First comprehensive review into PIP finds it is “not fit for purpose”

Personal Independence Payment is no longer fit for purpose and is failing to keep pace with how disability, health and work have changed over the past decade, the Timms Review has found

  • Millions of disabled people are being failed by a benefit that is no longer working, the first ever full review into Personal Independence Payment has found.
  • The largest co-produced review ever undertaken by government at a national level has heard from nearly 40,000 people and organisations across the country.
  • Publication of interim report finds that while PIP is a lifeline for many claimants, it can create barriers to work, physical activity and community life.
  • Report also reveals deep-rooted problems in the design and delivery of PIP with the assessment described as dehumanising and stressful.

Personal Independence Payment is no longer fit for purpose and is failing to keep pace with how disability, health and work have changed over the past decade, the Timms Review has found.

The interim report published today (Thursday 9 July 2026) comes as part of the first comprehensive review of PIP since the benefit was introduced in 2013 and sets out the evidence gathered so far to inform recommendations for reform due this autumn.

Drawing on findings from more than 38,000 responses to the Review’s Call for Evidence, alongside workshops and engagement with disabled people, their organisations and experts, it is one of the largest co-produced reviews delivered by the government.

The report has revealed that while PIP is widely valued as a cash benefit, it is not working as intended for disabled people or wider society.

While many disabled people say that PIP is vital in helping them meet the extra costs of disability and participate in everyday life, others stated PIP creates barriers to participating fully in work, social and community life. This is particularly true for people with fluctuating conditions, less visible conditions or multiple conditions.

The process of claiming, under assessment criteria designed more than a decade ago, was viewed negatively by 90% of respondents, and described as at times “dehumanising”, “degrading” and “stressful” and the use of supporting evidence too often inconsistent. Only 5% of responses about the process were positive.

The Report also reports low levels of trust in the system and the need for it to be built back both for disabled people and those with long-term conditions, as well as for the taxpayer.

PIP was introduced in 2013 to contribute towards the extra costs of disability and support independent living but has never been fully reviewed despite shifting trends in health and disability, and changes in wider society and the workplace.

The Review launched last October with the aim of making sure PIP is fair and fit for the future in a changing world and helps support disabled people to achieve better health, higher living standards and greater independence including through employment.

It will also take account of related work underway across the wider health and social care system, including the Milburn Review into the increase in the number of young people who are not in education, employment or training (NEET). Both reviews are due to conclude later this year, providing a foundation for effective and sustainable reform.

The steering group will now continue to gather evidence through evidence sessions with experts and workshops around the country, while moving into the next phase: designing and testing recommendations for change, with the final recommendations due to be published this autumn.

Around 10 million working-age people report living with a disability – equivalent to 24% of the working-age population, compared with under 17% in 2013/14. There have been greater increases in the prevalence of disability among young people and a rise in mental health conditions. The Review must consider how PIP can remain sustainable within fixed financial limits and support future generations.

The report draws on findings from over 38,000 responses to a Call for Evidence, which describe an assessment process that fails to reflect real-life impacts, particularly for those with multiple or fluctuating conditions.

Yet the report also found that disabled people consistently describe PIP as a vital lifeline, allowing independence. Without it, many say they would become housebound, dependent on family, or in need of residential care.

Sharon Brennan, co-chair of the Review, said: “Improving trust in the system – both from the public and those going through the system – is vital if PIP is to be fit and fair for the future.

“Of those that responded to the steering group’s Call for Evidence, over 90% described negative experiences of the process of claiming PIP, with concerns raised around all aspects of the process from application through to assessment and appeals.

“We are immensely grateful to the tens of thousands of people who have taken the time to share their lived experience and make a valuable contribution to this Review.

“We’ve heard loud and clear: PIP is highly valued as a benefit but is not fit for purpose. We are committed to making changes so that PIP can fulfil its purpose.”

Dr Clenton Farquharson CBE, co-chair of the Review, said: “PIP should contribute to disabled people meeting the extra costs of disability and participate in everyday life. What we have heard through this Review is that, while PIP is a lifeline for many people, the system too often fails to understand the reality of people’s lives.

