Changes to PIP could hit some disabled students hard

But there are overlaps. For example, forthcoming changes to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) eligibility criteria, proposed to be effective from November 2026, may well impact disabled full-time students in specific circumstances.

As it stands, individuals — including students — qualify for the standard rate of the daily living component of PIP by scoring at least eight points across any combination of daily living activities. But under the proposed new rules, claimants will need to score at least four points in a single daily living activity to qualify at all.

Consider the following scenarios.

Alex, a full-time university student with mild physical impairments. Alex uses a specialised knife to prepare meals (2 points), requires a stool to shower due to balance issues (2 points), and needs assistance with dressing the lower body (2 points), as well as prompting to manage medication (2 points). These challenges total eight points, qualifying Alex for the standard rate of the daily living component under the current system, which allows scores to be added across different activities.

But as of November 2026, the proposal is that a claimant must score at least four points in a single activity to qualify. Because all of Alex’s difficulties are spread across multiple areas and none individually reach four points, Alex would no longer be eligible for support under the revised criteria.

Jamie, a full-time student with moderate mental health challenges. Jamie needs prompting to prepare food (2 points), prompting to manage medication (1 point), prompting to make budgeting decisions (2 points), and prompting to engage with others (3 points). These difficulties accumulate to eight points, currently making Jamie eligible for the standard rate of the daily living component under the existing PIP system, which allows scores to be combined across multiple activities.

But as of November 2026, the proposal is that claimants must score at least four points in a single activity to qualify. Since none of Jamie’s individual challenges reach that threshold on their own, Jamie would no longer be eligible for the daily living component under the revised criteria.

Priya, an undergraduate student with ADHD and executive functioning difficulties. Priya often forgets to eat unless reminded (2 points for needing prompting to prepare food), cannot reliably manage her student finance or medication without guidance from her support worker (2 points for managing therapy or monitoring a health condition), needs help making budgeting decisions (2 points), and struggles to initiate or complete personal hygiene routines without external reminders (2 points for needing prompting to wash and bathe). These challenges total eight points, qualifying Priya for the standard rate of the daily living component under the current system, which allows scores to be combined across multiple activities.

But as of November 2026, the proposal is that claimants must score at least four points in a single activity to qualify. While Priya’s needs are real, recurring, and recognised under the current approach, none of her challenges individually reach the four-point threshold. Under the revised criteria, Priya would no longer qualify for the daily living component — a shift that risks excluding many neurodivergent students whose support needs are spread across several areas of daily life.

Leo, a full-time PhD student with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS/ME). Leo finds it physically exhausting to prepare meals, so he uses pre-prepared food and only occasionally cooks (2 points). He requires assistance to plan and execute daily tasks like grocery shopping and scheduling appointments (4 points for needing help with complex budgeting decisions). He also struggles to engage socially without emotional support (2 points). Altogether, Leo currently scores eight points, making him eligible for the standard rate of the daily living component under the current system, which allows scores to be combined across multiple activities.

Despite Leo’s difficulties affecting multiple areas of daily living, as of November 2026 the proposal is that claimants must score at least four points in a single activity to qualify. While Leo’s challenges are genuine and ongoing, no individual activity reaches the new threshold. The subtle, cumulative effects of chronic fatigue – difficult to confine to just one category – may leave him excluded under the revised system.

Fatima, a postgraduate law student recovering from spinal surgery. Fatima can’t use public transport unaided and must be accompanied when navigating unfamiliar environments (8 points for needing assistance with both planning and following unfamiliar journeys). She also needs help dressing below the waist due to limited flexibility (2 points). She manages most other activities independently and has adapted her study schedule to allow for extra rest. These challenges give her a total of ten points, qualifying her for the standard rate of the mobility component under the current system — and she continues to qualify under the proposed 2026 criteria, as she scores more than four points in a single activity.

However, Fatima’s case highlights a risk built into the proposed system – if her mobility improves during recovery, even slightly, her score in that single qualifying activity could drop below the threshold, making her ineligible. For students with temporary or fluctuating conditions, future eligibility reviews may no longer consider the broader, cumulative impact of multiple lower-level needs, leaving them vulnerable to losing support just when it remains most critical.

How many students could this hit?

We know young people form a significant minority of PIP recipients. In England and Wales, the number of Personal Independence Payment claimants aged 16-24 with a daily living component (either standard or enhanced rate) was around 366,000 by late 2024.

This represents roughly 10% of all PIP claimants (for context, there were 3.6 million PIP claimants in E&W in Oct 2024. Including Scotland and Northern Ireland (where PIP is administered separately), the UK total of under-25s on PIP daily living is estimated at 400,000 (roughly 10 per cent of the UK-wide caseload).

This share has risen sharply in recent years due to increasing claims for mental health conditions in this age group. For example, the under-25 PIP caseload in E&W roughly doubled between 2020 and 2024:

• Under-25 PIP daily living claimants (UK) – Approx. 380-400k (≈10 per cent of all PIP claimants)
• Most have mental health or learning disabilities as primary conditions (about 38% of all PIP claimants have psychiatric disorders), reflecting the rise in young claimants with conditions like anxiety or depression.

Data on PIP claimants who are students in higher education (HE) is not explicitly published by DWP or HESA. There is, of course, no official breakdown of how many PIP daily living claimants are in HE.

But we can infer an order of magnitude. Nationally, about 33 per cent of 18–24-year-olds are in full-time study (the vast majority in higher education). If young PIP claimants follow a similar pattern, a substantial subset of the circa 400k under-25 PIP recipients are likely HE students.

This would suggest tens of thousands of PIP daily living claimants could be in higher education across the UK (perhaps 50–100k, though no precise figure exists). This is a relatively small proportion of all PIP claimants (on the order of a few percent), since most PIP recipients are older or not in study.

You can of course (and many have and are doing so) that the DWP should change its proposals. But although PIP and Disabled Students Allowances (DSA) serve different purposes and are administered by separate bodies, there’s an undeniable and increasing interplay between the two.

Students who lose entitlement to PIP – not because their needs have diminished, but because of a technical shift in assessment criteria – may also see knock-on effects in their access to support and ability to undertake their course. If support needs no longer “stack up” in the right way for PIP, yet remain very real in day-to-day student life, you can argue that the DSA should become a backstop.

The proposed shift to requiring four points in a single activity risks leaving behind precisely those students whose challenges are diffuse but disabling – those with neurodivergent profiles, chronic or fluctuating conditions, and mental health needs that don’t conveniently cluster into one box. While PIP is not an income-assessed benefit and does not directly determine DSA eligibility, its role in providing financial stability and independence for students can’t be ignored. Losing it, for many, may mean losing the ability to afford additional costs associated with their studies – from specialist equipment to travel and personal care.

DSA isn’t intended to cover living costs, but it might need to flex more readily in response to these changes. This might mean expanding definitions of eligible needs, streamlining access for those who no longer qualify for PIP but demonstrably face barriers to study, or enhancing funding in key areas such as mentoring and study skills support. It may also mean revisiting how evidence is gathered and weighted – particularly for students whose needs are real, yet hard to document under a rigid scoring system.

Or maybe not. Either way, DfE and DWP should get in a room with some actual numbers and some actual students, don’t you think? And in England, OfS should both be updating its Equality of Opportunity Risk Register and requiring revisions from those whose APPs target improvements re disabled students.