Recommendations & Conclusions
34 items
2
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department’s expectation that it will take at least 18 months to clear the applications backlog means hardship for individuals and businesses will continue for some time. The backlog of applications for Access to Work support has built up over a number of years, with the number of cases awaiting …
Read more
The Department’s expectation that it will take at least 18 months to clear the applications backlog means hardship for individuals and businesses will continue for some time. The backlog of applications for Access to Work support has built up over a number of years, with the number of cases awaiting a decision growing from 21,700 in March 2022 to around 66,000 in March 2026. We received a large number of evidence submissions highlighting the impact of the backlogs and processing delays, such as individuals losing jobs and employers hiring fewer disabled people. In response to the backlogs, the Department more than doubled the number of staff administering the scheme from 247 in 2021–22 to 648 by the end of 2025–26. It plans to recruit another few hundred case managers 3 and to continue efforts to improve productivity. Despite these measures, the Department expects it will still take 18 months to two years to get the applications backlog down to an acceptable level. It expects to meet its target of processing applications within 25 working days after it has cleared the backlog, but would not commit to when it would achieve the target. Following the evidence session, the Department announced that it is recruiting an additional 480 staff as part of a plan to clear the applications backlog by September 2027. While increased staffing may aid the work to lessen the backlog, it is not clear that delays are entirely the result of low staff numbers rather than inappropriate IT, poor administrative process and a lack of grip. recommendation The Department should urgently develop and publish the plan not only to clear the Access to Work backlog but also to reduce significantly the time taken to process applications.
Show less
HM Treasury
3
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
We are concerned about the large volume of written evidence we received that highlighted people’s experience of multiple failings in the Department’s administration of the scheme. As well as highlighting delays, the people who contacted us described poor communication from the Department and an inaccessible process that often requires the …
Read more
We are concerned about the large volume of written evidence we received that highlighted people’s experience of multiple failings in the Department’s administration of the scheme. As well as highlighting delays, the people who contacted us described poor communication from the Department and an inaccessible process that often requires the kind of administrative capacity that some disabled customers are applying for support to access. The evidence of those who contacted us suggests that Access to Work does not work well for freelancers, self-employed people or those working part time or with fluctuating earnings because it is built around assumptions of stable, full-time employment. While many of those who provided evidence recognise the scheme’s importance in enabling employment, they also say that widespread issues undermine its effectiveness and act as a barrier to disabled people’s employment. recommendation In light of the written evidence the Committee has received, the Department should urgently engage with users of the scheme to uncover any administrative failings beyond delays, and write to the Committee by September 2026, with the full results of that engagement, setting out a roadmap for change, with defined milestones and a clear description of the service standards that users can expect and that the Department can be held accountable for providing.
Show less
HM Treasury
4
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department does not know how many cases its case managers can feasibly process in a day, which hampers its workforce planning. Based on a 2021 work study, the Department expected its case managers to be able to process 2.8 cases per day. However, it no longer considers 4 this …
Read more
The Department does not know how many cases its case managers can feasibly process in a day, which hampers its workforce planning. Based on a 2021 work study, the Department expected its case managers to be able to process 2.8 cases per day. However, it no longer considers 4 this standard to be achievable because assessing what support an applicant needs has become more complex, with more applicants having mental health and neurodivergent conditions. To improve productivity and the consistency of decision-making, the Department introduced in late 2025 a standard operating process, which it aims to roll out to all its offices by summer 2026. It then plans to complete a new study to assess, given the change in caseload and what it now takes to make appropriate decisions, how many cases on average case managers can process per day. Case managers’ productivity is also hampered by the fact that the scheme relies on three IT systems, which require case managers to transfer information manually from one system to another. The Department plans to reform the IT platform by June 2026, integrating the three separate systems. recommendation a. The Department should undertake the planned work study and use it to set an up-to-date productivity standard for the number of cases its case managers can process in a day. It should share the results of the study with the Committee by the end of 2026, along with an action plan of how it plans to meet the new standard. b. In its Treasury Minute response to this report the Department should confirm whether it successfully introduced an integrated IT system by June 2026, and specifically whether that has put an end to the need for case managers to transfer information manually between the separate systems.
