1
BRIEFING ON THE CLOSURE OF THE INDEPENDENT LIVING
FUND (ILF)
Disability Rights UK
We are led, run and controlled by disabled people and work to
create a society where everyone with lived experience of
disability or health conditions can participate equally as full
citizens. We provide a range of information and advice services
for disabled people including independent living.
Contact Sue Bott, Director of Policy and Development
07725 511 562
Sue.Bott@disabilityrightsuk.org
Closure of the ILF
On the 18th December, 2012 the government announced that the
ILF would close on 31st March, 2015 with funding transferred to
local authorities in England and the devolved administrations in
Scotland and Wales.
The legality of the decision was challenged in the High Court
through judicial review proceedings. At the High Court hearing
in March 2013, The Court upheld the decision to close.
The High Court decision was subsequently appealed to the
Court of Appeal and following an appeal hearing in October 2013
the Court decided to allow the appeal on the grounds that more
evidence was required regarding the impact of closure of the
2
fund on its users and that ministers had given due regard to the
Public Sector Equality Duty.
Following the undertaking of a new equality impact assessment,
the Minister for Disabled People, Mike Penning announced in
Parliament on 6th March 2014 that the ILF would now close on
30th June 2015.1
Funding for ILF users will be transferred to local authorities in
England and the devolved administrations in Scotland and
Wales according to the numbers currently using the ILF in that
area. In June 2013 it was announced that the amount would be
£262m for 2015/16. Three points to note:

This amount is not
ring fenced and therefore local authorities will be able to
spend it according to local decision so not necessarily on
current ILF recipients and others with the highest support
needs and risks of loss of independence for those who
have been protected by the ILF system.

This funding is for
one year only. There has been no announcement on future
funding.

The level of realterms cuts to local authority social care funding is such
that the spending on services for disabled people will be
drastically reduced overall, many times outweighing the
addition of any funds transferred from ILF.2
Background to the ILF
1
2
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/ilf/news/
The Health and Social Care Information Centre states that the total number of people
receiving social care services in 2012-13 was 1.3m, down 9% from 2011-12 and down 25%
from 2007-08 (HSCIC, Community Care Statistics, Social Services Activity: England 201213, Provisional Release, 2013). This is the expected result of the targeting of cuts at local
authority funding which will continue until at least 2015-16, suggesting a nearly 50% cut in
social care provision by that stage.
3
The ILF was originally established in 1988 as a transitional fund
to provide cash to support severely disabled people at home,
and who were at risk of losing the value of domestic assistance
allowances provided under the old supplementary benefits
system.3 It is a non departmental public body funded by a grant
from the Department for Work and Pensions. It operates as a
discretionary trust, governed by a Trust Deed.
The ILF currently makes cash payments to 18,000 disabled
people to purchase care and support services or employ a
personal assistant.
The Fund set up in 1988 ran until 1993 when it was closed to
new applicants and a new fund created. The two ran in parallel
until 2007 when they were merged. The two funds had different
eligibility criteria which has resulted in two different groups of
users:
Group 1 – pre 1993 users. There are about 2,800 in this group.
Many of this group do receive some support in addition
resources from the ILF but by no means all. It is not known how
many in this group will meet the substantial and critical
eligibility criteria as set out in the Care Bill.
Group 2 – post April 1993 users. There are approximately 15,200
in this group. They have care packages that must include a
local authority minimum contribution to their care package,
currently £340 per week, and are very likely to have needs that
are substantial or critical.4
In recent years eligibility for the fund has been tightened owing
to financial pressures and government budgetary decisions.
This has been exacerbated by a significant increase in
applications. In March and April 2010 a total of 2,600
applications were received representing a 435% increase on the
number normally expected for that time of year.5 The Trustees
had to temporarily close the fund to new applicants in June,
3
Henwood M, Hudson B, 2007 Review of the Independent Living Funds, DWP
DWP Equality Impact Assessment Independent Living Funds March, 2014
5
ILF letter to local authorities May, 2010
4
4
2010 because the budget for 2010/11 had been allocated.
Finally, following a review, the Government decided to
permanently close the ILF to new applicants as the model was
‘financially unsustainable’.
The Impact of the Closure of the ILF on its Users
In their response to the Government’s consultation on the
closure of the ILF the Local Government Association and the
Association of Directors of Adult Social Services stated:
“As ILF recipients transfer into the LA system in 2015, and are
subsequently reviewed against the local authority assessment
criteria, the value of the personal budget calculated through the
Resource Allocation System will generally be at a lower level
than the initial ILF/LA budget.”6

It is likely that current
ILF users will face a reduction in the funding available to
them currently

Those in group 1 (pre
1993) who have limited or no support from their local
authority may find on transfer that their needs are
assessed as low or moderate and therefore will not receive
funding

