bers of clai*s are not aguaranteed indicator of i*%ro&e*ents in the le&el of disability %o&erty ore"a*%le, as %art of the %ackage of changes set out in the elfare ;efor* =ct,ad7ust*ents ha&e been %ro%osed to the Personal Ca%ability =ssess*ent that isthe eligibility test for nca%acity )enefit <and, in the future, the ne *%loy*ent

and 1u%%ort =lloance@ 'hese changes could *ean that nu*bers clai*ingbenefits ill be reduced si*%ly by a tightening of eligibility criteria $ such a *o&e,far fro* indicating a decrease in disability %o&erty, could, unless considerablei*%ro&e*ents in e*%loy*ent rates are achie&ed, actually ser&e to %ush *ore%eo%le toards %o&erty t ill be critically i*%ortant, therefore, to follo thei*%act of the elfare ;efor* =ct $ if it can hel% to su%%ort *any *ore disabled%eo%le into a%%ro%riate long-ter* ork, then it ill no doubt be 7udged to ha&ehad a substantial %ositi&e i*%act on disability %o&erty

Key benefits that ill i*%act on disability %o&erty include6 nco*e 1u%%ort,nca%acity )enefit, Disability Li&ing =lloance and =ttendance =lloance 1o*e

current u%take figures are gi&en in the folloing tables

Disability Li&ing =lloance is an i*%ortant benefit for *any disabled %eo%le t isbroken don into to %arts, care co*%onent and *obility co*%onent, ith anu*ber of differing rates for each co*%onent igures on the nu*bers ofreci%ients, broken don by aard ty%e, are as follos 536

'he total caseload for higher ;ate Care Co*%onent is (30,(20, for higer rate*obility co*%onent the caseload is ++8,!+0 (30,(20, for loer rate *obilityco*%onent the caseload is !+!,+00 and for nil rate *obility co*%onent thecaseload is +!,080

'he total caseload for #iddle ;ate Care Co*%onent is 08,50, for higher rate*obility co*%onent the caseload is +!(,00, for loer rate *obility co*%onentthe caseload is 380,30 and for nil rate *obility co*%onent the caseload is!!!,!20

'he total caseload for Loer ;ate Care Co*%onent is /(,/0, for higher rate*obility co*%onent the caseload is385,530, for loer rate *obility co*%onentthe caseload is !5/,000, for nil rate *obility co*%onent the caseload is 22/,++0

'he total caseload for ?il ;ate Care Co*%onent is 53(,2!0, for higher *obilityco*%onent the caseload is +3(,/20, for loer rate *obility co*%onent thecaseload is ,+80

nca%acity benefit <including 1e&ere Disable*ent =lloance@, take-u% figures,broken don by aard ty%e and length of clai*5+6

53 ro* DP tabulation tool, figures for ?o&e*ber 200(J

htt%6HH!3!!5!522!H!00%cHdlaHcare%ayHcc*ob%ayHaQcarateQrQcare%ayQcQcc*ob%ayQno&0(ht*l

Page 36: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 36/74

'here are !+!,000 cases lasting u% to 3 *onths'here are !!!,00 cases lasting 3 *onths u% to ( *onths'here are !+/,+0 cases lasting ( *onths u% to ! year'here are 238,80 cases lasting ! year and u% to 2 years'here are 5/+,8+0 cases lasting 2 years and u% to 5 years

'here are !,500,380 cases lasting 5 years and o&er'he total nu*ber of clai* cases is 2,/!+,50

nca%acity benefit, reasons for clai*556

'here are !,!02,550 cases for *ental and beha&ioural disorders'here are !((,2+0 cases for diseases of the ner&ous syste*'here are 2!2,880 cases for diseases of the Circulatory or ;es%iratory 1yste*'here are +8/,80 cases for diseases of the #usculoskeletal syste* andConnecti&e 'issue'here are !5!,!/0 cases for in7ury, Poisoning and certain other conse.uences of 

e"ternal causes'here are 5+,2!0 cases for other reasons'he total nu*ber of cases is 2,/!+,50

nco*e su%%ort take-u% figures, broken don ty%e of clai*5(6

'here are !,200,880 cases for nca%acity benefits'here are //5,(20 cases for Lone Parent su%%ort'here are 83,+/0 cases for Carer su%%ort'here are 8!,00 cases for others on inco*e related benefit'he total nu*ber of cases is 2,!+!,50

Peo%le ith a disability or long-ter* health condition *ake u% a huge %ro%ortionof those recei&ing out of ork benefits $ around three *illion out of around fi&e*illion hilst recei%t of disability benefits is not in itself an indication of %o&erty,the fact that *any of those ho rely long-ter* on benefits are disabled %eo%le,and that those benefits are not sufficient to su%%ort %eo%le out of %o&erty, doesre%resent an i*%ortant factor in the o&erall %icture of disability %o&erty

 =s *entioned %re&iously in this re%ort, Leonard Cheshire Disability is concernedthat the e"tra costs of disability are si*%ly not co&ered by e"isting e"tra costbenefits such as DL= 'his *eans that disabled %eo%le can be %laced at an

54 "tracted fro* De%art*ent for ork and Pensions tabulation tool, figures for ?o&e*ber 200(6

htt%6HH!3!!5!522!H!00%cHibsdaHctdurtnHccbencodHaQcarateQrQctdurtnQcQccbencodQno&0(ht*l55

 "tracted fro* the De%art*ent for ork and Pensions tabulation tool, figures for ?o&e*ber 200(6

htt%6HH!3!!5!522!H!00%cHibsdaHicdg%su**HccbencodHaQcarateQrQicdg%su**QcQccbencodQno&0(ht*l56

 "tracted fro* the De%art*ent for ork and Pensions tabulation tool, figures for ?o&e*ber 200(6

htt%6HH!3!!5!522!H!00%cHisHccstatg%HctdurtnHaQcarateQrQccstatg%QcQctdurtnQno&0(ht*l

Page 37: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 37/74

i**ediate financial disad&antage and is likely to set in stone the fact thatdisabled %eo%le are o&er-re%resented on al*ost any e"isting %o&erty indicator'here is a clear need for the go&ern*ent to undertake research to *ake anaccurate assess*ent of disabled %eo%le4s e"tra costs of li&ing and ensure thatDL=, or any other %otential e"tra cost benefits, ade.uately reflect these costs

#onitoring the nu*bers of reci%ients of benefits is an i*%ortant staring %oint forindicators in these areas Leonard Cheshire Disability is assu*ing that such*onitoring ill continue as no, but in order to generate a fuller %icture e alsosuggest so*e additional indicators belo

-roposed disability poverty indicators . 'ene$it ta&e(up:

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B sti*ates of take-u% for disability related benefits <including Disability Li&ing

 =lloance@JB Disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of the benefits syste*, including o&erallsatisfaction, decision *aking, benefit le&els co*%ared to outgoings, effecti&enessof return to ork su%%ort <here a%%ro%riate@, *onitored through a sub7ecti&esur&ey

-olicy recommendations . 'ene$it ta&e(up

elfare benefits should %lay a crucial role in su%%orting those on lo inco*esout of %o&erty, in *atching the e"tra costs of disability and in %ro&iding a safetynet for those hose circu*stances change

n %articular the benefits syste* needs to ork *uch better for those furthestfro* the labour *arket 'he Disability ollo % to the a*ily "%enditure1ur&ey5/ %ublished in !0 shoed that those in the highest se&erity category ofi*%air*ent ere faced ith the loest likelihood of being in e*%loy*entco*bined ith the highest e"tra costs of disability 'he elfare benefits syste**ust be calibrated %ro%erly to su%%ort this grou% $ it *ust ensure that no-one isritten off, but also ensure that those for ho* a return to ork is %articularlydifficult should not si*%ly be left to languish in %o&erty

'hose disabled %eo%le for ho* a return to ork is not considered a reasonablee"%ectation are also likely to be those ho face the greatest additional costs ofli&ing through *anaging their i*%air*ent )enefits such as Disability Li&ing

 =lloance <DL=@ can hel% to co&er so*e of the e"tra costs that disabled %eo%lecan face, but Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4n the balance458 re%ort found thatDL= all too often failed to co&er all additional costs 'his can lea&e indi&idualsith no recognisable route out of %o&erty other than through fa*ily, friends or

57 4Disability, household inco*e and e"%enditure6 a follo u% sur&ey of disabled adults in the a*ily "%enditure 1ur&ey4,

De%art*ent of 1ocial 1ecurity, ;esearch ;e%ort ?o 2, !058

 4n the balance6 disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of debt4, Claire Kober, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2005

Page 38: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 38/74

charity Leonard Cheshire Disability ould argue that, if disability %o&erty is to beaddressed, then significantly *ore *ust be done for those ho cannot ork andare forced to rely on benefits t cannot be acce%table si*%ly to conde*n thisgrou% to inesca%able %o&erty

'he ne *%loy*ent and 1u%%ort =lloance <1=@ created in the elfare;efor* =ct 200/ ill ha&e a higher rate for those not e"%ected to undertakereturn to ork acti&ity $ this rate *ust be sufficient to ork in tande* ith otherbenefits such as DL= acti&ely to lift disabled %eo%le fro* %o&ertyLeonard Cheshire Disability suggests that a re&ie of ho the benefits syste*orks for those ho are not e"%ected to return to e*%loy*ent be undertaken, asat %resent there are serious concerns that *any could si*%ly be left tra%%ed ininesca%able %o&erty

'he role of *onitoring the refor* of ), and of looking at broader issues, such asthe le&el of DL=, could be effecti&ely carried out by a elfare Co**ission 'he

introduction of a elfare Co**issioner as %ro%osed by a recent ork andPensions 1elect Co**ittee re%ort,5 and Leonard Cheshire Disability ouldstrongly su%%ort such a %ro%osal = Co**ission, functioning in a si*ilar ay tothe Pensions Co**ission, ould be able to ork closely ith go&ern*ent, butalso retain a degree of inde%endence to *onitor de&elo%*ents in elfare %olicyeffecti&ely

Ane key area of benefit %ro&ision that re.uires urgent attention is the .uality ands%eed of decision *aking hilst conducting research for our 4n the balance4re%ort(0, hich looked at disability and debt, Leonard Cheshire Disability s%oke toa nu*ber of %eo%le hose debt %roble*s had begun hen there had been a

change in their benefit circu*stances Ane res%ondent4s e"%erience, fore"a*%le, as as follos6

B a decision as *ade that the indi&idual as no longer eligible for benefitsJB benefit %ay*ents ere then sto%%edJB the for*er reci%ient found that they could no longer *eet their outgoingsJB they ere forced into borroing *oney and getting into debtJB benefits ere ulti*ately re-instated on a%%eal, but the indi&idual as nofacing %roble* debt'his se.uence of e&ents outlines the *assi&e significance of the .uality ofdecision *aking in the benefits syste* =t %resent around half of a%%eals againstbenefit decisions for DL= and ) are successful $ suggesting that there areserious %roble*s ith the standard of initial decision *aking Leonard CheshireDisability ants to see a s%ecific focus on this area, including re&ies of bothtraining and %rocedures for benefit decision-*aking 'he *ethods by hiche&idence is gathered for decisions on ) <and in the future 1=@ are currentlybeing re&ieed as %art of the follo-u% to the elfare ;efor* =ct $ this is a

59 1ee 4Conclusions and reco**endations4, 4ork and Pensions $ 1e&enth ;e%ort4, ork and Pensions 1elect

Co**ittee, Euly 200/60

 4n the balance6 disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of debt4, Claire Kober, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2005

Page 39: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 39/74

elco*e de&elo%*ent Leonard Cheshire Disability also suggests that the%rocess of a%%eals is re&ieed, to ensure that, hilst necessary decisions canstill be taken, there is %erha%s an e"tra o%%ortunity for clai*ants to challengedecisions, before benefits are sto%%ed