Show less
HM Treasury
5
Recommendation
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
Deciding what workplace support the scheme should fund for each individual applicant is difficult and the Department’s case managers need more support to help them make consistent decisions. The Department intends that the support funded through the scheme is tailored to a worker’s individual needs. However, assessing what each applicant …
Read more
Deciding what workplace support the scheme should fund for each individual applicant is difficult and the Department’s case managers need more support to help them make consistent decisions. The Department intends that the support funded through the scheme is tailored to a worker’s individual needs. However, assessing what each applicant requires is complex and resource-intensive. In 2024–25, 37,900 people with mental health or learning conditions received Access to Work funding, up from 11,200 in 2018–19. The nature of mental health and neurodivergent conditions, in tandem with changes to the nature of work, make it challenging for case managers to assess what workplace adjustments an applicant needs. People who provided written evidence describe the system as arbitrary and unreliable, with support being reduced or removed without a clear rationale, change in need and sometimes without warning. The Department acknowledges that its focus on processing cases quickly in order to clear the applications backlog has resulted in some decisions not being consistent with the principles it has set to guide funding decisions. To improve decision-making, the Department has introduced new training for its staff, for example about the 5 questions they should ask applicants, but we consider that case managers would benefit from more support and guidance to help them make consistent decisions. recommendation The Department should set out what more it plans to do to support its case managers, including improving its guidance to better support staff in assessing what support should be funded for people with a wide variety of health conditions.
Show less
HM Treasury
6
Recommendation
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
In some cases, taxpayers have been paying for workplace adjustments that employers should have been covering. The Department intends that the Access to Work scheme provides support over and above the reasonable adjustments that employers are legally required to make. It says that the scheme should fund those adjustments that …
Read more
In some cases, taxpayers have been paying for workplace adjustments that employers should have been covering. The Department intends that the Access to Work scheme provides support over and above the reasonable adjustments that employers are legally required to make. It says that the scheme should fund those adjustments that are necessary but that it is not reasonable for an employer to provide, and notes that what is reasonable will vary according the nature of the employer. The Department is concerned, however, that some employers, particularly large ones, do not do enough to meet their legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010, and that the scheme may be filling the gaps. In its 2024 employer survey, the Department found that 80% of employers were taking action to support disabled staff. However, it believes there is much more that employers need to do in many cases to reach the standard of the best. In 2025, the Department found, from a review of 200 cases, that some 40% of support funded by the scheme should have been provided by the employer, the employee or the NHS. recommendation a. The Department should set out clearly what support it expects employers to provide, with examples of reasonable adjustments covering employers of different sizes. b. The Department should engage directly with employers to establish how they are meeting their duty to provide reasonable adjustments as part of the process of assessing what support the scheme should fund for an applicant.
Show less
HM Treasury
7
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department has not done enough to generate evidence on the value for money of the scheme. The Department acknowledges that it does not know whether the scheme provides value for money. It undertook qualitative research some time ago—in 2009 and 2018—to gather the views of individuals and employers. This …
Read more
The Department has not done enough to generate evidence on the value for money of the scheme. The Department acknowledges that it does not know whether the scheme provides value for money. It undertook qualitative research some time ago—in 2009 and 2018—to gather the views of individuals and employers. This found that the scheme has a range of benefits and helps to create a level playing field in the workplace. The Department states it has assessed, based on unit costs, that the 6 scheme would need an additionality of 23% to break even – that is, 23% more people being in work than would otherwise be the case. It told us that it is quite unlikely that the scheme pays for itself fiscally, but stressed the scheme’s wider benefits to society and individuals. The Department says it cannot ethically undertake a formal value for money evaluation due to the need for a control group, which would effectively mean denying support to some people to create a comparison group. However, we consider that the Department could do more to model the benefits of the scheme, for example in terms of reduced benefit expenditure and increased tax revenue if people are in work. recommendation a. The Department should share with the Committee the evidence that underpins its assessment of the level of additionality needed for the scheme to break even. b. The Department should undertake further work to assess the value for money of the scheme, including modelling the costs and benefits, and provide the Committee with a summary of the findings, including the assumptions that have underpinned the assessment. 7 Chapter 1: Processing delays and backlogs Introduction
