The System of Disability Assessment and Socio-Vocational Rehabilitation in Poland Based on the Example of the Lublin Voivodeship: An Analysis of Challenges and Directions for Development

Introduction: The Polish support system for persons with disabilities is fragmented across six distinct assessment regimes, which generates administrative barriers and hinders effective socio-vocational rehabilitation. The Lublin Voivodeship, a region with one of the highest disability rates in the country (≈14% of the population), serves as a valuable case study illustrating the accumulation of problems typical for the entire state.

Aim: The aim of this review was to conduct an interdisciplinary analysis of the system of disability assessment and rehabilitation mechanisms in Poland, with consideration of their implementation in the Lublin Voivodeship, to identify key challenges, and to formulate directions for development consistent with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Material and methods: A qualitative review was conducted, encompassing scientific literature, legal acts, governmental and local government strategies, reports from the Supreme Audit Office (NIK), the Commissioner for Human Rights (RPO), Statistics Poland (GUS), and data from the State Fund for Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons (PFRON) and the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) for the years 2019-2024. The analysis was supplemented with regional BAEL (Labour Force Survey) indicators. A critical comparative method was applied, confronting the medical model of assessment with the functional paradigm of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).

Results: The study found that: (1) the fragmentation of the assessment system forces multiple procedures and prolongs waiting times for decisions; (2) the dominance of the medical approach limits the personalization of support; (3) the effectiveness of rehabilitation is low – the employment rate for persons with disabilities in the Lublin Voivodeship is 27-28% compared to 75% for the general population; (4) the allocation of PFRON funds is concentrated on care and therapeutic forms at the expense of vocational activation (≈6% of funds).

Conclusions: The key directions for reform are: the integration of assessment systems into a unified structure, the full implementation of the ICF functional assessment, the introduction of a ‘case-management’ model in rehabilitation, and increased funding directed towards supported employment. The implementation of these recommendations requires coordinated action by governmental, local government, and non-governmental organizations, and in peripheral regions – the strengthening of mobile and digital forms of service delivery for beneficiaries.