Considerable *edia attention is often gi&en to the issue of benefit fraud, throughregular %ress stories, a go&ern*ent *edia ca*%aign and regular %olicyinitiati&es hilst, of course, it is i*%ortant that fraud is tackled, figures ha&econsistently suggested that the a*ount lost in fraud is less than the a*ount thatgoes unclai*ed by those ho are entitled(! 'his could lead to an indi&idualending u% li&ing in %o&erty, or *issing out on the o%%ortunity to recei&e return toork su%%ort, si*%ly because they are unaare of, or are unilling to clai*, their entitle*ent because of the %ercei&ed stig*a and negati&e %erce%tions of thoseho clai* disability benefits =ll clai*ants should recei&e clear and conciseinfor*ation about their benefits, including an auto*atic 4benefit check4 confir*ingtheir entitle*ents across the syste*, and an acti&e *edia ca*%aign is needed to

ensure that those ho re.uire the su%%ort of benefits, but do not clai* the*, areaare of their entitle*ents

Summary o$ recommendations:

B ndertake a re&ie of 4benefit %o&erty4 and ho the syste* functions for long-ter* clai*ants ho are not e"%ected to return to orkJB stablish a 4elfare co**ission4 to o&ersee de&elo%*ents in elfare benefit%olicyJB *%ro&e decision-*aking in the benefits syste*, including a *ore for*alo%%ortunity to a%%eal before benefits are sto%%edJ

B Pro&ide a 4benefit check4 for reci%ients to establish their full entitle*ents, andan acti&e ca*%aign to engage ith those ho need, but currently do not clai*,their entitle*ents

)ccommodation'ac&round and proposed indicators:

1helter4s 4Chance of a lifeti*e4 re%ort(2, hich looked at the i*%act of %oor .ualityhousing on children, found that loer educational attain*ent, greater likelihoodof une*%loy*ent, and %o&ertyM could all result fro* lo .uality housing Disabled%eo%le can face additional barriers in finding suitable acco**odation $ not onlyis there a .uestion of affordability, but also accessibility

>o*e onershi% offers strong %rotection fro* %o&erty $ this is one reason hythe go&ern*ent is increasingly, and correctly, e"a*ining the %rinci%les of 4asset-based elfare4 hen the state can su%%ort indi&iduals to build u% assets it canoffer the* a %oerful buffer against %o&erty ?ational statistics currently esti*ate

61 1ee 4nco*e related benefits esti*ates of take-u% in 2005-0(4, DP %ress release, 1e%te*ber 200/ for *ore

infor*ation about the scale of under-clai*ing in the *eans-tested benefits syste*62

 4Chance of a lifeti*e6 the i*%act of bad housing on children4s li&es4, Lisa >arker, 1helter, 1e%te*ber 200(

Page 40: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 40/74

that around /0:(3 of the %o%ulation as a hole on their on ho*es, hilst only55:(+ of those disabled %eo%le ho re.uire ada%ted housing on theirs

Disabled %eo%le are tice as likely to li&e in social housing as non-disabled%eo%le(5 +2: of housing association households contain so*eone ith a long-

ter* health condition or i*%air*ent((

'his is not only an indicator that they are*ore likely to li&e in %o&erty, but also that %o&erty *ay be harder to esca%e thanfor those ho are able to fall back on assets, such as their on ho*e

 = recent re%ort fro* the De%art*ent of Co**unities and Local Go&ern*entfound that 25:(/ of those ho need ada%ted housing in ngland are currentlyli&ing in unsuitable housing 1o*e disabled %eo%le ill re.uire no ada%tations totheir ho*e, others *ay need s*all ada%tations $ *aybe a ra*% u% to the frontdoor, others ill need significant ada%tations $ such as installing a donstairsbathroo* Li&ing in a ho*e ithout a%%ro%riate ada%tations can seriouslyda*age .uality of life, li*it o%%ortunities for social interaction and effecti&ely

*ake so*e roo*s unusable

 = lack of accessible housing in a neighbourhood can also cause significant%roble*s for those ho ac.uire an i*%air*ent or hose i*%air*ent orsensithout a%%ro%riate accessible housing stock a&ailable *any disabled %eo%lecan be forced to stay in hos%ital hilst aiting for ada%tations to their ho*e to be*ade or suitable alternati&e acco**odation found t can also lead to youngdisabled %eo%le li&ing in older %eo%le4s nursing ho*es because there is noaccessible and affordable housing a&ailable nearby

or those ho cannot ork or are on lo inco*es other %roble*s can also arise

Peo%le li&ing in older %ro%erties ith single glaIing, for e"a*%le, can face%articular difficulties in the inter *onths in *aintaining a ho*e at a constantte*%erature 1o*e i*%air*ents can be aggra&ated by the cold and can be*anaged by kee%ing the ho*e at a constant te*%erature $ but in %oorlyinsulated ho*es this can %ro&e %rohibiti&ely e"%ensi&e

1ources of infor*ation on housing differ across the nations of the K, de%endingon hether housing is a de&ol&ed issue #ost of our indicators could be*onitored relati&ely easily through the 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing, and could alsotherefore be co&ered by si*ilar sur&eys in other nations nderstanding thei*%act of housing on disability %o&erty *eans e"a*ining both disabled %eo%le4sle&els of ho*e onershi% as ell as the a&ailability of %ro%erly accessiblehousing

63 htt%6HHstatisticsgo&ukHCCHnuggetas%DR!!05PosR(Col;ankR2;ankR22+

64 4>ousing in ngland 2005H0( $ a re%ort %rinci%ally fro* the 2005H0( 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing4, DCLG, Actober 200/

65 4Disability =genda $ creating an alternati&e future4, Disability ;ights Co**ission, 200/

66 =s re%orted in the >ousing =ssociation 4Disability .uality 1che*e and =ction Plan, 200( $ 04, >ousing =ssociation,

200(67

 >ousing in ngland 2005H0( $ a re%ort %rinci%ally fro* the 2005H0( 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing4, DCLG, Actober 200/

Page 41: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 41/74

-roposed disability poverty indicators . accommodation:

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B Percentage of disabled %eo%le ho on their on ho*es, together ith a

co*%arison for non-disabled %eo%leJB Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in social housing, together ith aco*%arison for non-disabled %eo%leJB Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in acco**odation that falls belo the setstandard of decency, together ith co*%arison for non-disabled %eo%leJB ?u*ber of disabled %eo%le ho re.uire ada%ted ho*es currently li&ing inina%%ro%riate housingJB Percentage of ho*es built to Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards each year

-olicy recommendations . accommodation

'he standard and a&ailability of acco**odation are *aterial factors in disability%o&erty 'ackling current %roble*s re.uires a coherent strategy both to increasethe stock of accessible, affordable acco**odation, and also to ensure that hataccessible housing stock is a&ailable can be *atched to those that need it

t is orth noting that for *any disabled %eo%le the difficulties in accessinga%%ro%riate acco**odation are e"actly the sa*e as for the ider %o%ulation $ itis a relati&ely s*all %ro%ortion of the !! *illion disabled %eo%le in the K thatould re.uire substantially ada%ted ho*es 'he links beteen disability and%o&erty, hoe&er, and the increased likelihood of those ith long-ter* healthconditions or i*%air*ents li&ing on loer inco*es *ean that difficulties in finding

affordable housing can be e"acerbated Leonard Cheshire Disability elco*esgo&ern*ent initiati&es on affordable housing, but ould suggest that e"traattention be %aid to the %ro&ision of good .uality accessible social housingDisabled %eo%le are tice as likely as non-disabled %eo%le to li&e in socialhousing, and %oor .uality or lo le&els of %ro&ision ill therefore ha&e adis%ro%ortionate i*%act on disability %o&erty

 =cross all ty%es of housing there is a need to *ake sure not only that there isenough a&ailable stock of accessible and ada%ted ho*es, but also that ada%tedho*es can be *ade a&ailable to those that need the* =t %resent it is still far tooco**on for young disabled adults to end u% li&ing in older %eo%le4s nursingho*es, si*%ly because it is not %ossible to *atch the* ith a%%ro%riateaccessible housing 'he de&elo%*ent of a nationide syste* of accessiblehousing registers is the first and *ost ob&ious ste% to hel% i*%ro&e this situation

 =ccessible housing registers ould hel% local authorities and other sociallandlords not only to *aintain clear records of the accessible and ada%ted ho*esithin their area, but also to *atch disabled %eo%le ho need ada%tedacco**odation ith the right housing 1o*e local authorities *aintainaccessible housing registers, but they are a *inority Leonard Cheshire

Page 42: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 42/74

Disability ants to see a duty on all local authorities to de&elo% and *aintain anaccessible housing register

Leonard Cheshire Disability ould also ad&ocate the ado%tion of the Lifeti*e>o*e 1tandards ithin K building regulations 'he Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards

are a set of building guidelines that ere de&elo%ed by the E; and hichensure not only that ne-build houses are *ore accessible, but also that they are*ore easily ada%table to future needs(8 'he accessibility of ne-build %ro%erty inthe K is currently co&ered by the Part # building regulations, and, hilst theseregulations ha&e already hel%ed to %roduce considerable strides forard inaccessibility, Leonard Cheshire Disability ould ad&ocate that they be e"%andedto *atch all the Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards Leonard Cheshire Disability elco*esthe co**it*ent fro* the De%art*ent of Co**unities and Local Go&ern*entthat all ne social housing built ith go&ern*ent *oney ill be built to Lifeti*e>o*e 1tandards fro* 20!! onards(

'he go&ern*ent currently intends to include Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards in its%ro%osed code for sustainable ho*es, but the ado%tion of Lifeti*e >o*e1tandards ould not be *andatory 'he go&ern*ent has said that it ould like tosee the nu*ber of %ri&ate ho*es built to Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards increase, butit is currently unilling to regulate Leonard Cheshire Disability is concerned thatithout regulation the nu*ber of %ri&ate ho*es built to Lifeti*e >o*e1tandards ill not increase substantially and that the 3 *illion ne ho*es thatthe go&ern*ent has %ro%osed be built o&er the ne"t !0 years ill not be asaccessible and easily ada%table as should be the case

'he recent 4ra*eork for airness4/0 Green Pa%er includes a %ro%osal to e"tend

the right of disabled %eo%le to re.uest ada%tations to the 4co**on %arts4 ofrented %re*ises 'he %ro%osal ould bring this area of the la into line ithlegislation for other areas of a ho*e Leonard Cheshire Disability &ery *uchelco*es this %ro%osal, although it is orth obser&ing that it ould still be theres%onsibility of indi&idual tenants to %ay for ada%tations, and that a%%ro%riatesu%%ort needs to be a&ailable to enable the* to do so

Summary o$ recommendations:

B nsure that the need to increase a&ailability of ada%ted and accessible socialhousing is integral to housing %olicy de&elo%*entJB stablish a duty on local authorities to create and *aintain an accessiblehousing registerJ

68 #ore infor*ation on Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards can be found through the Eose%h ;ontree oundation at

htt%6HH7rforgukHhousingandcareHlifeti*eho*esH69

 4'he future of the Code for 1ustainable >o*es6 *aking a rating *andatory4, De%art*ent of Co**unities and Local

Go&ern*ent Euly 200/70

 4Discri*ination La ;e&ie6 = ra*eork for airness6 Pro%osals for a 1ingle .uality )ill for Great )ritain $ =

consultation %a%er4, De%art*ent of Co**unities and Local Go&ern*ent, Eune 200/

Page 43: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 43/74

B "tend Part # building regulations to *atch the Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards,%articularly urgent for all ne-build social housingJB =do%t the %ro%osal in the 4ra*eork for airness4 Green Pa%er on rights forada%tations in 4co**on %arts4 of %re*ises

