ENFIELD DISABILITY

ACTION
Community House, Tel : 020 8373 6228
311 Fore Street, Edmonton, Fax: 020 8373 6223
London N9 0PZ Textphone: 020 8373 6270
E mail: eda@e-d-a.org.uk
Chair: Jacqui Slater
Chief Executive: Barbara Litchfield

Department for Work & Pensions

DLA Consultation
Via email to: consultation.dlareform@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

18th February 2011

Please see to follow Enfield Disability Action’s response to the DLA Reform consultation paper.

EDA is a User Led Organisation that has been operating information and advice services,
including the provision of benefits advice and casework, for over 20 years.

In responding to this consultation document, volunteer benefits advisers, welfare rights workers,
project managers, trustees and partner organisations had input. All parties involved were
disabled people and many have direct experience of applying for DLA and other benefits.

A range of concerns, recommendations and comments have been included, and we do hope
that they are duly considered and aid in planning the implementation of PIP. There are,
however, some particularly key concerns that were frequently raised by respondents, as
outlined below:
• EDA is deeply concerned about the removal of payments of the mobility component of
DLA/PIP for those in long-term residential or hospital settings. We support the numerous
national and local campaigns, as well as the extremely compelling cases made by
individuals and families who would be affected by this proposed cut.
• Many voiced concerns about the level of disability and cultural awareness that would be
experienced from medical assessors, and assurances were sought that those with
fluctuating, rare or complex health conditions would be assessed by workers with the
appropriate skills and knowledge
• EDA welcomes the joining of benefits assessment and information provision functions as
a concept, but would recommend that organisations who have local knowledge and are
experienced in producing accessible information materials be considered for funding to
carry out this function

We look forward to seeing the final policy for implementation of DLA reforms, and particularly to
finding out how these key challenges are met.

Yours sincerely

Aaron Dryden
Independent Living Project Manager

EDA is a Registered Charity No1082063 & Company Limited by Guarantee (England and Wales) Quality Mark
No. 3937507. Registered Office : As above. EDA has an access to records policy. All information General Help including Casework

received and recorded is subject to the Access to Personal Files Act 1987 and the Data Protection Disability Casework Category

Act 1998.
Disability Living Allowance reform – consultation
questions
You can respond to the consultation questions in this document and send it to us at
consultation.dlareform@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

1. What are the problems or barriers that prevent disabled people participating
in society and leading independent, full and active lives?

A general lack of disability awareness by service providers means that access barriers
are still all too common. The built environment presents many issues for people with
sensory and mobility impairments, and attitudinal issues are a frequent barrier to those
with mental ill health and learning difficulties. These factors combine to make the
society for disabled people somewhat smaller than it is for their non-disabled peers,
and there are invariably higher costs involved in accessing it. For example:
• Travelling further to use leisure, educational or health facilities because those
available close to home are inaccessible
• Purchasing aids and equipment in order to utilise products, buildings or
technology that is not otherwise accessible
• Using carers to access activities that are not possible when alone

In addition to these barriers where a cost is involved, it should be noted that inequality
is indicated in a range of areas:
• Education – disabled people generally experience lower educational attainment
than their non-disabled peers due to difficulties accessing educational
institutions, or having their needs met within the Special Educational Needs
provision
• Health – disabled people have above average instances of many health
conditions, due to poor access to screening, difficulties accessing primary care
and communication problems where spoken English is not possible or
understood
• Socio-economic class – due to the gaps in health and social care and welfare
benefits, the cost of being disabled or having a disabled family member means
that disabled people experience some of the highest levels of poverty in the
country.

2. Is there anything else about Disability Living Allowance (DLA) that should
stay the same?

EDA strongly feel that DLA should remain non-means tested and should afford
recipients the same access to other benefits or services in the future. For example, a
recipient of high-rate mobility should remain automatically eligible for a blue badge for
parking.

In our experience, many disabled people find an assessment process intrusive and

EDA is a Registered Charity No1082063 & Company Limited by Guarantee (England and Wales) Quality Mark
No. 3937507. Registered Office : As above. EDA has an access to records policy. All information General Help including Casework

received and recorded is subject to the Access to Personal Files Act 1987 and the Data Protection Disability Casework Category

Act 1998.
difficult to engage with. As such, we would welcome any alignment of assessment
processes across health and social care, benefits and education settings. This is with
the qualification that disabled people are clearly informed of information sharing and
consent to it.

