Access to Work is failing neurodivergent employees — and the figures prove it

The government scheme designed to help disabled and neurodivergent people stay in employment is taking an average of 210 days to process applications — seven months — according to figures from Disability Rights UK. A February 2026 report by the National Audit Office found processing times had already risen from 28 days in 2020–21 to 109 days by November 2025, with the situation worsening further since the report’s analysis concluded.

For neurodivergent employees waiting for workplace adjustments, assistive technology or support workers funded through Access to Work, the consequences are tangible. Some have lost jobs. Others are working without the support they need while their applications remain unresolved.

What Access to Work is supposed to do

Access to Work is a government grant scheme administered by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). It funds practical support for disabled and neurodivergent people in work — job coaches, mental health support, assistive technology, travel assistance and support workers. Crucially, it funds support that goes beyond what an employer is required to provide as a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act 2010.

For HR professionals, Access to Work is one of the most significant tools available when supporting neurodivergent employees. The scheme can fund equipment and support that would otherwise fall to the employer, and it can enable neurodivergent employees to remain in roles they would otherwise be unable to sustain.

What has gone wrong

Demand for the scheme has roughly doubled in six years. The NAO found that applications rose from 76,100 in 2018-19 to 157,000 in 2024-25, with DWP spending increasing from £163 million to £321 million over the same period. The system has not kept pace with demand.

Complaints about Access to Work rose from 234 in 2022-23 to 657 in 2024-25, with 800 complaints recorded in just the first six months of 2025-26. The NAO noted that delays have had a negative impact on both individuals and employers, and confirmed that DWP does not expect the backlog to fall significantly in the short term.

A Westminster Hall debate in September last year heard from MPs across parties about the scheme's failures in practice. Daisy Cooper, Liberal Democrat MP for St Albans, revealed that a written parliamentary question had uncovered a constituent who had waited 393 days — more than a year — for a response to an Access to Work application. Charlotte Cane, Liberal Democrat MP for Ely and East Cambridgeshire, who secured the debate, cited the case of a constituent who had been told they could not receive support because they were already privately funding a monthly therapy session — despite being unable to afford additional sessions without the scheme's help.

Claire Young, Liberal Democrat MP for Thornbury and Yate, made a pointed observation: that a scheme designed to support people with executive dysfunction requires strong executive functioning skills to navigate successfully — an irony that the application process itself seems to have overlooked. The application process prohibits digital sharing of documents and requires communication by post, creating a systemic barrier for neurodivergent people who struggle with phone calls or written forms.

Disability Rights UK, citing survey data from the Disability Poverty Campaign Group, has documented significant cuts to support hours, refusals to fund essential travel and personal care support, delays in payments and approvals, and employer refusals to provide necessary equipment.

What this means for HR professionals

HR teams who routinely signpost neurodivergent employees to Access to Work need to set realistic expectations. A seven-month wait for support is an extended period during which an employee may be working without necessary adjustments, managing conditions without funded support, or considering leaving a role that the right provision would make sustainable.

Practically, HR professionals supporting employees through an Access to Work application should document the application date and expected processing timeline, maintain regular contact with the employee during the waiting period, consider whether interim reasonable adjustments can be provided by the employer while the application is processed and ensure line managers understand that delays are systemic rather than reflecting a problem with the employee's application.

The Equality Act duty to make reasonable adjustments is not suspended while an Access to Work application is pending. Employers cannot rely on the scheme's delays as a reason to defer support entirely.

What is being done

The government consulted on Access to Work reform through the Pathway to Work Green Paper, and a collaboration committee including disabled people's organisations is working on proposals. The NAO made recommendations including updating guidance to support consistent decision-making, improving data collection and resolving bottlenecks in the application process.

The Public Accounts Committee has issued a call for evidence on the scheme's delivery.

The DWP has added over 100 staff to administer the scheme, but the NAO found that waiting lists have continued to grow despite this. The department has indicated it is waiting for the outcome of the government's consultation before committing to further improvements.

For the neurodivergent employees and HR professionals managing these situations now, that timeline offers limited reassurance.