Qualitative research with disadvantaged groups on Universal Credit covering: care experience, ex-offenders, homelessness and substance dependency

Question 1

Executive summary

Accepted Answer

Introduction

This qualitative research focused on understanding the challenges and barriers to moving towards work faced by Universal Credit (UC) claimants facing at least one of four types of disadvantage: care leavers or care experienced, ex-offenders, and those with experience of homelessness or substance dependency. This research builds on the Survey of Disadvantaged Groups on Universal Credit which explored the incidence rate and profile of Universal Credit claimants with experience of one of these four disadvantages within the overall UC claimant population, as well as their barriers to work and support needs.^{[footnote 1]}

The findings of this research are based on in-depth qualitative follow-up interviews with 50 survey respondents who said in the survey they were not in employment, that their disadvantages impacted their ability to work, and that work was a goal either now or in the future.

Background of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

The research revealed that experience of these disadvantages rarely occurred in isolation; most participants had navigated multiple, overlapping challenges. These experiences profoundly influenced claimants’ outlook, shaping their perceptions of employment, their trust in support systems, and their engagement with services. For example:

Care experienced claimants felt “let down” by care placements which were seen as unsuitable and a perceived lack of support from social workers. This was sometimes reinforced by feeling “passed around” due to frequent moves between care settings. Care experienced claimants often drew a direct connection between these experiences and their current mental health conditions.
Ex-offenders felt a lack of control over their lives, as their criminal records and restrictions attached to their sentences (for example, being banned from using a computer or being around children) ruled them out of a number of job roles. They also believed that employers would discriminate against them due to their convictions. The contrast in work opportunities in prison compared to those available after being released felt particularly stark to those who had engaged with work during their time in prison.
Claimants with experience of substance dependency expressed strong feelings of guilt and shame, as well as lasting physical effects. Employment appealed in terms of the structure and socialisation it could provide, but claimants worried their recovery was fragile and they could relapse at any point.
Claimants with experience of homelessness still felt they lacked complete stability in their housing situation, which negatively impacted their mental health.

For claimants who had experienced multiple disadvantages, there were no consistent patterns in the order different disadvantages were experienced. The exception to this was homelessness, which tended to occur as a result of any of the other disadvantages or other life difficulties. Any one disadvantage worsening or reoccurring could have a knock-on effect on other disadvantages.

Profile of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

Most claimants had long-term physical or mental health needs, learning difficulties, or neurodiversity. The severity and effects of these often fluctuated, and claimants often connected these directly to the disadvantages they had experienced, particularly substance dependency or care experience.

Claimants, particularly those with experience of care, had also faced disrupted education and schooling, meaning they sometimes had limited skills and qualifications. Claimants had often experienced significant life events such as domestic abuse, bereavement, or migration as a refugee, which either caused or compounded the disadvantages they experienced.

Most had at least some experience of working, but their employment history was often very varied; they had changed career or sector multiple times in an effort to find something which suited their needs. Reasons for having become unemployed by the time of the survey were varied, and included: a contract coming to an end, declining physical or mental health, workplace discrimination or malpractice, or a criminal offence. Only six of the claimants interviewed were currently in some form of work by the time of their interview, around a year after they participated in the survey.

Pathways into work

Claimants’ journeys towards work were characterised by four overlapping stages, and each had its own corresponding barriers which needed to be overcome:

Achieving stability: claimants facing the most acute instability wanted to focus on addressing basic needs such as health and housing before considering work. Health was often the primary barrier at this stage, particularly the long-term and fluctuating nature of claimants’ conditions which made it hard for them to see if and how their condition would improve. Many had negative experiences of seeking support for the issues that contributed to their instability (for example, their health or disadvantages) in the past, which could make them reluctant to do so again.
Getting work-ready: once their circumstances felt more stable, claimants felt able to focus on building confidence, skills, and qualifications, often after periods of instability or disrupted education. However, claimants felt nervous about the prospect of preparing for work for a number of reasons: the pathway to up- or re-skilling felt unclear and daunting, they struggled to believe there were roles or employers which could accommodate their needs, and they feared what impact working might have on their health and receipt of benefits. Claimants at this stage also needed more practical support and guidance around deciding what they wanted to do, and how to pursue qualifications and skills courses in line with that.
Finding suitable work: claimants who felt ready to work were typically interested in part-time work or self-employment, as they felt this would allow them to manage their health condition, and any caring responsibilities, alongside work. Some said they would consider full-time employment in the future, but wanted to start with part-time work and gradually increase their hours if this was successful. The main barriers claimants faced to finding suitable work were feeling unable to apply to certain roles due to their disadvantage (particularly criminal convictions), and difficulty finding roles to accommodate their health condition, both of which contributed to low confidence and self-esteem. Lack of local opportunities and unreliable public transport were also highlighted as broader difficulties to finding suitable work.
Staying in work: claimants recognised that employment was a foundation for achieving personal stability and some of their broader aspirations, including regaining financial independence, building social connections, and providing a sense of purpose. Worsening or fluctuating health conditions, without appropriate workplace adjustments, was the main factor claimants felt would prevent them from staying in work.

Progress along this pathway to work was often non-linear, with setbacks and periods of regression as personal circumstances changed.

Claimants’ experiences with support services, especially Jobcentre Plus, were mixed. Some reported receiving empathetic and tailored support, while others described generic, inconsistent, or impersonal help. Frequent changes in work coaches and short appointments undermined trust and engagement. Many claimants expressed a strong desire for more consistent, personalised, and holistic support that addressed their full range of needs - health, housing, skills, and employment - rather than focusing solely on job search. Key unmet support needs included support with pursuing skills courses and qualifications, support to navigate the private housing sector, mental health support, substance dependence support, and advice and support around managing finances. There was also a call for better integration between services, particularly between mental health and substance dependency support.

Principles and considerations for delivering support

This research showed that disadvantages rarely occurred in isolation; most claimants faced multiple, overlapping challenges that shaped their views on work, trust in support systems, and service engagement. Those experiencing severe instability prioritised basic needs like health and housing before considering employment.

Claimants who were ready to look for work tended to be interested in part-time roles or self-employment, which they felt would allow them to balance health conditions and caring responsibilities alongside work.

Claimants saw employment as key to personal stability and broader goals such as financial independence, social connections, and a sense of purpose. Given the complexity of claimants’ circumstances, the support offered should be holistic, balancing addressing health, housing, skills and employment needs together.

Alongside identifying what types of support should be offered at each point in the pathway into work, this research highlighted six key principles which are integral to the design of future support for claimants impacted by the four disadvantages:

1. Sensitive and mindful contact, as a single negative experience with a support service could reinforce previous negative experiences and cause them to disengage.

2. Intensive, tailored support via regular one-to-one sessions would allow in-depth discussion of their circumstances, building trust in the support giver and tailoring support to specific barriers or unmet needs.

3. Choice and agency over the support claimants will receive, to show their needs are valued.

4. Integrate services and maintain continuity of care to reduce the number of times claimants would have to retell “their story” and would reduce preconceptions around lack of care and ‘being passed around’.

5. Time-unlimited support, with an ‘open door’ policy would boost claimants’ optimism about their chances of making progress towards resolving the issues they face. Allowing easy re-entry to support services would also enable earlier intervention if their circumstances change.

6. Support with employer engagement, particularly advocating for claimants’ needs during the application and interview process would secure reasonable adjustments.

Question 2

Glossary and acronyms

Accepted Answer

Term	Definition
Care experienced	Claimants (across all age groups) with any experience of the care system before the age of 18, covering: foster care; residential children’s home; supported accommodation; and living with parents, grandparents, other family or friends with support from social services.
Care leaver	Claimants (across all age groups) with experience of the care system, covering: foster care; residential children’s home; supported accommodation; and living with parents, grandparents, other family or friends with support from social services) who were in care for a period of at least 13 weeks from the age of 14 and ending after their 16th birthday.
Claimants	People who claim benefits. In this context, it refers to people in receipt of Universal Credit.
Disadvantaged Group	In this report, this term is used to describe individuals who belong to at least one of the following four disadvantaged groups based on their responses to the Disadvantaged Groups survey: care experienced / care leaver, ex-offender, homeless in the past two years before the survey, and substance dependent in the past two years before the survey. Survey fieldwork took place between 14 May and 13 October 2024, approximately a year before qualitative interviews.
Domestic abuse	In the Disadvantaged Groups survey, domestic abuse was defined as: having had a partner or ex-partner, or a member of your family you were living with at the time, who has ever used controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour; violence; or abuse.
DWP	Means: The Department for Work and Pensions
Ex-offenders	In the Disadvantaged Groups survey ex-offenders were defined as: a claimant that has ever received a criminal conviction resulting in either a custodial, suspended or community sentence (exclusive of fines and cautions).
Homelessness	In the Disadvantaged Groups survey, experience of homelessness was defined as, in the past two years, having experienced homelessness. This covers: staying overnight in a bed and breakfast or hotel arranged by a local authority, staying overnight in temporary rented accommodation or room in a shared house arranged by a local authority, staying overnight in a hostel, refuge, shelter or supported housing, having sofa surfed or temporarily stayed with family or friends, or having slept rough.
Jobcentre Plus (JCP)	A government-funded employment agency and social security office that can be found in most population centres, whose aim is to provide benefits payments to people of working age and help them find employment.
Multiple disadvantage	Claimants who are in more than one of the four disadvantaged groups.
Substance dependency	In the Disadvantaged Groups survey, experience of substance dependency was defined as: the need to drink alcohol and/or drugs is too strong to control, and coping with life without it is difficult. To be classed as substance dependent in this research, this must have been experienced in the past two years.
Universal Credit (UC)	A single monthly benefit payment for people of working age who are out of work or on low incomes. Introduced to replace six other benefits from 2013 onwards.
Work coach	The work coach is responsible for providing claimants with personalised support, guidance, and advice to help them find work, as well as reviewing their work search and preparation obligations.

Question 3

1. Introduction

Accepted Answer

1.1 Background

DWP commissioned IFF Research to conduct the Disadvantaged Groups Survey, a large-scale quantitative survey of Universal Credit claimants who have experienced at least one of four forms of disadvantage.^{[footnote 2]} The research focused on the following groups: care leavers or care experienced, ex-offenders, and those with experience of homelessness or substance dependency. This quantitative research was designed to:

1. Measure the incidence rate and profile of the four groups within the Universal Credit claimant population, and the overlap between them (those facing ‘multiple disadvantage’).

2. Understand current and past experiences of working, and attitudes to work.

3. Identify barriers to work faced by these claimants; and

4. Explore the types of support that claimants were accessing or would be interested in accessing in the future.

Following this, DWP commissioned IFF Research to conduct qualitative research with UC claimants who participated in the Disadvantaged Groups Survey. The aim of this research was to understand in more depth how the four types of disadvantage shape claimants’:

1. Experiences of work, and attitudes towards work.

2. Broader life goals and aspirations, and how these relate to work.

3. Barriers faced to employment, and which are the priority to address first.

4. The types of support claimants want, including when this support should be offered, who they want this to be delivered by and, what form(s) support should take.

1.2 Key definitions

The definitions used for the four disadvantaged groups that were the focus of this research were developed in collaboration with the DWP to identify claimants for the Disadvantaged Groups Survey. It should be noted that the qualitative interviews for this research took place approximately one year after the Disadvantaged Groups Survey, meaning experiences of disadvantage may have become less recent, or reoccurred since the survey. The definition for each group used in the survey were as follows:

Those who had experienced homelessness

Whether claimants met this definition was established through asking them whether they had experienced a number of different types of homelessness in the past two years. The definition was based around the two years prior to the survey as this was considered to be recent enough for impacts on the ability to find and stay in work still to be felt. The forms of homelessness that were included were having:

stayed overnight in a bed and breakfast or hotel arranged by your local authority
stayed overnight in temporary rented accommodation or room in a shared house arranged by your local authority
stayed overnight in a hostel, refuge, shelter or supported housing
sofa surfed or temporarily stayed with family or friends, or
slept rough

Ex-offenders

Claimants who have ever received a criminal conviction resulting in either a custodial, suspended or community sentence (exclusive of fines). The decision to only focus on custodial, suspended or community sentences was taken as these were deemed to have a much more significant effect on claimants’ ability to find and stay in work than fines or cautions. Criminal convictions over any time period were deemed relevant as the impact of having a criminal conviction on the ability to find and stay in work can be long-lasting.