EDA’s welfare rights workers and benefits support volunteers report that the self-
assessment process works well and should be retained.

3. What are the main extra costs that disabled people face?

The list of extra costs faced by disabled people is as lengthy as it is unique to each
person. The effect that having a disabled family member is, for instance, very difficult to
isolate in the general costs of meeting the needs of a whole family. Some key areas of
above-average expenditure are listed below:
• Transport
o Use of taxis where accessible public transport is not available
o Costs associated with adapting vehicles
o Payment of parking charges where the blue badge does not guarantee
free parking (as is the case in some hospitals)
o Additional cost of travelling further to accessible facilities
• Social activities including holidays
o Paying the costs associated with using a carer (eg additional entry fees,
food and transport costs)
o Accessible hotels and transportation is often more expensive, and rarely
available in popular ‘budget’ options
• Respite activities
o Where a family carer is used at home, the cost of respite care is rarely
fully met by local authorities
• Health
o For those with long-term illnesses who pay prescription charges, the cost
can be significant
o Many medical items such as incontinence pads are purchased at the
disabled person’s expense
o Many disabled people seek complementary therapies to manage long-
term conditions, including the stress associated with these
• Adaptations to property
o Many people self-fund adaptations unaware of funding streams available
to them
o The long waiting time and complex processes for major adaptations
funded by Disabled Facilities Grants often leave unmet needs and risk,
necessitating self-funding of some or all of the work
o The cost of long-term maintenance of adaptations is often borne by
disabled people rather than statutory bodies
o Ensuring that the needs of the whole household remain met often
requires additional decoration or building work when adaptations are
carried out
o Due to the everyday use of adaptations, and the progressive nature of
many impairments, many adaptations need to be replaced, and funding is
not often available for alterations to existing adaptations
• Equipment and independent living aids
o Many people self-fund equipment unaware of funding streams available
to them
o The ongoing maintenance and servicing of equipment is often carried out
at the disabled person’s expense
o Disabled people often top up any direct payment made for equipment
themselves in order that they can avoid items with an institutional
appearance. This is particularly important when the equipment will be
used in a family or shared home.
o The cost of powering electrical equipment (eg mains electricity or
batteries) can become high, and is an increasing area of expenditure as
energy prices continue to rise
o Due to the fluctuating or progressive nature of many impairments, many
items of equipment require frequent replacement
o Often the use of mobility aids causes additional expenditure (eg
wheelchairs and leg calipers rapidly damaging clothing, furniture and
decoration)
• Increased household expenditure
o Often disabled people will require more laundry to be carried out, and the
cost of this can be very high due to:
 Energy to power the washing machine
 Energy to power a dryer due to items being required again quickly
 Detergents
 Increased wear and tear on clothing or bedding
o Appliances needing repair or replacement due to heavy usage by
disabled people reliant on them to meet daily living needs
o Many long-term conditions require a very hygienic living environment and
the cost of maintaining this (either through employing staff or purchasing
additional equipment and cleaning products)
o Many disabled people are reliant on convenience foods as they are less
able to prepare whole meals themselves, this is more expensive due to
the higher cost of:
 Having food delivered
 Buying pre-prepared ‘ready-meals’
 Buying partially prepared ingredients (eg chopped vegetables)
 Using vitamin and other supplements due to difficulty eating or
preparing fresh food
• Care workers
o For many people who self-fund or make contributions to their social care,
the cost of doing so can be extremely high
o With both eligibility criteria and charging thresholds becoming tighter in
light of decreasing social care budgets, this will be a growing cost to
disabled people
• Help in the home including cleaning, gardening, etc
o For many this is an essential area of support that is not funded by their
Local Authority
o A clean and safe living environment is key to many disabled people who
are often more isolated than their non-disabled peers
o A garden is more important to someone who has restricted access to
 public open spaces

4. The new benefit will have two rates for each component:
• Will having two rates per component make the benefit easier to
understand and administer, while ensuring appropriate levels of support?
• What, if any, disadvantages or problems could having two rates per
component cause?

