Disabled campaigners have criticised the decision to award an OBE to the senior Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) civil servant responsible for delivering the much-criticised Access to Work (AtW) scheme.Rilesh Jadeja, AtW’s national delivery manager, was recognised in the latest new year’s honours “for services to people with disabilities”, just two months after new research found the future of the scheme was in jeopardy because of “bureaucratic incompetence” and a cost-cutting drive to reduce people’s support packages.The research, commissioned by Inclusion London, said that “shocking levels of delay, error, and the de-skilling of staff” within AtW were putting Deaf and disabled people’s jobs at risk.AtW provides disabled people with funding to pay for some of the extra disability-related expenses they face at work – including travel, personal assistants or the use of BSL interpreters – reducing the costs organisations meet when taking on disabled employees.The Inclusion London report said the scheme was “a cornerstone of the movement for equality and civil rights for Deaf and disabled people in the UK” but had been “beset with so much bureaucratic incompetence and obstructionism in recent years that, in many respects, Access to Work is no longer fit for purpose”.Jadeja’s award also came only three weeks after a Deaf chief executive launched a legal case against DWP over the “discriminatory” cap it has imposed on the amount of support available through AtW.The cap was introduced for new AtW claimants in 2015 and is due to affect existing claimants from April.Linda Burnip, co-founder of Disabled People Against Cuts, said: “This award is as farcical as the DWP twitter asking about what DWP has done for claimants over the last 12months*.“Given the many serious issues outstanding with cuts to Access to Work funding, which have seriously disadvantaged many disabled people and actively prevented them accessing employment, it can only be described as a further slap in the face.“It does of course show just how meaningless such awards actually are.”Nicky Evans and Geraldine O’Halloran, from the StopChanges2AtW campaign, said: “SC2AtW strongly condemn the whole system of rewarding someone who has been paid to do a job an additional award which is not based on any achievement, and to make matters worse, under the guise of services to disabled people.“Services have, under this government, got progressively worse for Deaf and disabled people.“We would have preferred to be saying ‘well done’ to DWP for delivering a fully supported Access to Work service to Deaf and disabled employees. “Instead we have record number of Deaf and disabled people experiencing cuts to budgets and this is impacting on their ability to get on with their job. The government continue to ignore our plight.”Asked how DWP justified recommending Jadeja for the award, a DWP spokesman said: “Honours – like this one given to Mr Jadeja – are awarded to individuals on merit for their own exceptional achievement or service.“It’s important to note that honours are backed by independent honours committees.”*DWP’s Twitter feed drew hundreds of angry and critical responses when it announced last week that it was “looking back at some of our highlights of 2017”, with many disabled people pointing to its failure to point out that it had been heavily criticised by the UN’s committee on the rights of persons with disabilities over its record.
The government has taken a small step towards addressing the discrimination faced by service-users with complex healthcare needs who risk being forced into institutions.Last month, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) wrote to 13 clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) as the first step in a potential judicial review of their policies on long-term NHS funding for care outside hospital, known as NHS continuing healthcare (NHS CHC).But the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) now appears to have quietly altered key guidance on NHS CHC, making it harder for CCGs to continue to discriminate against disabled people receiving such funding.Concerns about the policies of more than 40 CCGs were first raised in January 2017 by Fleur Perry (pictured), herself a recipient of NHS continuing healthcare.Her research showed that many CCGs had drawn up policies suggesting they would move disabled people eligible for NHS CHC out of their homes and into institutions against their wishes, even if the cost of a homecare package was only slightly more expensive than residential care.These concerns were subsequently taken on by EHRC, which believes that “blanket” policies that have imposed “arbitrary” caps on funding and fail to consider the specific needs of individual patients are “a serious breach” of the Human Rights Act, the CCGs’ public sector equality duty and DHSC’s own NHS CHC framework.But Perry has now spotted that DHSC has made a minor, but significant, change to its framework document, which is due to come into effect in October and is the first new version for six years.In the new version, DHSC warns CCGs that while they can “take comparative costs and value for money into account, they must not set arbitrary limits on care at home packages based purely on the notional costs of caring for an individual in a home, if this does not represent a personalised approach or an accurate appraisal of the cost of meeting the assessed needs of the individual concerned”.There was no mention of arbitrary limits in the 2012 edition of the guidance.Imposing such “arbitrary limits” is “incompatible” with the principle of personal health budgets, which were “developed to enable people to live independently, work or participate in society”, says DHSC in the new version of the guidance.Perry said the change to the framework represented progress although it fails to address all her concerns and is “not a solution”.She said: “It’s great that arbitrary cost-caps are not supported by the new national framework.“However, this does not prevent care at home costs being effectively capped at the cost of a local care home by some CCGs.“It does not prevent a person being moved away from their home on the sole basis of small differences in cost. This is a step forward, but not a solution.”An EHRC spokeswoman said: “It is encouraging to see that the Department of Health and Social Care recognise the importance of an individual’s circumstances when arranging care packages.“We hope that CCGs take note and amend their NHS Continuing Healthcare policies accordingly.“Removing arbitrary caps on funding for NHS CHC will go a long way to improving many disabled people’s ability to live independently.”A DHSC spokeswoman said: “We have updated the national framework to ensure the process for accessing funding is clearer so people with the highest and most complex health and care needs get the care they deserve.”The department believes the change makes it clear that the starting point for agreeing a NHS Continuing Healthcare care package and the setting where services are to be provided should be the individual’s preferences.But it believes this is not a major departure from the 2012 guidance, which also highlights the importance of an individual’s preferences.
“Back Onside” is an exciting project for men aged 35-64 who haven’t exercised for a while and are looking to have fun and get fit.Come and train with current and past players to help build your strength, stamina and fitness like other like minded men here at the Totally Wicked Stadium.Sessions will be held every Wednesday at the home of the Saints. To book onto “Back Onside” or for more information about the project please contact [email protected]