Research and analysis

Research Summary: Survey of disadvantaged groups on Universal Credit covering: care experience, ex-offenders, homelessness and substance dependency

Published 30 October 2025

Background

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) commissioned a large-scale quantitative survey to address a long-standing evidence gap on the Universal Credit (UC) disadvantaged group population. This research focused on the following four groups: care leavers or care experienced, ex-offenders, and those with recent experience of homelessness or substance dependency.

The main aim of this study was to establish the incidence rate of these four disadvantages within the UC claimant population, as well as to better understand their attitudes and barriers to work for those who experience them.

In November 2024, the Government published the Get Britain Working White Paper, which set out an ambition to achieve an employment rate of 80%. Part of this effort will involve supporting people with complex needs into work, including the four groups represented within this survey.

Key findings

Incidence and profile of disadvantaged groups

The four groups that were the focus of this research were:

Care experienced defined as claimants (across all age groups) who experienced the care system before the age of 18 including: foster care, residential children’s home, supported accommodation; or living with parents, grandparents, other family or friends with support from social services. Care leavers are a sub-set of this group defined as being in care for a period of at least 13 weeks from the age of 14 and ending after their 16th birthday.

Ex-offenders defined as claimants who have ever received a criminal conviction resulting in either a custodial, suspended or community sentence (exclusive of fines and cautions).

Homelessness defined as claimants who experienced homelessness in the past 2 years including staying in: temporary accommodation, a hostel, refuge, shelter or emergency accommodation; sofa surfing; or sleeping rough.

Substance dependency defined as claimants who have been dependent on either drugs or alcohol in the past 2 years.

Overall, one in five (21%) UC claimants had experienced at least one of these four disadvantages, with 6% having experienced 2 or more. The incidence rate of each disadvantage was as follows:

• 9% of UC claimants had experienced homelessness in the past 2 years

• 7% of UC claimants were care experienced

• 7% of UC claimants had experienced substance dependency in the past 2 years

• 6% of UC claimants were ex-offenders

The most common co-occurrence of disadvantage was between ex-offenders and those with a substance dependency in the past 2 years (2.1% of all UC claimants).

A third of claimants in the four disadvantaged groups had also experienced domestic abuse (35%).

Around a quarter of UC claimants in the four disadvantaged groups were in employment (either employment or self-employed 27%) and just under 3 quarters were not in work (72%). The most common working status among claimants in the four disadvantaged groups was to be long-term sick or disabled (37%).

The overlap between experience of disadvantage and having a health condition or disability was common:

• UC claimants in the four disadvantaged groups were more likely to be on the UC health journey (48%) compared to 28% of UC claimants who did not identify as belonging to one of the four disadvantaged groups  

• 70% of disadvantaged UC claimants had a physical or mental health condition lasting or expected to last 6 months or more: 57% had a mental health condition and 51% had a physical health condition 

• those with experience of substance dependency in the past 2 years were more likely to have a physical or mental health condition lasting or expected to last 6 months or more (80%), compared to claimants with other disadvantaged experiences (65%) 

• ex-offenders were also more likely to have a physical or mental health condition lasting or expected to last 6 months or more (76%), compared to claimants with other disadvantaged experiences (67%)

Disadvantaged groups in employment

UC claimants in the four disadvantaged groups who were employed (including self-employment) were less likely to have experienced substance dependency (23%) in the past 2 years or be an ex-offender (22%). They were also less likely to have experienced multiple disadvantages (17%) than those not in employment (31%).

Among those in employment, 55% were in permanent jobs, 12% were on zero-hours contracts and 9% were in temporary or seasonal jobs.

While a third of claimants in employment (31%) reported no barriers to staying in work, a similar proportion felt that physical or mental health conditions or disabilities had been a barrier to staying in work over the past 6 months (34%). Of the four types of disadvantage, experience of homelessness in the past 2 years was most likely to be considered a barrier: 41% felt that this experience had made staying in work more difficult.

