Predicting policy performance: Can the Work and Health Programme work for chronically ill or disabled people?

Conclusion

The WHP is likely to fail. It is likely to cause harm to people with chronic illness or disability by requiring them to engage in activity of which they are not capable, under threat of (further) financial deprivation if they do not. It is unlikely that the policy will result in significant numbers of sick or disabled people moving into work; even the most successful programmes, such as fully-implemented IPS, only help one in four participants (Schneider et al., 2009). Sick and disabled people typically need multiple adaptations if they are to be able to work, including reduced and flexible hours, one-to-one support workers and physical adaptations to a workstation and workplace (DWP, 2013; Benstead, 2017). Yet the DWP and DH have not shown any sign that they are aware of these costs, let alone willingness to pay for them.

The DWP and DH have misled themselves through their selective use of data. They have relied upon low-quality data, misinterpreted the data they did use, and failed to use a comprehensive range of evidence. By not paying attention to the evidence of harm caused by externally imposed activity, sanctions, poverty and lack of practical support, they risk causing significant harm to sick and disabled people without achieving any good. The likelihood is that any sick or disabled person achieving work does so despite, not because of, the WHP.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0261018318820173