What is 'incapacity'? The role of working conditions & job availability in incapacity claims, & whether these should be part of incapacity assessment
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Kent
Department Name: Sch of Social Pol Sociology & Social Res
Abstract
Over a million older people (aged 50-64) claim incapacity benefits in Britain, on the grounds that their health or disability stops them from working - four times as many as those claiming unemployment benefits, despite the downturn. Being classed as 'incapacitated' is important because incapacity claimants are widely seen as more deserving, and therefore receive more money and have to jump through fewer hoops. But what does it actually mean to say that someone is 'incapacitated'?
Policy treats 'genuine' incapacity as if it was strictly medical (either diseases or impairments); the current incapacity assessment has criteria like 'cannot pick up and move a one litre carton full of liquid'. But in reality it is not that simple. Take two people with identical impairments: a London-based graduate and an unskilled person in Merthyr Tydfil. The graduate may have better working conditions, an employer who is more willing to change the job to fit them, or be able to find another job that their health permits them to do. The unskilled worker may have none of these options, particularly if they are older and therefore more likely to have lower qualifications, to be biologically 'slowing down', and to face age-related discrimination.
There have been calls to take these 'non-medical factors' into account in assessing incapacity - including by the Shadow Minister just as this project was being finalised. Yet the Government's independent reviewer of the WCA dismissed this policy last year because we "lacked the necessary detail and evidence base" (Harrington 2011:37). In this project I will therefore do two things that have not been done before. Firstly, I will look at the role of non-medical factors in incapacity, for the first time looking simultaneously at working conditions, adjustments & the availability of work. I will do this with an advanced statistical analysis, using already-existing, high-quality surveys that follow thousands of older workers over time in England and Europe. I will also focus on whether these non-medical factors matter more in some countries than others, reflecting their different welfare systems and labour markets.
Secondly, I will look at whether the public and elites think that non-medical factors should be taken into account in assessing incapacity. We increasingly see stories that incapacity claimants are 'really' fit-for-work, alongside a reform process that suddenly tells people they are not incapacitated; yet from the other side, the British Medical Association and others have attacked the incapacity assessment as unfairly harsh and inaccurate. In this project I will look at what different groups think 'genuine incapacity' should mean, using:
(i) a survey to investigate attitudes among the public as a whole; and
(ii) workshops with elites (policymakers, frontline staff in the benefits system, disability advocates, and unemployment/disability claimants themselves) and the public to probe attitudes more deeply, in both cases getting people to respond to a series of pen portraits.
These workshops are unusual in answering a key research question at the same time as getting people to engage with my own results from the first part of the project. This means that the policy implications will be developed jointly with others - for example, seeing whether we should assess incapacity differently for those with lower skills (like GPs informally used to with the old 'Invalidity Benefit', and as other countries still do) and in regions with fewer jobs.
To do this work requires an unusual set of skills - advanced statistical skills that are rare in Social Policy, combined with skills in qualitative research and public attitude research. The Future Leaders Scheme will provide me the opportunity to gain these abilities, building on initial skills I am fortunate to have had the opportunity to develop in past work, and putting me in a position to deliver powerful research that can change policy.
Policy treats 'genuine' incapacity as if it was strictly medical (either diseases or impairments); the current incapacity assessment has criteria like 'cannot pick up and move a one litre carton full of liquid'. But in reality it is not that simple. Take two people with identical impairments: a London-based graduate and an unskilled person in Merthyr Tydfil. The graduate may have better working conditions, an employer who is more willing to change the job to fit them, or be able to find another job that their health permits them to do. The unskilled worker may have none of these options, particularly if they are older and therefore more likely to have lower qualifications, to be biologically 'slowing down', and to face age-related discrimination.
There have been calls to take these 'non-medical factors' into account in assessing incapacity - including by the Shadow Minister just as this project was being finalised. Yet the Government's independent reviewer of the WCA dismissed this policy last year because we "lacked the necessary detail and evidence base" (Harrington 2011:37). In this project I will therefore do two things that have not been done before. Firstly, I will look at the role of non-medical factors in incapacity, for the first time looking simultaneously at working conditions, adjustments & the availability of work. I will do this with an advanced statistical analysis, using already-existing, high-quality surveys that follow thousands of older workers over time in England and Europe. I will also focus on whether these non-medical factors matter more in some countries than others, reflecting their different welfare systems and labour markets.