“Disabled people have told us about a process that can feel stressful, dehumanising and hard to navigate, especially for people with fluctuating conditions, less visible or multiple conditions. That matters, because a system that does not feel fair or humane will not command trust from disabled people or from the wider public.

“This Review is significant because disabled people, Disabled People’s Organisations and experts are helping and supporting to shape the work from the inside, not simply being consulted from the outside. As we move towards final recommendations, we need to be bold in our ambition, practical in our proposals, and focused on making PIP fair, trusted and fit for the future.”

Sir Stephen Timms, Minister for Social Security and Disability and co-chair of the Review, said: “This interim report delivers a clear message: while PIP is widely valued as a benefit, it is not working as intended and needs fundamental change.

“Our work so far has been informed by a wide range of evidence, expertise, and insight to ensure we hear from as many disabled people as possible across the country, including through workshops, engagement and a call for evidence which attracted more than 38,000 responses.

“I’m grateful to my fellow co-chairs and the steering group for their intensive work and look forward to the Review’s final report being delivered in the autumn.”

Charlotte Gill, Head of Campaigns at the MS Society, says: “Today’s interim report confirms what disabled people have been saying for many years – that the current PIP system is stressful and exhausting.

“We’ve been supporting people with MS to share their experiences as part of the Review, and they are clear in their call for a new approach based on fairness, dignity and respect.

“Over 150,000 people live with MS in the UK, with most diagnosed in their 30s and 40s. This is our chance to build a PIP system that acknowledges invisible and fluctuating symptoms, ends unnecessary reassessments, and works for everyone.

“But the next steps are crucial – and must continue involving and listening to disabled people. That’s the only way to make PIP fair and fit for the future.”

Sarah Hughes, CEO of Mind, says: “The report echoes what we hear every day: that the PIP system is dehumanising, stressful and damages trust.

“PIP is a lifeline for people who, through no fault of their own, live with the additional costs of mental illness.

“So as this work progresses, it’s vital that, alongside improving the process, we also recognise that in a decent society we must support those facing additional need. This is a line-in-the sand moment for how we treat people, that improves lives for those who are unwell and reduces the impacts on families and communities.”

Jon Sparkes, OBE, Chief Executive of learning disability Mencap, said: “It’s groundbreaking to see proper co-production in action. Disabled people are shaping the way that PIP works, and their lived experience is essential to making the right decisions on its future.

“This report shows clearly that that the current claims process is not fit for purpose and places an unfair administrative and emotional burden on people with a learning disability and their families. This chimes with our experience: the application process is not accessible, assessments end up being a needless fight and unnecessary re-assessments create distrust in the decision-making process.

“This approach should continue so that future recommendations are practical, deliverable and do not harm disabled people. I hope that the process of co-production will help to restore trust in the welfare systems that many of us rely on.”

The Call for Evidence forms just one part of a wider programme of engagement and evidence gathering. Last month, the group launched a toolkit to gather organisations’ insights on people’s experiences of PIP. Feedback from these sessions, combined with existing research, has helped ensure the report reflects a broad range of views and evidence.

The steering group is clear that co-production is central to the Review, putting disabled people at its heart. Co-production is a new undertaking for the UK government, and this is the first time it has been used on this scale.

It includes disabled people, representatives from Disabled People’s Organisations and experts – bringing together lived experience, policy knowledge and practical expertise to develop recommendations based on real lives.

Harriet Edwards, Director of Influencing, Sense: “Too many disabled people are being failed by the current benefits system, and we welcome the Timms Review’s acknowledgment of this.

“Sense research found that nearly half of disabled people with complex needs on benefits said that the application process made their conditions worse; this is clearly a system that needs to urgently change.

“We are also pleased to see the review’s commitment to co-production with disabled people, and look forward to being further involved in this process.

“Benefits like PIP are a vital lifeline for disabled people. They are the difference between people being part of their communities, seeing people they love, being able to stay active and getting to work.