Those who had experienced a substance dependency

Claimants who, at the time of the survey, have been dependent on either alcohol, drugs, or both, in the past two years. For the purposes of the survey, dependence was described as ‘feeling the need to drink / take drugs is too strong to control and having difficulty coping with life without it / them’. Again, a two-year timeframe prior to the survey was agreed as it was felt that this was an appropriate amount of time for the impact on a person’s ability to find and stay in work to be substantial.

The care experienced

Claimants (across all age groups) with any experience of the care system before the age of 18. Whether or not a respondent met this definition was determined through a series of questions asking about their experiences of different forms of care, including:

foster care
a residential children’s home
supported accommodation, or
while living with family with support from social services

Care leavers

Claimants (across all age groups) with experience of the care system (covering foster care; residential children’s home; supported accommodation; and living with parents, grandparents, other family or friends with support from social services) who were in care for a period of at least 13 weeks from the age of 14 and ending after their 16th birthday.

1.3 Methodology

Stage 1: Survey screening (14 May to 13 October 2024)

Universal Credit claimants were contacted to complete the Disadvantaged Groups Survey screener, which identified if they belonged to one of four disadvantaged groups.

Stage 2: Quantitative survey (14 May to 13 October 2024)

Claimants that had experienced one or more disadvantages, completed the full Disadvantaged Groups Survey. At the end, they were asked if they were interested in participating in follow-up research.

Stage 3: Qualitative Sample Identified (12 May to 4 July 2025)

Claimants that had agreed to take part in future research and met the agreed criteria, were invited to participate in in-depth interviews.

Stage 4: In-Depth Interviews (27 May to 23 July 2025)

IFF conducted 50 in-depth interviews with UC claimants that had experienced disadvantages.

1.3.1 Overall approach

This report is based on findings from 50 in-depth qualitative interviews undertaken by IFF Research with UC claimants from the four disadvantaged groups that had taken part in the survey and agreed to be recontacted about future research. These interviews were approximately 60 minutes in length and took place around one year after fieldwork for the quantitative survey. All took place via telephone, though participants were offered the option to be interviewed in-person. All participants received a £30 shopping voucher as thank you for their time.

In-depth interviews were semi-structured, and the topic guide used to conduct interviews was designed collaboratively between IFF Research and DWP. All interviews were recorded and uploaded to qualitative analysis software. Thematic analysis was then conducted on transcripts from these interviews, using a code frame developed in collaboration with DWP. This was supplemented by structured, collaborative discussions between team members to identify themes and refine interpretations.

Verbatim quotes from interviews have been used throughout to illustrate the key findings of this research. Each quote is labelled with the disadvantages the claimant had experienced (identified in the survey) and their age, at the time of the qualitative interview.

1.3.2 Sampling

As one of the primary objectives of this research was to understand barriers to work, and support needs to progress towards work, only survey participants who met all of the following criteria were invited to participate in a qualitative interview:

were not in employment at the time of the survey
felt that at least one of the four disadvantages they were experiencing acted as a barrier to them gaining employment; and
felt that employment was achievable at some point in the future

IFF Research designed quotas to ensure claimants from each of the four disadvantaged groups (including those with experience of multiple disadvantages), with differing distances from work, and of different ages were represented in the qualitative interviews. Table 1-1 provides a breakdown of the interviews achieved with each disadvantaged group, across three broad groupings:

those who were aged 16 to 24 and were ready to work now or within the next 12 months at the time of the survey
those who were aged 25+ and were ready to work now or within the next 12 months at the time of the survey
those of any age (16+) who were interested in work but as a longer-term goal (12+ months) at the time of the survey

Alongside this, it was important to speak to claimants who had different characteristics and experiences. Quotas were therefore set to ensure representation from claimants who had seen a work coach in the last 6 months, and claimants from minority ethnic backgrounds. Other characteristics were also monitored to ensure interviews were conducted with a variety of different claimants. These included: overall interest in support, experience of other disadvantages, age, region, health conditions, gender and conditionality group. A breakdown of these can be found in Appendix A.

Table 11 Number of interviews completed for age and self-reported distance from work, broken down by disadvantage

Age and self-reported distance from work, broken down by disadvantage type	Aged 16-24 and ready to work now or within the next 12 months	Aged 25+ and ready to work now or within the next 12 months	Any age, and interested in work but as a longer-term goal (12+ months)	Total
Homelessness	3	9	4	16
Care experienced	8	7	3	18
Care leaver^{[footnote 3]}	6	1	1	8
Ex-offender	0	10	4	14
Substance dependence	3	7	5	15
Total	13	24	13	50

Question 4

2. Background of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

Accepted Answer

This chapter explores the background of claimants belonging to one or more of the four disadvantaged groups: care leavers or care experienced, ex-offenders, and those with experience of homelessness or substance dependency, and those with multiple disadvantages. Taking each group in turn, this chapter highlights how claimants’ experience of disadvantage impacted their life, their world view, and attitudes towards employment, providing important context for interpreting findings later in this report around barriers to employment and support needs.

2.1 Summary: quantitative research findings

Overall, one in five (21%) UC claimants had experienced at least one of these four disadvantages, with 6% having experienced two or more. The incidence rate of each disadvantage was as follows:

9% of UC claimants had experienced homelessness in the past two years
7% of UC claimants were care experienced
7% of UC claimants had experienced substance dependency in the past two years; and
6% of UC claimants were ex-offenders

Among claimants who had experienced at least one of these four disadvantages and who were not in employment:

40% had experienced homelessness in the past two years
35% had been dependent on substances within the past two years
33% were care experienced
32% were ex-offenders

Just under a third (31%) of claimants not in employment had experienced multiple forms of disadvantage.

2.2 Background of care experienced claimants

Care experienced claimants’ last experience of care ranged from a few months before the qualitative discussion, to over 10 years ago. Additionally, the experiences of those that were care experienced were often similar to claimants aged 16-24. This is due to the sample design for this research, as there was a priority on reaching care leavers under 30 years of age.

Claimants who had experienced the care system described this as creating lasting negative impacts on their lives. Foremost, claimants felt this experience had negatively impacted their trust in institutions to help them. This was because being placed in care was often seen as a continuation of the abuse and neglect they had experienced from their immediate family. For example, one claimant recalled being removed from their immediate family and being placed with another family member, who they also felt was abusive. Another care experienced respondent reported that they were placed into an all-girls accommodation where they said they were sexually assaulted. In addition, many care experienced claimants shared stories of having to move several times as children or young adults between different care settings. These experiences resulted in care experienced claimants feeling they had been ‘let down’ by the care system.

I didn’t feel like anything was really going right [within my foster family] and I ended up getting moved to a different place. It was independent [housing] but there was always someone, an adult sort of person there, if that makes sense. She was quite horrible.

Care Experienced, 20-24

These feelings could be further reinforced by a difficult relationship with a social worker, or simply a social worker who was perceived as absent or uninterested in their life. Others highlighted how they were left without support when their social worker was not replaced after leaving the job. These negative experiences of the care system in general, and specifically of social workers, contributed towards a general mistrust of people in positions of authority (such as people at support services, or employers).

When you’re in care, you deal with a lot of social workers and staff and… they’re like trying to control me throughout my life. I’ve been mentally abused by social services and foster carers, so it makes it difficult to talk to anyone professional.

Care Experienced, 16-19

These negative care experiences had several other long-term consequences:

Education and qualifications: disrupted and unstable living situations affected their academic achievements, limiting their ability to gain qualifications such as GCSEs. Claimants in this group were often still trying to fill gaps in their education as a result of being placed in care.
Personal relationships and support network: negative care experiences had knock-on effects on relationships throughout their entire life. The behaviours experienced before and in care would repeat themselves in friendships and relationships, creating cycles of toxic and abusive relationships. As a result, some claimants distanced themselves from family members and friends, leaving them without a support network.
Mental health: Claimants reported feelings of isolation, and often struggled with anxiety and depression, as discussed in section 3.2.

Claimants who had been placed in care because they had come to the UK as young refugees were generally less critical of the care system, but their limited English language skills made it more difficult to finish their education or find employment. Most refugees included in this research moved to the UK as children without their parents, sharing feelings of loneliness or isolation due to a lack of a support system in the UK.

I’m living by myself. Like I don’t have my family here, only some of my friends.

Care Experienced, 16-19

2.3 Background of claimants who were ex-offenders

Offences among those interviewed varied considerably, and included assault, sexual assault and drink driving. Although there was limited data on what led to them committing an offence, a few respondents linked this to other disadvantages, such as substance dependency. Amongst the claimants interviewed, 12 claimants had received a community sentence sentence, 8 had received custodial sentences, and some claimants had received both. For both groups, the majority of convictions had occurred more than 10 years ago (at the time of the survey). For those who had been to prison, some had worked in jobs throughout their sentence that they enjoyed and felt they could continue after their sentence. For example, one individual had worked in waste management while in prison, but could not find a similar role after their sentence.

Ex-offenders had a strong desire to move on with their life after their conviction but felt ‘stuck’ in their current situation for a number of reasons. Primarily, they felt their criminal record severely limited their future employment opportunities. This was often because of restrictions, such as losing their driving licence or not being allowed to work in spaces with young people or children or engage in work involving computers, which impacted the types of work they were able to do. Some claimants’ certifications that they had obtained prior to their conviction had expired, and they could not renew with a criminal record.

More generally, these claimants often expressed a lack of control over their situation, as they assumed they were being ruled out of certain jobs or judged by employers because of their conviction (regardless of the type of role or requirements). This created a sense of resignation that they would have to wait until their conviction was spent to make progress with their life.

Besides their criminal conviction, there was also some suggestion that experience of the criminal justice system could impact claimants’ relationship with people or organisations in positions of authority, though this was less strongly articulated compared to experiences of the care system. Claimants expressed not reaching out for help as they felt they would be met with judgement.

Obviously it’s been over a while now and it’s still on the record and it doesn’t go away. It just sits there until they decide to clear it all and stuff.

Care Experienced and ex-offender, 35-44

2.4 Background of claimants with experience of substance dependency

Claimants who had experienced substance dependency described this as being triggered by challenging life events. Some claimants, often those who had a dependency on alcohol, felt caught in a cycles of dependency and recovery which had continued to recur since they participated in the survey.

It was rarely the primary cause, but some claimants felt becoming unemployed had at least contributed towards their dependency beginning or worsening, as it led to increased financial instability, as well as feelings of losing purpose in life. Others mentioned how being unemployed left a lot of space to be alone and fall into old habits. Some claimants suggested that employment was a way of “keeping busy” which helped in maintaining sobriety.

Claimants expressed how they had taken steps towards recovery, but this was a slow process. Many of those in recovery feared that they could relapse quickly if they faced difficulties in life, and claimants who struggled to maintain their recovery highlighted that relapse often occurred suddenly and unexpectedly.

On a rainy Sunday and I was like, do you know what, I’m just going to have a drink. So, I over did it.

Ex-offender and substance dependence, 45-54

Many claimants reported that, even when they had overcome their dependency or were in a period of stability, their experiences continued to affect their self-esteem, confidence, and physical health. Claimants described ongoing mental and physical health challenges that persisted beyond their recovery from substance use. In addition to the original triggers that contributed to their dependency, they now had to manage the lasting effects and additional trauma associated with their experiences of dependency. Claimants described feelings of guilt for having their family witness them struggle with addiction. Other lasting effects included the impact of substance dependency on their physical health.