Secondly, I will look at whether the public and elites think that non-medical factors should be taken into account in assessing incapacity. We increasingly see stories that incapacity claimants are 'really' fit-for-work, alongside a reform process that suddenly tells people they are not incapacitated; yet from the other side, the British Medical Association and others have attacked the incapacity assessment as unfairly harsh and inaccurate. In this project I will look at what different groups think 'genuine incapacity' should mean, using:
(i) a survey to investigate attitudes among the public as a whole; and
(ii) workshops with elites (policymakers, frontline staff in the benefits system, disability advocates, and unemployment/disability claimants themselves) and the public to probe attitudes more deeply, in both cases getting people to respond to a series of pen portraits.
These workshops are unusual in answering a key research question at the same time as getting people to engage with my own results from the first part of the project. This means that the policy implications will be developed jointly with others - for example, seeing whether we should assess incapacity differently for those with lower skills (like GPs informally used to with the old 'Invalidity Benefit', and as other countries still do) and in regions with fewer jobs.
To do this work requires an unusual set of skills - advanced statistical skills that are rare in Social Policy, combined with skills in qualitative research and public attitude research. The Future Leaders Scheme will provide me the opportunity to gain these abilities, building on initial skills I am fortunate to have had the opportunity to develop in past work, and putting me in a position to deliver powerful research that can change policy.
Planned Impact
Incapacity benefits themselves have multiple impacts on society: they are a major public expense, they help protect all of us from the income risk of losing our job through ill-health, and they are a central pillar of what is considered a fair and decent society. Yet currently in Britain (and elsewhere) they are heavily contested, particularly around the boundary of who is 'really' incapacitated. In this context, four groups will benefit from this research.
1. POLICYMAKERS
Policymakers will benefit from (i) understanding the role of non-medical factors in incapacity and how this contributes to inequalities in incapacity, and (ii) how far elites and the public consider these non-medical factors when assessing incapacity. This will help UK policymakers (i) design a better-functioning system of incapacity assessment (following on from official reviews in 2013 & 2014); and (ii) ensure that provision for disabled people in the new Universal Credit system (being rolled out 2013-2018) is efficient and fair - with analogous impacts in similar debates internationally(e.g. prompted by the OECD). It will also suggest broader policy areas and specific targeting of subgroups that could reduce the social and economic cost of incapacity claims (e.g. job matching for low-skilled disabled people in areas of low labour demand), and address issues about whether old workers will be 'fit for work' if state pension ages continue to be raised internationally.
2. PRACTITIONERS
Another impact will be on a diverse group of practitioners, including those involved in occupational health within employers, GPs, benefit incapacity assessors (Atos Healthcare), Jobcentre Plus staff, Prime Contractors, and other staff within the welfare-to-work arena. The project will lead to immediate lessons for practice in understanding how non-medical factors make it harder for their clients to return-to-work, and which factors may help overcome this. This will contribute to more accurate assessment, better support for clients, better employment-related outcomes, and (in the long-term) better contracts with Government with incentives that reflect the real barriers clients face.
3. LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HEALTH PROVIDERS
Incapacity claims are highly concentrated in certain areas. This spatial analysis in this project will (i) given local authorities and GPs (taking over responsibility from Primary Care Trusts) a better understanding of incapacity in their specific area, helping them negotiate for appropriate settlements with central government and design appropriate local policy responses; and (ii) consider the acceptability among stakeholders of bringing regional factors into the assessment of incapacity, mirroring debates on regional variations in public sector pay.
4. DISABLED PEOPLE, OLDER PEOPLE and THE WIDER PUBLIC
Finally, the project will have an impact on the lives of disabled people and older people in three ways. Firstly, a better understanding of the nature of incapacity will contribute to a better system of incapacity assessment, not only providing support where it is intended but without the high levels of appeals and anxiety of the current system. Secondly, a clear idea of what incapacity is - linked to evidence on what the public think it SHOULD be - could remove some of the lack of legitimacy in the current system, thereby reducing some of the stigma of claiming (Baumberg et al, In Press). Finally, public debate about incapacity benefits is based on the misconception that incapacity is about whether people are 'completely incapable of work', and how many older people this applies to. The project's evidence on non-medical influences will contribute to a better quality of debate on a key welfare state issue - itself a positive impact on wider society.
Please see the Pathways to Impact statement for details of the innovative activities to achieve this.