Some local
authorities may take the view that restrictions on available
funding will result in the offer being residential care rather
than living in the community
The Impact of the Closure of the ILF on the Care and Support
System
In recent years social care funding and expenditure has
been reducing whilst the demand for support has been
increasing. A recent report from the National Audit Office7
has highlighted:
6
7
Quoted in DWP Equality Impact Assessment Closure of the Independent Living Fund
Adult Social Care in England: An Overview, National Audit Office March 2014
5

Local authorities total
spending on adult social care fell 8% in real terms between
2010 – 2011 and 2012 – 2013 and is projected to continue
falling

Local authorities have
reduced the amount of state-funded care provided through
individual packages of care every year since 2008 – 2009
Demographic trends are creating additional financial pressures
only mitigated in part by increased charges and self-funders.
Added to this people of all ages who require support from local
authorities have increasing high and complex needs.8
Although the number supported by the ILF is small in
comparison to the total numbers supported by adult social care,
the pressure on resources for local authorities will be
exacerbated by the closure of the Fund particularly given that
the overwhelming majority of ILF users are likely to come within
the substantial and critical eligibility criteria. The closure of the
ILF therefore has implications not just for ILF users but other
users of local authority care and support.
The Impact of the Closure of the ILF on Independent Living
90% of responses (1,700 – 1,800) to the Government’s
consultation in 2012 on the proposed closure of the ILF came
from individual ILF users and their families.9 A common
concern raised was about inability to access social activities,
voluntary work or employment because of the perceived
reduction in people’s care packages.
Two quotes from consultation responses given in the EIA
illustrate the concern that the closure will result in not being
able to take part in everyday activities as equal citizens that are
the essentials of independent living:
8
Ayling R. Walden D. A Problem Share: Making Best Use of Resources in Adult Social
Care, Towards Excellence in Adult Social Care (TEASC) and Think Local Act Personal
(TLAP) 2013
9
DWP Equality Impact Assessment Closure of the ILF March 2014
6
“…people like me will end up sitting alone looking out of the
window for most of the day unable to even go to the toilet. Until
now, despite being severely disabled . . . and being unable to
walk or use my hands or arms, I’ve been able to lead a fulfilling
life . . . (without the ILF) I will be imprisoned at home, and will
even have to give up my dogs.”
“ILF allows me to do, as closely as possible, what normal human
beings do, I do not do ‘activities’ or ‘access the community’ – I
go out for a drive, for a picnic, to visit people, the kind of things
‘real’ people do.”
In its report on the implementation of the right of disabled
people to independent living published in March 2012 the Joint
Committee on Human Rights expressed its concern for disabled
people who could no longer apply to the ILF particularly with no
alternative source of funding or any ring fenced funding. The
Committee took the view that disabled people may be severely
limited in being able to participate in society. They expected the
Government to give consideration to alternative funding so as to
ensure that rights enshrined in Article 19 of the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (UNCRPD)
were not breached.10
Although £262m will be transferred to local authorities and the
devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales concern
remains that funding is for 2015 – 2016 only and is not ring
fenced.
The Way Forward
Disabled people are very unhappy about the decision by Mike
Penning to close the fund. The decision has simply been
repeated without fresh evidence being provided about the
equality impact. The ILF is not perfect, and needs reform, but is
the primary means for disabled people in the UK with the
highest support needs to live independent lives in their
23rd report of session 2010 – 2012 Implementation of the Rights of Disabled People to
Independent Living, Joint Committee on Human rights, House of Lords House of
Commons 2012
10
7
communities. It levers additional and greater resources from
Local Authorities and ensures their commitment and the quality
of support. Demand may be growing but is easily limited
through the Government’s budget. Closing the ILF is premature
and savage without an alternative mechanism being put in place
to ensure that Local Authorities continue to support inclusion
rather than residential care for those with highest needs. It is the
loss of the system that ILF represents that is at issue and is so
catastrophic for those with the highest support needs. The risk
is that local authorities will conclude that independent living is a
luxury that can no longer be afforded.
Given the closure of the ILF Disability Rights UK would urge the
following to ensure disabled people are not denied their right to
independent living as set out in the UNCRPD; and to ensure that
the progress towards independent living that has been achieved
over the past 30 years is maintained: a)
The interdepartmental
Ministerial Group on Disability chaired by Mike Penning,
Minister of State for Disabled People discusses the
implications of the closure of the ILF and the action that
can be taken across government to ensure that the
18,000 users of the Fund and those who have been
prevented from accessing the fund since 2010 are still
included in society and able to realise their aspirations
b)
An undertaken is
given that users of the ILF and disabled people in
similar situations will not be consigned to residential
care
c)
Local government to
look at new ways of working and delivering adult social
care so as to ensure that budget reductions are dealt
with in a way that maximises the independent living of
disabled people by working in partnership with others
d)
The NHS looks at how
the provision of health in the community can be
delivered in a way that maximises opportunities for
independent living
8
e)
Government
undertakes further work towards a right to independent
living and for all disabled people to be supported to
overcome barriers that prevent us from leading ordinary
lives in our communities
Disability Rights UK
March 2014