I’m clean now as well. I’ve been for a while; it’s more I guess the after effects of it and like struggling with the I guess trauma of that. […] I still have the same guilt, although… I am not actively using drugs, and I don’t feel the urge to really. It impacts my self-esteem a lot and how I feel about myself in general.

Substance Dependent, 16-19

2.5 Background of claimants with experience of homelessness

Homelessness was rarely the ‘primary’ disadvantage claimants experienced; it represented hitting “rock-bottom” following a series of other difficulties. For example, claimants reported becoming homeless after experiencing domestic abuse, disputes with family members as a result of their substance dependency, leaving prison, or ‘no-fault’ evictions.

Claimants’ experiences of homelessness varied in length between a few weeks and multiple months. Of those that were interviewed, seven claimants were homeless at the time of the survey. However, by the time of the qualitative discussions, only two were two were experiencing homelessness.

Claimants described short periods of rough sleeping followed by longer periods of being housed in temporary accommodation, hostels, or “sofa surfing” with friends and family in the past. Claimants in temporary accommodation described how this was very poor quality and felt unsafe. For example, one claimant was placed in a temporary hotel where other residents were actively using and dealing drugs.

Some claimants had also struggled with repeated homelessness; they would find employment and housing for a period of time but then would lose their accommodation due to landlords suddenly evicting them or family kicking them out, with no financial savings to rely on, forcing them to become homeless again.

I’m a little bit anxious because I’m like, is this going to happen again? Or like just a little bit nervous because I don’t want to be in the same situation where I’m just made to feel out of place, like I don’t belong.

Homelessness, 20-24

Most claimants were not homeless at the time of their interview but still felt they lacked stability. Their current housing situation felt temporary in that they often wanted to move to better quality housing or to a better area in the near future, or because the costs felt financially unsustainable for them in the long-term. This uncertainty negatively impacted their mental health.

I wouldn’t say it’s stable. It feels currently like the sort of the best that I’ve experienced in a long time. I was for a while trying to find somewhere that wasn’t too triggering for my health and that was more supportive to my health. Where I am at the moment is definitely good, but I don’t know what it’s going to look like long-term financially for me it’s a stretch.

Care experienced and homelessness, 45-54

2.6 Background of those with experience of multiple disadvantages

Among claimants who had experienced more than one of the four disadvantages, there were no consistent patterns in the order different disadvantages were experienced. The exception to this was homelessness, which tended to be as a result of any of the other disadvantages or other life difficulties. Any one disadvantage worsening or reoccurring could have a knock-on effect on other disadvantages.

As claimants experienced additional disadvantages, these became intertwined and linked, in turn deepening their existing problems. Claimants described being stuck in a loop where instability in one aspect of their life caused their other disadvantage to worsen. For example, one claimant described how a precarious living situation would trigger their substance dependency, but at the same time their substance dependency would make their living situation precarious. This complex picture of disadvantage and instability made it difficult for this group to see a path forward towards resolving their situation. Not only did this mean they simply had more needs to address before considering employment, but it was hard for claimants to know where to start with improving their situation.

Having that spell of homelessness and drinking too much, I kind of hit the bottom.

Homelessness, substance dependence, 55-64

Question 5

3. Profile of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

Accepted Answer

This chapter explores the employment history, status and work experience of claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages. The chapter explores their current employment status, and path to unemployment prior to the survey. Besides work experiences, it considers claimants’ health status and the effects of their mental and physical health needs on finding suitable employment. Finally, this chapter delves into other disadvantages such as domestic abuse, refugee status, family breakdown, and bereavement, and how these increased claimants’ vulnerability.

3.1 Summary: quantitative research findings

It is important to note that only those claimants who felt their disadvantage impacted their ability to work, and believed they could work in the future, were invited to participate in this qualitative research. As a result, the sample on which this qualitative report is based differs slightly from the survey sample. The figures below provide a summary of the overall profile of those ‘not in employment’ as of April 2024, and should only be treated as indicative for this qualitative research.

Employment

Nearly three-quarters of UC claimants in one of the four disadvantaged groups were not in employment (72%).
Most UC claimants in one of the four disadvantaged groups who were not in employment said this was because of long-term sickness or a disability (51%). This was more common for those that had experienced substance dependence in the past two years (67%) and ex-offenders (62%).
The majority of those not in employment stated that physical or mental health conditions or disabilities were the main barrier for finding employment (72%).
Of the four disadvantages, experience of homelessness in the past two years was most commonly reported as a barrier to employment (59% of this group said that this experience had been a barrier to finding work). This was followed by substance dependency in the past two years (47%), being an ex-offender (44%) and being care experienced (31%).

Qualifications

A higher proportion of claimants in one of the four disadvantaged groups not in employment had no qualifications (30%) than for those who were in employment (14%).

Mental and physical health

Claimants in one of the four disadvantaged groups not in employment were more likely to be affected by mental or physical health conditions, and to rate their health less positively:

78% had a health condition expected to last six months or more (compared to 48% of those in employment): 59% had a physical health condition and 65% had a mental health condition
73% had a health condition that significantly limited their ability to carry out day-to-day activities (compared to 40% of those in employment)

Learning difficulty and neurodiversity

Around a third of claimants in one of the four disadvantaged groups not in employment had a learning difficulty or neurodiversity (30%, compared to 14% of those in employment).

3.2 Employment status

The majority of claimants were still unemployed and looking for work at the time of the interview. Only six were in employment, split evenly between full-time, part-time and self-employment, all of which were flexible to accommodate other responsibilities or needs. There was no clear pattern explaining why some respondents had secured a job. A couple of claimants who had found roles had entered and left employment again between completing the survey and the interview.

Neither of the claimants who were self-employed earned a living wage. These claimants used ‘permitted work’ to be able to work on their own terms and manage their health conditions, which they felt was improving their mental health and self-esteem, even if this was not contributing towards increased financial stability.

Because of my health conditions and because of my previous experience in employment in corporate environments, I know that I won’t survive in the in the corporate jungle anymore. So, I would like to sort of work from home and be my own boss and manage my health conditions as best I can.

Care experienced and homelessness, 45-54

Some claimants had moved further away from employment since the survey and classed themselves as long-term sick or disabled due to worsening or persistent health conditions.

Five out of the 25 care experienced claimants interviewed were in full-time or part-time education. These claimants were limited in their employment opportunities as they were either focussing on gaining qualifications or waiting until they had their qualifications to be able to find suitable employment. Younger claimants aged 16-24 expressed feeling discriminated against because of their age, as they felt they were not given the opportunity to enter employment without experience.

I went to an interview they asked me about experience, but I told them I don’t have any experience, so that’s why I didn’t get a job.

Care experienced, 16-19

3.3 Work history and pathway to becoming unemployed

Most claimants had some experience of working in the past five years. However, this was often inconsistent, with claimants working in a variety of roles ranging from manual labour to office jobs after finishing education. Many claimants had experience in multiple sectors, with job moves driven by the need to find an alternative role or working conditions which better suited their physical or mental health needs.

I’ve worked in a bakery, in the local bakery for a few years, security guard, team leader.

Homelessness, 55-64

Multiple factors had contributed to claimants becoming unemployed:

Contracts coming to an end

Some claimants had been on short-term contracts through agencies that had to be renewed every year, and had not had the opportunity to renew them. This also applied in a couple of cases where claimants had started and left employment between the survey and their interview.

I would say the limitations on that was it’s often a one-year contract with the possibility of it being renewed and what happened with me was my first job I didn’t get the contract renewed, the second job I had I got laid off in the middle of it.

 Substance dependence, 45-54

They’re using the agency when they’re you know when they’re under pressure, then once the pressure is off, they get rid of you do you know what I mean?

Homelessness and substance dependent, 55-64

Declining physical or mental health

This decline was sometimes linked with other traumatic life experiences, such as bereavement or domestic abuse. In these cases, claimants experienced multiple traumatic events at once, causing them to have to leave their job to be able to focus on achieving stability in other aspects of their life.

[I was] working all day in the summer [outside]. I’ve got allergies to everything. Half the [things] I was picking up were giving me a rash. Being out there when they’re cutting the grass all the time was ruining my eyes. I could barely breathe.

Care experienced, 20-24

Workplace discrimination or malpractice

This included bullying by colleagues, which sometimes compounded previous experiences (e.g. abuse or trauma during childhood). This was specifically mentioned by claimants who experienced racial discrimination, as they were certain that their race would become a barrier to future employment. For some claimants, these negative workplace experiences not only made them wary of entering employment again for fear of experiencing the same treatment, but also affected their confidence going into future employment. Claimants also expressed low self-esteem as a result of these negative experiences, which affected their ability to imagine themselves succeeding in employment in the future.

So, it’s like no matter where I go, I’m just going to be receiving the same treatment because there’s no point for me to excel or try anything because it’s just going to be the same outcome.

Homelessness, 20-24

Their specific disadvantage

Some claimants explained how their disadvantage specifically led them to becoming unemployed. Ex-offenders or those who were substance dependent experienced distinct difficulties in being able to work, such as criminal records or sobriety (this included a couple of claimants who had managed to enter and leave employment between completing the survey and their interview). Those who had experienced homelessness felt that unemployment had contributed to this, but no claimants said it was the reason for leaving employment. Care experienced respondents had often not yet started work, due to their age.

3.4 Health Status

The majority of claimants with one of the four disadvantages reported experiencing long-term health conditions, both mental and physical.

Regarding physical health conditions, these were often long-term and fluctuating, making it difficult to understand future needs. Claimants reported having “good and bad days”, with many factors influencing the fluctuation of their health conditions, such as physical activity, sleep, and stress. Some claimants were also waiting for appropriate care for their physical health conditions, such as operations or to get the correct prescription.

Besides physical health conditions, many claimants experienced mental health conditions as well, including depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. Most claimants linked these conditions to traumatic life experiences and disadvantage, causing different forms of PTSD. Some claimants drew a direct link between their mental and physical health and substance dependency, saying they used substances to calm their mind or feel less of their physical pain.

Claimants who were neurodivergent, typically having autism or ADHD, felt they had received a diagnosis relatively late. These claimants felt frustrated, as they felt that an earlier diagnosis would have helped their own understanding of themselves and potentially have prevented some of the challenges and barriers they had experienced in life.

Claimants aged 16-24 often described struggling with anxiety, depression, or learning difficulties, and how these needs posed significant barriers. These conditions, combined with little or no work experience, meant it was often difficult for young claimants to envision moving into suitable employment.

3.5 Other challenges and disadvantages

Beyond the four disadvantages which are the focus of this report, claimants had also experienced a host of broader challenges and disadvantages, which further increased their vulnerability. This included:

Bereavement

The death of loved ones placed additional burdens on claimants, worsening mental health, and putting aspirations on hold. A few claimants had to pause their job or education as a result. Besides worsening mental health conditions, bereavement often had negative effects on physical living conditions. Claimants reported having to move house as a result of bereavement. For example, one claimant lost her grandmother with whom she lived, and as a result lost her home, which was the only place where she felt safe. Many claimants felt that they did not have the opportunity to process the bereavement as they were balancing many different priorities.

Last year I had a few deaths, that put a stop on my education quite a fair bit.

Care experienced, 16-19

Domestic abuse and family breakdown

Family breakdown often contributed to first experiences of homelessness, with some respondents being ‘kicked out’ of their family home or having to leave abusive situations. Examples of family breakdown include divorce, domestic abuse, pregnancy losses, and familial rejection due to sexual orientation or gender identity. Domestic abuse during childhood was sometimes linked to later experiences of homelessness or becoming an ex-offender. A few claimants who experienced domestic abuse as children mentioned how their traumatic experiences led them to engage in criminal activity, as they had been exposed to violence during childhood and had no support network that could intervene. Other claimants experienced abusive relationships throughout their adult life, repeating abusive cycles they experienced as children.

I had bereavement in my family and then I split up with my wife, and it sort of overwhelmed me.