Educational )ttainment'ac&round and proposed indicators:

hilst, of course, the le&el of .ualifications that an indi&idual attains is far fro*the only deter*ining factor in the indi&idual4s future %ros%ects, it is clear fro*a&ailable statistics that life chances and educational attain*ent are closelylinked = London 1chool of cono*ics re%ort into the links beteen educationand social e"clusion found that educational .ualifications sho a clear andstrong relationshi% to e&ery single adult *easure of disad&antage at ages 23 and33M/! 'his is su%%orted by the .ualities ;e&ie/2, hich found that not being ine*%loy*ent, education and training for si" *onths or *ore beteen !( and !8 is

the single *ost %oerful %redictor of une*%loy*ent at age 2!, and is therefore%articularly significant in e"%laining hy so*e young %eo%le *ake lesssuccessful transitions to adult, and orking, lifeM

'he fact, therefore, that disabled %eo%le face a continuing dra*atic ga% in le&elsof educational attain*ent co*%ared to non-disabled %eo%le is critical in furtheringour understanding of disability %o&erty

'he infor*ation belo outlines le&els of educational attain*ent across theorking age %o%ulation/3

Af those hose highest .ualification is a degree or e.ui&alent !!: are disabled%eo%le and 2!: are non- disabled %eo%le

Af those hose highest .ualification is higher education /: are disabled %eo%leand 8: are non $ disabled %eo%leAf those hose highest .ualification is GC = Le&el or e.ui&alent 2!: aredisabled %eo%le and 2+: are non $ disabled %eo%le

Af those hose highest .ualification is GC1 grades =-C or e.ui&alent 2!: aredisabled %eo%le and 23: are non-disabled %eo%le

Af those hose highest .ualification is another .ualification !+: are disabled%eo%le and !2: are non-disabled %eo%le

71 4'he ;oles of 1chooling and ducational ualifications in the *ergence of =dult 1ocial "clusion4, Eohn >obcraft,

C=1 Pa%er +3, L1, Dece*ber 200072

 4airness and freedo*6 the final re%ort of the .ualities ;e&ie4, Cabinet Affice, 200/73

 Data fro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, e"tracted fro* Disability ;ights Co**ission 4Disability )riefing #ay 200/4, D;C,

#ay 200/

Page 44: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 44/74

Af those ho ha&e no .ualification 25: are disabled %eo%le and !!: are non-disabled %eo%le

 =t !( young disabled %eo%le are tice as likely not to be in any for* ofeducation, e*%loy*ent or training as their non-disabled %eers <!5: as o%%osed

to /:@/+

hilst the ga% in educational attain*ent for disabled %eo%le continues,the %ercentage of 7obs re.uiring no .ualification is decreasing, and the nu*ber of  7obs re.uiring degree le&el education <or e.ui&alent@ is increasing 'he nstitutefor Public Policy ;esearch has %redicted that by 2020 al*ost half of alle*%loy*ent ill be in occu%ations re.uiring this higher le&el of educationalattain*ent/5

'here are *any issues that *ight hel% e"%lain the skills ga% that e"ists fordisabled %eo%le 'hese can range fro* %hysical barriers in educationalestablish*ents to lo e"%ectations or negati&e attitudes about disabled %eo%le4sabilities

;es%ondents to Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 ereasked a nu*ber of .uestions about their e"%eriences of education, including bothin a 4s%ecial school4 en&iron*ent, and in *ainstrea* schooling Af all thoseres%ondents ho had ac.uired their i*%air*ent before school6B +8: stated that as a conse.uence of their disability it had taken the* longerthan their non-disabled %eers to reach their %resent le&el of attain*entJB 38: indicated that as a result of their disability their teachers had loere"%ectations of the*JB 5!: found that their choice of sub7ects and or courses as restricted becauseof their i*%air*entJ

B 53: said that they had e"%erienced discri*ination or %re7udice in theeducation syste*

Challenging the ine.uities that still e"ist ithin the education syste* ill becrucial to *aking a lasting difference to disability %o&erty hilst disabled %eo%lecontinue to face negati&e e"%ectations and barriers to engage*ent in theeducation syste*, the cycle of disability %o&erty ill %ro&e difficult to break

1o*e figures on educational attain*ent for the orking age %o%ulation arecollected through the Labour orce 1ur&ey and this data could be used to*onitor %rogress on disability %o&erty Leonard Cheshire Disability ould alsosuggest that so*e ork be undertaken to e"a*ine the i*%act of education onfuture life chances for disabled %eo%le, %articularly in the ork%lace

-roposed disability poverty indicators . educational attainment:

74 4Disability, skills and ork6 raising our a*bitions4 1te%hen &ans, 1ocial #arket oundation, Eune 200/

75 4Disability 20206 o%%ortunities for full and e.ual citiIenshi% of disabled %eo%le in )ritain in 20204 Pillai et al, PP;, #arch

200/

Page 45: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 45/74

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B Le&el of educational attain*ent a*ong disabled %eo%le, together ithco*%arison for non-disabled %eo%leJB Percentage of disabled %eo%le ith no .ualifications, together ith co*%arison

for non-disabled %eo%le

-olicy recommendations . educational attainment

 = fair and accessible education syste* is one of the first ste%s toards a fair andinclusi&e society, yet for *any disabled %eo%le barriers and obstacles in theeducation syste* can lead to long-ter* restrictions on their life choices andchances ducation is a tool hich can and *ust be used to hel% break the cycleof %o&erty

;ecent figures ha&e shon that ha&ing a degree ill add an a&erage of 9!(0,000

earnings o&er a %erson4s orking life

/(

)ut, ith young disabled %eo%le aged !(to 2+ currently tice as likely as their non-disabled %eers to be 4not in education,e*%loy*ent or training4//, it is clear that continuing barriers in the educationsyste* are a key factor in %ushing disabled %eo%le toards %o&erty #ore *ustbe done firstly to ensure that the attain*ent ga% is reduced, and also that thoseho find that for*al education hasn4t orked for the* are able to access othero%%ortunities for training or e"%erience

 =s a starting %oint Leonard Cheshire Disability ould suggest that all staffin&ol&ed in the deli&ery of education %rogra**es should be ell &ersed in the%rinci%les of disability e.uality, and that disability e.uality issues should beincluded in the de&elo%*ent of all education %olicy and %ractice at both local and

national le&els

Disabled %eo%le in school are less likely to take %art in ork %lace*ents or orke"%erience %rogra**es/8 ith uni&ersities increasingly using such sche*es as%art of ad*ission %olicies, there can be a long-ter* i*%act ste**ing fro* this'he barriers hich can %re&ent disabled %eo%le fro* undertaking suche"%erience *ust be addressed

t is also critical that careers ad&ice ser&ices offer ade.uate su%%ort to disabled%u%ils = lack of knoledge or training in disability for career ad&isers can be asignificant factor in li*iting the chances and choices for disabled %eo%le to gainuseful ork e"%erience #onitoring the effecti&eness of the ser&ice offered bycareer ad&isers to disabled %eo%le *ight hel% to ensure that the ser&ice de&elo%sand i*%ro&es o&er ti*e

76 4'he econo*ic benefits of a degree4, ni&ersities K, ebruary 200/

77 4Disability, skills and ork6 raising our a*bitions4 1te%hen &ans, 1ocial #arket oundation, Eune 200/

78 ritten anser in the 1cottish Parlia*ent, !2th ebruary 200/, .uestion nu*ber 12-3!(+5

Page 46: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 46/74

Leonard Cheshire Disability belie&es that disability e.uality issues should for*%art of ?ational Curriculu* citiIenshi% classes CitiIenshi% classes areco*%ulsory at secondary school le&el, and ensuring that all children at this le&elrecei&e an education that addresses disability e.uality ould go so*e ay toaddressing a continuing lack of understanding around disability in the K today

Summary o$ recommendations:

B nsure that all le&els of education $ and %articularly higher education, heredisabled %eo%le4s inclusion is notably lo $ are fully accessible to disabled%eo%leJB nsure that all education %rofessionals recei&e full disability e.uality trainingJB nsure that disability e.uality issues are integrated into citiIenshi% classes as%art of the ?ational Curriculu*

*uality o$ +i$e

'ac&round and proposed indicators:

hilst financial %o&erty is, of course, a crucial as%ect of disability %o&erty, it isclear that *oney is not the only indicator of an indi&idual4s .uality of life "isting%o&erty indicators, such as those used in the De%art*ent for ork and Pensions44A%%ortunity for all4/ re%orts, look, for e"a*%le, at fear of cri*e a*ong older%eo%le as a relati&e indicator of %o&erty ear of cri*e is, of course, not in itselfan indicator of a lack of financial ell being, but %o&erty is not si*%ly aboutfinances, it is about .uality of life, %ersonal circu*stances and life chances

'here are nu*erous co*%onents that contribute to an indi&idual4s .uality of life

 =ccording to a re%ort by 'he cono*ist

80

, all of the folloing indicators arerele&ant to o&erall life satisfaction6

B #aterial ell beingJB >ealthJB a*ily relationsJB 1ocial and co**unity acti&itiesJB Eob security

#any of these are co&ered in %re&ious indicators and so this section focuses onengage*ent in ci&ic and social life as ell as the barriers to inclusion that canste* fro* negati&e attitudes and lo e"%ectations

Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/48! asked a nu*ber of.uestions ai*ed at gathering e&idence about %eo%le4s life e"%eriences and &ieson .uality of life 'he folloing infor*ation sets out the res%ondents4 general &ieof their .uality of life679 1ee for e"a*%le, 4A%%ortunity for all6 indicators u%date 200/4, DP, Actober 200/

80 econo*istco*H*ediaH%dfH=L'QAQL%df 

81 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber 200/

Page 47: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 47/74

!/: of res%ondents ere &ery satisfied ith life+2: of res%ondents ere .uite satisfied ith life!8: of res%ondents ere neither satisfied nor dissatisfied !8:!5: of res%ondents ere .uite dissatisfied

/: of res%ondents ere &ery dissatisfied2: of res%ondents did not kno

1i*ilar .uestions ere asked in a recent De%art*ent for the n&iron*ent, oodand ;ural =ffairs sur&ey82 hich looked at broad issues of satisfaction ith life nthis sur&ey, hich looked at the hole %o%ulation rather than any %articulargrou%, around three-.uarters </3:@ of res%ondents rated their o&erall lifesatisfaction at / or *ore out of !0 'his co*%ares to only 5: of res%ondents inLeonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 ho stated that they ereeither N&ery satisfiedO or NsatisfiedO ith their o&erall .uality of life

'he &ast *a7ority </8:@ of res%ondents in Disability ;e&ie 200/ said that theyfelt their i*%air*ent, or barriers resulting fro* their i*%air*ent, had li*ited theirlife o%%ortunities n %ractice this *eans that the &ast *a7ority of disabled %eo%lestill feel that there are barriers to inclusion ithin society hilst such barriersre*ain it is likely that disabled %eo%le4s %o&erty of o%%ortunity ill ne&er beco*%letely o&erco*e

;es%ondents to Leonard Cheshire Disability4s sur&ey ere also asked aboutcri*e and fear of cri*e !: of res%ondents stated that they had been a &icti*of cri*e during the last tel&e *onths hilst these figures are si*ilar to o&erallnational figures, it is orth noting that 8: of res%ondents re%orted that they had

been a &icti* of cri*e *oti&ated by their disability or i*%air*ent 'his figureindicates that cri*e *oti&ated by i*%air*ent can be a significant %roble* andcould add significantly to o&erall e"%eriences of social e"clusion

