5Access to Work
40.Employers are required to make “reasonable adjustments” for disabled employees under the Equality Act 2010.131 Access to Work funds support for beyond those basic requirements. This can include expensive AT, travel costs, interpretation or a support worker.132 53% of Access to Work grants include some form of AT or equipment.133 The process begins once the employee is in work, or has a start date. They undergo an assessment with an Access to Work-trained assessor, who then drafts a report outlining the specific adjustments that the employee requires. A Decision Maker in DWP then costs any recommendations and decides whether the support should be funded by the scheme, or by the employer.134
The Access to Work cap
41.Assistive technology helps overcome many workplace barriers for disabled people, and has the potential to do much more. It still has its limitations, however. One of these is communication support for D/deaf people. Organisations explained that there is no real technological substitute for British Sign Language (BSL) interpretation support for D/deaf people in some types of employment.135 AT such as remote interpreting can be effective for brief phone calls or short one-to-one conversations. But it is not a practical nor cost effective alternative for people in jobs that require regular, unstructured interaction with colleagues or clients. This means that dedicated one-to-one communication support remains necessary for many D/deaf people to do their jobs.136 Jane Cordell, a deaf business owner and former senior civil servant who has given evidence to us on several occasions, told us this is particularly so for D/deaf and disabled people in senior professional roles, who often act as aspirational role models for other disabled people.137
42.Alongside one-off payments for AT, Access to Work can fund ongoing payments for support workers and BSL interpreters. The latter is the single largest category of Access to Work expenditure.138 In 2014 DWP began to systematically apply a discretionary limit on Access to Work for BSL interpreters at £35,000 per year.139 In response to complaints by D/deaf and disabled people increased cap of £40,800 was introduced for new users in October 2015. It was due to apply to existing users—set at £42,100—from April 2018.140 Affected D/deaf people and organisations told us the revised cap was still too low; the market rate for full time BSL interpreters is £60,000 per year. Deaf people commenting to the inquiry told us the cap makes it impossible to access communication support full time. This limited their employment prospects, making it harder, to get into, stay in, and progress in employment. It also risked acting as a “cap on aspiration”, fuelling a perception that people with complex communication needs cannot be accommodated in work—especially in highly paid, senior roles.141
43.In March 2018 the Department announced that the cap would be lifted to £57,200 per year from April 2018, for both new and existing users—an increase of £15,000. This brings the cap much more in line with the market rate for BSL interpreters. The Department said this would ensure that more disabled people, particularly those who are d/Deaf, would be able to benefit from support and improve their employment prospects. The UK Council on Deafness (UKCoD)—an umbrella group for organisations supporting people with hearing loss—welcomed the announcement. Action on Hearing Loss, one of UKCoD’s members, agreed with the Department that the new cap meant many more people would be able to “thrive and succeed” at work.142
44.Lifting the Access to Work cap sends a clear message that the Department is willing to listen to evidence. We welcome this decision.
A broader definition of assistive technology
45.The Department told us assessors have regular team meetings and external training to ensure they have up-to-date knowledge of the latest AT.143 They are encouraged to recommend cost-effective solutions and have access to a supply chain list which includes mainstream and low-cost technologies.144 Access to Work cannot fund “standard” equipment—equipment anyone doing a particular job would require, irrespective of disability. Assessors are under no obligation, however, to recommend specialist equipment if there is an appropriate free or built-in alternative.145 Action on Hearing Loss told us, however, that assessors are “not usually well informed of the latest products”. Even when they are, “they may not understand how best they can be utilised in the workplace”.146 AT users agreed that assessors sometimes appeared to lack up-to-date knowledge of AT.147 One user suggested their assessor seemed wedded to certain specialist suppliers, perhaps based on previous working relationships.148 Access to Work users said assessors seemed to favour specialist AT, even where mainstream built-in or app-based technologies may have been more or equally effective.149 Microsoft’s Hector Minto explained the consequences of Access to Work assessors not being aware of developments in AT:
If [assessors] are not using the latest technology and understanding the latest benefits of inclusive design, then they simply cannot understand what the options are in a modern workplace. They need to make sure that they are running the latest versions, and that they are utilising the resources that are available for them from all of the technology companies.
46.A reliance on specialist technologies also comes with cost implications.150 For example, specialist magnification software and training to use it can range from a few hundred to several thousand pounds. Encouraging people with residual vision to use free, built in software could release substantial funding in the Access to Work budget.151
47.Leonard Cheshire Disability told us mainstream technology should not be a substitute for specialist technologies where a clear need for the latter exists.152 Assessors should be encouraged to think innovatively, however, about the AT options available. We heard that the Department could encourage this shift by introducing a quality standard for Access to Work assessors.153 Scope explained that this should follow the same model used for Disabled Students Allowance (DSA) assessors, who must meet qualification requirements and maintain their expertise through continual professional development.154
48.Access to Work provides training as well as equipment. The availability of tailored training in using equipment may influence assessors’ AT recommendations. Specialist suppliers usually include a block of one-to-one training in their Access to Work offer.155 Mainstream suppliers tend not to offer training, though companies such as Microsoft and Google have dedicated AT helplines. We heard that Access to Work assessors and users were rarely using these facilities.156 Jisc, a non-profit organisation working on skills and new technologies, said that assessors should be open to consider different training models. They explained that the “block of training” approach can be “overwhelming” for new users. They further highlighted the benefits of continuous “post-assessment training, support and review” to ensure disabled people make the most of their AT.157 Aspire, a charity, recommended this broader AT training should be “delivered by specialist organisations across the country”.158 Such an approach would lower training costs by removing the link to equipment providers. In turn, this would drive a more competitive, open market place, making the best use of Access to Work’s substantial purchasing power.