Homelessness, 55-64

Becoming a refugee

Young refugees arriving in the UK under age 18 were placed in the care system, as most of these interviewees came to the UK without the support networks of their parents or other family members. Young refugees explained how low English proficiency was one of their biggest barriers to achieving stability. This meant they struggled to build new support networks, which led to feelings of isolation, and also meant that they struggled to engage with work and education.

It’s hard to be like a refugee living without your family, you know, there is not many people around you.

Care experienced, 20-24

Caring responsibilities

A few claimants, more commonly female, shared that they had caring responsibilities. This was mostly for their children, with a few examples of claimants caring for an older or unwell relative. For those who felt further from work, these responsibilities often took priority over employment, limiting the time and capacity they had to consider work or engage with support. Those who felt closer to work described challenges in finding roles that could accommodate their caring arrangements, especially when they needed predictable or limited hours. Across both groups, limited availability and affordability of alternative care options created additional barriers to pursuing suitable employment.

Having to fit stuff around my little boy, that was the main barrier, childcare. I have to drop him off at school for nine o’clock and then I’ve got to pick him up again at half past three. There’s not many jobs fit in between those hours.

Substance Dependent, 45-54

Question 6

4. Pathways into work

Accepted Answer

Claimants’ complex backgrounds and experiences meant they often struggled to articulate their own distance from work. However, through discussions about the barriers they experienced, and the aspirations they had, it is evident that there were four main stages in claimants’ “pathway” into work: achieving stability, getting work-ready, finding suitable employment and maintaining employment. This pathway into work was not a linear journey for many claimants, and their experiences often meant frequently moving closer to work, and subsequently further away from it as their personal circumstances changed. The type of barriers to work claimants faced differed at each stage, although some did persist throughout the pathway into work, such as health conditions. This chapter will explore each stage and the corresponding barriers in turn.

4.1 Summary: Quantitative survey findings

In the quantitative survey, claimants were asked about their aspirations and barriers separately, not in relation to each stage of the pathway into employment, as this was something that only became clear from the qualitative data.

Aspirations

The most common aspirations and goals for the next two years amongst claimants with experience of the four disadvantages who are not in employment were:
- get a job (33%)
- be physically healthy (17%)
- move house/buy a house (16%)
Over half (55%) of those not in employment felt that returning to work was a possibility with the right support, with one in five (20%) feeling they were ready to return to work immediately.
Over half (51%) of claimants who were not in employment agreed that they would be happier and more fulfilled if they were working.

Barriers to work

The most commonly stated barriers to work amongst claimants with experience of the four disadvantages not in employment were:

physical or mental health conditions or disabilities (72%)
not having the right skills or qualifications for the job available (33%)
lack of confidence in applying for jobs (30%)
just under one third (30%) stated that they had no qualifications

Claimants that had experienced each disadvantage were asked whether it had made finding work more difficult: The proportions who reported increased difficulty were:

59% of those who had experienced homelessness in the two years before the survey
47% of those who had experienced substance dependency in the previous two years
44% of ex-offenders
31% of care experienced claimants

4.2 Achieving stability

Claimants at the start of the “pathway to work” were focused on achieving stability. To claimants, this meant reaching a point where their basic needs and health conditions are sufficiently managed. At this stage, employment was not a priority, but a long-term goal, if their situation improved.

4.2.1 Causes of instability

Claimants’ instability largely stemmed from ongoing health conditions that were long-term or chronic in nature, or from experiences of disadvantage. The disadvantages that were most destabilising for claimants tended to be active substance dependence, and recent experiences of homelessness.

Health

It was common for claimants to face significant struggles with both their mental and physical heath, therefore making improving their health their main focus so they could have greater agency over their lives and to increase their overall life satisfaction. In practice, this meant their condition becoming less severe, less unpredictable and easier to manage. These claimants needed support rebuilding their overall confidence in themselves and to be offered information about the types of roles that could be managed alongside their health condition, so that they could consider employment as a more feasible option.

But at the moment, my health is so unpredictable and like to be employed by somebody would be, yeah, near on impossible.

Homelessness, Substance Dependence, 35-44

Substance dependency

Claimants who were still actively dependent on substances placed even greater emphasis on their health and their aspiration to improve it, particularly when it came to overcoming their addiction. Claimants who experienced substance dependence viewed it as a key barrier they needed to overcome so they could regain control over their lives and think about the future.

Insecure Housing

Some claimants had experienced homelessness within two years of the survey and while the vast majority were no longer actively experiencing homelessness at the time of the interview, their housing situation was not secure. The causes of their historic homelessness had often been out of their control (for example, domestic abuse or family disputes), and if a similar situation occurred, they would potentially experience homelessness again. These claimants wanted to find a more permanent and stable housing situation for themselves and any dependants before they considered their future career options.

4.2.2 Barriers to achieving stability

Barriers to achieving stability included:

Unclear pathways to improving health

Health-related issues were both destabilising and a barrier to achieving stability. The long term or chronic nature of these conditions acted as a barrier to moving towards work as claimants did not know if or when their health condition would improve, nor what steps they could take to improve their conditions. Claimants with fluctuating health conditions were also fearful that their condition could worsen at any moment, undoing any progress they might have made.

My mental health is still not exactly there, I’ve been trying to seek support for my mental health since I was 16, even younger. I do want to work eventually, but I can’t even get out of bed, so I just need my mental health sorted before I can think about getting a job.

Care Experienced, 20-24

Being in “survival mode”

Alongside these complex health conditions, current or recent experiences of disadvantage contributed to ongoing instability and stress, impacting on claimant’s ability to plan for the future. Many claimants’ circumstances and daily challenges were complex, and as a result, their priorities tended to focus primarily on surviving and getting by, making employment or skill development a lower priority.

Homelessness

This was particularly common amongst claimants who had recently experienced homelessness as their basic needs of shelter and safety had not been met. These claimants lacked stability due to poor housing, feeling unhappy or unsafe with where they lived, or were worried about eviction, and felt that this needed to improve before they could focus on employment.

Having to go from place to place and not being able to guarantee where my next meal was coming from, that’s the part I was kind of scared about, and why I’m traumatised.

Homelessness, 20-24

Substance dependency

Claimants who were substance dependent struggled to stay sober, as they would use substances to help manage their complex needs. For example, claimants with physical health conditions who experienced pain on a daily basis would use substances to be able to “get through the day”. As a result of this ongoing dependency, these claimants would struggle to achieve stability in their lives.

Care experience

For young care experienced claimants, who often had mental health conditions or neurodiversity, their situation was often worsened by a lack of safe or stable home environment. They felt that an improvement to their living situation would help improve their physical or mental health.

Reluctance to start engaging with support

Claimants facing instability were sometimes reluctant to engage in support, whether it be mental or physical health, substance dependency, housing or financial support, even if they had received information that the support might help them overcome some of their barriers. Partly, the daily struggles some claimants experienced had made them feel sceptical about their situation improving, even with outside support. This cynicism could also stem from previous negative experiences of accessing support, such as support not meeting their needs as it was either too brief, lacking personalisation, or was pushing them into employment before they felt ready (Please see chapter 5 of this report for more information on experiences with support).

Suzy’s story

Care experienced and experience of homelessness, aged 16-19

Suzy is care-experienced, and had been living in supported accommodation for a few years by the time of her interview.

Suzy became homeless when she was 16. The relative she was living with passed away, and she felt she could not live with other family members due to abuse she had experienced from them. After a few days of sleeping rough, she was placed in supported accommodation by her social worker. She did not hear from her social worker again after that, despite Suzy still wanting their help. She did not feel safe in her new accommodation, but she worried that if she disclosed her concerns or mental health difficulties to the support workers there, they would evict her.

These experiences took a significant toll on Suzy and worsened mental health conditions she had struggled with since she was younger. She tried to seek treatment, but was on a waiting list for a couple of years. When she finally started receiving treatment, she missed some appointments due to her condition affecting her memory and causing anxiety around leaving the house. This led her to be discharged from treatment suddenly. Each of these experiences with medical, housing, and social care professionals made her feel her needs were being disregarded, which only compounded the trauma she had experienced from her family situation.

At the time of the interview, she was simply focused on surviving day-to-day and getting the right treatment for her condition. She described facing ongoing difficulties when interacting with health services, such as prescriptions for medication arriving late, and a lack of follow-up from her GP after she finished a short course of therapy.

Suzy mentioned future aspirations to work, but felt her poor mental health, lack of qualifications and experience, and lack of secure housing meant she could not consider working now or in the near future.

I’m stuck really. Like, I’m trying, you know, to take my time to heal and this, that, the other. But, you know, I suppose there’s always that fear as well […] what am I going to do if I’m not better?

4.3 Getting work ready

Some claimants experienced greater stability in their daily lives but still felt that employment was a challenging goal that they would struggle to achieve. These claimants lacked confidence in their own employment prospects due to a disrupted education experience and a self-perceived lack of skills. Claimants often did not have a clear aspiration or goal in mind in terms of what role or sector they wanted to work in. To them, being ready for work involved addressing their educational and skill gaps so that they felt employable. How claimants perceived their own employability correlated with their self-confidence, as they felt their confidence would improve if they addressed skill gaps. Younger claimants (aged 16-24) at this stage wanted more support with exploring what they wanted to do, while navigating their own circumstances, including recent experiences of homelessness or disruptions to their education.

4.3.1 Barriers to getting “work-ready”

Barriers to getting “work-ready” included:

Low confidence and self-esteem

Claimants’ lack of confidence in their employability affected their willingness to consider employment as a feasible option. They assumed that employers would not consider them for roles, which impacted their motivation to seek out employment. Similarly, claimants felt that the process required to gain qualifications or skills was too daunting, which discouraged them, especially those that had been unemployed for a long time, or those who wanted to look for a different role or work in a different sector compared to what they had done previously.

I think it’s more just because of my experiences, I get more anxious. I start thinking that I’m not good enough and that I’m going to mess up the job.

Care Experienced, 16-19, Could work now if the right job was available or had the right support

Claimants aged 50 or older also felt discouraged to apply for jobs feeling that they would be overlooked on account of their age. One claimant mentioned about how the language used in most employment adverts discouraged older applicants by the usage of language like “new” and “fresh”.

If I’ve found [a job] and then I [disclose] my age, then they say, they’re looking for younger people or whatever, so you don’t want to look anymore.

Ex-offender, 55-64

Unclear or disrupted pathways to up-and-re-skilling

For other claimants, unclear pathways to improving their skillset and gaining qualifications prevented them from being work-ready. Many had experienced a disrupted education, leading to a lack of qualifications that would be necessary for many forms of employment, such as GCSEs. Care experienced claimants were particularly affected by educational disruption, due to moving in and out of different care systems during key academic periods. Refugees who had moved to the UK as a child were another group that experienced educational disruption, as they had to adjust to a new language and educational system. Claimants aged 16-24, where the experience of this disruption was more recent, also tended to have a lack of confidence in themselves and their employability.

So, when you’re not doing what social services are telling you to do, they will ship you off to a different area, into a children’s home. So, I was doing my GCSEs and, because I didn’t do what they wanted me to do, they took me to Wales, and I wasn’t allowed to return home […] And then I didn’t do education for a whole year because of them, […] they kind of messed up my future.

Care Experienced, 16-19

Once this educational disruption had occurred, it was unclear to claimants how to best develop these skills and make themselves more ready for work. The type of skills claimants wanted to develop varied according to their individual interests, but there were some common themes:

Older claimants lacked confidence in their own computer literacy and felt they did not have the digital skills that younger people, who might apply for the same job, would potentially have. However, these claimants lacked belief they would be able to bridge that gap in skills compared to younger people, even with appropriate training.
Claimants who had previously worked in manual labour roles but had developed physical health conditions also felt that they lacked appropriate skillsets for employment. The development of their condition had meant they could no longer perform their previous role and had made their experience and skillset redundant. These claimants needed greater support and guidance on upskilling to become work ready in non-manual roles.
English language proficiency was also identified as a priority skill to develop by young refugees, so that they could more actively engage in work and/or further study.
Fear of how work would impact their health and benefits: Some claimants felt hesitant about taking steps towards work for fear of how this would impact their pre-existing health conditions. Some claimants were also worried that the financial support they receive from their benefits might be reduced if they gain employment, threatening their housing situation. This held them back from exploring employment options and ruled out entry level or lower paid jobs.