 = re%ort %roduced by the Disability ;ights Co**ission found that disabled%eo%le of all ages find o%%ortunities to %artici%ate constrained by fear or reality of harass*ent and the failure of cri*inal 7ustice agencies to offer fair redress 'hisincludes bullying of disabled children and abuse of disabled adults in theco**unity and ithin ser&ices that are *eant to su%%ort the*M83

nderstanding the disabling i*%act of negati&e %reconce%tions and attitudesabout disabled %eo%le, and a*ong disabled %eo%le the*sel&es, is crucial toassessing the e"tent of disability %o&erty

82 41ur&ey of )eha&iours and =ttitudes4, D;=, 200/ htt%6HHdefrago&ukHnesH200/H0/0/2/bht*

83 4Disability =genda $ creating an alternati&e future4, Disability ;ights Co**ission 200/

Page 48: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 48/74

'he *ost recent )ritish 1ocial =ttitudes ;e%ort <)1=;@ <;igg, 200/@8+ foundcontinuing negati&e res%onses toards disability #ost %eo%le </5:@ felt thatthere as %re7udice against disabled %eo%le in )ritain today $ but only 25:thought that there is a lot of %re7udice n Leonard Cheshire Disability4s sur&ey ofdisabled %eo%le the figures ere higher on both counts, ith 8/: feeling that

there as %re7udice against disabled %eo%le and 3: belie&ing that there as alot of %re7udice

?egati&e attitudes or lo e"%ectations ill re%resent a huge barrier to reducingine.ualities in any field, including the labour *arket and education #onitoringsociety4s attitudes ill hel% gi&e a clear steer as to the *o&e toards greatere.uality, and the end of disability %o&erty

1uccessfully *onitoring social e"clusion and .uality of life can be difficult, andcan rely on sub7ecti&e 7udge*ents t is i*%erati&e that such *onitoring isundertaken, hoe&er, if a full understanding of disability %o&erty is to be reached

igures in *any of these areas are not %resently a&ailable, and to geta%%ro%riate data ould re.uire either the addition of 4disability4 .uestions toe"isting studies, or for ne research to be co**issioned 'his is one as%ect ofdisability %o&erty here Leonard Cheshire Disability ould reco**end the useof a broad sub7ecti&e sur&ey of disabled %eo%le 'here are, hoe&er, so*e areashere figures could %erha%s be *ore easily deter*ined and that ould still gi&ea broad understanding of disabled %eo%le4s social e"clusion6 for e"a*%le,*onitoring the nu*bers of disabled %eo%le in %ublic a%%oint*ents

-roposed disability poverty indicators . 3uality o$ li$e:

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B Percentage of a%%ointed %ublic offices held by disabled %eo%leJB Disabled %eo%le4s e"%erience of cri*e and fear of cri*e, including the nu*bersof disabled %eo%le ho ha&e e"%erienced cri*e *oti&ated by an i*%air*entJB 1ociety4s res%onses to disability $ *onitoring social attitudes and %re7udiceyear on year, including disabled and non-disabled %eo%le4s %erce%tions ofdisability discri*ination and %re7udice

-olicy recommendations . 3uality o$ li$e

hat constitutes a good 4.uality of life4 is a broad and co*%le" notion and ill&ary considerably fro* %erson to %erson )ut to fully understand %o&erty *orebroadly, and disability %o&erty in %articular, it is essential to de&elo% so*e clearer understanding of 4.uality of life4 and *easures that *ight hel% to enhance it

84 4Disabling attitudes Public %ers%ecti&es on disabled %eo%le4 by Eohn ;igg, in

4)ritish 1ocial =ttitudes6 the 23rd ;e%ort $ Pers%ecti&es on a changing society4, %ublished by 1age for ?atCen, 200/

Page 49: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 49/74

Leonard Cheshire Disability has focused on so*e areas, such as ci&ic andco**unity engage*ent, the res%onses of society to disability and disabled%eo%le4s on e"%ectations )ringing about change in such areas can be a longand arduous %rocess $ but, hilst society4s attitudes can seldo* be changed bya single action, it is %ossible to hel% set the tone and the backdro% against hich

attitudes are for*ed

'he i*%le*entation of the Disability Discri*ination =cts <DD=s@ !5 and 2005%ro&ided disabled %eo%le ith %rotection fro* discri*ination, but by doing sothey also began to gradually alter society4s res%onses to disability )y %lacingduties and res%onsibilities on the %ublic sector, on e*%loyers, on trans%ort%ro&iders, on %ro&iders of goods and ser&ices, the =cts ha&e re.uired all thesegrou%s to gi&e greater consideration to disabled %eo%le as consu*ers, and thusbegun to challenge %erce%tions of disability

'he Disability .uality Duty <DD@, introduced as %art of the DD= 2005, is one

area here the i*%act is 7ust beginning to be felt 'he DD a%%lies to %ublicauthorities and re.uires the* to engage ith disabled %eo%le, to consider thei*%act of their %olicies on disabled %eo%le and to %ro*ote e.uality and goodrelations ithin all their ork t also re.uires the authorities to %roduce aDisability .uality 1che*e in consultation ith disabled %eo%le, hich outlinesthis ork and other future actions, and hich can be scrutinised by the %ublic'he DD re%resents an i*%ortant ste% toards the *ainstrea*ing of disabilityinto %olicy-*aking, and the i*%act that it *ight ha&e in changing and de&elo%ingsociety4s attitudes in future years could be si*ilar to the i*%act that as%ects ofthe DD= !5 are ha&ing today

'he 4ra*eork for airness4 Green Pa%er that folloed the Discri*ination La;e&ie *ade a nu*ber of %ro%osals for the future of the DD that cause seriousconcern hilst su%%orti&e of the idea of the de&elo%*ent of a 41ingle .uality1che*e4 that brings together e"isting duties on disability, race, gender and otherareas, Leonard Cheshire Disability ould be dee%ly concerned at anyde&elo%*ent that ser&ed to di*inish the effecti&eness of the DD as it currentlystands 'he DD has only been fully in %lace since Dece*ber 200( and so hasonly had a li*ited chance to e*bed Gi&en that initial signs are %ositi&e85, eould be reluctant to see changes to the sche*e at such an early stage in itsde&elo%*ent 'he DD re%resents an i*%ortant tool in changing attitudes and in%ro*oting best %ractice $ Leonard Cheshire Disability ould argue that the neN1ingle .uality DutyO should *aintain all the duties and res%onsibilities that arecurrently %art of the DD, including the need to %ublish an .uality 1che*e

Political re%resentation is also an area considered as %art of the 4ra*eork forairness4 %a%er, as ell as in the Green Pa%er on constitutional refor*, 4'heGo&ernance of )ritain48( Leonard Cheshire Disability ould reco**end that

85 or so*e *ore infor*ation about the Disability .uality Duty and e"a*%les of best %ractice see6 4Case study e"a*%les

of Disability .uality Duty best %ractice4, ;=D=; and D;C, =%ril 200/86

 4'he Go&ernance of )ritain4, #inistry of Eustice, Euly 200/

Page 50: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 50/74

ork undertaken on *aking Parlia*ent *ore re%resentati&e should include aclear focus on disability, and that any efforts to i*%ro&e le&els of &oting and thefor*at of elections also include ork to build accessibility for all disabled %eo%leinto the electoral %rocess at all le&els, fro* &oting to being elected

 =n i*%ortant %art of engage*ent ith local co**unities can be through&olunteering and the &oluntary sector Soluntary ork can offer those not ine*%loy*ent a &ital route back into ork by %ro&iding e"%erience and buildingconfidence, as ell as offering those for ho* it is not reasonable to e"%ect areturn to full-ti*e, %aid ork an o%%ortunity for further co**unity engage*entSolunteering is not, hoe&er, effecti&ely co&ered under the DD= LeonardCheshire Disability ould like to see the e*%loy*ent %ro&isions of the DD=e"tended to &olunteering, to ensure that disabled %eo%le are not unreasonablydisad&antaged hen looking to &olunteer e ould also su%%ort the introductionof an 4=ccess to Solunteering4 fund orking in a si*ilar ay to the =ccess toork sche*e, an 4=ccess to Solunteering4 fund ould %ro&ide su%%ort fro*

central go&ern*ent for those disabled %eo%le ho ould re.uire additionalsu%%ort to &olunteer 'his ould hel% enhance the &olunteering o%%ortunitiesa&ailable to disabled %eo%le and, gi&en the %ositi&e links that can e"ist beteentrying out ork on a &oluntary basis and entering %er*anent ork, ould alsoork toards the go&ern*ent4s e*%loy*ent targets

Summary o$ recommendations:B nsure that the duties under the Disability .uality Duty are fully *aintainedunder any future 1ingle .uality Duty, including the duty to %ublish an .uality1che*eJB nclude disability in the ork to *ake Parlia*ent and %olitics *ore

re%resentati&e, and ensure that i*%ro&ing access for disabled %eo%le is built intoany refor*s to the electoral syste*JB *%ro&e *onitoring and enforce*ent of cri*e related to i*%air*ent, andensure that disabled %eo%le ha&e full access to the cri*inal 7ustice syste*JB "tend co&erage of e*%loy*ent %ro&isions of the DD= to &olunteeringJB ntroduce an 4=ccess to Solunteering4 fund to su%%ort those ho need %articular su%%ort in &olunteering roles

)ccess to services'ac&round and proposed indicators

Leonard Cheshire Disability belie&es that %o&erty of o%%ortunity is one of the*ost significant as%ects of disability %o&erty naccessibility in the %ro&ision ofgoods and ser&ices can deny disabled %eo%le the o%%ortunities to engage in thee&eryday acti&ities en7oyed by their non-disabled %eers, hich in turn can lead tosocial e"clusion and disability %o&erty

'he Disability Discri*ination =ct <DD=@ re.uires all %ro&iders of goods andser&ices to *ake all %ossible reasonable ad7ust*ents to ensure that their

Page 51: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 51/74

ser&ices are fully accessible to all disabled %eo%le et se&eral years on fro* theintroduction of the =ct, and the subse.uent e"tensions of co&erage to s*allerbusinesses, our society re*ains far fro* fully accessible

Partici%ants in Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 ere asked

about their e"%eriences of accessing goods and ser&ices 'hose ho said thatthey had e"%erienced difficulties in accessing goods and ser&ices listed thefolloing issues6

B (5: had %roble*s accessing %re*isesJB 8: had been asked to lea&e %re*isesJB (+: had e"%erienced difficulties getting around inside the %re*isesJB 5/: had difficulties because of a lack of facilities for disabled custo*ersJB !3: had been refused entry to %re*isesJB 25: had e"%erienced staff ho ere reluctant or refused to ser&e the*JB 2: had co**unication %roble*s

et des%ite continuing %roble*s, it is clear that the DD= is *aking a differencehen asked hether or not they thought there had been an i*%ro&e*ent in the%ro&ision of goods and ser&ices to disabled %eo%le, (2: of res%ondents toLeonard Cheshire Disability4s sur&ey said that there had been a littlei*%ro&e*entJ 23: felt that there had been a big i*%ro&e*entJ !3: felt thatthere had been no i*%ro&e*entJ and only 2: felt that things had got orse

'he use of the internet has long been identified as an alternati&e for usingser&ices that *ight otherise not be easily accessible hilst si*%ly %ro&idingser&ices online is not a substitute for %ro%erly accessible ser&ices in the

co**unity, the %otential to %ay bills, sho% and access key infor*ation about%ublic ser&ices online certainly *akes the internet an i*%ortant tool for *anydisabled %eo%le Af those res%ondents to Leonard Cheshire Disability4s sur&eyho had access to the internet6

B nearly a third <2:@ said that it has had a huge i*%act on their .uality of lifeJB *ore than a third <35:@ said that it has had a lot of i*%actJB 23: said that it has had so*e i*%actJ andB only !3: said that it had had only a &ery little i*%act u%on their .uality of life