“As the Timms review moves into its next phase, we urge the review team to ensure its recommendations are driven by the goal of improving disabled people’s lives, not reducing public spending.

“Changes to welfare must remove barriers, strengthen support and build a system that treats disabled people with dignity, respect and trust.”

David Newbold, Director of Community, Parkinson’s UK: “We welcome the Timms Review’s recognition that the current PIP system is not working for many disabled people and that it can be particularly difficult for those with fluctuating conditions such as Parkinson’s.

“It is encouraging to see acknowledgement that assessments do not always capture the full impact of a condition, can be subjective, and that assessor training needs to improve.

“As the Review develops its recommendations, it will be important to ensure that support remains based on the impact a condition has on someone’s daily life. People with Parkinson’s should be able to access the support they need regardless of whether they are able to work, volunteer or take part in other activities.

“It is also vital for the Review to ensure that unnecessary reassessments for people with progressive conditions such as Parkinson’s are stopped. A fair system should not require people to repeatedly prove the impact of a condition that will not improve.

“We will continue to work with the Timms Review to help ensure any future changes to PIP work for people with Parkinson’s and lead to a fairer, more consistent system that provides the support people need.”

James Taylor, Director of Strategy, Scope: “Co-producing with disabled people is the right thing to do. We’re pleased lived experience is at the centre of the Review.

“This report reflects what Scope hears day in, day out, from disabled people. PIP isn’t working.

“The assessment process is complex and dehumanising. The system does not reflect the reality of disabled people’s lives, especially people with fluctuating conditions.

“Life costs more if you are disabled. And PIP exists to help with the extra costs disabled people face, whether they are in work, out of work, or unable to work.

“The government has started to listen. Now it must build a person-centred system that is easier to deal with and fit for disabled people’s lives.”

Stewart McCulloch, Chief Executive Officer, Christians Against Poverty: “We welcome that the Timms Review has listened to the voices of people living with disabilities, including a visit to meet with some of our clients at CAP’s support hub in Bradford.

“As rightly highlighted by the review, the current application process for PIP is complicated and adds additional stress and anxiety onto people already facing vulnerable circumstances. CAP’s debt coaches and local church teams frequently see this reality when working with clients in their communities.

“Many people with disabilities come to us for free debt advice because they have had to take out credit as a result of not being able to afford their basic needs.

“This report is a positive step on the journey of reviewing PIP. But, from this review, steps need to be taken to ensure that the social security system supports and empowers disabled people into good, quality employment, whilst also providing a livable income for those unable to work to live a life with dignity.”

NHS Lothian ‘welcomes’ publication of Scottish Hospitals Inquiry interim report into New Sick Kids delays

NHS LOTHIAN has welcomed the publication of the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry Interim Report into the delayed opening of the Royal Hospital for Children and Young People and Department for Clinical Neurosciences.

The planned opening of the new building at Little France was halted in July 2019 when final safety checks revealed that the ventilation system within the Critical Care area did not comply with national standards.

Jim Crombie, Deputy Chief Executive, NHS Lothian said: “Patient safety was always our driving force in commissioning a first-class hospital building so we know that the discovery of a ventilation problem just days before it was due to open caused shock and significant concern for our patients, their families and our staff.

“We once again reiterate our sincere and unreserved apology to them all for the resulting delay to the transfer of patient services to the new facility. I am particularly sorry that patients and their families were let down at a time when they were already worried and vulnerable.”

Lord Brodie, Chairman of the Inquiry, acknowledged the huge operation that was put in place within hours to reschedule thousands of patients who were due to attend the new hospital and prevent families and patients from turning up to the wrong building in an emergency.

A total of 2255 appointments required to be rescheduled immediately – 1586 in paediatrics and 669 in DCN were affected.

The report found there had been no wrongdoing or attempts to conceal information.

Lord Brodie also noted the positive organisational culture in NHS Lothian and said there were a variety of channels through which concerns could have been raised, as well as whistleblowing policies.

But that it was a “lack of clarity” around technical building standards led to the issue around ventilation and the delay.