Rose’s story

Care experienced and experience of homelessness, aged 45-54

Rose’s experience of the care system began as a young child, when she was removed from her parents’ care and placed in the care of another relative. She experienced abuse from this family member, too, and she decided to leave home when she was still a teenager.

Rose felt her childhood experiences led her to be more vulnerable to abusive relationships with partners as an adult. Her last partner subjected her to financial abuse, which contributed to her becoming homeless around a year before participating in the survey. She is also neurodiverse, and has a physical health condition with fluctuating symptoms, which caused her to leave her last job after experiencing bullying and harassment. These complex experiences negatively impacted her confidence in herself, and her ability to work.

She was referred by her GP to therapy for her mental health, which helped her to process the trauma she had experienced, and build her confidence to work again. Rose was interested in becoming self-employed and working from home, which she felt would help her manage her health conditions, and broader anxieties about the workplace.

Rose applied for Access to Work, through which she was awarded a support worker. Her support worker supported her to apply for permitted work. She also approached her Jobcentre about additional support, and was assigned a Disability Employment Adviser (DEA). She has found the support provided by her support worker and DEA incredibly useful to prepare for self-employment, as they helped her to implement processes that support her neurodiversity such as automated calendars and reminders.

[Life] feels vulnerable but more positive than it’s been in a few years because of the support that’s in place and because of the fact that I have this permitted work.

However, Rose still does not feel completely work-ready. She continued to experience anxiety and uncertainty about how to manage being self-employed alongside her health condition. She was also nervous about how her age and lack of experience might impact her ability to attract clients to support her self-employment. On top of this, she worried about how working will impact her Universal Credit payments, and how she would pay her bills if her payments were to decrease.

4.4 Finding Suitable Work

4.4.1 Part-time work

Most claimants who were ready and looking for employment showed a preference for part-time work, as they felt it would provide greater flexibility and control to help them manage caring responsibilities, ongoing health conditions, or for claimants aged 16-24, continuing their studies.

Something I’ve been thinking about recently is finding work, but one that’s very low commitment, something that’s a very small stepping stone in, that will limit the stress… maybe just a couple of hours a week at the start, to ease into it and not be too overwhelmed.

Care Experienced, 25-34

4.4.2 Self-employment

Self-employment was also appealing for the same reasons, being perceived as an option which would not be too ‘overwhelming’ as they could have more control over their work hours and scheduled, and they could “be their own boss”. This was particularly appealing to ex-offenders, who struggled to access employment due to their conviction, and care experienced claimants, whose mental health conditions meant they struggled to work regular and predetermined working hours.

More generally, claimants with health conditions often favoured self-employment because they had not received reasonable adjustments in the past, and therefore could not foresee an employer providing them with the adjustments they needed.

However, claimants’ expectations of self-employment sometimes did not correspond with what would be required of them to be considered gainfully self-employed. For example, of the small number of claimants who had reported working as self-employed, around half reported only working a handful of hours a month and were not earning any meaningful income from it.

I’d still like to get back into work or earning money. I’d like to be self-employed.

Ex-Offender, Homelessness, Substance Dependent, 35-44

4.4.3 Full-time work

Full-time employment, was for the most part, seen as a longer-term goal for claimants due to fears that it would be too drastic a change from their current circumstances, partly due to negative experiences of employment in the past. Claimants generally felt more comfortable starting part-time employment and then working their way up to full-time employment as a longer-term aspiration. Claimants who were less impacted by health conditions or other barriers were more inclined to consider full-time employment as an immediate goal.

4.4.4 Types of roles

Claimants tended to fall into one of two categories when it came to the type of role they would consider:

Those that were happy with any role

Claimants who felt they were closer to employment and expressed more positive sentiments towards employment were generally happy to consider any role and were primarily just seeking an initial opportunity to enter employment. They were looking for roles that had lower entry requirements such as retail, hospitality, warehouse work or delivery driving. Ex-Offenders and care experienced claimants tended to fall into this category, due to an overall eagerness to move on from their past and progress to their next stage in life.

I’m not a fusser. Anything would be happy for me. If I don’t like it, then obviously that’s something that I’d have to just try. But I’m willing to just try anything.

Care Experienced, 20-24

Those that had something specific in mind

On the other hand, some claimants wanted to work in specific roles. They tended to be claimants who had strong personal interests in specific sectors (though there were no identifiable patterns in the sectors claimants were interested in) or older claimants, who had previous work experience to draw on and desired to work in a similar role.

4.4.5 Barriers to finding suitable work

Barriers to finding suitable work included:

Feeling “ruled-out” of certain jobs due to their disadvantage

Claimants’ disadvantages could hinder them from finding work that fitted their preferred patterns, roles, and sectors, even when they were work-ready.

Having a criminal conviction

Ex-offenders expressed that they were often or always excluded from job opportunities due to their convictions. They felt that employers would never hire them as a result of their conviction. These feelings were based on their own lived experiences of frequent employment rejections, even if they felt they were qualified for the job. These experiences contrasted starkly to their experiences of employment while serving a sentence in prison. For example, one claimant had been provided the opportunity to work in waste management while they were in prison, and had done well and received positive feedback. However, once they left prison, they said employers were not willing to offer them similar roles. Experiences of discrimination dominated ex-offenders’ explanations for why they faced difficulties finding a job. This often stopped them from being able to consider or articulate if they faced any other barriers to finding employment.

Basically, with the conviction, it does make it harder because an employer is going to check up on you, or if they want a DBS or something like that, then you just cannot take that job or you can’t apply.

Ex-Offender, Homelessness, 55-64

Lack of stable housing

Claimants who had experienced homelessness also described how this experience had impacted their ability to find a job, as they did not have a permanent address to share on job applications. A lack of a safe, quiet environment also made preparing for interviews or applications a challenge.

Low confidence and self-esteem

More broadly, claimants who were ready to find work still experienced difficulties with confidence and self-esteem when it came to applying to jobs, often stemming from stigma or shame around the disadvantages they had experienced. This was particularly true for those with more complex personal backgrounds, who felt that employers or potential colleagues would judge them for their past. Care experienced claimants also lacked confidence around the social aspect of employment, as they felt they had historically struggled to socialise and had faced workplace harassment due to being care experienced, or for their neurodiversity.

I haven’t regained my confidence since then really I don’t feel like I’m up to doing what I used to do if you know what I mean?

Homelessness, Substance Dependent, 55-64

Difficulty finding roles to accommodate their health condition(s)

Claimants’ health conditions were once again a key barrier. Claimants faced difficulties managing ongoing health conditions and would experience unpredictable patterns in their health, making attending regular work hours or undergoing necessary training a challenge.

I’ve been applying for remote jobs. I am ready to go back into work, especially if they are able to support me with my health. I’ve been looking at remote jobs for months […] but it’s really competitive at the moment.

Homelessness, 20-24

Lack of opportunities available locally

Claimants living in more rural areas also had fewer local opportunities available to them when it came to finding employment, and this barrier was amplified as they also felt this reduced the pool of potential employers that they felt would make reasonable adjustments for them. Local roles were important to claimants as they tended to want shorter commutes which could be more flexible for their living arrangements, especially those with caring responsibilities, who wanted employment that could accommodate school pick up and drop off responsibilities.

Lack of reliable transport options

Given the lack of local opportunities available, claimants often had to rely on public transport to get to work, which became a barrier in itself to claimants finding employment. This created difficulties getting to work on time, and some claimants had lost employment in the past because the public transport they relied on consistently made them late. This was particularly impactful for those living in rural areas, where public transport links were less reliable and less frequent.

The upfront cost required for commuting was also identified by claimants as a barrier, as those more financially vulnerable claimants struggled to consistently pay for public transport, or the costs associated with travelling via a car. Claimants who had experienced homelessness were particularly affected by this cost, as they had experienced more extreme financial hardship than other groups, which had led to them becoming homeless.

Well, the area we sort of live in now, neither of us drive, so it’s like buses and stuff like that that we have to get. So when you’re on like a set time to get to work and you’ve got a set timetable for the buses to get home from work, that’s what makes it that bit difficult.

Care Experienced, 16-19

Dan’s Story

Ex-offender and experience of homelessness, 55-64

Dan received his first and only criminal conviction around five years ago, and has experienced homelessness multiple times throughout his life, including living in temporary and supported accommodation upon leaving prison.

For a while, his housing situation prevented him from looking for work because he would not have been able to afford the rental costs in supported accommodation once he started working. Once he has moved into social housing, he felt more able to focus on employment. Prior to his criminal conviction, Dan had worked in a variety of jobs in different sectors and roles and described himself as a “Jack of all trades.” The jobs he enjoyed most involved driving or manual labour. However, he now felt limited in the jobs he could consider. He could not take, and actively avoided roles involving heavy lifting due to health conditions. However, his conviction prohibited him from working on computers, which often ruled-out office-based roles which may be more suitable for his condition.

Dan had been proactively searching for employers that would consider hiring someone with his background and attending job fairs. To support him to find employment and prevent a cycle of offending and homelessness, Dan received mentoring from specialist organisations for ex-offenders. Dan’s work coach also supported him by helping him to write his CV, make job applications, and signposting to different support schemes to pay for clothes and travel to attend job interviews. He was also referred to some additional online workshops on CV writing but could not make use of these, due to being prohibited from using computers.

Despite his commitment to finding work and the support he received, he struggled to find employment. Dan felt his conviction was to blame. He felt this limited the number roles available to him, as most jobs he had researched required some computer usage, or would not hire individuals with a conviction. More generally, he assumed that a lack of response to some applications was down to his conviction.

I sort of know the ones that might be discriminating because they never answer me. You can’t even get an email saying thank you for your application or, that we’ll put you on file.

Dan said his work coach had provided him with general encouragement to keep searching for work but had not suggested any new approaches to the problems presented by his conviction. Dan said he would stay positive and keep searching, in the hope the right opportunity will come up eventually.

It’s just a case of being positive. I know there are companies […] that will give you a go and see how you do. That’s what I’m trying to do.

4.5 Staying in work

As most claimants had not yet found employment between taking part in the survey and their interview, this section explores the barriers that claimants had historically experienced when in employment, and the benefits claimants thought employment could bring based on their previous experiences.

Many claimants recognised that employment could provide a foundation for their own personal stability and help them achieve their future aspirations. They felt that employment could offer financial independence and help them provide for themselves and others. Some claimants also felt it could help them regain their confidence and allow them to build social connections, which was referenced by care experienced claimants who experienced mental health difficulties or neurodiversity. Employment was seen as an opportunity to regain a sense of purpose and routine; this was seen as particularly important for claimants who had or were experiencing a substance dependency, as a routine reduced urges to engage in substance use. The six claimants who were in employment at the time of the qualitative discussions highlighted similar benefits, particularly that it gave them a sense of routine and purpose, and had improved their confidence.

4.5.1 Barriers to staying in work

Barriers to staying in work included:

Worsening or fluctuating health conditions

Those with ongoing health conditions had experienced their condition worsening once again while in work. Likewise, claimants who had previously been dependent on substances reported that managing these whilst in work took a daily mental toll. Previous substance use in some instances had limited their ability to perform in employment environments; for example, one claimant stated that historic substance usage had reduced short- and long-term memory.

Insufficient workplace adjustments for health or caring responsibilities

Claimants who had managed to receive workplace adjustments had also needed ongoing support from their employers to ensure employment was maintained. This included being able to attend healthcare appointments, and being able to work flexibly to accommodate their health condition and caring responsibilities. Claimants worried that without appropriate and continual support, future employment could cause additional stress, exacerbate other disadvantages, and risk them falling out of employment again.