Pre&ious studies ha&e identified, hoe&er, that disabled %eo%le are actually lesslikely to ha&e access to co*%uters and the internet than non-disabled %eo%le =re%ort %ublished by the E; in 200+8/ deter*ined that to thirds of res%ondentsould like to use the internet *ore, citing the cost of going online as the %ri*arybarrier

Ane of the *ost significant obstacles to accessing ser&ices and engaging insociety is inaccessible trans%ort ;es%ondents to the 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4

87 4Does the internet o%en u% o%%ortunities for disabled %eo%le4, Pilling, )arrett and loyd, E;, 200+

Page 52: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 52/74

ere asked if there ere any ty%es of trans%ort that they had been unable to useduring the %re&ious tel&e *onths because of barriers linked to their i*%air*ent,ith ell o&er half <58:@ stating that they had faced difficulties in accessingtrans%ort

;es%ondents ere also asked about %articular %roble*s that they hade"%erienced hen tra&elling by %ublic trans%ort $ and ga&e the folloingres%onses6

Af res%ondents ho had e"%erienced trans%ort inaccessibility6

35: had difficulty getting to the station or sto%!/: had %roble*s accessing infor*ation about ti*etables and routes etc+8: had %roble*s getting on and off trans%ort22: had %roble*s hearing announce*ents!3: had %roble*s identifying the right busHtrainHtra* or ferry

32: found the staff insufficiently hel%ful or su%%orti&e30: did not ha&e enough s%ace to sit or stand!0: had %roble*s seeing tra&el infor*ation++: ere unable to stand in a *o&ing &ehicle3(: ere unable to ait for long at the station or sto%!8: had other %roble*s ith trans%ort accessibility

Po&erty of o%%ortunity is ine"tricably linked ith inaccessible %ublic trans%ort4#ind the ga%488, a Leonard Cheshire Disability re%ort in 2003, e"a*ined thesocial i*%act of inaccessible trans%ort #any res%ondents to the sur&ey re%ortedthat their ability to *eet ith friends and fa*ily, or to en7oy an acti&e social life

as curtailed by inaccessible trans%ort $ leading ine&itably to a greater degree of social e"clusion

Disabled %eo%le looking for ork also re%orted that %roble*s ith trans%ortreduced their access to the ork%lace $ 23: of res%ondents ho ere lookingfor ork said that they had had to turn don a 7ob offer due to inaccessibletrans%ort, and a further +8: stated that their choice of 7obs as restricted due toinaccessible trans%ort ;es%ondents to the sur&ey also re%orted ha&ing to *issor cancel health a%%oint*ents, or being unable to attend other i*%ortant e&ents

 $ all clear e"a*%les of an inaccessible en&iron*ent being a critical factor indisabled %eo%le4s %o&erty of o%%ortunity

t is clear that access to goods, sho%s, trans%ort and other ser&ices is a criticalfactor in social engage*ent )ut the e&idence also shos that it can ha&e a*aterial i*%act on both a disabled %erson4s .uality of life and, ith %ooraccessibility restricting the a&ailability of e*%loy*ent and other ser&ices, onfinancial ell-being #onitoring de&elo%*ents in the accessibility of ser&ices, and

88 4#ind the ga%4, Ca*%ion, Greenhalgh and Knight, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2003

Page 53: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 53/74

disabled %eo%le4s e"%erience of the barriers that they still face ill therefore be acrucial %art of understanding disability %o&erty

 =s ith *onitoring .uality of life and other as%ects of social e"clusion, there is aco*%arati&e %aucity of infor*ation on the accessibility of goods and ser&ices in

society 'here are &ery fe nationally recognised statistics as to the nu*ber ofco**ercial %re*ises that are fully accessible, or the ay in hich ser&ice%ro&iders are ad7usting their %olicies and %ractices to ensure that they areaccessible to disabled %eo%le t should be %ossible to deter*ine ho *anycases are being brought under Part 3 of the DD=, hich deals ith goods andser&ices, but a reduction in the nu*ber of cases is si*%ly not the sa*e as ani*%ro&e*ent in accessibility 'he nu*ber of cases at %resent is restricted by theco*%le"ities of bringing a case, and the fact that so *any cases are settledoutside of court Leonard Cheshire Disability has long called for the %rocess to be*ade easier, both for indi&idual disabled %eo%le, and for ser&ice %ro&iders#onitoring the nu*ber of Part 3 cases ould not, therefore, be an effecti&e

*easure of i*%ro&ing accessibility

Leonard Cheshire Disability ould reco**end that issues of accessibility could%erha%s be best addressed through a sub7ecti&e sur&ey of disabled %eo%le,looking at the barriers that they face and their e"%eriences of inaccessibleser&ices Ather o%tions *ight also include *ore for*al auditing of %ublicbuildings in order to fully deter*ine their accessibility

#onitoring %rogress toards accessible trans%ort ill also be i*%ortant, as this isone area here consistent %rogress is already being *ade 'he De%art*ent for'rans%ort %ro&ides so*e infor*ation on the accessibility of %ublic trans%ort that

*ight %ro&ide so*e useful bench*arks for future %rogress, although it ill bee.ually i*%ortant to *onitor disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences o&er ti*e

-roposed disability poverty indicators . access to services:

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *onitor %rogressannually on the folloing key indicators of disability %o&erty6B Percentage of disabled %eo%le ho e"%erience difficulties in accessing goodsand ser&ices $ *onitored through a re%resentati&e sur&ey disabled %eo%leJB Percentage of6

 $ trains fully co*%liant ith ;ail Sehicle =ccess ;egulations <;S=;@ $ buses fully co*%liant ith Public 1er&ice Sehicle =ccess ;egulations <P1S=;@ $ train stations that are 4ste%-free4JB Disabled %eo%le4s onershi% of consu*er durables, including access to theinternet

-olicy recommendations . access to services

Page 54: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 54/74

'he need to *ake reasonable ad7ust*ents to ensure e.ual access to goods andser&ices is %erha%s the *ost idely recognised and understood %art of the DD=et, se&eral years on fro* the introduction of Part 3 of DD=, and the e"tension of the %ro&isions to s*all businesses, there are still huge ga%s in the accessibility of ser&ices u% and don the K

'hat is not to say that Part 3 of the DD= has *ade no difference to theaccessibility of the K, it undoubtedly has )ut the instant and dra*atic i*%act of initiati&es like the ban on s*oking in confined %ublic s%aces is in *arked contrastto the years of slo change since Part 3 ca*e into effect Ane of the key reasonsfor this is the sheer difficulty of actually bringing a case under Part3 ith the s*oking ban, on the other hand, Local =uthority enforce*ent officersere a%%ointed and gi&en %oers to issue on the s%ot fines 'his direct a%%roachto enforce*ent contrasts starkly ith the enforce*ent *echanis*s for disabilityaccess legislation

t is rare to see *ore than a handful of Part 3 cases *aking it to court each year,des%ite the fact that res%ondents to Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability;e&ie 200/48 re%orted *any continuing obstacles and barriers to accessingser&ices Currently an indi&idual needs to take a ser&ice %ro&ider to court in order to try to force action under Part 3 of the DD= e %eo%le are %re%ared to take acase as far as court, gi&en the cost, ti*e i*%lications and co*%le"ity of doing sohen cases do %rogress they can often be settled out of court, *eaning arelati&e lack of case la and clear guidance for ser&ice %ro&iders as to theirdefiniti&e legal res%onsibilities

Leonard Cheshire Disability has long su%%orted the de&elo%*ent of a tribunal

syste* to hel% gi&e disabled %eo%le a greater chance to enforce their rights, togi&e ser&ice %ro&iders clearer guidance on their res%onsibilities, as ell as aroute around costly legal action, and to %ro&ide a *ore effecti&e *echanis* forresol&ing dis%utes in a *anner *ore ti*ely and con&enient for all %arties

 =lloing tribunals, %erha%s ith s%ecific training, or ith the addition of e"tra%ersonnel to tribunal %anels, to take Part 3 cases ould be a .uick ay ofde&elo%ing this ca%acity Leonard Cheshire Disability ould also like to seeconsideration gi&en to a %otential role for an =ccess A*buds*an in this area tohel% *ediate and gi&e clear guidance

 =ccess to trans%ort, des%ite definite i*%ro&e*ents in so*e areas of %ro&ision,re*ains one of the *ost significant barriers to %artici%ation that *any disabled%eo%le face 'he fact that 23: of those res%ondents to Leonard CheshireDisability4s 4#ind the ga%40 sur&ey ho ere looking for ork stated that they hadhad to turn don a 7ob because of inaccessible trans%ort is testa*ent to this =naccessible and integrated trans%ort netork is essential to tackling disability

89 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4, Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber 200/

90 4#ind the ga%4, Ca*%ion, Greenhalgh and Knight, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2003

Page 55: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 55/74

%o&erty, as it ill facilitate i*%ro&e*ents not only in the e*%loy*ent rate, butalso in co**unity engage*ent and .uality of life for disabled %eo%le

 =t %resent trans%ort is co&ered under both Part 3 of the DD=, hich co&ersreasonable ad7ust*ents and access to goods and ser&ices, and Part 5, hich

sets accessibility guidelines for trans%ort &ehicles Part 3 of the DD= does not,hoe&er, co&er access to aero%lanes and shi%%ing, although it is easily %ossibleto bring these areas under the re*it of the =ct 'his *eans that, des%itecontinuing e&idence of disabled %eo%le facing additional barriers and obstacles toaccessing these ser&ices, they are left ith li*ited or no legal %rotection fro*discri*ination hilst there is recent uro%ean legislation on the accessibility ofair tra&el,! hich, e ho%e ill ha&e a %ositi&e i*%act on the accessibility of thea&iation industry, Leonard Cheshire Disability belie&es that the dri&e for e.ualityof o%%ortunity to access i*%ortant trans%ort ser&ices necessitates the e"tensionof Part 3 of the DD= to a&iation and shi%%ing

ithout *ore ork in this area, %articularly to *ake it easier for disabled %eo%leto enforce their rights, inaccessibility in the K ill continue to be a substantialcontributing factor to the social e"clusion and the %o&erty of o%%ortunity thatdisabled %eo%le can e"%erience

Summary o$ recommendations:

B nable tribunals to ad7udicate on Part 3 DD= casesJB n&estigate a role for an o*buds*an to hel% set o&erall duties on i*%ro&ingaccess to goods and ser&icesJB "tend Part 3 of the DD= to access to aero%lanes, ferries and shi%%ingJ

B Conduct a re&ie of the effecti&eness of the DD= ith a &ie to *aking the laeasier to enforce and easier to understand

Chapter ,

Conclusion

n his s%eech acce%ting the leadershi% of the Labour Party, ;t >on Gordon)ron #P s%oke about ongoing ork to end child %o&erty, referring to *easures

to address this %o&erty of inco*e and to address also the %o&erty ofas%irationsM 'hese are to issues that a%%ly e&ery bit as %oerfully to disability%o&erty

91 4uro%ean ;egulation concerning the rights of disabled %ersons and %ersons ith reduced *obility hen tra&elling by

air4 $ for *ore infor*ation about Leonard Cheshire Disability4s %osition on access to air tra&el see 4?o )oarding6 disabled%eo%le4s e"%eriences of air tra&el4, =nnette Laidler, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 200/

