Parliament is currently running an inquiry into the Access to Work scheme. We submitted written evidence, and we wanted to share what that evidence was based on: the real experiences of Disabled people across the North East who took the time to tell us what is working, what is not, and what needs to change.

Access to Work is a government scheme that provides practical support for Disabled people in employment. It can fund equipment, travel, support workers, and coaching. When it works well, it is genuinely life-changing. It can be the difference between staying in work and having to leave. But the people who shared their experiences with us show a scheme that too often creates more barriers than it removes.

As a Deaf and Disabled People’s Organisation (DDPO) led by Disabled people, we gathered these experiences to make sure the voices of people in our region informed the parliamentary process. This is what they told us.

What people told us

Delays that cost people their support

The most common issue raised was delays. Not just waiting a long time to access support initially, but being sent to the back of the queue when something routine changed, such as moving house or needing a different piece of equipment.

“I was offered assistive technology for note taking support, which is not compatible with my workplace, and I was not aware of this at the time of my assessment. When trying to go back to Access to Work to review this and explore alternative options, I was advised I needed to be reallocated to a new case adviser with an approximate 9 month waiting list. That was over one year ago. I still do not have the ability to manage note taking effectively in my workplace.”

Jade, Newcastle

Jade also told us that when she moved house and rang to update her address, she was told she would need to be fully reassessed. A letter about her case was sent to her old address. More than a year later, the situation is still not resolved. Jade works as a disability practitioner supporting students in higher education to access reasonable adjustments. The fact that she cannot access the support she has been awarded is not lost on her.

“The irony of this is that my day job is working as a disability practitioner to support students in higher education to access reasonable adjustments. Yet for me myself as a Disabled colleague in the workplace, I am unable to meaningfully access any of the support I have been offered by Access to Work.”

Jade, Newcastle

For people who rely on travel support to get to work, delays are not just frustrating. They mean paying out of pocket, relying on family members, or not being able to get to work at all. One respondent from the North East described spending over £100 on taxis in a few months when public transport repeatedly failed, while waiting to hear back from Access to Work about taxi support.

Support cut without warning or consultation

For some people, the scheme worked well for years before changing suddenly, with no discussion and no warning.

“For the last year, I have been reduced to barely 5 hours of support a week, and it has had a distressing impact on my ability to do my job.”

Sara, Durham

Sara is AuDHD and had received around 13 hours of support a week for three years, which she described as transformational. Her support worker helped with coaching, administrative tasks, emails, scheduling, and project management. It meant she could work on equal terms with her non-Disabled colleagues. During what should have been a routine renewal in January 2025, her hours were cut in half and her support worker’s hourly rate was reduced to a third of its previous level. She was not consulted at any point.

Sara appealed, requested a mandatory reconsideration, and after a promotion in July 2025 submitted a new application. At the time we submitted our evidence, more than six months had passed with no response to that application.

Support that did not match the need

People told us about being given equipment or support that did not help them, while the thing that actually made a difference was refused. This is not just frustrating; it wastes public money and leaves people without effective support.

“I trialled hearing aids for several months but was then told they would not be funded by Access to Work. I was given other equipment which I was told I needed but frankly rarely use as there is no benefit to it. The thing that really helped was denied to me and I had to purchase it myself.”

Katy

Katy has profound hearing loss on one side and moderate to severe loss on the other, which is deteriorating due to Meniere’s Disease. The hearing aids she trialled via Bluetooth allowed her to hear phone calls, which are central to her job. The equipment she was funded for did not. She was left with two options: buy the hearing aids herself, or leave her job.

This experience reflects a wider problem. Decisions about support are not always made with the individual. Disabled people have the right to reasonable adjustments at work, and support through Access to Work should complement that, not cut across it with one-size decisions that do not reflect what someone actually needs.

No continuity between advisers

Several people described cases being moved between different advisers repeatedly, requiring them to explain their situation from scratch each time.

“Overall the experience was incredibly frustrating, negative and costly to myself. It was a very lengthy process and there was little consistency as the case worker changed several times.”

Katy

Having to re-explain a disability, its impact, and your working situation repeatedly is not just time-consuming. For many Disabled people it is exhausting and distressing. It should not be a standard feature of accessing support.

Fixed-term workers left without support

One case in our evidence highlighted how current Access to Work timescales make the scheme effectively unavailable to people on short or fixed-term contracts. A Disabled worker applied for support early in their role. The process took several months. Their support was confirmed on their final day of employment.

This is not an edge case. Fixed-term and short-term contracts are increasingly common, and Disabled workers are not exempt from that reality. A scheme that cannot move quickly enough to support people in these roles is failing a significant part of the workforce.

When it works, it really works

People also shared positive experiences, and we think it is important to include those. The potential of Access to Work is real. When support is matched to need and delivered on time, it changes what is possible for Disabled people at work.

“The ADHD coach gave me strategies to help focus and prioritise on my work, and she gave me space to talk about my challenges and successes that my line manager was not interested in. The sessions became a supportive space during a challenging time, and I did manage to pass my probation and I’m still in post.”

Anonymous

Another respondent told us that Access to Work taxi support helped them get back to work when they were unable to walk independently. Support like this enables Disabled people to participate, contribute, and progress. That is what the scheme is for.

What we are calling for

Our submission to the parliamentary inquiry set out five areas where change is needed. These came directly from what Disabled people told us.

1. A faster route for routine changes. Address updates, mileage recalculations, and minor adjustments should not trigger a full reassessment. People should not lose access to support because they moved house.
2. Continuity in case handling. People should not have to explain their disability and circumstances from scratch every time their case moves to a new adviser. Better internal information sharing would reduce this burden significantly.
3. Clear communication about timescales. People need to know what stage their case is at and when to expect a response. Long periods without updates cause stress, and in some cases lead people to leave work entirely.
4. Support decisions led by the individual. Disabled people know what helps them do their job. Equipment and adjustments should be chosen with them, not for them. Funding the wrong support wastes money and leaves people without what they actually need.
5. Timescales that reflect fixed-term employment. For people on short or fixed-term contracts, a slow process is effectively no process at all. Faster assessment and delivery is essential if Access to Work is to serve the whole workforce.

You can read our full written evidence submission on the parliamentary inquiry page. Our submission is listed as AWS0046.

This evidence is part of our wider work documenting what Disabled people across the North East are experiencing. You can read more in our 2026 report on what Disabled people in the North East are telling us.

Thank you to everyone who shared their experience

This evidence exists because people trusted us with their stories. Some of those experiences were painful to share. We are grateful to everyone who took part, and we will keep using what you told us to push for real change.

If you have experienced barriers to employment or support as a Disabled person in the North East, we want to hear from you. Find your local Difference North East team or find out more about your rights as a Disabled person.