Two rates per component may be easier to understand but unfair for those who, for
example, require help to prepare and cook a meal but can just about manage with their
other care needs. Having low-level needs adequately met can have a preventative
effect and minimise risk of health deterioration or accidents requiring acute health
services.

5. Should some health conditions or impairments mean an automatic

entitlement to the benefit, or should all claims be based on the needs and
circumstances of the individual applying?

EDA welcomes the continued commitment to special rules for processing DLA claims
for those with terminal illnesses.

An issue with maintaining a list of conditions or impairments is that they cause

understandable frustration among those who may have greater needs but not have a
‘qualifying’ diagnosis. As such, EDA would support the introduction of any system that
can expedite assessment for those with conditions or impairments with widely
understood and consistent impact, whilst ensuring that there is still opportunity to
address any additional needs that the individual may have. One way to achieve this
may be to waive the need for a medical assessment of those with certain illnesses. The
introduction of Electronic Health and Social Care Records should make it easy to
establish the diagnosis and treatment regime for each applicant.

6. How do we prioritise support to those people least able to live full and active
lives? Which activities are most essential for everyday life?

Firstly it is important to note that the activities most essential for everyday life are those
that the individual chooses to participate in to meet their own goals and aspirations.
The notion that the state should impose a generic standard of living and resources
necessary to achieve it is offensive to many disabled people, and may constitute an
infringement of basic human rights.

If somebody is in receipt of social care they should have a person-centred plan that is
drawn up in line with their individual goals and lifestyle choices, and it would make
sense that any assessment of ability to undertake activities would include those
contained therein.

In order to prioritise support to those people least able to live full and active lives, EDA
would welcome the measurement of ability to engage in activities determined as
important by both the state and the disabled person themselves.

7. How can we best ensure that the new assessment appropriately takes
 account of variable and fluctuating conditions?

This is an area that disabled people have told us they are particularly anxious about,
and it is our experience that disabled people find it difficult to articulate the impact that
fluctuating or progressive impairments have on their lives, usually referring to an
‘average’ or ‘good’ day when talking about their ability to undertake daily living tasks.

We would recommend that the assessment process prompts people to acknowledge

any changes in their needs and quantify them, for example by stating how many manic
or depressive episodes they usually experience if bipolar, and the duration and impact
of these.

Practically, it will not be possible for medical assessors to witness the range of
difficulties that applicants experience, and particularly so for people with fluctuating or
progressive conditions, or hidden impairments. As such, EDA would welcome further
work to scope out how evidence can be gathered from existing health and social care
records to limit the need for repetition of already-recorded data about the impact of
impairments, and minimise the risk of severe needs going unmet because they were
not visible to the medical assessor during their meeting.

One practical measure that may help is for applicants to keep a diary over a prescribed
period to help demonstrate how their condition varies and fluctuates. For instance, a
person may walk in the morning but for the rest of the day the effort has made them
incapable of leaving their home.

8. Should the assessment of a disabled person’s ability take into account any
aids and adaptations they use?
• What aids and adaptations should be included
• Should the assessment only take into account aids and adaptations where
the person already has them or should we consider those that the person
might be eligible for and can easily obtain?

The assessment of a disabled person’s ability should take into account any aids and
adaptations that can be reasonably provided and used, unless there is good cause for
not using such aids or adaptations. For instance a person cannot use a walking stick
because their arms are not strong enough.

EDA is concerned that the impact of use of aids and adaptations is measured by
medical professionals rather than qualified Occupational Therapists who understand
the limitations of such devices, and how to minimise any long term impact such as the
risk of any impairments or conditions developing or worsening as a result of their use.

As outlined in our response to question 3, EDA feels that the additional cost of using
aids and adaptations needs to be considered, and as this is an area that many disabled
people do not differentiate from general expenditure there should be prompts in the
application process in order that they can be included.