Mr Crombie added: “Lord Brodie has identified our failure to provide a clear design brief at the outset as critical to events as well as weaknesses in governance and understanding between contractual partners.

“We are sorry for these failures and also deeply regret that opportunities were missed by all parties over the course of the project to detect and rectify errors in the design of the ventilation regime.

“The report acknowledges the changes that have been put in place in NHS Lothian and the new guidance introduced since 2019 to ensure that lessons are learned and similar events can be prevented in the future.

“Finally, I’d like to thank the relatives of patients affected by the delay who took part in the Inquiry for their important contributions.”

You can read the full report on the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry website

Full report here: https://ow.ly/mZRH50V9tK9

Our pandemic accommodation was unsafe, asylum seekers tell research team

Study suggests relocations took place with little consideration of people’s needs and adversely affected their health and wellbeing

Asylum seekers who were moved to temporary accommodation during the Covid-19 pandemic have faced unsafe conditions, mobility restrictions and a lack of communication from service providers, according to a new study.

Edinburgh Napier researchers said the asylum seekers’ accounts – in which they likened their hotel-type accommodation to detention centres – “pointed to a provision that was inattentive towards their needs, vulnerability and wellbeing.”

The study, which focuses on accommodation in Glasgow, is particularly critical of a “mothers and baby” unit in the south of the city, which was opened last October.  Mothers, who were moved there by Home Office accommodation contractor Mears Group who run the facilities, criticised the cramped and noisy living conditions, unsuitable furniture and inadequate washing facilities.

The report authors call for an independent assessment of the facility to be carried out as a matter of urgency, and say no more families should be moved there until this has taken place.

Other recommendations in the interim report include calls for risk assessments for individuals in advance of any relocation, the minimising of stays in hotel-type accommodation, a review of limits on travel luggage, and the lifting of restrictions requiring residents to stay ‘on-site overnight’.

Edinburgh Napier researchers carried out the study, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, as part of UK Research and Innovation’s response to Covid-19. They worked with migrant-led grassroots organisation Migrants Organising for Rights and Empowerment (MORE) to explore the impact of the pandemic on those placed in temporary accommodation in Glasgow.

Around 350 asylum seekers were moved from their settled flats into various hotels in the city centre following the outbreak of Covid-19 in March last year, which Mears Group claimed was an attempt to curb the spread of the virus. 

Researchers spoke to more than 50 asylum seekers and followed closely the lives of 14 participants of varied ages and backgrounds from December 2020 to June 2021, during the ‘second wave’ of the virus in the UK, through weekly online meetings. 

Accommodation for asylum seekers during the pandemic has long been a controversial topic. A mass outbreak of Covid at the repurposed Napier military barracks in Kent last winter and a mass stabbing at the Park Inn Hotel in Glasgow the previous June sparked debate and criticism of the government’s handling of asylum housing from parliamentary select committees.

The interim findings of the new Edinburgh Napier study suggest relocating asylum seekers to hotel-type accommodation had a negative impact on their health and wellbeing, and that they found social distancing almost impossible in their new environment.

Individuals living in hotels also faced a number of restrictions. They were unable to cook their own food or have visitors, had their weekly allowance withdrawn, and were told they could not spend nights away from the accommodation. The food served was said to be of poor quality, and it did not reflect their religious or cultural backgrounds.

The Glasgow-based mother and baby unit, the only such facility in the whole of Scotland, was reportedly noisy – with doors frequently banging and staff knocking, and had small beds, insufficient room ventilation and furniture which was unsuitable for breastfeeding. One mum told of her humiliation when the driver taking her to the unit told her she had too many belongings for a “destitute” asylum seeker.

The report said relocations to temporary accommodation took place with little consideration of people’s needs and with no consultation with asylum seekers themselves. There were cases of people being given less than 15 minutes to get ready for their move, and of individuals being threatened with deportation if they resisted.