1. POLICYMAKERS
Policymakers will benefit from (i) understanding the role of non-medical factors in incapacity and how this contributes to inequalities in incapacity, and (ii) how far elites and the public consider these non-medical factors when assessing incapacity. This will help UK policymakers (i) design a better-functioning system of incapacity assessment (following on from official reviews in 2013 & 2014); and (ii) ensure that provision for disabled people in the new Universal Credit system (being rolled out 2013-2018) is efficient and fair - with analogous impacts in similar debates internationally(e.g. prompted by the OECD). It will also suggest broader policy areas and specific targeting of subgroups that could reduce the social and economic cost of incapacity claims (e.g. job matching for low-skilled disabled people in areas of low labour demand), and address issues about whether old workers will be 'fit for work' if state pension ages continue to be raised internationally.
2. PRACTITIONERS
Another impact will be on a diverse group of practitioners, including those involved in occupational health within employers, GPs, benefit incapacity assessors (Atos Healthcare), Jobcentre Plus staff, Prime Contractors, and other staff within the welfare-to-work arena. The project will lead to immediate lessons for practice in understanding how non-medical factors make it harder for their clients to return-to-work, and which factors may help overcome this. This will contribute to more accurate assessment, better support for clients, better employment-related outcomes, and (in the long-term) better contracts with Government with incentives that reflect the real barriers clients face.
3. LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND HEALTH PROVIDERS
Incapacity claims are highly concentrated in certain areas. This spatial analysis in this project will (i) given local authorities and GPs (taking over responsibility from Primary Care Trusts) a better understanding of incapacity in their specific area, helping them negotiate for appropriate settlements with central government and design appropriate local policy responses; and (ii) consider the acceptability among stakeholders of bringing regional factors into the assessment of incapacity, mirroring debates on regional variations in public sector pay.
4. DISABLED PEOPLE, OLDER PEOPLE and THE WIDER PUBLIC
Finally, the project will have an impact on the lives of disabled people and older people in three ways. Firstly, a better understanding of the nature of incapacity will contribute to a better system of incapacity assessment, not only providing support where it is intended but without the high levels of appeals and anxiety of the current system. Secondly, a clear idea of what incapacity is - linked to evidence on what the public think it SHOULD be - could remove some of the lack of legitimacy in the current system, thereby reducing some of the stigma of claiming (Baumberg et al, In Press). Finally, public debate about incapacity benefits is based on the misconception that incapacity is about whether people are 'completely incapable of work', and how many older people this applies to. The project's evidence on non-medical influences will contribute to a better quality of debate on a key welfare state issue - itself a positive impact on wider society.
Please see the Pathways to Impact statement for details of the innovative activities to achieve this.
Organisations
Publications
Baumberg B
(2015)
Rethinking the Work Capability Assessment
Baumberg B
(2015)
Disability prevalence and disability-related employment gaps in the UK 1998-2012: Different trends in different surveys?
in Social science & medicine (1982)
Baumberg Geiger B
(2018)
The Growing American Health Penalty: International Trends in the Employment of Older Workers with Poor Health
in SSRN Electronic Journal
De Vries R
(2017)
Inequalities in the application of welfare sanctions in Britain
Geiger B
(2023)
Suspicious Minds? Media effects on the perception of disability benefit claimants
in Journal of Social Policy
Geiger B
(2017)
Introduction to the special issue on 'Disability and Conditional Social Security Benefits'
in Journal of Poverty and Social Justice
Geiger B
(2017)
Benefits conditionality for disabled people: stylised facts from a review of international evidence and practice
in Journal of Poverty and Social Justice
Geiger BB
(2021)
Disabled but not deserving? The perceived deservingness of disability welfare benefit claimants.
in Journal of European social policy
Geiger BB
(2017)
Success and failure in narrowing the disability employment gap: comparing levels and trends across Europe 2002-2014.