Page 56: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 56/74

t is clear that disability %o&erty is not si*%ly about disabled %eo%le4s inco*ePo&erty can ste* fro* a *ultitude of different as%ects of social e"clusion, fro*so*ething as tangible as the le&el of inco*e, to so*ething as difficult to defineas an indi&idual4s as%irations hat is clear is that a concerted and strategiceffort fro* %olicy *akers is needed first to understand and then to challenge

disability %o&erty

'he case for addressing disability %o&erty is not only one of basic social 7ustice,there is also an econo*ic case nding disability %o&erty ould al*ost certainly*ean *ore disabled %eo%le *o&ing into the ork%lace, as ell as an increase inskill le&els across the K $ and, as the success of sche*es like =ccess to orkhas de*onstrated, an initial in&est*ent in this area can actually %roduce long-ter* sa&ings Leonard Cheshire Disability ould also argue that ending child%o&erty ill re*ain an i*%ossibility hilst ine.ualities and barriers ithin societylead to social e"clusion a*ongst disabled %eo%le $ tackling %o&erty in the Ko&erall re.uires a concerted effort to tackle disability %o&erty A&er one third of

children li&ing ith a disabled adult li&e in lo inco*e households

n a fully e.ual and inclusi&e society there need be no relationshi% beteendisability and %o&erty, but the stark truth of the continuing correlation beteen theto stands as one of the *ost significant issues facing our *odern society 'hereare still *any barriers in society that *aintain the links beteen disability and%o&erty6 not only barriers to accessibility, but also barriers for*ed fro* negati&eattitudes, and barriers for*ed fro* lo as%irations of disabled %eo%lethe*sel&es Des%ite the i*%ro&e*ents that ha&e undoubtedly ste**ed fro* theDisability Discri*ination =cts, and the steady but slo increase in thee*%loy*ent rates a*ong disabled %eo%le, it is clear that there is still a long ay

to go before those barriers are co*%letely re*o&ed

Leonard Cheshire Disability calls on the go&ern*ent to *ake tackling disability%o&erty one of its key %riorities 'o do so ill first re.uire a co**it*ent tounderstand and *onitor disability %o&erty and its causes, and then the strategicde&elo%*ent of social %olicy initiati&es to eradicate it

'o end disability %o&erty is not only a *eans to dri&e don %o&erty throughoutthe K, and to i*%ro&e the econo*ic health of the nation, it is also an absolutenecessity of social 7ustice and inclusion

Page 57: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 57/74

)nnex )

Pro%osed disability %o&erty indicators

Income and $inancial poverty Indicators

! Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in a lo-inco*e household <belo (0: of *edian household inco*e@, ith co*%arison data for the non-disabled%o%ulation $ Data is collected on this indicator 

Page 58: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 58/74

2 Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in lo inco*e households, ad7usted toincor%orate a&erage esti*ates of disabled %eo%le4s additional costs of li&ing $Data is not collected on this indicator 

3 Percentage of disabled %eo%le ho6

- Could not afford to %ay a utility bill on ti*eJ- ;egularly ent ithout *ealsJ- 1ought financial hel% fro* friends or fa*ilyData is not collected on this indicator 

Savins and assets Indicators

+ Percentages of disabled %eo%le ith sa&ings Data is collected on thisindicator 

5 Percentages of disabled %eo%le ith bank accounts - Data is not collected on

this indicator

( =&erage a*ount held in sa&ings by disabled %eo%le - Data is not collected onthis indicator 

Employment rates Indicators

/ *%loy*ent rate a*ong disabled %eo%le, broken don by i*%air*ent grou% -Data is collected on this indicator

8 Percentages of orking age disabled %eo%le

in ork• not in ork but seeking ork

• not in ork and not seeking ork

Data is collected on this indicator 

#ype o$ %or& Indicators

Percentage of disabled %eo%le in %art-ti*e ork - Data is collected on thisindicator

!0 =&erage gross hourly %ay for disabled %eo%le, together ith co*%arison for

non-disabled %eers - Data is collected on this indicator 

'ene$it ta&e up Indicators !! sti*ates of take-u% for disability related benefits <including Disability Li&ing

 =lloance@ - Data is not collected on this indicator

Page 59: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 59/74

!2 Disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of the benefits syste*, including o&erallsatisfaction, decision *aking, benefit le&els co*%ared to outgoings, effecti&enessof return to ork su%%ort <here a%%ro%riate@ Data is not collected on thisindicator

)ccommodation Indicators

!3 Percentage of disabled %eo%le ho on their on ho*es, together ithco*%arison for non disabled %eo%le - Data is collected on this indicator

!+ Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in social housing, together ithco*%arison for non disabled %eo%le - Data is collected on this indicator

!5 Percentage of disabled %eo%le li&ing in housing that falls belo the setstandard of decency, together ith co*%arison for non-disabled %eo%le - Data iscollected on this indicator

!( ?u*ber of disabled %eo%le ho re.uire ada%ted ho*es currently li&ing inina%%ro%riate housing - Data is collected on this indicator

!/ Percentage of ho*es built to Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards each year - Data isnot collected on this indicator

Educational attainment Indicators

!8 Le&el of educational attain*ent a*ong disabled %eo%le, together ithco*%arison for non disabled %eo%le - Data is collected on this indicator

! Percentage of disabled %eo%le ith no .ualifications, together ithco*%arison for non disabled %eo%le - Data is collected on this indicator

*uality o$ li$e Indicators

20 Percentage of a%%ointed %ublic offices held by disabled %eo%le - Data iscollected on this indicator

2! Disabled %eo%le4s e"%erience of cri*e and fear of cri*e, including thenu*bers of disabled %eo%le ho ha&e e"%erienced cri*e *oti&ated by ani*%air*ent - Data is not collected on this indicator

22 1ociety4s res%onses to disability $ *onitoring social attitudes and %re7udiceyear on year, including disabled and non-disabled %eo%le4s %erce%tions ofdisability discri*ination and %re7udice - Data is not collected on this indicator

)ccess to services Indicators

Page 60: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 60/74

23 Percentage of disabled %eo%le ho e"%erience difficulties in accessing goodsand ser&ices - Data is not collected on this indicator

2+ Percentage of $ $ trains fully co*%liant ith ;ail Sehicle =ccess ;egulations <;S=;@J

 $ buses fully co*%liant ith Public 1er&ice Sehicle =ccess ;egulations <P1S=;@J $ train stations that are 4ste%-free4Data is collected on this indicator 

25 Disabled %eo%le4s onershi% of consu*er durables, including access tointernet - Data is not collected on this indicator

Current in$ormation:

10 -ercentae o$ disabled people livin in a lo% income household 9belo%8; o$ median household income< %ith comparison data $or the non(

disabled populationigures are collected as %art of the De%art*ent for ork and Pensions4>ouseholds )elo

 =&erage nco*e sur&eys, and also co*%iled in the E; and ?P %o&erty re%ortsCurrent figures are6

n 200+H05 3!: of disabled adults aged 25 to retire*ent ere li&ing in a loinco*e householdJ co*%ared to !5: for non-disabled adults aged 25 toretire*ent

20-ercentae o$ disabled people livin in lo% income households ad=usted

to incorporate estimates o$ disabled people>s additional costs o$ livin'he go&ern*ent does not, as yet, use a definition of the additional costs ofdisability that is needed in order to reach an ad7usted figure Leonard CheshireDisability ould argue that %roducing an acce%ted standard *echanis* forassessing disabled %eo%le4s e"tra costs of li&ing is a critically i*%ortant %iece ofork that should be undertaken i**ediately = re&ised figure as generated as%art of the research into inco*e e.ui&alisation undertaken by =shgar Faidi and'ania )urchardt in 4Co*%aring inco*es hen needs differ4 <2003@ 'he figure%roduced there, factoring in disabled %eo%le4s e"tra costs of li&ing, as anad7usted %o&erty rate for disabled %eo%le of (!:

!0-ercentae o$ disabled people %ho:( Could not a$$ord to pay a utility bill on time( /eularly %ent %ithout meals( Souht $inancial help $rom $riends or $amilynfor*ation on these areas is not currently collected in the K ;esearch usingsi*ilar indicators has been undertaken in =ustralia as indicators of financial

Page 61: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 61/74

hardshi% and stress in the =ustralian >ousehold "%enditure sur&ey2 #onitoringthis area ould re.uire these .uestions to be added into an e"isting sur&ey,%erha%s the a*ily ;esources 1ur&ey

,0-ercentae o$ disabled people %ith savins

igures for the general %o%ulation are collected by ?ational 1a&ings andn&est*ents, and infor*ation is also collated as %art of the >ouseholds )elo =&erage nco*e re%ort 'o *onitor this area the go&ern*ent ould need toensure that .uestions to identify disabled %eo%le ere asked either through?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents4 .uarterly sa&ings su**aries, or through the>ouseholds )elo =&erage nco*e re%ort or a*ily ;esources 1ur&ey 'hisould allo figures to be cross-referenced Leonard Cheshire Disability4s4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 found that nearly half of res%ondents <+:@ stated thatthey had no sa&ings, hereas the *ost recent ?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents41a&ings 1ur&ey4 found that !2: of the %o%ulation had no sa&ings

?0-ercentae o$ disabled people %ith no ban& accounts =s ith the %re&ious indicator, in order to *onitor this area, the go&ern*entould need to ensure that breakdons based on disability ere a&ailable ine"isting sur&eys that collect this data 'he >ouseholds )elo =&erage nco*ere%ort collates infor*ation on access to bank accounts, but a s%ecific nationalfigure for disabled %eo%le does not a%%ear to be readily a&ailable ithin there%ort

80)verae amount held in savins by disabled people =s ith the indicators abo&e, *onitoring this ould re.uire the go&ern*ent toensure that infor*ation already collected could be broken don to disabled and

non-disabled %eo%le nfor*ation on this area is collected by ?ational 1a&ingsand n&est*ents, and is also collated in the >ousehold )elo =&erage nco*ere%orts, but again figures for disabled %eo%le s%ecifically do not currently a%%earto be %resented in the re%ort

@0Employment rate amon disabled people bro&en do%n by impairmentroup'his infor*ation is collected as %art of the Labour orce 1ur&ey, and figures ereregularly u%dated through the Disability ;ights Co**ission4s 4Disability)riefings4 'he 4Disability )riefing4 for #ay 200/ %roduced the folloing figures6

'he e*%loy*ent rate of all disabled %eo%le in Great )ritain is 50:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith %roble*s ith ar*s, hands <includingarthritis or rheu*atis*@ is 52:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith %roble*s ith legs or feet is +(:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith %roble*s ith back or neck is +:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith difficulty in seeing is +/:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith difficulty in hearing is (3:92

 1ee Disability, Po&erty and Li&ing 1tandards6 ;e&ieing =ustralian &idence and PoliciesM, 1aunders, 1ocial Policy

;esearch Centre, 2005

Page 62: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 62/74

'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith skin conditions or allergies is /2:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith chest or breathing %roble*s is (+:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith heart %roble*s or blood %ressure is 5:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith sto*ach, li&er, kidney or digestion %roble*sis (!:

'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith diabetes is (8:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith *ental illness is 22:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith e%ile%sy is ++:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith learning difficulties is 23:Progressi&e illnesses not elsehere classified <eg cancer, #1@ 3/:'he e*%loy*ent rate of %eo%le ith other %roble*s or disabilities is 5(:

A0-ercentaes o$ %or&in ae disabled people (a0 In %or&b0 Bot in %or& but loo&in $or %or&c0 Bot in %or& and not loo&in $or %or&

nfor*ation is collected through the Labour orce 1ur&ey, ith recent analysisa&ailable through the Disability ;ights Co**ission 4Disability )riefing4 <#ay200/@ hilst infor*ation is not collected in e"actly the for*at %ro%osed in ourindicator, the folloing infor*ation is useful6