The difficulty with including access to mobility aids such as wheelchairs is that the
benefit of these very much depends on the individual’s circumstances. For example,
many wheelchair users still experience a lack of drop-kerbs on pavements, buses that
refuse to stop or use the ramp (if fitted), train stations with no lifts and a lack of
available parking. Just one of these factors in a daily commute to work, or in pursuit of
leisure or cultural activities would result in the need for more expensive transport
options to be used, such as an accessible taxi service. The frequency of this occurring
would need to be discussed with the individual and applied not just to their existing
activities, but those which they aspire to achieve, and will be expected to under
schemes such as Welfare to Work.

EDA supports any policy that works towards greater independence through accessing
services or equipment, however our concern is that though aids and adaptations may
be of assistance, the individual may not be able to access them. For instance they may
be unaffordable, impractical in a family setting, or long waiting lists may apply to access
them. In cases where an assessor believes that such aids may be of use, we would
recommend that an interim rate is agreed, with an early review scheduled to reassess
the impact that obtaining them has had on the applicant’s level of need. This should, of
course, be accompanied by information about obtaining the appropriate equipment and
a referral for Occupational Therapy input.

9. How could we improve the process of applying for the benefit for individuals
and make it a more positive experience? For example:
• How could we make the claim form easier to fill in?
• How can we improve information about the new benefit so that people are
clear about what it is for and who is likely to qualify?

Under the Personalisation agenda and general social care reform, great strides are
being made to encourage people to self-assess their social care needs. EDA would
recommend that the lessons learned by the Department of Health are taken on board
by the Department for Work and Pensions, and that self-assessment tools are
developed in line with their findings.

EDA would recommend that the accessibility of materials produced is increased by

using appropriately transcribed materials (for example into British Sign Language
videos), different formats (such as symbols and pictures for those with learning
difficulties) and utilising new technology including web assessment tools that could
have interactive elements, such as appropriate prompts.

As a User-Led Organisation, EDA supports many people to access DWP products

every year, and would advocate for funding to be made available for work with those
communities and individuals who find accessing benefits, and information about them,
difficult. In our experience the most excluded communities are those who use British
Sign Language and those with learning difficulties, and funding to support them will
continue to be vital.

10. What supporting evidence will help provide a clear assessment of ability and
who is best placed to provide this?

Again, EDA would advocate for joint working between the DWP and health and social
care professionals who already hold data on the individual applicants. We also feel that
the collection of supporting evidence by applicants can be an empowering process if it
is duly considered and respected as being as valid as that provided by health and
social care workers. Such evidence may include:
• A diary of difficulties encountered over a fixed period, as above
• Photographs or videos taken to show physical access barriers encountered in
day-to-day life
• Receipts for expenditure incurred
• Mood charts and scrapbooks
• Timesheets for carers
• Accounts by family and friends

11. An important part of the new process is likely to be a face-to-face discussion

with a healthcare professional.
• What benefits or difficulties might this bring?
• Are there any circumstances in which it may be inappropriate to require a
face-to-face meeting with a healthcare professional – either in an
individual’s own home or another location?

For some applicants, demonstrating their need in a face-to-face setting will undoubtedly
be more accessible to them than completing a form, which many find difficult.

Disabled people have informed EDA of a number of negative experiences of medical

assessments for benefits in the past and this is a huge source of anxiety to those who
will continue to claim DLA/PIP in the future.

The main areas of concern are the level of disability awareness and condition-specific
knowledge that the healthcare professional has. Previous experiences have included a
very medical model approach to disability that applicants have found to be
disempowering and limited in it’s scope to consider the social and lifestyle needs of
disabled people. People with sensory impairments have found that their needs are
particularly often misunderstood, and the low takeup of health services by this group,
and disabled people in general, has resulted in a small cohort of healthcare
professionals with the experience of disability with which to apply to this role.

Disabled people with fluctuating, rare or complex disorders have reported particularly
negative experiences of medical assessments to us, and as such we would welcome
arrangements for the commissioning of specialist assessments in these cases to
minimise any chance of wasted resources or distressing experiences.

Some disabled people who have had medical assessments previously have reported
that though it has been for non-means tested benefits the assessor has made them feel
as though their personal circumstances are being taken into consideration. One EDA
trustee noted that she felt as though her postcode and the fact that she has a
comfortable home – the result of 30 years hard work by her and her family – counted
against her when the assessor saw and made comments about them. The risk of
introducing such a widespread human element to the assessment process is the
introduction of human nature as a variable – including applying judgements outside of
the assessment criteria for the benefit. To manage this risk, all applicants should
understand the standard of assessment they can expect, and how to complain or
request a review if they feel it wasn’t met.