Henry’s story

Experience of substance dependency, aged 45-54

Henry had a varied career in a number of different sectors, and then set up his own business. However, the business failed, and he became dependent on alcohol to cope with the stress caused by his financial situation in combination with being a single parent to his young child. He felt being unemployed also contributed to his substance dependency, as he had a lot of “time on his hands” during the day while his child was at school. His dependency had a debilitating impact across all areas of his life, including on his physical health, his sleep, and ability to drive.

Henry felt his work coaches responded well to his circumstances. He appreciated that they acknowledged that his significant work history and qualifications, along with his caring responsibilities, meant he was looking for a very specific role. His work coaches focused on building his confidence to apply to roles that met his level of experience, as well as updating his CV. He emphasised how the work coaches made him believe he would not be written-off because of his age. Each work coach he met with had a good understanding of his situation, so he did not have to retell his story.

You’re in an unusual position, right? Because you’re too qualified for the jobs you’re applying for, but you don’t feel confident going back into the industry that you were in. So [the work coaches] were very understanding about that.

Henry was also receiving counselling for his substance dependency, which he was referred to via a mental health crisis team. He found his counsellor warm and friendly, and they were able to give him some useful coping mechanisms. He felt more optimistic about the future after this support.

Ultimately, Henry found work again via a former colleague, but the support he received from work coaches helped him to believe he had the ability to stay in work. Working has restored Henry’s financial stability, reducing the stress he felt and his alcohol intake. By the time of his interview, Henry had been in recovery from his alcohol dependency for a few months. He said he felt financially and physically better off, and was spending more quality time with his child.

Once you’re back in work, it gives you that self-worth and self-respect.

Question 7

5. Experiences of support and support needs

Accepted Answer

This chapter explores participants’ experiences of receiving support, both through Jobcentre Plus (JCP) and other sources, and examines the extent to which their support needs were met. The chapter first considers experiences of JCP support, including frequency, and the degree to which participants felt that work coaches understood their circumstances and were able to offer appropriate support. This chapter then explored engagement with other forms of employment-related and non-employment-related support. Finally, it examines areas where support was perceived to be lacking, offering insights into unmet needs and opportunities to strengthen future service provision.

5.1 Summary: Quantitative survey findings

Existing support networks

The majority of those not in employment (82%) felt that they had someone they could trust and go to for help if they had a serious problem. This support came from: family members (55%), a friend or friends (45%), a professional (37%); and someone else (12%).

Experience with JCP

Among UC claimants in one of the four disadvantaged groups not in employment, 47% had seen a work coach in the last six months.
Three quarters (76%) of claimants who had spoken to their work coach in the past six months were satisfied with the support they have received from them.
Just under half (48%) of these claimants spoke with the same work coach every appointment.
Around two thirds (64%) felt comfortable discussing their circumstances with their work coach.
Three in five (59%) felt that their work coach understood their needs.

In terms of differences in perceptions of work coaches by disadvantaged group:

Experience of homelessness in past two years: less likely to be satisfied with the support that they received from their work coach (72% compared with 79% of all others).
Care experienced: less likely to feel comfortable sharing their circumstances than claimants with experience of other disadvantages (58% compared to 67% of all others).
Substance dependent in past two years: less likely to feel comfortable sharing their circumstances (56% compared to 67% of all others). They were also less likely to feel that their work coach understood their needs (50% compared with 63% for all others).

Interest in future support

Overall, 53% of claimants were interested in receiving help with at least one type of employment-related support. The areas claimants tended to be most interested in were: improving confidence (31%), accessing education or training (27%) or managing money and debt (24%).

For those that had experienced each type of disadvantage, or had health conditions, the most common areas of unmet needs were wanting help with: finding stable housing (44% of those that had experienced homelessness were interested in receiving support); managing mental health (34% of those with a health condition); and managing physical health (29% of those with a health condition).

5.2 Experiences of receiving employment support

5.2.1 Jobcentre Plus Support

Extent of contact with JCP

As found in the quantitative survey, there was a mixed picture around whether claimants interviewed were seeing their work coach fortnightly or monthly, seeing their coach less regularly, or not at all. Claimants who were not required to see a work coach typically were satisfied with this arrangement as they often had a health condition which they felt ruled them out from working in the near future. There were instances where claimants were unsure as to why they had not interacted with their work coach, but they generally did not have strong feelings about their lack of contact.

Appointment Times

Consistency around appointments was a common theme raised by claimants. The key aspects were appointments being kept, and having a consistent length of appointment.

Reliability: Appointments going ahead on schedule was an important factor for claimants. This helped to generate a sense that claimants were accessing reliable, consistent support, which was often less present in claimants’ lives. While appointments starting behind schedule was an uncommon experience, when it did occur, it caused notable dissatisfaction. Work coaches not attending appointments at all was uncommon, and if they didn’t attend, a replacement was organised for the claimant.
Consistent length: Having overly short appointments with work coaches (e.g., 5 minutes rather than 10) was a commonly reported experience, though frequency of these short appointments varied among claimants. These short appointments caused considerable frustration, particularly as the standard length of appointments was already viewed as being too short. The allotted time was not seen as sufficient for claimants to discuss their circumstances and aspirations in depth with the work coach. The high workload of work coaches was recognised as a potential factor around the overly short appointments, however, this did not ease claimants’ dissatisfaction.

Relationship with work coaches

Claimants that had seen a work coach within the last 6 months reported that they had mixed relationships with their work coaches and there were a number of factors which contributed towards whether a relationship was seen positively or negatively:

Consistency in seeing the same work coach: Claimants with work coaches typically met with the same work coach each time, with this helping claimants to build relationships and trust with their work coaches. For example, one claimant stated that over time their work coach was able to better tailor the job suggestions for them, based on a better understanding of their mental health struggles. However there were some claimants who reported that they had seen multiple different work coaches at their appointments which created difficulties in building a relationship with them. For one claimant that had recurring experiences of this, it had led to the belief that their work coach was actively taking steps to avoid them, demonstrating the significant impact a lack of consistency can have on trust.

My work coach just never, she never wants to see me. So even when she does book an appointment with me, she’ll schedule somebody else at that time, so I end up seeing somebody else, and when I do get a chance to have an appointment with her, she’s just always rude.

Homelessness, 20-24

Overall, a lack of consistency compounded existing difficulties claimants had around building relationships and trust, directly linked to their experience of the four disadvantages. For example, care experienced claimants often had poor past experiences around receiving support within the care system, which they explained made it difficult to trust other support services. This lack of consistency impacted on claimants’ belief that progression towards work was possible.

I’d rather just speak to one person and then I can confide in that one person and not have to go through the whole process with different people every time.

Care Experienced, 25-34

Speed of responses to claimant queries: This typically related to queries made through their UC Journal. When queries were answered promptly, it helped to create a perception that work coaches were responsive to claimant’s needs.

I’ve always found my work coach to be great whenever I’ve had an appointment…, Never had a problem, always fairly rapid at getting back to you on Universal Credit Journal and also occasionally … they used to send through things that could be helpful like other services they might think that might be a help to you.

Substance Dependence, 25-34

However, when claimants experienced delays in receiving responses to their queries, for example, waiting weeks or months, this was seen as negatively contributing towards the claimants’ relationship with their work coach. Though there was some recognition that work coaches provide support to a high number of people, overall, it gave the impression that claimants were not being considered or supported.

I get they’ve got loads of clients, I get that, I get they’ve got loads of members of public that need their help and stuff like that. I just wish it wouldn’t take so long for them to get back to me.

Care Experienced, Ex-Offender, Homelessness, 25-34

The majority of claimants had stayed at the same Jobcentre since completing the survey. However, a few who had moved to a different area since taking the survey observed that they had experienced different levels of support from different Jobcentres. While these claimants noted there had been differences in the quality and type of support offered, the key differences that were highlighted were around the attitude of staff at the Jobcentres, with one location typically being viewed more positively viewed than the other.

Talking about disadvantages and circumstances with a work coach

Claimants generally felt comfortable disclosing their circumstances to their work coach. This was not necessarily due to a close relationship with the work coach, but because they wanted to be able to fully explain their situation, so that their work coach could understand their needs and provide more tailored support. Despite this, claimants generally felt that their disadvantage was not something they had discussed at length with their work coach on an ongoing basis, with this partly being attributed to the perceived short length of appointments. In some cases, claimants said that they had withheld their full circumstances from their work coach, if they did not feel it was directly impacting their ability to search for work. This was particularly true for claimants who had experiences of care, or had previous convictions, that were viewed as being too far in the past.

Definitely not all of [my circumstances], but I’ve mentioned stuff in the past. It’s one of those things where I’ve never sat down to go for a bullet point by bullet point, but I’ve not hidden things either. It’s just come up as and when. Probably a good chunk of it, but not all of it.

Care experienced, 25-34

Some claimants had positive experiences of work coaches reacting with empathy and respect to their disclosure, and then continuing to offer respectful support moving forward. Claimants generally shared that this helped to create trust with their work coaches, and a sense that they could build towards their goals, whether that was moving into employment or addressing the barriers they faced.

To be fair, she did listen. She listened to what I had to say. She tried to meet all my needs to the best that she could.

Care Experienced, 20-24

Some claimants reported more negative experiences when disclosing personal circumstances to work coaches. These experiences often stemmed from a perception that work coaches did not believe them, which was particularly common among claimants with health conditions, neurodiversity, substance dependence, or multiple disadvantages. This perception reduced trust in work coaches and made claimants less willing to share information in the future.

A few work coaches I had [told about circumstances]. Some of them were nice, some of them were horrible. But they were just acting and treating you like basically whatever you say, you’re just lying just to get the money and you get that kind of feeling from them people.

Substance Dependence, 35-44

Support with disadvantages from JCP

Overall, there were mixed feelings from claimants on whether their work coach provided support that considered their experience of one of the four disadvantages. The key factors determining claimants’ experiences of receiving this type of support were:

The amount of empathy and understanding shown by their work coach: Those that had positive experiences typically described their work coaches as flexible and empathetic to their needs, which helped build confidence that their work coach had their best interests at heart and fully understood their needs. Conversely, claimants who had negative experiences of receiving support from JCP around their disadvantage tended to focus on a perceived lack of sensitivity and empathy from their work coach.
Tailored support and referrals: Building this shared understanding of the impact of disadvantage was felt to lead to more appropriate and better tailored support and referrals, which in turn helped claimants build stability and address barriers that were preventing them from considering employment. This included giving claimants easements on their work search requirements, helping claimants access language courses, and discussing potential support resources that claimants could access for their mental health, such as local mental health services or providing details on counselling options available to them. Another example of how a better understanding of claimants’ disadvantage led to improved support was an ex-offender being given a special advisor in the Jobcentre who knew about their circumstances. This alleviated stress as the claimant did not have to re-explain their circumstances and also provided them with greater assurance that the support provided was suited to their needs.

My work coach, I was lucky to feel like she was almost like a little bit of a counsellor as well in a way… at that point we weren’t kind of discussing going into work, just kind of… what I could maybe try and do to like improve the parts of my mental health that I struggle with and to then obviously move on to looking at things like jobs that maybe might impact positively on my mental health and what that might look like.

Substance dependence, 25-34

Inappropriate referrals could damage trust and engagement. For example, a claimant with anxiety being recommended group sessions, to both address their anxiety and to find work, after they had explained that their anxiety impacts them in group environments. This negatively impacted claimants’ relationships with work coaches as it created a sense that work coaches were not adequately taking claimant’s needs or circumstances seriously, which claimants suggested lowered their confidence around asking for support or adjustments around their disadvantages in the future.

While these factors are likely to be important for all UC claimants, given how the experience of the four different types of disadvantage have undermined claimants’ resilience and trust (as described in Chapter 2), they are particularly important for those with experiences of disadvantage.

