A team of researchers at ISER and the University of East Anglia have just submitted written evidence to the Health Select Committee Social Care Inquiry.
Professor Steve Pudney, Professor Ruth Hancock and colleagues have been looking into the role of cash benefits in the support of older disabled people.
The Health Select Committee decided to undertake an inquiry into the future of social care services following the publication of the Green Paper Shaping the Future of Care Together.
The written evidence submitted to the committee summarises emerging findings from the team’s ongoing research on the role of cash benefits – Attendance Allowance (AA) and Disability Living Allowance (DLA) –in the support of older disabled people. It relates to people living in private households and excludes the care home population. Initial findings show:
- Claim behaviour for AA is strongly related to age, income and severity of disability. People with higher levels of age and disability, and lower levels of income, are more likely to make a claim for AA. Adjudication outcomes are, as expected, strongly related to disability.
- Although not explicitly means-tested, AA/DLA payments display a degree of income targeting, since low-income people are more likely to have severe disability and are also more likely to make a claim. The degree of income-targeting is less than for Pension Credit, but still significant.
- There is evidence of a large group of older people (at least 30% of the over-65s) who are not receiving AA but would be predicted to be successful, were they to make a claim.
- Our analysis finds no evidence of significant numbers of older people receiving AA/DLA long-term without any accompanying health problem.
- Receipt of AA/DLA and receipt of local authority social care services overlap only partially – there are many people who receive social care services who do not receive AA/DLA and vice versa.
- A switch from a dual system of support (AA/DLA + local care services) to a unitary system providing only care services will greatly increase the uncertainty faced by potential applicants for support and the risk of uneven administration. Increased uncertainty poses a significant threat to take-up.
A full copy of the written evidence submitted to the committee is available here