A key challenge for any assessor will be ascertaining the level of need with people who
have a learning difficulty or experience mental ill health to a degree that limits their
capacity. In some cases it may be distressing and inappropriate to carry out such an
assessment and we would recommend that other sources of evidence are accessed in
these cases.

When applicants are asked to attend assessments outside their home, consideration
should be given to the range of access needs that they may have, including:
• Parking
• Level access throughout
• Changing and toileting facilities
• Lighting and signposting
• Hearing loops
• Disability-aware staff
• Availability of interpreters, including signers and lipreaders
• Proximity of public transport
• Easy reimbursement of travel expenses
• Out-of-hours appointments for working applicants or those in education
• Crèche facilities for siblings and children

12. How should the reviews be carried out? For example:

• What evidence and/or criteria should be used to set the frequency of
reviews?
• Should there be different types of review depending on the needs of the
individual and their impairment/condition?

The frequency of reviews should be both proportional to the rate awarded and any
known factors that may affect the level of need. These could include:
• participation in a reablement exercise
• accessing aids and adaptations
• having a progressive or fluctuating condition

After a period of stability in evidenced need, it would be reasonable to reduce the

frequency and level of scrutiny involved in any review – perhaps to only include
submission of up-to-date evidence in line with previous assessments.

Reviews undertaken with people who accessed DLA/PIP under special arrangements
for those who are terminally ill should take particular care that timescales and
prognoses are approached sensitively.

For applicants with impairments that are known to progress, and who do not receive
the maximum award possible, it should be noted that a regular review schedule would
pick up any qualification for higher rates promptly.

Where people may lack capacity, or simply not demonstrate objectivity about the
impact of their impairment/condition, a shorter interval between reviews may be
necessary in order to minimise the risk of needs going unmet.

13. The system for Personal Independence Payment will be easier for individuals
to understand, so we expect people to be able to identify and report changes
in their needs. However, we know that some people do not currently keep the
 Department informed. How can we encourage people to report changes in
circumstances?

Though there is little doubt that reporting changes in circumstances presents a real
problem, EDA strongly opposes the proposed ‘civic penalty’ if changes in
circumstances are not immediately reported. For many people with learning difficulties,
mental ill health, communication difficulties or simply those not used to form-filling this
will be extremely unfair, and would in effect be a tax on poor communication or admin
skills.

One way of tackling the issue of under-reported changes could be to have regular
reviews on benefits being received by means of a simple checklist. If any change in
need is highlighted, a basic assessment could establish whether a more detailed
assessment is required. If a condition or impairment is expected to improve, for
instance after surgery or following the introduction of independent living aids, a ‘light
touch’ or interim assessment could be used to establish what, if any, evidence is
required to establish the present level of need.

The means by which people are contacted would need to be in line with their
communication preferences, access requirements and capacity issues. Many welfare
rights workers within EDA reported that telephone calls to assess people with learning
difficulties or dementia were extremely counter-productive, when correspondence in
writing or communication with a nominated intermediary would have streamlined the
process for all involved.

EDA’s recommendation on updating information is that while the option to report

changes in circumstances or needs should be open and accessible, the schedule and
planned means of monitoring should provide a robust enough framework for regularly
updating information. This would be in line with community care assessments for social
care, which are updated via annual reviews but earlier reviews can be arranged at the
request of the service user.

14. What types of advice and information are people applying for Personal
Independence Payment likely to need and would it be helpful to provide this
as part of the benefit claiming process?

The information needs of PIP applicants will be as diverse as their impairments and
conditions, and as such it would be difficult to provide a list. Also, given the
government’s agenda for localism and societal provision of services, the provision of
centralised information would seem to be contrary to the aims of support being sourced
close to home. That said, there are some universal and cross-cutting issues that could
be addressed, eg information on safeguarding, self-direction of HASC, DWP products,
HMRC products etc.