Support with employment from JCP

Overall, claimants had mixed experiences of support from JCP around employment. The different types of support claimants received included:

Signposting to support schemes claimants may be eligible for that could help with finding work (e.g., support accessing clothing, transport, building confidence and employment support programmes). Signposting to these types of schemes were received positively by claimants, especially the schemes that provide them with suitable interview clothing and ones that cover transport costs for attending interviews.
Support and guidance for how to search for and apply to jobs. This was especially beneficial for claimants aged 16-24, as these claimants tended to have less experience and confidence around finding and accessing work. Feelings on this were mixed, as support tended to focus on job searching, with less attention on what makes a good application. However, those that lacked confidence in searching for jobs were positive about the support they received in finding suitable jobs to apply for.
Support to identify relevant training courses to improve qualifications and skills (e.g., an AI course, English, maths, first aid, etc.). These training courses were appreciated by claimants, but some did express frustration if it hadn’t directly led them into employment.

Across these areas, claimants were more critical of support which was seen as generic and unspecific to claimants’ needs or circumstances. Typically, this related to practices such as claimants being sent links to job adverts which did not align with their interests or needs. This created a sense that the claimants had not been listened to and that work coaches were only interested in getting them into some form of employment, regardless of the claimants’ needs or wants. Claimants were also critical about being given little practical support to make an application once their work coach had identified relevant roles.

I wanted to try and ease my anxiety by trying to get a job where, obviously I’m working, I still need to speak to people, but it’s not all customer related…Obviously, because of my anxiety, I can’t exactly just do any old job, so, I was looking for the ones that I felt like I could do, whereas they were pushing [me] to sort of apply for any.

Care experienced, 16-19

5.2.2 Employment support provided by other organisations and support networks

While not all claimants had received employment support from other organisations, those that had shared that this had been provided by a range of independent organisations (including those delivering DWP contracted provision). This support was often similar to what was provided by JCP, including building confidence, job searching/applying for jobs, and support with training.

Types of organisations

Claimants’ experiences and perceptions of these independent organisations varied, typically based around the perceived size of the organisation. Larger organisations were generally viewed in a more negative light, as the support they offered was often viewed as being more generic in nature, and not tailored to claimants’ specific needs. This was in contrast to smaller organisations (or at least those perceived to be) which were seen more positively, with particular praise being drawn to the more practical and tailored nature of the support they offered. This was viewed as being more relevant to claimants’ needs and therefore was typically found to be more useful.

Type of support provided

The type of support these organisations provided included:

Employment support: This included helping claimants write CVs, accessing training courses and navigate employment pathways. This had varying degrees of success, as it was felt that this could repeat information that was available online, rather than offering additional support.
Tailored mental health support: Tailored support was typically felt to be more effective. Examples of tailored support included helping a claimant with anxiety to access a workshop to help address interview-related anxiety, supporting a claimant to find a voluntary opportunity in a role they were interested in, and identifying potential courses for a claimant which suited their interests.
One-to-one programmes: a couple of claimants were also receiving employment support through one-to-one programmes, described as similar to NHS Talking Therapies or Individual Placement and Support. Claimants primarily found out about these through public services such as their social worker or NHS staff, although they did not always feel they were well joined up.
Accessing volunteering: This was identified as an important intermediary step for a couple of the younger claimants (aged 16-19) who had moved into employment since the survey. These claimants had independently decided to volunteer as a way to both gain experience and to ‘give back’.

Existing support networks

The positive impact of existing connections was highlighted as an enabler to entering work, with two employed claimants sharing that they had been supported into work by people in their existing support networks. This included a former colleague reaching out to suggest the claimant come back to their previous profession, and a friend suggesting that the claimant should try working with them, after a discussion around work.

Disadvantage support provided by other organisations and support networks

Claimants had engaged with a variety of non-employment related support services outside of Jobcentre Plus. This support included mental and physical health support, housing and financial support, substance misuse support, and social care services. Support around health conditions and social care was commonly ongoing, while support for other needs tended to have been used in the past.

Experiences of support

Claimants had a range of experiences across the different types of support:

For mental health support, some claimants were attending therapy and counselling, through 1-2-1 programmes like NHS Talking Therapies. When accessed, they enabled individuals to better manage their symptoms and develop mental resilience.
Physical health support was accessed through GPs and other NHS services. Specific examples of this support include someone who received physiotherapy via a GP, and another who received improved medication, allowing them to overcome some of their physical health issues. Overall, claimants felt that this support was difficult to access, and they rarely felt that their conditions had been fully addressed.
In relation to housing support, claimants had received support from Local Authorities in securing stable housing, as well wider support around navigating property-related issues. Claimant experiences were generally positive, with claimants sharing that they were able to receive the support they needed.
Substance misuse support primarily involved rehabilitation services, support groups, or meetings with a mentor or sponsor. Claimants were typically positive about this support and recognised the impact the support had on their dependency. Most claimants were no longer accessing these services, as they had addressed their needs, however, a few claimants were still attending peer support groups or mentoring. Overall, claimants felt that these services were a significant enabler in rebuilding confidence and providing them with stability.
Social care services primarily provided support to those who had recently left care, (i.e. those aged 16-24). Generally, these services were viewed positively, with particularly focus being placed on the tailored and practical support that was provided. Claimants who had accessed these services received support from social workers, personal assistants (PAs), and community organisations, addressing a range of practical needs like transportation, caregiving, and administrative tasks.

Well, when I’ve had no food, they’ve [Personal advisor] supplied me with food vouchers. They’ve helped me with my gas bills. They’ve helped me get my internet. They’ve helped me get my house actually started into a home.

Care Experienced, 20-24

For support around managing money and debt, claimants had sought assistance through housing associations, councils, charities, and personal advisors, for support with accessing and paying for essential services, like utilities and internet setup, as well as advice on applying for further benefits (e.g., PIP). Care experienced claimants in particular needed support around accessing and paying for essential services, typically because they had not had opportunities to develop these skills and did not have parents or guardians to draw on for advice. Ex-offenders also more commonly accessed support with money. Generally, this was related to difficulties with finding employment, which impacted on claimant’s disposable income and their ability to pay for essentials. Overall, claimants were positive about the support they’d received with money and debt, as it had enabled them to address or begin to address their financial concerns.
There were limited mentions from ex-offenders of support provided by probation services. This could partly be attributed to most of the ex-offender claimants having committed their offence over 10 years ago.

Claimants who felt their issue had been fully resolved generally chose to discontinue the support. However, these claimants acknowledged their circumstances could easily deteriorate again. A few claimants mentioned that they now felt they knew who to reach out to if they needed support again in the future, with these claimants acknowledging that their previous positive experiences provided reassurance they could be supported again, if needed.

Support provided by existing support networks

Outside of support provided by organisations, claimants had also received support for disadvantages through their existing support networks, primarily via friends, family, and professionals. Conversely, younger participants – particularly those who had experience of care - tended to draw on support through friends or professional (e.g., support workers) rather than family. Within this age range, refugees and those that had experienced homelessness made particular reference to support from their friends. This support covered advice around different support services that they could access, emotional support, and providing temporary or permanent housing.

5.3 Unmet needs

Regardless of who was providing the support or what the support aimed to address, claimants from across the four disadvantaged groups expressed that they want to feel listened to and that their full needs are being considered. There was a desire to have consistent support from the same person or team to better enable claimants to build relationships and trust. This was particularly the case for claimants who were further from work and had other aspirations they wanted to achieve first, as it was felt that this would help them manage their stress and create a belief that they could build toward progression. Overall, ideal support, whether provided by JCP or external partners, was viewed as being highly personalised and based on addressing the specific needs of each individual claimant. This focused on two key areas:

Consistency in seeing the same person: this included having the same work coach for each appointment and having a consistent length of appointment each time. The ideal length of an appointment varied across claimants, depending on their needs. Typically, claimants also suggested that having less frequent appointments could be beneficial, so that they could either focus on addressing their barriers (for claimants further from work) or so that they could spend more time focusing on finding work (for those closer to work).
Empathetic, personalised support: despite some claimants reporting positive experiences, many had a perception that those providing support (particularly of work coaches) were either not interested in the circumstances of claimants or that claimants should be grateful for any support that they receive. By support services showing greater empathy and understanding around claimants’ circumstances, it was hoped that this would improve trust and enable more tailored support.

Whilst claimants had received a wide range of different support (as outlined above), the research identified some key areas of unmet needs. These were similar to those uncovered in the quantitative survey: skills and qualifications, mental health, and financial advice.

In relation to support for skills and qualifications, there was a clear interest in practical training, particularly in digital skills such as content writing and online work. Some claimants highlighted the potential benefits of trade-related courses, which could create pathways to employment in construction and related fields. However, despite the interest, some claimants didn’t know where to start with finding training that would be relevant for the skills they wanted to develop or how to apply. There was also a small group of claimants who were particularly frustrated, as they had been told by their work coach that they would be provided with this type of training, but had still yet to be referred to it.

We spoke about small courses and tickets [construction qualification certificates], anything that will improve my chances of getting work, like a pump driver, roller driver. All these little more skills or things you can do just gives you more opportunity.

Homelessness, Substance dependence, 55-64

For mental health support, some claimants expressed frustration with the lack of tailored mental health services, indicating that attempts to seek help often led to unmet expectations. This related to the specific types of therapy they were referred to either not meeting their needs or not being suitable to the individuals’ preferred approach to support (e.g., being offered CBT when they felt other methods would be more appropriate). An additional source of frustration was that claimants had often experienced lengthy waiting lists to receive support. Once claimants were able to access the service, there was also frustration around some services only being offered on a short-term basis (e.g., 6-10 sessions). Already feeling pessimistic about their situation, this immediately limited how much progress claimants thought they could realistically achieve in this time.
In terms of financial support, several individuals reported challenges in managing their finances and felt that the support services relied on signposting to written information, rather than providing personalised one-to-one support with a debt advice expert. Some care experienced claimants explained how handling finances was one of their primary struggles, and whenever they were signposted, they felt like they were going in circles and not actually receiving practical help. This perhaps coincided with respondents being younger and having limited experience handling finances or knowing what options for financial support are more widely available.

I’m terrible at managing finances, appalling. I’ve already bought myself out of debt several times through quite crisis situations and I can feel it escalating again… I’m terrible at tracking my money, unfortunately, I have now got credit card debt again so yes, some support, payment plan or anything like that.

Care experienced, homelessness, 45-54

Beyond the three support needs identified in the survey, there were also several other unmet support needs claimants’ highlighted during interviews:

For substance dependence support, the main unmet need was when the support that was available was not fully suited to their needs e.g., time-limited support, or a lack of specialised support for their specific addiction (e.g. prescription drugs). It was also suggested by some claimants that the integration of substance dependency and mental health support was poor, particularly around the process of accessing support. For example, claimants being told they can’t access dependence support until they receive mental health support, but then being told they can’t access mental health support until they receive dependence support. With the overall impact of this lack of integration effecting the perceived accessibility of support services
Claimants with unstable living arrangements wanted more housing support, primarily around how to engage with the private sector to access housing. Partly this was due to claimants having a lack of knowledge or confidence around interacting with private sector housing providers. Those living in supported accommodation or social housing were also concerned how the housing element of UC would be impacted by work, and how they would manage this. While this need was primarily expressed by those with experience of homelessness, claimants from the other disadvantaged groups also shared an interest in this support. An interest or desire to access more affordable or better quality housing was shared by all those interested in this type of support.

Overall, claimants emphasised that wider non-JCP support should be easier to access through better integration of services. Claimants did not want to have to retell ‘their story’ to each new service they interacted with, which could feed perceptions that support providers did not really ‘care’ about claimants and their circumstances. Specific attention was drawn to the lack of integration between mental health support and substance support, where claimants could end up being unable to access either service.

Question 8

6. Conclusions and key principles for delivering support

Accepted Answer

This research sought to understand the barriers to employment facing those with experience of four types of disadvantage, and what support they would like to move towards work.

The research highlights that disadvantage is rarely experienced in isolation. Many of the claimants interviewed had experienced significant life events and challenges, including domestic abuse, divorce, bereavement, and migration as a refugee. Physical and mental health conditions were also a central barrier to claimants being able to progress towards work, as these were often fluctuating and unpredictable.