in BMC public health
Description | The key findings to date are those of the Demos report from March 2015 (other work is either within-Government and confidential, or only partially complete). These are: Lesson 1 Real-world assessment is possible - and even commonplace Lesson 2 A standardised real-world assessment is possible Lesson 3 We can separate real-world incapacity from unemployment Lesson 4 Unemployment benefits must also be a 'safe place' for disabled people Lesson 5 It is hard to evaluate the success of incapacity assessments from other countries [Further detail on all of these is given in the executive summary of https://www.rethinkingincapacity.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Rethinking-the-WCA-full-for-web.pdf] |
Exploitation Route | These findings can be fed into disability benefits policy, particularly around assessments - see my narrative description of impact for a fuller description. |
Sectors | Government Democracy and Justice |
URL | http://www.rethinkingincapacity.org |
Description | This project has become one of the main sources on models of disability benefit assessment & on the role of conditionality in disability benefits, as used by Government, Parliament, think-tanks, disability charities, and disabled people's organisations, as follows: - THINK TANK REPORTS: I was the lead author on two Demos (think tank) reports that reviewed incapacity assessment in other countries, one in 2015 and the other in 2018 (and linked to the academic publications documented elsewhere). - GOVERNMENT: I was brought in on secondment as an Expert Advisor in the DWP's ESA and WCA Policy Division from late 2015 until mid 2016. I was involved in many discussions about the Green Paper (published Dec 2016), and have continued to speak to the civil servants concerned about assessment & conditionality, which as of 2021 included membership of a policy forum on related issues - and spoke to the Secretary of State (then Amber Rudd) in a small, invite-only meeting as part of this policy forum. - PARLIAMENT: I was invited to give oral evidence to the Work and Pensions Select Committee two inquiries into the disability employment gap in 2016 and 2021, and to their report on sanctioning in 2018 (with their final report heavily citing my work). I was also invited to present to the backbench social security interest group of the Parliamentary Labour Party. I also met with the Shadow Ministerial team several times. - THINK TANKS: aside from my formal partnership with Demos for this project, I have fed these conclusions into many think tank reports - for example, being invited to speak alongside the Minister for Disabled People at the launch of a Resolution Foundation report in 2016, or being a member of the advisory group for the Centre for Social Justice disability report to be released March 2017. In both cases, the language around conditionality was amended as a direct result of my interventions to highlight the evidence on its counterproductive effects. - DISABILITY CHARITIES & DISABLED PEOPLE'S ORGANISATIONS: I have had countless conversations with disability charities and disabled people's organisations, sometimes directly communicating my evidence findings and sometimes indirectly feeding evidence into their work through meetings and comments on their work. For example, I spoke to Mencap at length about their response to the 2016 Green Paper, held a workshop with the Disability Benefits Consortium, and helped the grassroots disability group Spartacus by commenting on their own draft report in response to the Green Paper. Most recently (2021), I gave evidence to the Commission on Social Security led by Experts by Experience. During the project, my project blog had 33,000 unique users and almost 50,000 page views. |
First Year Of Impact | 2015 |
Sector | Government, Democracy and Justice |
Impact Types | Policy & public services |
Description | Invited to roundtable for the Independent review into the impact on employment outcomes of drug or alcohol addiction, and obesity |
Geographic Reach | Europe |
Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
Description | Select Committee influence - written evidence, invited oral evidence, & use in written report |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
URL | http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/work-and-pensions-committ... |
Description | Select Committee inquiry into Health assessments for benefits |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
URL | https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/10465/html/ |
Description | Welfare at a (Social) Distance: Accessing social security and employment support during the COVID-19 crisis and its aftermath |
Amount | £528,630 (GBP) |
Funding ID | ES/V003879/1 |
Organisation | Economic and Social Research Council |
Sector | Public |
Country | United Kingdom |
Start | 04/2020 |
End | 11/2022 |
Title | Attitudes to disability benefits in the UK and Norway 2017 |
Description | This project contains replication data for the paper, 'Disabled but Not Deserving? The perceived deservingness of disability welfare benefit claimants' in the Journal of European Social Policy. Two datasets are used in the paper: 1. SGC-MHS: instructions on how to obtain the dataset are available in the guide to replication (within Online Appendices B). 2 . YouGov and NatCen files: the data are included within this data deposit. |
Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
Year Produced | 2020 |
Provided To Others? | Yes |
Impact | None |
URL | https://osf.io/94hck/wiki/home/ |
Description | DWP Policy Forum on the WCA |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | I was invited to be part of the DWP Policy Forum on the Work Capability Assessment - one of only two academics invited to take part in a group of 15-20 people to have regular conversations about ways of reforming the disability assessment for the benefits system. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018,2019,2020,2021 |
Description | Demos Quarterly article |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | The activity is a thinkpiece in the summer 2014 edition of main online journal of one of the most important think-tanks in the UK, Demos, with associated social media activity. (Demos are also the only think-tank that has substantially engaged with disability issues). I do not yet have audience data (though I will have this in future), but it seems that it reached a reasonable audience (see below). The activity was viewed positively, and resulted in one offer of future research collaboration: [(i) A prominent disability advocate contacted me, with her email reading, "Just read your article in Demos Quarterly. Excellent. Congratulations." (ii) A representative from the Strategy, Equality and Performance team within the London Borough of Islington contacted me, with his email beginning "Have just read your piece in the DEMOS Quarterly with interest", and offering the possibility of doing future work in Islington] However, the main impacts will come from the more detailed future outputs in the project, beginning in early 2015. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