Show less
HM Treasury
1
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Department for Work & Pensions (the Department) on the Access to Work scheme.1
HM Treasury
8
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
Many of the people who provided written evidence described waiting periods of several months, and in some cases over a year, between applying for support and receiving a decision or having support put in place. Some reported being unable to start jobs and having job offers withdrawn while waiting for …
Read more
Many of the people who provided written evidence described waiting periods of several months, and in some cases over a year, between applying for support and receiving a decision or having support put in place. Some reported being unable to start jobs and having job offers withdrawn while waiting for the Department to make decisions.8
Show less
HM Treasury
9
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
We asked the Department whether, to manage expectations, it would be possible at the outset of the process to provide people with an estimate of how long it was likely to take to process their claims.9 The Department acknowledged that people need to know what to expect when they apply.10 …
Read more
We asked the Department whether, to manage expectations, it would be possible at the outset of the process to provide people with an estimate of how long it was likely to take to process their claims.9 The Department acknowledged that people need to know what to expect when they apply.10 It told us that when a customer calls the Access to Work helpline, a voice recording tells them how long it is likely take for a decision to be made. At present, the message was advising a duration of 37 weeks, although the Department clarified that this was the longest it might take for some customers. It noted that it was relatively easy to make decisions on some applications, while others were much more complicated.11
Show less
HM Treasury
10
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department stressed that the crucial thing at the point people applied was for them to make clear if there was a time-critical element to their application.12 It told us that it prioritised applications from people who had a job offer and were due to start work within four weeks, …
Read more
The Department stressed that the crucial thing at the point people applied was for them to make clear if there was a time-critical element to their application.12 It told us that it prioritised applications from people who had a job offer and were due to start work within four weeks, which represented 6 C&AG’s Report, para 14 7 Q 10 8 See Annex: Summary of confidential written evidence 9 Q 9 10 Q 5 11 Qq 9-10 12 Q 10 10 about 10% of applications.13 From October 2023 to November 2025, the Department processed 55,706 (30%) of 188,106 applications in fewer than 20 working days.14
Show less
HM Treasury
11
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
Once an application for support has been approved, customers can submit claims for reimbursement of costs incurred.15 There has been a backlog of requests for payment, with the number of outstanding requests more than quadrupling from 6,900 at 31 March 2022 to 31,700 at 31 March 2025.16 The Department told …
Read more
Once an application for support has been approved, customers can submit claims for reimbursement of costs incurred.15 There has been a backlog of requests for payment, with the number of outstanding requests more than quadrupling from 6,900 at 31 March 2022 to 31,700 at 31 March 2025.16 The Department told us that payments were now being issued within its standard of 10 working days. It said that it had prioritised eliminating the payments backlog because the customers involved had already had their awards approved and their employers were expecting costs to be reimbursed.17 The applications backlog
Show less
HM Treasury
12
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The number of applications waiting for the Department to make a decision almost trebled, from 21,700 at 31 March 2022 to 62,100 at 31 March 2025.18 The Department told us that it currently had around 66,000 applications awaiting a decision.19 It explained that the backlog had emerged because the number …
Read more
The number of applications waiting for the Department to make a decision almost trebled, from 21,700 at 31 March 2022 to 62,100 at 31 March 2025.18 The Department told us that it currently had around 66,000 applications awaiting a decision.19 It explained that the backlog had emerged because the number of applications had doubled—from 76,000 in 2018–19 to 157,000 in 2024–25—and because cases had become more complex.20
Show less
HM Treasury
13
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The processing delays and backlogs have had a negative impact on individuals and employers.21 The written evidence we received highlighted the hardship, both human and economic, caused by the delays in processing applications as a result of the backlogs. For example, Citizens Advice shared case studies that showed workers were …
Read more
The processing delays and backlogs have had a negative impact on individuals and employers.21 The written evidence we received highlighted the hardship, both human and economic, caused by the delays in processing applications as a result of the backlogs. For example, Citizens Advice shared case studies that showed workers were at risk of losing their jobs or facing unsafe conditions while they waited for the Department to make decisions.22 In another example, SignHealth (a national deaf-led charity) said that delays disrupted the onboarding of staff, that small employers were disproportionately affected due to their limited internal flexibility, and that late payments reduced the willingness of British Sign Language interpreters to accept Access to Work bookings.23 13 Qq 2 and 6 14 C&AG’s Report, para 3.3 and Figure 10 15 C&AG’s Report, para 2 and Figure 1 16 C&AG’s Report, para 3.2 17 Qq 6-7 18 C&AG’s Report, para 14 19 Q 4 20 Q 25; C&AG’s Report, para 11 21 C&AG’s Report, para 15 22 Citizens Advice (AWS0082) 23 SignHealth (AWS0044) 11