6.1 Conclusions – The “pathway to work”

The “pathway to work” claimants take can be understood as having four main stages: achieving stability, getting “work-ready”, finding suitable work, and staying in work.

Regardless of their point in the pathway, claimants’ experiences had significantly impacted their self-esteem, and therefore confidence that they would be able to find a role aligned with their skills and capabilities. Claimants had often tried to access support, but regularly had negative experiences related to: support not being sufficiently tailored or personalised, not having a consistent point of contact who they could build rapport with, lack of joined-up communication and information sharing creating a perception of an uncaring system. Together, these factors meant that the “pathway to work” felt long and daunting.

Given the complexity of their circumstances, the support offered to claimants should be holistic, balancing addressing health, housing, skills and employment needs together. However, the emphasis of the support needs to be tailored depending on claimants’ starting point along the pathway:

For claimants focusing on achieving stability

For those who experienced the most challenges around their disadvantages, instability meant their immediate priorities were basic – housing and health – rather than employment. This reduced their capacity to engage in support, particularly for those that faced multiple problems, as it was difficult to know which issue to tackle first. For these claimants, their health, including long-term health conditions, needed to be supported first. This can be done through referrals to support services which can provide claimants with direction on how they can better manage their health conditions and help them to assess which types of work might be feasible for them. Secondly, there is also a need to help claimants create an action plan for addressing other disadvantage barriers they are facing. While the action plans may differ for each individual, there were some clear areas that specific disadvantaged groups needed assistance with. For example, those that had recently experienced homelessness needed assistance on how to navigate the housing sector so that they can potentially secure more stable housing. Those who were experiencing substance dependency needed encouragement to access support, and support with navigating eligibility requirements.

For claimants focusing on getting “work-ready”

Once their health conditions and disadvantages are more manageable, claimants then needed to develop the skills and gain qualifications that will make them ready for work. Claimants at this stage were often highly aware of where they lacked skills and qualifications for the job roles they wanted, or assumed they were likely to be “ruled out” for other reasons, primarily having a criminal conviction. At this stage, claimants needed support with accessing training and developing their job search skills so that they can improve their employability. Alongside this, claimants needed help identifying pre-existing skills and building their confidence that these skills are transferable to the workplace and will be valued.

For claimants trying to find suitable work

Claimants at this point highlighted a broader set of barriers which limited their opportunities: lack of job opportunities available locally, unreliable public transport, and difficulty finding roles which could accommodate their health condition or caring responsibilities. To address this, claimants need assistance with identifying opportunities that offered them flexibility around their personal circumstances, including their health conditions, caring responsibilities and anything else that requires reasonable adjustments. Claimants also needed support in advocating for these adjustments to employers, as they sometimes lack the confidence to do so.

To support claimants to stay in work

Finally, once in employment, claimants require active in-work support for their health and other disadvantages they have or are still experiencing, so to ensure a positive experience of work, and help them maintain employment.

6.2 Key principles for delivering support

This research also identified 6 key principles for how claimants want any type of support to be delivered, which applied across claimants experiencing different types of disadvantage. These are discussed in turn below:

1. Deliver sensitive and mindful contact consistently: Claimants often felt marginalised by organisations, compounding their existing shame and stigma. A single negative experience with a support service could reinforce these feelings and cause them to disengage. Support services need to be particularly mindful of the importance of consistently positive interactions for this group.

2. Intensive, tailored support: Claimants preferred one-to-one sessions that allowed in-depth discussion of their circumstances, with the desired length and regularity of these sessions depending on the individual claimant’s needs. Developing a personal, empathetic relationship with the support giver reduced stigma and built trust that the service had their best interests in mind. Claimants wanted support which was tailored to their specific barriers or unmet needs, rather than being signposted to generic support or skills courses, and felt having a personal relationship with one support worker or team would facilitate this.

3. Choice and agency: Lack of choice over the type of support they received made claimants doubt the effectiveness of support, especially if similar options had failed before. Removing autonomy increased frustration among a group that often has low tolerance towards unsuitable support, while offering choice would show their needs are valued.

4. Service integration and continuity of care: Claimants were frustrated by having to repeat their story to different services, often with changing key contacts. Sharing case information and making warm referrals could ease their emotional burden and reduce preconceptions around lack of care and ‘being passed around’.

5. Time-unlimited support, with an ‘Open Door’ policy: Providing long-term or open-ended support can boost claimants’ optimism about their chances of making progress towards resolving the issues they face, and therefore the quality of engagement with support from the outset. Allowing easy re-entry to support services would also enable earlier intervention if their circumstances worsened.

6. Support with employer engagement: For the few claimants employed by the time of their interview, part-time work and accommodating employers were key. Given claimants believed the difficulties they have faced will make them less attractive to potential employers, this group will likely require additional support advocating for their needs during the application and interview process.

Question 9

7. Appendix A: Additional information on the qualitative research sample

Accepted Answer

The following tables provide additional detail on the characteristics of claimants interviewed in this qualitative research. For these tables, ‘survey data’ refers to data collected during the Disadvantaged Groups Survey, and ‘qualitative screener’ refers to data collected from a short questionnaire individuals completed via telephone after being invited to take part in a follow-up qualitative interview.

Multiple Disadvantages (Survey Data)	Total
Yes	18
No	32
Total	50

Work Coach (Qualitative Screener)	Total
I do not have a work coach	10
Not seen work coach in the last 6 months	8
Seen work coach in the last 6 months	32
Total	50

Ethnicity (Survey Data)	Total
Black/Black British	6
Asian/Asian British	2
Other Ethnic Group	6
White	36
Total	50

Other disadvantage (Survey Data)	Total
Young Refugee	7
British Armed forces	1
Domestic abuse	18
Financial abuse	7
Slavery/Human Trafficking	1
Total	50

Age (Sample Data)	Total
16 to 19	10
20 to 24	6
25 to 34	5
35 to 44	9
45 to 54	6
55 to 64	13
65+	1
Summary: 50+	14
Total	50

Region	Total
East Midlands	4
East of England	5
London	8
North East	3
North West	9
South East	6
South West	6
West Midlands	2
Yorkshire and The Humber	5
Wales	2
Total	50

Physical Health condition (Survey Data)	Total
Yes	32
No	18
Total	50

Mental Health condition (Survey Data)	Total
Yes	37
No	13
Total	50

Gender (Survey Data)	Total
Male	28
Female	22
Total	50

UC Conditionality Group (Sample Data)	Total
Work Focused Interview or Work preparation (combined)	6
No Work-Related Requirements	21
Working Enough	2
Light touch	3
Intensive Work Search	18
Total	50

Question 10

8. Appendix B: Interview topic guide

Accepted Answer

The following guide is a formatted, streamlined version of the topic guide that was used in interviews.

A. Research introduction with participants - 5 minutes

B. Participant background, lifestyle, and aspirations – 10 minutes

1. To start with, when you completed the survey in [SURVEY MONTH 2024] you were claiming Universal Credit and said that you were - [employment status] - is this still the case?

2. That’s useful to hear – we’ll come back to your experience of work later in the conversation. I would first like to hear a bit more about what life is like for you at the moment.

3. In the survey you took part in, you mentioned that you were hoping to [summarise answer in survey re their goals and aspirations] over the next two years, could you tell me a bit more about that?

4. In the survey you also mentioned that you had experienced [disadvantage(s)]. Thinking back to [SURVEY MONTH 2024], how did you feel these experiences were impacting your life at the time?

5. If experienced multiple disadvantages: How, if at all, do you feel these experiences [of disadvantage(s)] are linked or related? Why do you say this?

6. How, if at all, are these things impacting you now compared to [SURVEY MONTH 2024]?

C. Work status and attitude to work – 10 Minutes

1. At the time of the survey in [SURVEY MONTH 2024], you said you felt that [statement] Why did you feel that way at the time? KEY QUESTION: How were some of the things we have discussed impacting on your feelings towards work?

2. [If said they were still unemployed] How do you feel about working now? KEY QUESTION: How are some of the things we have discussed affecting how you feel about working now?

3. [If said they are now employed] What job are you doing now? How long have you been doing this job? Moderator to probe on hours of work, type of contract, type of work (employer, sector, daily tasks) if not mentioned spontaneously

D. Barriers to work – 15 minutes

1. In the survey, you mentioned that your experience of [Disadvantage(s)] had made it more difficult for you to find work. Please could you tell me a more about why you felt that way?

2. In the survey, you said the following things had also made it more difficult for you to find work: [summarise responses] Thinking back to [SURVEY MONTH 2024], which of these were impacting your ability to find work the most? Why do you say this?

E. Support – 15 Minutes

1. In the survey, you said that you were getting support for [summarise survey responses]. Can you tell me more about this?

2. Outside of any interactions you have with your work coach and the Job Centre, what support are you currently getting with [if unemployed] finding work [if employed:] staying in work? How about in the past?

3. I’d like to ask you some questions about your experiences with your work coach and the Job Centre. Could you tell me about what type of support you have received/are receiving from them?

4. Did your work coach ever refer you to or recommend other services?

5. [If had unmet support needs in survey] In the survey you said you were interested in getting support with [summarise responses]. Have you ever considered asking for support with these things?

6. [If received any support now or in the past] Thinking about all the support you have received, how well do these different organisations / people work together to support you?

7. Can you think of any examples where different organisations / people have not worked well together? Why do you say this?

8. What do you think stops people in similar circumstances to you from reaching out for support with finding work?

9. Apart from what we have discussed already, do you feel that there any gaps in the available support or any improvements required?

F. Closing reflections – 2 Minutes

1. If you could get DWP to understand anything about yourself and the support you need, what would it be?

Cookies on GOV.UK

Executive summary

Introduction

Background of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

Profile of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

Pathways into work

Experiences of employment-related support and support needs

Principles and considerations for delivering support

Glossary and acronyms

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Key definitions

Those who had experienced homelessness

Ex-offenders

Those who had experienced a substance dependency

The care experienced

Care leavers

1.3 Methodology

Stage 1: Survey screening (14 May to 13 October 2024)

Stage 2: Quantitative survey (14 May to 13 October 2024)

Stage 3: Qualitative Sample Identified (12 May to 4 July 2025)

Stage 4: In-Depth Interviews (27 May to 23 July 2025)

1.3.1 Overall approach

1.3.2 Sampling

Table 11 Number of interviews completed for age and self-reported distance from work, broken down by disadvantage

2. Background of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

2.1 Summary: quantitative research findings

2.2 Background of care experienced claimants

2.3 Background of claimants who were ex-offenders

2.4 Background of claimants with experience of substance dependency

2.5 Background of claimants with experience of homelessness

2.6 Background of those with experience of multiple disadvantages

3. Profile of UC claimants with experience of one of the four disadvantages

3.1 Summary: quantitative research findings

Employment

Qualifications

Mental and physical health

Learning difficulty and neurodiversity

3.2 Employment status

3.3 Work history and pathway to becoming unemployed

Contracts coming to an end

Declining physical or mental health

Workplace discrimination or malpractice

Their specific disadvantage

3.4 Health Status

3.5 Other challenges and disadvantages

Bereavement

Domestic abuse and family breakdown

Becoming a refugee

Caring responsibilities

4. Pathways into work

4.1 Summary: Quantitative survey findings

Aspirations

Barriers to work

4.2 Achieving stability

4.2.1 Causes of instability

Health

Substance dependency

Insecure Housing

4.2.2 Barriers to achieving stability

Unclear pathways to improving health

Being in “survival mode”

Homelessness

Substance dependency

Care experience

Reluctance to start engaging with support

Suzy’s story

Care experienced and experience of homelessness, aged 16-19

4.3 Getting work ready

4.3.1 Barriers to getting “work-ready”

Low confidence and self-esteem

Unclear or disrupted pathways to up-and-re-skilling

Rose’s story

Care experienced and experience of homelessness, aged 45-54

4.4 Finding Suitable Work

4.4.1 Part-time work

4.4.2 Self-employment

4.4.3 Full-time work

4.4.4 Types of roles

Those that were happy with any role