It should be noted that disabled people receive a great deal of information during
assessment processes already, and EDA would therefore recommend that information
is targeted towards individual need. For example, when PIP is awarded at a rate that
would trigger eligibility for other benefits or services, information on these could be
provided. Similarly if a person notes that they employ staff privately (ie without social
care input) they could be sent information about safeguarding.
As a User Led Organisation, EDA has a great deal of experience with providing support
with both accessing DWP products, and providing information and signposting to both
national and local services. It is our opinion that local advice and information services
can make the greatest impact on disabled people’s lives, and would recommend that
some of the resources earmarked for this advice function could be made available to
local networks to follow up the contact with DWP.

15. Could some form of requirement to access advice and support, where
appropriate, help encourage the minority of claimants who might otherwise
not take action? If so, what would be the key features of such a system, and
what would need to be avoided?

There should not be any obligation to obtain advice and support, however it should be
made clear to people that there are clear advantages to doing so. It would also be
helpful if up-to-date information on local and national information and advice services
could be provided as part of the post-application support.

16. How do disabled people currently fund their aids and adaptations? Should
there be an option to use Personal Independence Payment to meet a one-off
cost?

EDA supports disabled people to access all sources of funding available to minimise
the cost of meeting their needs, and for equipment and adaptations this includes:
• Accessing free equipment and minor adaptations via Social Servcies
• Applying for Disabled Facilities Grants for major adaptations
• Applying to charitable trusts where statutory funding is not forthcoming

There are, however, instances where the above are not available, and in those cases
needs often go unmet or are self-funded. Equipment and adaptations is an area of
social care with a very low level of public awareness of services and support available,
and as such many people self-fund and meet needs without assessment or expert
input. This can be a risk in terms of inappropriate aids and adaptations being used, as
well as a major financial burden. It is worth noting that the quality and price of
independent living aids varies considerably, and that this is an area of concern
nationally.

EDA would support any increase in availability of funding to support takeup of aids and
adaptations to maximise independence. However, these costly and important items
should be selected with input from an Occupational Therapy function – whether an OT
assessment or a self-assessment tool – in order to minimise any risk. The additional
costs would also need to be considered, namely the following:
• Installation, demonstration and training in correct use
• Powering and annually servicing electrical items
• Repairing and replacing equipment
• Meeting any costs associated with use, such as wear and tear on clothing or the
home

Given the above, we would prefer that any additional resources for equipment and
adaptations be channelled through existing HASC functions and provided via a
Personal Budget.

17. What are the key differences that we should take into account when
assessing children?

Existing DLA claimants have reported to EDA that there is a pervasive notion amongst
decision-makers that many children will grow out of impairments or will learn to cope
with them without support in time. This assumption needs to be challenged as it does
not universally apply, and to give families this impression mismanages expectation and
often leads to disappointment.

It should be made clear that the information requested during the assessment is in
respect of the ‘extra’ care that is required by the child due to their impairment or
condition. It should also be noted that any child needs help and assistance to be safe,
and that it is not this information that is relevant to the claim. Some examples of
universal needs that are not disability related may help applicants decide what to
include and therefore streamline assessment processes.

Given the broad impact that having a disabled child has on a family, EDA would
consider this a key area for targeting information and advice if this is a service that
DWP moves into. For example, information on respite services, funding and support
available to carers and other DWP products may help tackle some of the issues that
lead to families with disabled children experiencing higher levels of poverty and mental
health issues among siblings.

18. How important or useful has DLA been at getting disabled people access to
other services or entitlements? Are there things we can do to improve these
passporting arrangements?

In our experience DLA has been very useful in helping disabled people to access other
services and entitlements eg. Blue Badge, help in the home from Social Services,
equipment for disability, etc.

EDA would recommend, as above, that targeted information could be provided post
application to support the takeup of such passported services. Where an automatic
eligibility applies, a simple set of information and an ‘opt in’ form pre-filled with
information already held by DWP could be sent in an accessible format for the
applicant to read and sign if they would like to take up the product. Where further
information is required, signposting to support services and providing any forms, again
already populated with the applicant’s data, would expedite the processes for all
involved.

19. What would be the implications for disabled people and service providers if it
was not possible for Personal Independence Payment to be used as a
passport to other benefits and services?