Show less
HM Treasury
14
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department told us that its plan was to arrest the growth in the applications backlog over the next few months, as it increased the number of staff working on the scheme, and then for the backlog to be back down to where it should be within 18 months to …
Read more
The Department told us that its plan was to arrest the growth in the applications backlog over the next few months, as it increased the number of staff working on the scheme, and then for the backlog to be back down to where it should be within 18 months to two years.24 The Department more than doubled the number of staff working on the scheme, from an average of 247 full-time equivalents in 2021–22 to 588 in 2024–25.25 It said that, by the end of March 2026, staffing would be up to 648 and that it planned to increase the number of case managers by a further few hundred once it had improved the consistency of its decision-making. It would also continue its efforts to improve case managers’ productivity.26
Show less
HM Treasury
15
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
We asked the Department when it expected to meet its target of processing applications in 25 working days. The Department told us that it considered the target was achievable and that it would be able to meet it once the backlog of applications had been cleared. However, it said it …
Read more
We asked the Department when it expected to meet its target of processing applications in 25 working days. The Department told us that it considered the target was achievable and that it would be able to meet it once the backlog of applications had been cleared. However, it said it would not promise when the target would be met for two reasons. First, it did not know what would happen to the volume of applications and whether the rate of increase would continue. Second, it considered it was more important to prioritise making the right decisions, as opposed to making the wrong decisions more quickly.27
Show less
HM Treasury
16
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
Following the evidence session, in May 2026, the Department announced a plan of action to clear the backlog of applications by September 2027. It said that it would recruit an additional 480 case staff to process the higher volume of applications – the recruitment process had begun, and new case …
Read more
Following the evidence session, in May 2026, the Department announced a plan of action to clear the backlog of applications by September 2027. It said that it would recruit an additional 480 case staff to process the higher volume of applications – the recruitment process had begun, and new case managers would receive extensive training to handle complex applications with confidence. The Department said that this would ensure that disabled people and people with health conditions could receive timely support to secure and sustain employment.28 Case managers’ productivity
Show less
HM Treasury
17
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
Based on a work study it carried out in 2021, the Department expected its case managers to be able to process an average of 2.8 cases per day, but does not now consider this standard to be achievable.29 The Department told us that this was due to the increased complexity …
Read more
Based on a work study it carried out in 2021, the Department expected its case managers to be able to process an average of 2.8 cases per day, but does not now consider this standard to be achievable.29 The Department told us that this was due to the increased complexity of the Access to Work caseload – there had been a dramatic change in the nature of claims and in the health conditions involved, with an increase in the number of applicants with mental health and neurodivergent conditions. The Department 24 Q 3 25 C&AG’s Report, para 3.8 26 Qq 1 and 6 27 Qq 1 and 3-4 28 HCWS34, Access to Work Backlog, 19 May 2026 29 C&AG’s Report, para 3.10 12 explained that there was no standard way of looking at what would be required in terms of reasonable adjustments and that conditions could fluctuate and affect people in different ways. It also noted that the nature of the workplace had changed dramatically. Therefore, to make the right decision about the support a worker needed was a complex piece of work.30
Show less
HM Treasury
18
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department told us that, to improve productivity and the consistency of decision-making, it had introduced a new standard operating process in late 2025. It was rolling out the new process office by office and hoped to have completed this by summer 2026. The Department said that it would be …
Read more
The Department told us that, to improve productivity and the consistency of decision-making, it had introduced a new standard operating process in late 2025. It was rolling out the new process office by office and hoped to have completed this by summer 2026. The Department said that it would be in a position to carry out a new work study once the rollout had been completed.31 That study would help it to determine, given the change in caseload and what it now took to make an appropriate decision, what the productivity standard should be and what its aspirations should be in terms of clearing cases and the backlog.32
Show less
HM Treasury
19
