Impact of Universal Credit in North East England: a qualitative study of claimants and support staff

Objectives To understand the impact of the roll-out of Universal Credit (UC) from the perspectives of claimants and staff supporting them in North East England. Design Qualitative study comprising interviews and focus groups. Setting Gateshead and Newcastle, two localities in North East England characterised by high levels of socioeconomic deprivation, where the roll-out of UC started in 2017 as a new way to deliver welfare benefits for the UK working age population. Participants 33 UC claimants with complex needs, disabilities and health conditions and 37 staff from local government, housing, voluntary and community sector organisations. Results Participants’ accounts of the UC claims process and the consequences of managing on UC are reported; UC negatively impacts on material wellbeing, physical and mental health, social and family lives. UC claimants described the digital claims process as complicated, disorientating, impersonal, hostile and demeaning. Claimants reported being pushed into debt, rent arrears, housing insecurity, fuel and food poverty through UC. System failures, indifference and delays in receipt of UC entitlements exacerbated the difficulties of managing on a low income. The threat of punitive sanctions for failing to meet the enhanced conditionality requirements under UC added to claimant’s vulnerabilities and distress. Staff reported concerns for claimants and additional pressures on health services, local government and voluntary and community sector organisations as a result of UC. Conclusions The findings add considerable detail to emerging evidence of the deleterious effects of UC on vulnerable claimants’ health and wellbeing. Our evidence suggests that UC is undermining vulnerable claimants’ mental health, increasing the risk of poverty, hardship, destitution and suicidality. Major, evidence-informed revisions are required to improve the design and implementation of UC to prevent further adverse effects before large numbers of people move on to UC, as planned by the UK government.

[1]  Ruth Patrick For Whose Benefit?: The Everyday Realities of Welfare Reform , 2017 .

[2]  M. J. Wise For whose benefit , 2011 .

[3]  T. Waters,et al.  The impact of tax and benefit reforms on household incomes , 2017 .

[4]  M. Powell,et al.  Analysis and debate in social policy , 2004 .

[5]  S. Fothergill,et al.  Hitting the poorest places hardest : the local and regional impact of welfare reform , 2013 .

[6]  M. Ezzati,et al.  Contributions of diseases and injuries to widening life expectancy inequalities in England from 2001 to 2016: a population-based analysis of vital registration data , 2018, The Lancet. Public health.

[7]  S. Fothergill,et al.  The uneven impact of welfare reform : the financial losses to places and people , 2016 .

[8]  A. Pors,et al.  Digital by default? A qualitative study of exclusion in digitalised welfare , 2018, Social Policy & Administration.

[9]  R. Cain Responsibilising recovery: Lone and low-paid parents, Universal Credit and the gendered contradictions of UK welfare reform , 2016 .

[10]  Yvette F Hartfree Universal Credit: the impact of monthly payments on low income households , 2014 .

[11]  Margaret Whitehead,et al.  Trends in mental health inequalities in England during a period of recession, austerity and welfare reform 2004 to 2013. , 2015, Social science & medicine.

[12]  It never rains, but it pours , 1989, Nature.

[13]  T. Richardson,et al.  The relationship between personal unsecured debt and mental and physical health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2013, Clinical psychology review.

[14]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[15]  Judith Green,et al.  Qualitative methods for health research , 2004 .

[16]  Katy Jones No strings attached? An exploration of employment support services offered by third sector homelessness organisations , 2019, Dealing with Welfare Conditionality.

[17]  S. Genz Austerity bites , 2015, Nature.

[18]  J. Seddon,et al.  The Achilles' Heel of Scale Service Design in Social Security Administration: The Case of the United Kingdom's Universal Credit , 2013 .

[19]  S. Wright,et al.  Universal Credit, ubiquitous conditionality and its implications for social citizenship , 2014 .

[20]  P. Larkin Universal Credit, ‘Positive Citizenship’, and the Working Poor: Squaring the Eternal Circle? , 2018 .

[21]  K. Mattheys,et al.  "Treading in sand": A qualitative study of the impact of austerity on inequalities in mental health (Forthcoming) , 2017 .

[22]  S. Salway,et al.  Equal North: how can we reduce health inequalities in the North of England? A prioritization exercise with researchers, policymakers and practitioners , 2018, Journal of public health.

[23]  C. Webster,et al.  Poverty and Insecurity: Life in Low-Pay, No-Pay Britain , 2013 .

[24]  Martin Lindsay,et al.  The house of commons , 1947 .

[25]  N. Thorogood,et al.  Qualitative Methods for Health Research, 4th ed. , 2018 .

[26]  J. Donovan,et al.  Understanding vulnerability to self-harm in times of economic hardship and austerity: a qualitative study , 2016, BMJ Open.

[27]  P. Kemp,et al.  The impact of the direct payment of housing benefit: evidence from Great Britain , 2017 .

[28]  B. Friend Hitting rock bottom. , 1991, Nursing times.

[29]  J. Wiggan,et al.  The Time-related Underemployment of Lone Parents during Welfare Reform, Recession and Austerity: A Challenge to In-work Conditionality? , 2016 .

[30]  Sirin Sung,et al.  Money matters: using qualitative research for policy influencing on gender and welfare reform , 2014 .