URL | http://quarterly.demos.co.uk/article/issue-3/what-is-incapacity/ |
Description | ESRC-DWP invited full day meeting on disability & employment research |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | An invited ESRC-DWP event on disability & employment research & policy, to underpin the Government's follow-up to the Dec 2016 Green Paper |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
Description | Evidence heavily used by influential Select Committee report |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | I submitted written evidence and had extensive conversations about disability and conditionality with the Work and Pensions Select Committee staff (I was invited to present orally, but could not make the rearranged date). I was then heavily cited in the resulting Select Committee report, which in turn influenced Government policy in early 2019 (via the Government's response to the Select Committee report, and Amber Rudd's speech in March 2019, which highlighted the start of tests to change the level of conditionality applied to disabled people). |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018,2019 |
URL | https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/955/955.pdf |
Description | Meeting Shadow Ministerial team |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | A roundtable on 9th April 2014 organised by the Shadow Ministerial Team of the Labour Party to discuss disability, employment and welfare reform. Two shadow Ministers attended (Kate Green MP and Stephen Timms MP), along with four other key stakeholders (2 of us were from academia). I have also spoken one-to-one with Kate Green MP on 13th March 2014. Part of a process leading to intended decisions in 2015. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
Description | Oral evidence to SSAC evidence session |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | I gave evidence as part of an expert meeting on 5th May 2022, which contributed to this report https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/out-of-work-disability-benefit-reform |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
Description | Oral evidence to Select Committee |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | I was invited to give oral evidence to the Work and Pensions Select Committee inquiry into the disability employment gap. This was reported by the Disability News Service at http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/disability-employment-gap-experts-demolish-government-excuses-for-wrag-cut/ |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
URL | https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/1ce6b662-de5f-436b-8196-4dc62686e07b |
Description | Oral evidence to Select Committee (2021) |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | I was invited to give oral evidence to the Work and Pensions Select Committee inquiry into the disability employment gap (the 2021 iteration, the Select Committee having looked at this previously, to which I also gave evidence). |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
URL | https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/1752/html/ |
Description | Oral evidence to claimant-led commission |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Patients, carers and/or patient groups |
Results and Impact | Invited to give oral evidence to the Commission on Social Security led by Experts by Experience, discussing disability assessment and wider issues in the benefits system. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
URL | https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/news/commission-social-security-led-experts-experience/ |
Description | Presentation within Government (DH) |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | On June 12th 2015, I spoke to a small group of Department of Health (DH) civil servants who were working on work and health policy (who later became part of the DWP-DH Joint Unit on Work and Health). As with the earlier DWP presentation, I focused on incapacity assessment and the results of my Demos publication. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
Description | Presentation within Government (DWP) |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | On April 21st 2015, I gave a presentation within the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) to civil servants who work on incapacity benefit (ESA) policy, both operational staff and strategy staff. The presentation focused on my international review of incapacity assessment, as published in the Demos report described in researchfish. 21 people were present, including the Deputy Medical Directory of DWP and the Director of ESA Policy. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
Description | Research central to story in national newspaper |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | A piece of research from my 2018 Demos report was used in the Observer story, 'A million benefit sanctions imposed on disabled people since 2010' (the headline figure is the one from my research) - see https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/18/disabled-people-million-benefit-sanctions-since-2010. This was then quoted in other news articles (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/18/disabled-people-million-benefit-sanctions-since-2010 and https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/20/sanctions-disabled-people-claimants-tough-love), and in the Equality and Human Rights Committee's report How Fair Is Britain (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/is-britain-fairer-2018-pre-lay.pdf), as well as being part of my submission to the Work & Pensions Select Committee (see further output). |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
URL | https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/18/disabled-people-million-benefit-sanctions-since-2010 |
Description | Series of workshops with policymakers, other stakeholders, & the public |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | A series of 2-3 hour workshops with policymakers (MPs on the Select Committee, disability charities, disabled people's organisations, medical organisations, think tanks) as well as welfare-to-work organisations and the general public, about their attitudes to disability benefits. At the policymaker event, this included a short evidence summary presentation that I gave to inform the debate. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016,2017 |
Description | Talk at policymaker- & practitioner/focussed event |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
Results and Impact | Invited talk at the 'Closing Disability Gaps at Work; London Conference 13th December, to a small audience (5) formed of people from the EHRC, DVLA, a trade union, think tank analyst, and DWP statistician. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
URL | http://sites.cardiff.ac.uk/events/view/closing-disability-gaps-at-work-conference/ |