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The productivity of the Department’s case managers is hampered by the fact that the scheme relies on three IT systems, which require case managers to transfer information manually from one system to another.33 The Department explained that it had more modern systems at the start of the process to allow …
Read more
The productivity of the Department’s case managers is hampered by the fact that the scheme relies on three IT systems, which require case managers to transfer information manually from one system to another.33 The Department explained that it had more modern systems at the start of the process to allow customers to apply online, and at the end to allow it to assess receipts and make payments. In the middle, however, was a legacy system—a case management tool—that did not talk effectively to the other two systems. The Department told us that it planned to reform the IT platform and by June 2026 the systems would be integrated. It could then introduce a modern case management system that avoided the need for re-keying and allowed better data collection, which would help it to target its work more effectively.34
Show less
HM Treasury
20
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
We asked the Department when it would be sensible for us to assess the work going on to improve productivity and whether it had been successful. The Department suggested that coming back to this issue in a year’s time would be reasonable as it would take six months for it …
Read more
We asked the Department when it would be sensible for us to assess the work going on to improve productivity and whether it had been successful. The Department suggested that coming back to this issue in a year’s time would be reasonable as it would take six months for it to recruit more staff and a further six months to improve the impact of the standard operating process and increase productivity.35 30 Q 11 31 Q 16 32 Qq 14 and 16-17 33 C&AG’s Report, para 3.15 34 Qq 15-16 35 Qq 19-20 13 Chapter 2: Decision-making and value for money Decision-making
Show less
HM Treasury
21
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department intends that the support provided by the Access to Work scheme is tailored to a worker’s individual needs and its case managers engage with the specifics of each case, meaning the process is resource-intensive.36 The Department told us that case managers had to make difficult decisions – they …
Read more
The Department intends that the support provided by the Access to Work scheme is tailored to a worker’s individual needs and its case managers engage with the specifics of each case, meaning the process is resource-intensive.36 The Department told us that case managers had to make difficult decisions – they had to look at the application in great detail and understand the nature of the customer’s disability and the work environment they were operating within. This work required great skill and often a conversation back and forth with the customer and their employer.37
Show less
HM Treasury
22
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
In the written evidence we received, people described opaque and inconsistent decision-making, painting a picture of an arbitrary and unreliable system. They stated that support was reduced or removed without a clear rationale, change in need, and sometimes without warning. Employers and organisations that support disabled people’s employment also raised …
Read more
In the written evidence we received, people described opaque and inconsistent decision-making, painting a picture of an arbitrary and unreliable system. They stated that support was reduced or removed without a clear rationale, change in need, and sometimes without warning. Employers and organisations that support disabled people’s employment also raised concerns about inconsistent decision-making, with different case managers often making very different decisions for similar customers.38
Show less
HM Treasury
23
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department acknowledged that it had not immediately recognised that the nature of the scheme’s caseload had changed. More applicants with health conditions relating to mental health and neurodiversity meant that some of the standard types of support that the scheme was used to providing were not applicable any more.39 …
Read more
The Department acknowledged that it had not immediately recognised that the nature of the scheme’s caseload had changed. More applicants with health conditions relating to mental health and neurodiversity meant that some of the standard types of support that the scheme was used to providing were not applicable any more.39 In 2024–25, 37,900 people with mental health or learning conditions received Access to Work funding, up from 11,200 in 2018–19.40
Show less
HM Treasury
24
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department acknowledged that it had prioritised throughput— processing cases quickly—at the expense of consistent decision-making. With hindsight, that had been the wrong thing to do. It had been done for the right reasons—because the Department wanted to get the backlog 36 C&AG’s Report, paras 2, 1.5 and Figure 1 …
Read more
The Department acknowledged that it had prioritised throughput— processing cases quickly—at the expense of consistent decision-making. With hindsight, that had been the wrong thing to do. It had been done for the right reasons—because the Department wanted to get the backlog 36 C&AG’s Report, paras 2, 1.5 and Figure 1 37 Q 8 38 See Annex: Summary of confidential written evidence 39 Q 25 40 C&AG’s Report, para 2.7 14 down—but it had produced the wrong outcomes.41 The Department said that the five principles of Access to Work, which it has set out to guide its decisions about the award of funding, had not been properly applied in a consistent way, particularly around things such as employers’ reasonable adjustments and job aides.42
Show less
HM Treasury
25