50+: of long-ter* disabled %eo%le are in orkJ 802: of non-disabled %eo%leare in ork++/: of long-ter* disabled %eo%le are econo*ically inacti&eJ !5(: of non-disabled %eo%le are econo*ically inacti&e305: of long-ter* disabled %eo%le are econo*ically inacti&e ho ould like toorkJ 2+(: of non-disabled %eo%le are econo*ically inacti&e ho ould like to

ork

0-ercentae o$ disabled people in part(time %or&nfor*ation is collected through the Labour orce 1ur&ey, ith recent figuresanalysed and collated in the Disability ;ights Co**ission 4Disability )riefing4<#ay 200/@ ;ecent figures are6

22: of long-ter* disabled %eo%le are orking %art-ti*eJ 232: of non-disabled%eo%le are orking %art-ti*e

10 )verae ross hourly pay $rom %or& $or disabled people toether %ithcomparison $or non(disabled peers'his infor*ation is also a&ailable through the Labour orce 1ur&ey, and thefigures, as %roduced in the D;C4s 4Disability )riefing4 <#ay 200/@, are as follos6

 =&erage gross hourly age for long-ter* disabled %eo%le is 9!028J and for non-disabled %eo%le it is 9!!30

Page 63: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 63/74

110 Estimates o$ ta&e(up $or disability related bene$its 9includin Disability+ivin )llo%ance<igures are currently collected on the take-u% of inco*e-related benefits such asnco*e 1u%%ort and >ousing )enefit )ut figures are not currently collected for*ost disability benefits, such as Disability Li&ing =lloance <DL=@, here those

benefits are aarded on the basis of a co*%le" set of eligibility criteria 'heDe%art*ent for ork and Pensions has, hoe&er, %roduced a feasibility study toe"a*ine the %ossibility of collecting data3 on the take-u% of DL=, and LeonardCheshire Disability ould strongly su%%ort *easures to %ro%erly assess the le&elof take-u% of DL= and other disability benefits

120 Disabled people>s experiences o$ the bene$its system includin overallsatis$action decision ma&in bene$it levels compared to outoinse$$ectiveness o$ return to %or& support 9%here appropriate<1tudies into the .uality of decision-*aking in the benefits syste* are carried outby the =%%eals 1er&ice,+ but Leonard Cheshire Disability4s %ro%osal is for a *ore

sub7ecti&e study analysing clai*ants4 e"%eriences of the benefits syste*,including looking at the effecti&eness of benefits in co&ering outgoings related toi*%air*ents

1!0 -ercentae o$ disabled people %ho o%n their o%n home toether %ithcomparison $or non(disabled people'he results of the 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing are collected in the 4>ousing inngland4 re%ort, %ublished annually by the De%art*ent of Co**unities and LocalGo&ern*ent <DCLG@ 'he *ost recent re%ort, for 2005-0(, %ublished in 200/5,contains infor*ation about disabled %eo%le ho re.uire ada%ted housing 'hesur&ey co&ers ngland only, and the figures refer s%ecifically to those that re.uire

ada%ted housing, rather than all disabled %eo%le 'he re%ort found that 55: ofthis grou% oned their on ho*es

1,0 -ercentae o$ disabled people livin in social housin toether %ithcomparison $or non(disabled people'he DCLG re%ort 4>ousing in ngland 2005H0( $ a re%ort %rinci%ally fro* the2005H0( 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing4 <Actober 200/@ found that, of those disabled%eo%le in ngland ho re.uired s%ecially ada%ted acco**odation, +!: ere4social renters4

1?0 -ercentae o$ disabled people livin in housin that $alls belo% the setstandard o$ decency toether %ith comparison $or non(disabled people

93 'he take-u% rate of Disability Li&ing =lloance and =ttendance =lloance6 easibility studyM, Diana Kas%aro&a, =lan

#arsh and Da&id ilkinson, DP, 200/94

 or e"a*%le see 4President4s re%ort4, 2005-200(, =%%eals 1er&ice, 200(J

htt%6HHa%%ealsser&icego&ukH%ublicationsH%dfHre%ortsQandQbusinessQ%lanH%residentsQre%ortQ050(%df

95 4>ousing in ngland 2005H0( $ a re%ort %rinci%ally fro* the 2005H0( 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing4, DCLG, Actober 200/

Page 64: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 64/74

'he DCLG re%ort 4'he nglish >ouse Condition 1ur&ey 20056 =nnual ;e%ort4<Eune 200/@ contains details on standards of housing in ngland 'he re%ortfound that the likelihood of disabled %eo%le in ngland li&ing in 4non-decentho*es4 as 28(:, as o%%osed to 2(/: for all households

180 Bumber o$ disabled people %ho re3uire adapted homes currently livinin inappropriate housin'he DCLG re%ort 4>ousing in ngland 2005H0( $ a re%ort %rinci%ally fro* the2005H0( 1ur&ey of nglish >ousing4 <Actober 200/@ re%orted that 25: <of ano&erall figure of 3/!,000@ of disabled %eo%le re.uiring ada%ted housing erecurrently li&ing in housing that as unsuitable

1@0 -ercentae o$ homes built to +i$etime 4ome Standards each year 'here is currently little *onitoring of the use of Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards hilstso*e ho*es are built to the standards already, there are fe for*al *echanis*sto *onitor the o&erall le&els 1ur&eys such as the 1ur&ey of nglish housing

could be ada%ted to *onitor this infor*ation n future the nely %ro%osed4>o*es and Co**unities =gency4( *ight also ha&e a role in *onitoring the useof the 1tandards

1A0 +evel o$ educational attainment amon disabled people toether %ithcomparison $or non(disabled peopleigures on educational attain*ent a*ong the orking age %o%ulation arecollected through the Labour orce 1ur&ey Current figures are collated in theDisability ;ights Co**ission4s4Disability )riefing4 <#ay 200/@ and ha&e been refor*atted belo6

Af those hose highest .ualification as a degree or e.ui&alent !!: aredisabled %eo%leJ 2!: are non-disabled %eo%le

Af those hose highest .ualification as higher education .ualification /: aredisabled %eo%leJ 8: are non-disabled %eo%le

Af those hose highest .ualification as GC = Le&el or e.ui&alent 2!: aredisabled %eo%leJ 2+: are non-disabled %eo%le

Af those hose highest .ualification as GC1 grades =-C or e.ui&alent 2!:are disabled %eo%leJ 23: are non-disabled %eo%le

Af those hose highest .ualification as another .ualification !+: are disabled%eo%leJ !2: are non-disabled %eo%le

10 -ercentae o$ disabled people %ith no 3uali$ications toether %ithcomparison $or non(disabled people

96 'he ne agency as %ro%osed as %art of the >ousing and ;egeneration )ill announced in the 200/ ueen4s 1%eech

Page 65: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 65/74

Current figures fro* the Labour orce 1ur&ey, collated in the Disability ;ightsCo**ission4s 4Disability )riefing4 <#ay 200/@, for disabled %eo%le of orking ageare as follos6

Percentage of disabled %eo%le ith no .ualifications is 25:J for non-disabled

%eo%le it is !!:

20 -ercentae o$ appointed public o$$ices held by disabled people'he Co**issioner for Public =%%oint*ents %roduces an annual re%ort hich listsinfor*ation about the nu*ber of disabled %eo%le in %ublic a%%oint*ents 'hedata fro* the *ost recent re%ort/ found that (!: of %ublic a%%oint*ents ereheld by disabled %eo%le

210 Disabled people>s experience o$ crime and $ear o$ crime includin thenumbers o$ disabled people %ho have experienced crime motivated by animpairment

#any national figures on cri*e are currently collected through the )ritish Cri*e1ur&ey, but at %resent data s%ecifically on disabled %eo%le4s e"%eriences of cri*eand on instances of cri*e *oti&ated by i*%air*ent are difficult to find 8: ofres%ondents to Leonard Cheshire

Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 re%orted that they had been the &icti* of acri*e related to their i*%air*ent

220 Society>s responses to disability . monitorin social attitudes andpre=udice year on year includin disabled and non(disabled people>sperceptions o$ disability discrimination and pre=udice

Longitudinal data *onitoring this infor*ation o&er ti*e is not readily a&ailable,but a series of .uestions about disability ere asked as %art of the )ritish 1ocial =ttitudes 1ur&ey conducted by the ?ational Centre for 1ocial ;esearch, hichas released in Eanuary 200/8 

indings fro* the sur&ey included that /5: of %eo%le felt that there as so*e%re7udice toards disabled %eo%le in the K today, and that 25: of %eo%le feltthat there as a lot of %re7udice Leonard Cheshire Disability4s 4Disability ;e&ie200/4 asked disabled %eo%le about heir feelings about discri*ination and%re7udice 'he sur&ey found that 8: of res%ondents felt that there as so*e%re7udice toards disabled %eo%le, and +!: felt that there as a lot of %re7udiceLeonard Cheshire Disability ould suggest that such infor*ation is routinelycollected, %erha%s through the Affice for Disability ssues

2!0 -ercentae o$ disabled people %ho experience di$$iculties in accessinoods and services

97 4'he Co**issioner for Public =%%oint*ents, !2th =nnual ;e%ort 200(H0/4, ACP=, 200/

98 ro* 4Disabling attitudes Public %ers%ecti&es on disabled %eo%le4 by Eohn ;igg, in 4)ritish 1ocial =ttitudes6 the 23rd

;e%ort $ Pers%ecti&es on a changing society4, %ublished by 1age for ?atCen, 200/

Page 66: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 66/74

uestions regarding the ease of access to goods and ser&ices for older %eo%leare collated as %art of the De%art*ent for ork and Pensions4 4A%%ortunity =ge4re%ort Leonard Cheshire Disability ould suggest that a si*ilar a%%roach beado%ted for *easuring disabled %eo%le4s access to goods and ser&ices =t%resent, hoe&er, national figures about disabled %eo%le4s access to goods and

ser&ices are not easily a&ailable Aur 4Disability ;e&ie 200/4 asked aboute"%eriences of accessing goods and ser&ices ith 2+: of res%ondents sayingthat they had difficulty this area

2,0 -ercentae o$:( trains $ully compliant %ith /ail ehicle )ccess /eulations 9/)/<( buses $ully compliant %ith -ublic Service ehicle )ccess /eulations9-S)/<( train stations that are >step($ree>Data on the le&el of accessibility of %ublic trans%ort is generally *aintainedthrough the De%art*ent for 'rans%ort, although infor*ation %resented is not

alays e"act ;ecent esti*ates ha&e suggested that around +0: of trains in theK are fully co*%liant ith ;ail Sehicle =ccessibility ;egulations, that about 50:of buses are co*%liant ith Public 1er&ice Sehicle =ccessibility ;egulations andthat about 50: of the K4s train stations are 4ste%-free4

2?0 Disabled people>s o%nership o$ consumer durables includin access tointernetAnershi% of consu*er durables is *onitored through the General >ousehold1ur&ey, but statistics on this area relating s%ecifically to disabled %eo%le are noteasily a&ailable Leonard Cheshire Disability ould therefore suggest ensuringthat the ca%acity to break don data by disability is incor%orated into this sur&ey

)nnex '

1u**ary of ;eco**endations

#he overnment should commit to:

10 End disability poverty by developin and implementin a speci$icstratey $or tac&lin the issue

Page 67: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 67/74

20 Measure disability poverty as a uni3ue $orm o$ poverty throuh the useo$ a series o$ indicators0

Leonard Cheshire Disability also belie&es that the go&ern*ent should ado%t thefolloing reco**endations to hel% to challenge disability %o&erty in the K6

