Adult Disability Payment - mobility component: consultation analysis

An independent analysis of the responses to the consultation on the eligibility criteria for the mobility component of Adult Disability Payment (ADP).

Appendix D: The planning and following journeys activity

Recurring themes

Criteria language

"The planning and following journeys criteria are overly simplistic. This is again the main reason for them being difficult for applicants to interpret and understand. They lack clarity and detail and use a lot of vague subjective terms to describe the criteria. One person's interpretation of what constitutes a journey may be different from the next person's. What is classed as familiar will vary from person to person adding a great deal of subjectivity in to the application process. This subjectivity will then be replicated in the decision-making process as this will add in further level of individual interpretation." - MS Society Scotland

6. Do you agree or disagree that the planning and following journeys activity eligibility criteria are easy to understand?

6(a). Please give reasons for your answer, outlining which parts you think are easy or difficult to understand and why.

Other themes

Some highlighted a difficulty in understanding how criteria related to individual situations and called for a more person-centred approach. This included concern about the lack of variation allowed by the closed questions structure, and specific considerations about mental health experiences not being well-represented by the criteria.

The overarching themes of considering the additional impacts of planning and following journeys and considering real life situations and environments were also mentioned by some. These included mid-journey brain fog, changed plans, route diversions, and weather conditions.

The following themes were each mentioned by a few respondents:

  • A request to expand the definition of orientation aids as mentioned in the overarching themes section of this chapter.
  • General critiques of the criteria and application without further specification.

9. What impact do you think the changes to how we make decisions on the planning and following journeys activity have on understanding a person's ability to plan and follow journeys? Please give reasons for your answer

Other positive feedback

"We welcome the inclusion of support from other people such as carers, family and professionals in the guidance on this criteria as they have a key role in a person's life. This is in line with the social model approach to disability and could create confidence that there is an effort to understand the applicant's condition and needs beyond medical needs." - Scottish Association of Social Work

Not enough data on the process yet

Some organisations noted that they had to withhold judgement of the changes until they were able to collect more data from first-hand experiences of the new process.

"We do not have any experience of these changes as they mostly relate to the way consultations are carried out, and we have not, to date, advised anyone who has had a consultation. However, we broadly welcome these changes and think that they should result in more accurate reports. In particular, we think that ensuring that practitioners have relevant experience may make a big difference for people with learning disabilities and mental health conditions. We would still like to see that all evidence is weighed appropriately by case managers where a consultation report is available, including information on the application form." - The Action Group & VOCAL & Grapevine at Lothian Centre for Inclusive Living

10. If there was an opportunity to change any specific aspects of the planning and following journeys activity, what changes would you make (if any)?

The following themes were each mentioned by a few respondents:

  • Inclusion of variable or fluctuating conditions, such as providing space in the application to allow those with fluctuating conditions to explain their experiences.
  • Comments that no further changes were needed to the planning and following journeys activity, with no further detail being given.
  • Suggestions about points-based system changes, such as providing more points to those clients who need assistance from another person to get around.
  • Suggesting that practitioners have specific training, including an understanding of visual impairments and how to speak with clients who have specific conditions. Two individual respondents requested that practitioners listen and believe the information provided to them.
  • Consideration of environmental factors, public transport routes and difficulties during the journey.



Back to top