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
We asked about the design of the scheme and why the Department had not defined the rules more tightly.43 The Department explained that the scheme has an element of prescription – the eligibility criteria and the five principles.44 At the same time, the scheme’s guidance needed to be fairly loose …
Read more
We asked about the design of the scheme and why the Department had not defined the rules more tightly.43 The Department explained that the scheme has an element of prescription – the eligibility criteria and the five principles.44 At the same time, the scheme’s guidance needed to be fairly loose because a person’s impairment, their job role, and the size of their employer influenced what it would be reasonable for an employer to provide and therefore what the scheme might fund. The Department said that it could make the scheme more prescriptive but people would not like it as they valued the flexible and personalised nature of the support provided. Its view was that having a stricter scheme would not help people or deliver the outcomes it was seeing at present.45
Show less
HM Treasury
26
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department told us that the changing nature and complexity of its caseload had meant its staff required different training.46 In 2024, it introduced new training for staff, which included reinforcing the principles of Access to Work and the questions to ask customers such as whether they already have support …
Read more
The Department told us that the changing nature and complexity of its caseload had meant its staff required different training.46 In 2024, it introduced new training for staff, which included reinforcing the principles of Access to Work and the questions to ask customers such as whether they already have support in place, including adjustments made by their employer.47 The Department explained that cases where it had previously made a mistake were now coming up for renewal and receiving lower awards even though the customer’s situation had not changed.48 The Department acknowledged that its case managers had said they would like more guidance but its view was that many people would interpret that as a change in policy. It stressed that it had not changed the policy, but was trying to use the use the five principles to anchor its decision-making.49 Reasonable adjustments
Show less
HM Treasury
27
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department intends that the scheme provides support for individual needs within the workplace over and above an employer’s legal duty to make reasonable adjustments. Under the Equality Act 2010, employers are required to make reasonable adjustments to ensure that workers 41 Q 26 42 Qq 2 and 26-27; C&AG’s …
Read more
The Department intends that the scheme provides support for individual needs within the workplace over and above an employer’s legal duty to make reasonable adjustments. Under the Equality Act 2010, employers are required to make reasonable adjustments to ensure that workers 41 Q 26 42 Qq 2 and 26-27; C&AG’s Report, para 1.4 43 Q 26 44 Q 27; C&AG’s Report, para 1.4 and Figure 2 45 Qq 26-27 46 Q 25 47 C&AG’s Report, para 1.21 48 Q 29 49 Q 36 15 with disabilities, or physical or mental health conditions, are not substantially disadvantaged when doing their jobs.50 The Department told us that the scheme should cover those adjustments that are necessary but that it is not reasonable for the employer to make. It also noted that what is reasonable varies according to the nature of the employer – some of the adjustments that a big company could easily afford are not affordable for very small businesses.51
Show less
HM Treasury
28
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
In 2025, the Department found, from a review of 200 cases, that some 40% of support funded by the scheme should have been provided by the employer, the employee or the NHS, and that employers had failed to make reasonable adjustments in 18% of cases reviewed.52 The Department told us …
Read more
In 2025, the Department found, from a review of 200 cases, that some 40% of support funded by the scheme should have been provided by the employer, the employee or the NHS, and that employers had failed to make reasonable adjustments in 18% of cases reviewed.52 The Department told us that it was concerned that employers were not fulfilling their legal responsibilities and were expecting the Department to provide adjustments that would be reasonable for employers to pick up. It said that it had examples of big employers who had put in applications to Access to Work for an ergonomic chair, which was something it would expect an employer to provide. The Department also told us that it was seeing inappropriate applications for job aides whose role was not to help level the playing field for customers with disabilities as the scheme intended but more to do tasks that an employer would normally take on an additional employee to do – it described this as misusing the scheme.53
Show less
HM Treasury
29
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
In its 2024 employer survey, the Department found that 80% of employers were taking action to support disabled staff and staff with long-term health conditions, most commonly by offering workplace adjustments.54 However, the Department told us that there was much more employers needed to do in many cases to reach …
Read more
In its 2024 employer survey, the Department found that 80% of employers were taking action to support disabled staff and staff with long-term health conditions, most commonly by offering workplace adjustments.54 However, the Department told us that there was much more employers needed to do in many cases to reach the standard of the best.55 The Department also referred to the Keep Britain Working review, led by Sir Charlie Mayfield, which had looked at workplace health provision in particular. It said the question was what could employers do, not just about reasonable adjustments but about identifying and helping to support people when health conditions first started to develop.56 50 C&AG’s Report, para 1.2 51 Q 45 52 C&AG’s Report, para 1.16 53 Q 26 54 C&AG’s Report, para 1.15 55 Q 45 56 Q 28 16 Value for money of the scheme