Dr Taulant Guma, Principal Investigator and lecturer in Edinburgh Napier’s School of Applied Sciences, said: “While issues around asylum accommodation have received a significant amount of media and public attention since the start of the Covid-19 outbreak, little attention has been paid to the experiences and perspectives of asylum seekers themselves, who are directly and mostly affected by these housing arrangements.

“As a collaboration with a grassroots organisation, our study offers a unique and in-depth insight and understanding into the day-to-day realities of asylum seekers’ housing experiences during the pandemic.

“In the context of the current Afghan crisis and discourses of ‘warm welcome’, our findings offer a timely reminder of the cold realities that may await Afghan asylum seekers and refugees once they are relocated to their accommodation across the country.”

Robert Makutsa, Community Researcher with MORE, said: “The asylum accommodation system is broken because the level of duty of care that is required does not need to be met. Think about it; what legal action can an asylum seeker raise against Mears or the Home Office in their failure to adhere to the accommodation provision? None. 

“Their lives are defined and controlled by their agents and often it is us, migrant led organisations and grassroots groups, who put pressure on Mears when asylum seekers make complaints.”

Report reveals impact of coronavirus on poverty in Edinburgh

City council leader Adam McVey has outlined the measures the Council will take following a report from the Edinburgh Poverty Commission into the impact the Covid-19 pandemic is having on residents in the city.

The interim Poverty and Coronavirus in Edinburgh report has taken testimonies from people directly affected by the pandemic focussing on areas such as jobs, people’s incomes, housing, homelessness, the cost of living, health and social isolation.

Leader Adam McVey pledged the Council will do everything it can to support those most in need and welcomed the report which will inform the future direction the Council takes in tackling poverty in the city.

He said: “I welcome that this report recognises the work done by the Council, partners, third sector and volunteers across the city to respond positively and quickly to deliver lifeline services including vital food and medical supplies for citizens affected by the coronavirus measure that have been put in place.

“Today’s report contains important findings with vital and timely testimonies on the real impact that lockdown is having on people’s lives. While we have all been affected by the ongoing situation, it is clear from this report that this pandemic has been particularly challenging for those who were already in or at risk of poverty in the city.

“We’re absolutely committed to making sure this evidence shapes our continuing response to this emergency over the coming months, as well as the planning for how we will rebuild the city when this crisis has passed.

“It’s so important that while we look to address the additional hardship and pressures this crisis has brought, we also build on the renewed sense of community and collaboration we have witnessed across the city.

“As we plan for Edinburgh’s recovery, we will continue to be ambitious and make sure our responses are guided by our long-term commitment to boosting sustainability, tackling poverty and improving residents’ wellbeing.

“We will continue working with the Scottish and UK Governments to secure the right level of ongoing financial support to allow us to rebuild and create a fairer city for all going forward.”

In specific response to the actions the Commission has put forward, the Council will:

  • continue to deliver compassionate support directly to people in the most need during this period of emergency – this includes support for essential food supplies and medicine deliveries to people self-isolating and offering critical support to people in vulnerable situations through our Resilience Centres
  • make sure the support mechanisms set up by UK and Scottish Governments reach everyone in Edinburgh who needs them – we’ve already processed over 4,600 applications for Scottish Welfare Fund support, distributed nearly £600,000 in crisis payments to citizens and directed £61m in government grants to organisations in Edinburgh to help employers and the self-employed
  • make sure safe and secure housing options continue to be available for those people in temporary accommodation and rough sleeping who have been housed through emergency measures during this crisis, and
  • make sure that the city takes a co-ordinated and joined up approach to responding to and recovering from this crisis.

In the coming weeks the Council will publish its first plans for how the city will adapt and rebuild from this crisis throughout the rest of this year and beyond. A key element of this recovery programme will be ensuring that the twin targets of being fair and green for all lie at its heart.

The council will continue to encourage partners who are invested in the prosperity of the city work with them to achieve a ‘fair and green economic recovery’ which will include the work of both the Edinburgh Poverty Commission and the Edinburgh Climate Commission.

The final report by the Edinburgh Poverty Commission and their findings will be published in the autumn.

20200518_EPC_Interim_Coronavirus_Report