Income and $inancial poverty

B De&elo% an acce%ted standard calculation for the e"tra costs of disability, andsubse.uent 4disability ad7usted4 %o&erty statisticsB ;e&ie the effecti&eness of DL=, %redicated on continuing and enhancedsu%%ort for current reci%ients, and a clear e&idence base of e"tra costs andneedsB "tend inter uel =lloance to disabled adults under the age of (0 in recei%tof certain %arts of DL=B ;efor* the 1ocial und to ensure that it effecti&ely su%%orts disabled %eo%le

on a lo inco*eB De&elo% financial ca%acity and ad&ice %rogra**es to ensure the accessibilityof financial ser&ices to disabled %eo%le

Savins

B ntroduce a 4Disability 1a&ings Gateay4, and de&elo% a s%ecific strategy toensure that disabled %eo%le are fully included in any future de&elo%*ent of the1a&ings Gateay sche*eB ;e&ie the i*%act of social care charging %olicy on disability %o&erty, includingreco**endations for tackling the sa&ings disincenti&e

B De&elo% guidance for financial institutions to ensure that they are fully *eetingtheir obligations under the Disability Discri*ination =ct and are *aking theirser&ices fully accessible to disabled %eo%le

Employment rates

B ;e&ie the long-ter* effecti&eness of *easures in the elfare ;efor* =ct200/ in tackling disability %o&ertyB nsure that e*%loyers are adhering to their res%onsibilities under the DD=,and e"tend the antici%atory duty to *ake reasonable ad7ust*ents to e*%loy*entB ntroduce a syste* of 4rehabilitation lea&e4 to hel% %eo%le ho ac.uire ani*%air*ent to re*ain in e*%loy*entB 1trengthen residential care charging guidance to re*o&e any disincenti&e toork for users of residential care su%%ort

#ypes o$ %or&

B ;aise aareness of, and increase funding for, the =ccess to ork sche*e, andin&estigate routes for *aking =ccess to ork su%%ort *ore 4%ortable4

Page 68: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 68/74

B #onitor the i*%act of the ithdraal of =ccess to ork fro* centralgo&ern*ent and re&erse the ithdraal if necessaryB nsure that the *onitoring undertaken hen %eo%le *o&e fro* benefits in toork fully ca%tures the long-ter* sustainability and .uality of e*%loy*ent, not

 7ust the fact that an indi&idual has taken a 7ob

'ene$it ta&e(up

B ndertake a re&ie of 4benefit %o&erty4 and ho the syste* functions for long-ter* clai*ants ho are not e"%ected to return to orkB stablish a 4elfare co**ission4 to o&ersee de&elo%*ents in elfare benefit%olicyB *%ro&e decision-*aking in the benefits syste*, including a *ore for*alo%%ortunity to a%%eal before benefits are sto%%edB Pro&ide a 4benefit check4 for reci%ients to establish their full entitle*ents, andan acti&e ca*%aign to engage ith those ho need, but currently do not clai*,

their entitle*ents)ccommodationB nsure that the need to increase a&ailability of social housing is integral tohousing %olicy de&elo%*entB stablish a duty on local authorities to create and *aintain an accessiblehousing register B "tend Part # building regulations to *atch the Lifeti*e >o*e 1tandards,%articularly urgent for all ne-build social housingB =do%t the %ro%osal in the 4ra*eork for fairness4 Green Pa%er on rights forada%tations in 4co**on %arts4 of %re*ises

Educational attainment

B nsure that all le&els of education - and %articularly higher education, heredisabled %eo%le4s inclusion is notably lo - are fully accessible to disabled %eo%leB nsure that all education %rofessionals recei&e full disability e.uality trainingB nsure that disability e.uality issues are integrated into citiIenshi% classes as%art of the?ational Curriculu*

*uality o$ li$e

B nsure that the duties under the Disability .uality Duty are fully *aintainedunder any future single e.uality duty, including the duty to %ublish an .uality1che*eB nclude disability in the ork to *ake Parlia*ent and %olitics *orere%resentati&e, and ensure that i*%ro&ing access for disabled %eo%le is built in toany refor*s to the electoral syste*B *%ro&e *onitoring and enforce*ent of cri*e related to i*%air*ent, andensure that disabled %eo%le ha&e full access to the cri*inal 7ustice syste*

Page 69: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 69/74

B "tend co&erage of e*%loy*ent %ro&isions of the DD= to &olunteeringB ntroduce an 4=ccess to Solunteering4 fund to su%%ort those ho need %articular su%%ort in &olunteering roles

)ccess to services

B nable tribunals to ad7udicate on Part 3 DD= casesB n&estigate a role for an o*buds*an to hel% set o&erall duties on i*%ro&ingaccess to goods and ser&icesB "tend Part 3 of the DD= to access to aero%lanes, ferries and shi%%ingB Conduct a re&ie of the effecti&eness of the DD= ith a &ie to *aking the laeasier to enforce and easier to understand

)nnex C

)ibliogra%hy and references

>"act Sheet on -overty and Disability nclusion nternational, data dran fro*4Po&erty and Disability4, =nn lan, orld )ank, Actober !

>vercomin bstacles to the Interation o$ Disabled -eople> , ?1CA,Disability =areness in =ction, #arch !5

Page 70: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 70/74

>Monitorin poverty and social exclusion 28>, Pal*er, #acnnes andKenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e Policy nstitute, 200(

>Child poverty tarets need disability at their heart> %ress release fro*

Disability ;ights Co**ission, #arch 200/

>Comparin incomes %hen needs di$$er: E3uivalisation $or the extra costso$ disability in the UK>, =shgar Faidi and 'ania )urchardt, C=1 ;e%ort (+,L1, 2003

>Disability household income and expenditure: a $ollo% up survey o$disabled adults in the "amily Expenditure Survey>, De%art*ent of 1ocial1ecurity ;esearch ;e%ort ?o 2, D11, !0

>Disability /evie% 2@> Laidler et al, Leonard Cheshire Disability, ?o&e*ber

200/

>Improvin the li$e chances o$ disabled people>, Pri*e #inister4s 1trategynit, Cabinet Affice, 2005

>pportunity )e . Meetin the challenes o$ aein in the 21st century> ,De%art*ent for ork and Pensions, 2005

>Monitorin poverty and social exclusion 28> Pal*er, #acnnes andKenay, Eose%h ;ontree oundation and ?e Policy nstitute, 200(

>*uarterly savins survey Summer 2@>?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents,?1, 200/

>*uarterly savins survey )utumn 28> ?ational 1a&ings and n&est*ents,?1, 200(

>Disability 'rie$in May 2@>, D;C, #ay 200/

>Discrimination doesn>t %or&>, #ac;ae and La&erty, Leonard CheshireDisability, 200(

>Chance o$ a li$etime: the impact o$ bad housin on children>s lives> Lisa>arker, 1helter, 1e%te*ber 200(

>Disability E3uality Scheme and )ction -lan 28 . > 'he >ousing =ssociation, >ousing =ssociation, 200(

>Disability )enda . creatin an alternative $uture>, Disability ;ightsCo**ission, D;C, 200/

Page 71: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 71/74

>4ousin in Enland 2?F8 . a report principally $rom the 2?F8 Surveyo$ Enlish 4ousin> De%art*ent of Co**unities and Local Go&ern*ent,Actober 200/

>#he /oles o$ Schoolin and Educational *uali$ications in the Emerenceo$ )dult Social Exclusion>, Eohn >obcraft, C=1 Pa%er +3, L1, Dece*ber2000

>"airness and $reedom: the $inal report o$ the E3ualities /evie%> , CabinetAffice, 200/

>Disability s&ills and %or&: raisin our ambitions> 1te%hen &ans, 1ocial#arket oundation, Eune 200/

>Disability 22: opportunities $or $ull and e3ual citiGenship o$ disabled

people in 'ritain in 22> Pillai et al, PP;, #arch 200/

>#he Economist intellience unit>s 3uality o$ li$e index 28>, 'he cono*ist,200( <as shon at econo*istco*H*ediaH%dfH=L'QAQL%df @

>Disability )enda . creatin an alternative $uture>, Disability ;ightsCo**ission, 200/

>Disablin attitudesH -ublic perspectives on disabled people> by Eohn ;igg,in 4'ritish Social )ttitudes: the 2!rd /eport . -erspectives on a chaninsociety4, %ublished by 1age for ?atCen, 200/

>Does the internet open up opportunities $or disabled peopleH> Pilling,)arrett and loyd, E;, 200+

>Mind the ap> Ca*%ion, Greenhalgh and Knight, Leonard Cheshire Disability,2003

>In the balance: disabled people>s experiences o$ debt> Claire Kober,Leonard Cheshire Disability, 2005

>Securin ood care $or older people> Derek anless, King4s und, 200(>Spendin -o%er: disabled people>s experiences o$ accessin andspendin their money> Lee ebster, Leonard Cheshire Disability, 200/

>Charin $or residential accommodation uide4, 200/ edition, %age 2!,De%art*ent of >ealth, 200/

Page 72: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 72/74

>'arriers to Employment $or Disabled -eople> Goldstone, #eager, ?APConsu*er and the nstitute for *%loy*ent 1tudies, DP re%ort ?o 5, DP,2002

>)ccess to or& $or Disabled -eople> Disability *%loy*ent Coalition,

Actober 200+

>)n introduction to li$etime homes> Eose%h ;ontree oundationJhtt%6HH7rforgukHhousingandcareHlifeti*eho*esH

>Discrimination +a% /evie%: ) "rame%or& $or "airness: -roposals $or aSinle E3uality 'ill $or Jreat 'ritain . ) consultation paper> De%art*ent ofCo**unities and Local Go&ern*ent, Eune 200/

>#he economic bene$its o$ a deree> ni&ersities K, ebruary 200/

>#he Jovernance o$ 'ritain> #inistry of Eustice, Euly 200/

>Disability -overty and +ivin Standards: /evie%in )ustralian Evidenceand -olicies> 1aunders, 1ocial Policy ;esearch Centre, 2005

>#he ta&e(up rate o$ Disability +ivin )llo%ance and )ttendance )llo%ance:"easibility study> Diana Kas%aro&a, =lan #arsh and Da&id ilkinson, DP,200/

>-resident>s report 2?(28> =%%eals 1er&ice, 200(

>#he Commissioner $or -ublic )ppointments 12th )nnual /eport 28F@>ACP=, 200/

>Disabled people in 'ritain: endurin economic exclusion> 'ania )urchardt,C=1, L1, 2000

>'ein and becomin: social exclusion and the onset o$ disability> 'ania)urchardt, C=1, L1, 2003

>Disabled people>s costs o$ livin: >More than you %ould thin&> 1*ith et al,E;, 200+

>/evie% o$ existin research on the extra costs o$ disability> #ike 'ibble,DP, 2005

>pportunity $or all: indicators update 2@> DP, Actober 200/>Case study examples o$ Disability E3uality Duty best practice> ;=D=; andD;C, =%ril 200/

Page 73: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 73/74

>Bo% 'oardin: disabled people>s experiences o$ air travel>  =nnette Laidler,Leonard Cheshire Disability, 200/

)bout +eonard Cheshire Disability

+eonard Cheshire Disability supports over 21 disabled people in theUK and %or&s in ?2 countries0 e campain $or chane and provideinnovative services that ive disabled people the opportunity to live li$etheir %ay0

Page 74: Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

7/21/2019 Disability Poverty in the UK 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/disability-poverty-in-the-uk-2008 74/74

#han&s are due to the many people %ho assisted in the production o$ thisreport or %hose %or& has provided data and in$ormation $or it includinthe %hole +eonard Cheshire Disability -olicy and Campains #eam #ania'urchardt Stephen Elsden Sue Jrant Caroline Jreenhalh and #revorat&ins0 #his report is available in alternative $ormats such as 'raille

audio and lare(print0 -lease contact us to re3uest a copy in an alternative$ormat0

+eonard Cheshire Disability30 #illbankLondon 1!P +D'el6 020 /802 8200*ail6 researchTLCDisabilityorg%%%0+CDisability0or0