49.Access to Work assessors should be at the cutting edge of assistive technology. This is not always the reality. Some assessors are wedded to a traditional understanding of assistive technology, tending towards specialist over mainstream options. The latter can be cheaper and just as good—especially in maintaining compatibility with existing workplace systems. The Department needs to drive cultural change amongst assessors, ensuring that the benefits of mainstream AT are fully recognised and understood. We recommend the Department review and update training for Access to Work assessors to emphasise that mainstream AT is, in many cases, at least as appropriate as specialist provision. To ensure assessors’ knowledge remains up-to-date, the Department should also introduce a framework of regular quality assessment for assessors.
50.Access to Work offers the first opportunity for many disabled people to use assistive technology. Access to Work funded training, however, is often one off, inflexible, and linked to particular specialist equipment. A more diverse training catalogue, including on mainstream options, would encourage assessors to recommend a wider range of technologies. This would result in better use of assistive technology and better value to the public purse. We recommend the Department introduce an “Access to Work (training)” stream within Access to Work. This should provide specialist-led training on using AT, including mainstream, built-in and app-based technologies. It should not be linked to receiving particular equipment, but should be available as a free-standing component of an award, including for equipment the user already owns.
51.The Department must make certain that Access to Work consistently recommends the most effective support for every individual—including pioneering innovations in assistive technology. Alongside this, it should work hard to ensure employers and disabled people themselves are fully aware and able to benefit from all that assistive technology has to offer. With these steps, it could deliver real progress in closing the disability employment gap and resolving the UK’s productivity challenge.
132 DWP, https://www.gov.uk/access-to-work, March 2018
133 DWP, Equality Analysis for the future of Access to Work, May 2015
134 DWP, https://www.gov.uk/access-to-work, March 2018
135 Action on Hearing Loss (AST0043), Action on Hearing Loss (AST0025), Jane Cordell (AST0040), National Association of Deafened People (AST0033), Deaf ATW (AST0012), Graeae Theatre Company Ltd (ATW0009), DeafATW (ATW0003)
136 Action on Hearing Loss (AST0043), Action on Hearing Loss (AST0025), Deaf ATW (AST0012), DeafATW (ATW0003)
137 Jane Cordell (AST0040), Deaf ATW (ATW0003), Inclusion London (ATW0002), British Deaf Association (ATW0005)
138 DWP, Equality Analysis for the future of Access to Work, May 2015
139 Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, A report of investigations into complaints about Access to Work, October 2017
140 The Parliamentary and Heath Service Ombudsman published a report into complaints received about Access to Work between 2014–2016. This highlights the effect of the initial cap on Access to Work customers. The £40,800 figure is set in line with 1.5 times national average earnings.
141 Marisa Cohen (ATW0010), Graeae Theatre Company Ltd (AWT0009), Business Disability Forum (ATW0008), Action on Disability (ATW0007), StopChanges2AtW and Branch Secretary of NUBSLI (ATW0006), British Deaf Association (ATW0005), Sam Calder Bray (ATW0004), Deaf ATW (ATW0003), Inclusion London (ATW0002), Action on Hearing Loss (AST0043), Action on Hearing Loss (AST0025), Jane Cordell (AST0040), National Association of Deafened People (AST0033), Deaf ATW (AST0012)
142 Action on Hearing Loss, Statement on DWP’s Access to Work cap increase, 20 March 2018
143 Letter from Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work to Chair of the Committee, 20 February 2018
144 Letter from Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work to Chair of the Committee, 20 February 2018
145 DWP, Access to Work: staff guide, p.75
146 Action on Hearing loss (AST0043). See also: Scope (AST0009), All Party Parliamentary Group for Assistive Technology(AST0035), Name Withheld (AST0042), Leonard Cheshire Disability (AST0022), John Welsman (AST0013), Vision Impairment Centre for Teaching and Research University of Birmingham (AST0008)
147 Inclusion London (AST0016), John Welsman (AST0013), Name Withheld (AST0042), Business Disability Forum (AST0035), Leonard Cheshire Disability (AST0022), Name Withheld (AST0047)
149 Name Withheld (AST0003), John Welsman (AST0013), Name Withheld (AST0042), Name Withheld (AST0047)
150 DWP, Equality Analysis for the future of Access to Work, May 2015
151 RNIB (AST0044), Leonard Cheshire Disability (AST0022), John Wellsman (AST0013), Q18 (Simon Wheatcroft)
153 Scope (AST0009), Shaw Trust (AST0039), Shaw Trust (AST0027), All Parliamentary Group for Assistive Technology (AST0035), Leonard Cheshire Disability (AST0022), Vision Impairment Centre for Teaching and Research at the University of Birmingham (AST0008), Action for ME (AST0006)
155 Jisc (AST0010), Vision Impairment Centre for Teaching and Research University of Birmingham (AST0008), Name Withheld (AST0047)
156 Q63 (Hector Minto), WAIS Accessibility Team University of Southampton (AST0019), Name Withheld (AST0047)
Published: 19 April 2018