The impact would be that more resources within both the voluntary and statutory
sectors would need to be directed at supporting the assessment processes for those
products where automatic eligibility currently applies. For disabled people, this would
mean more forms and assessment processes to engage with, which would invariably
lead to a lower takeup of services. Given that these services have a huge impact on the
quality of life of disabled people, not to mention a preventative function, EDA would
strongly advocate for the retention of this feature.

20. What different assessments for disability benefits or services could be

combined and what information about the disabled person could be shared to
minimise bureaucracy and duplication?

There should be just one medical assessment for all benefits. It is already the case
that, for instance, the DWP will use an Incapacity Benefit (ICB) medical to refuse a DLA
claim. However, the medicals are currently very different for ICB and DLA and the
resulting decisions are therefore open to challenge.

Given the differing eligibility criteria for benefits and services, EDA would recommend
that only data provided by the applicant should be shared, as interpretations made by
the decision-maker would almost certainly be applied in the context of specific products
and therefore not be universal. Sharing of information can be simply agreed by the
client at the point of application.

21. What impact could our proposals have on the different equality groups (our
initial assessment of which is on page 28) and what else should be
considered in developing the policy?

EDA welcomes equality impact assessments on government proposals, and has the
following points to make regarding this one:
• It is a stated aim that expenditure on DLA/PIP will reduce over time, therefore
the impact on disabled people, particularly those with lesser needs, should be
stated as certain rather than ‘likely’
• Adherence to a policy aim is not in itself justification for a negative impact on
disabled people
• Where negative impact is recognised, there should be robust measures
proposed for minimisation thereof. Unfortunately the proposals around
signposting and information sharing currently lack the detail and operational
planning to give that assurance
• EDA looks forward to the revised data on the impact on disabled people when
this becomes available
• As age discrimination legislation develops and barriers to working beyond state
pension age have been lifted, the impact on continuing the policy of ineligibility
for those working beyond state pension age to apply is surely discriminatory
• Given the increase in one-to-one contact during the assessment process, there
is the risk that BME groups may become further under-represented in takeup
due to communication issues or a lack of cultural awareness by assessors
• Any reduction in support available to disabled people will always have a
resultant impact on carers – a group predominated by women. In terms of direct
effects, with an ageing population an increasing number of women will find
themselves unable to apply for PIP if age limitations are retained
• As above, issues of discrimination may arise if assessors have inadequate
LGBT awareness
• For those whose religion or faith involves gathering at family homes or places of
worship, the removal of the mobility component of DLA when in residential care
 home settings will inevitably impact on their human right to participate in
religious activities and worship.

22. Is there anything else you would like to tell us about the proposals in this
public consultation?

A number of disabled people have contacted EDA expressing their grave concern that
the proposals will significantly affect their quality of life, and would be a huge step
backwards in terms of having the resources available to access the wider community
and be visible contributors to the much-lauded Big Society.

A particular concern is the removal of payments for the mobility component of DLA/PIP
for those in hospitals or residential care. For those people affected, access to
personalised support is minimal, and as such they do not enjoy the same level of
independence afforded to their peers who receive support in their own homes. Acute
NHS trusts and social service departments are facing tighter budgets and have rarely
been able to meet transport needs in a way that is in line with individual needs and
goals. Care homes are frequently unable to provide sufficient group travel facilities to
meet individual needs. To remove the mobility component for these groups would, in
many cases, restrict their human rights to access not only religious activities and
worship as outlined above, but also to participate fully in family life. The cessation of
payment for those who do not pay for their care would seem to be targeting those who
have the least means to maintain these essential elements of their lives otherwise, as
they would have undergone a financial assessment that determined they have few
finances or assets available.

EDA fully supports the numerous campaigns against this element of the proposals, and
will continue to do so if the proposal is implemented in the final policy.

Finally, EDA is somewhat puzzled by the inclusion of some of the proposals contained
in this document within the Welfare Reform Bill announced by the Prime Minister on
17th February 2011. Doing so a day before the consultation closed would appear to
devalue the input of so many individuals and organisations, not to mention the
government’s statements of being committed to engagement with and inclusion of the
views of the electorate.