Those who were in work were most interested in receiving support to increase their earnings (46%) and 41% of those with experience of homelessness were interested in receiving support with finding stable housing.  

Half of employed claimants had contact with a work coach over the previous 6 months (54%) and of these 74% were satisfied with the support they had received. A quarter of claimants (25%) in employment had experienced a problem with their benefit claim over the past 6 months and needed to contact DWP about it.

Disadvantaged groups not in employment

UC claimants from the four disadvantaged groups who were not in employment had a different profile to those in employment: a higher proportion of those not in employment had experienced substance dependency in the past 2 years (35%) or were ex-offenders (32%). They were also more likely to have experienced multiple types of disadvantage (31%) and to have no qualifications (30%).

The most common aspiration for disadvantaged claimants not in employment over the next 2 years was to get a job (33%), followed by being physically healthy (17%), and moving or buying a house (16%).

Over half (55%) of those not in employment felt that returning to work was a future possibility with the right support, with one in five (20%) feeling they were ready to work now. A third felt that paid work was not a realistic goal for them (34%). The longer the claim length, the less likely claimants felt that work was a future possibility.

Claimants’ self-reported distance from the labour market did not always align with the UC Labour Market regime they had been assigned to:

• 19% of claimants in the No Work-Related Requirements regime felt that with the right support employment was a realistic goal for them in the next 12 months. This indicates that these individuals might not be receiving the support they need to help them move into employment

• conversely, 16% of claimants in the Intensive Work Search regime did not think that work was a realistic goal, with a further 34% feeling that work was a future goal whereby they were not currently ready to work

The most commonly reported barrier to work for these claimants was physical or mental health conditions or disabilities (72%). Other barriers included not having the right skills or qualifications for the jobs available (33%) and a lack of confidence in applying for jobs (30%). Two in five (41%) felt that the jobs on offer were not flexible enough for their circumstances, and a third (33%) felt that the jobs on offer did not pay enough to make working financially worthwhile.

Of the four types of disadvantage, experience of homelessness in the past 2 years was most likely to be considered a barrier: 59% felt that this experience had made it more difficult to find work.

Those who were in not work were most interested in receiving employment-related support to improve their confidence (31%) and to access education or training (27%). Interest in this kind of support was higher amongst those that felt closer to work.

In relation to their experience of disadvantage, 44% of those who had experienced homelessness in the past 2 years were interested in receiving support with finding stable housing. Among those with health conditions, whilst some were already receiving support others were not: 34% were interested in receiving support for managing their mental health and 29% for their physical health.

Amongst those not in employment, 47% had seen a work coach in the last 6 months, and of these three quarters (76%) were satisfied with the support they had received. One in five claimants (22%) had experienced a problem with their benefit claim over the past 6 months and needed to contact DWP about it.

Segmentation analysis was conducted to better understand claimants’ distance from work by looking at patterns in their survey responses. The analysis produced 8 segments: Segment A were closest to work and Segment H were furthest away. Younger claimants aged 16 to 24 were over-represented in those segments closer to work (segments A-D), whereas claimants in segments further away from the labour market (E-H) were more likely to be older and on the UC health journey.

Methodology

The survey drew a large-scale random probability sample of 81,870 UC claimants. This was boosted by a sample of 11,261 care leavers (identified using the UC care leaver marker). The survey began with a screener section to establish whether claimants had experienced any of the four types of disadvantage; those that had went on to complete the main survey. The survey screened 14,321 UC claimants to identify 3,340 in a disadvantaged group. Only those claimants drawn from the random probability sample (13,598 respondents) were used to measure the incidence of each disadvantaged group in the UC claimant population.

The survey sample was drawn in April 2024 and fieldwork took place between May and October 2024. The survey used a mixed-mode approach: participants were initially invited to take part in an online survey and after sending 2 reminders a telephone survey was conducted. The data have been weighted to make the findings representative of the UC claimant population.