Show less
HM Treasury
30
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
One of the Department’s principles for awarding Access to Work grants is that any approved support must be value for money.57 However, the Department acknowledges that it does not know whether the scheme provides value for money – it has little evidence on the difference that the funding has made …
Read more
One of the Department’s principles for awarding Access to Work grants is that any approved support must be value for money.57 However, the Department acknowledges that it does not know whether the scheme provides value for money – it has little evidence on the difference that the funding has made and does not check whether the support was of benefit.58
Show less
HM Treasury
31
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
We asked the Department about the value for money of Access to Work, including how the cost compares with other government employment schemes and how it compares with other nations. The Department told us that, while it had not undertaken any quantitative assessment of the scheme’s effectiveness, it did have …
Read more
We asked the Department about the value for money of Access to Work, including how the cost compares with other government employment schemes and how it compares with other nations. The Department told us that, while it had not undertaken any quantitative assessment of the scheme’s effectiveness, it did have qualitative evidence.59 It said that the difficulty was that, to do a formal value-for-money assessment, it would need to have a control group to which it effectively denied Access to Work support so that it could create a comparison and see what the effect of the support was. The Department told us that its research had found there was effectively no ethical way to establish such a counterfactual and show what would have happened in the absence of the scheme.60
Show less
HM Treasury
32
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department told us that it had looked at the impact of the scheme from a qualitative point of view, in 2009 and 2018. This research had highlighted the value of the scheme for both individuals and employers.61 The Department told us that individuals had talked about how the scheme …
Read more
The Department told us that it had looked at the impact of the scheme from a qualitative point of view, in 2009 and 2018. This research had highlighted the value of the scheme for both individuals and employers.61 The Department told us that individuals had talked about how the scheme created a level playing field in the workplace, reduced sickness absence, and improved confidence and wellbeing. It said that employers had talked about how the scheme enabled them to recruit more disabled people, to better understand their needs and provide effective support.62
Show less
HM Treasury
33
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
We asked the Department about cost-benefit analysis of the Access to Work scheme relative to other schemes including, if a robust case-controlled study was not possible, whether it had done any sort of modelling.63 We suggested, for example, that, if someone had been refused Access to Work support and was …
Read more
We asked the Department about cost-benefit analysis of the Access to Work scheme relative to other schemes including, if a robust case-controlled study was not possible, whether it had done any sort of modelling.63 We suggested, for example, that, if someone had been refused Access to Work support and was not able to work, the counter might be that they would be on benefits, not paying taxes and potentially requiring additional care. This kind of analysis could help demonstrate the value for money of the scheme. The Department told us that, based on its analysis of the average unit cost which was £7,000 for those receiving grants and £10,500 for those using a support worker, the scheme would need to achieve an 57 C&AG’s Report, para 1.4 58 C&AG’s Report, para 8 59 Q 38; C&AG’s Report, para 8 60 Qq 38-39; C&AG’s Report, para 1.11 61 Q 38; C&AG’s Report, para 1.12 62 Q 38 63 Qq 39 and 41 17 additionality of about 23% to break even – that is, 23% more people would need to be in work because of the scheme than would otherwise have been the case. That level of additionality would mean Access to Work would be twice as effective as any of the Department’s labour market programmes over the past 20 years.64
Show less
HM Treasury
34
Conclusion
6th Report - The Access to Work scheme
The Department told us that it was “quite unlikely” that the scheme paid for itself fiscally, but it did not know that for certain. It explained that, from an Accounting Officer’s point of view, the value of the scheme was over and above the fiscal and economic considerations – it …
Read more
The Department told us that it was “quite unlikely” that the scheme paid for itself fiscally, but it did not know that for certain. It explained that, from an Accounting Officer’s point of view, the value of the scheme was over and above the fiscal and economic considerations – it was about the scheme’s benefits to society and to individuals. These benefits were what made the scheme appropriate to do and to do at the current scale.65 The Department stressed its view that Access to Work plays a very important role not just in helping people to get into work from a fiscal and economic point of view, but in the difference that work makes to people’s wellbeing and sense of purpose.66 64 Qq 39 and 41-42 65 Q 39 and 41-42 66 Q 1 18
Show less
HM Treasury