Disability advisers at the University of Cambridge are each assigned over 850 students, among the highest caseloads in the Russell Group, according to figures from the Accessibility and Disability Resource Centre (ADRC), prompting criticism from some students over rising waiting times.

The ADRC provides disabled students at the University with SSDs (Student Support Documents), organises personal and group support sessions, and runs staff training. Each student is assigned a disability adviser to help facilitate this support.

In recent years, the number of students declaring a disability to the University has risen significantly. In the 2019-20 academic year, the figure stood at 3568. In 2023-24, it had almost doubled to 6356.

At the same time, the adviser-to-student ratio has worsened, rising from 1:713 in 2021–22 to 1:877 in 2023–24. This is far above the ADRC’s estimation of 1:700, which they predicted after hiring an additional adviser in 2021.

The service is among the highest ratios in the Russell Group. In 2021-22, Cambridge ranked 10th out of 14 universities for the ratio of disability advisers to disabled students.

The lowest ratio was 1:161, over four times lower than Cambridge’s, whilst the highest was 1:1284. According to a journal study from the National Association of Disability Practitioners (NADP), the recommended ratio is 1:200.

These conditions have elicited criticism from some students, with one saying: “It took seven months for my SSD to actually be completed and uploaded online. During this time, the lack of accommodations caused issues that ultimately led to a mental breakdown, a year-long intermission, and a burnout/depression that I am still facing two years later.”

“I don’t blame the individual advisor – every interaction I had with them was lovely. I blame the University for not providing enough support for the number of disabled students who need it,” they continued.

Annual reports from the ADRC have also noted that students have “cited delays in responses and provision of support or apparent lack of resources” and highlighted delays in the time it takes to provide documentation and an “insufficient” number of in-person appointments.

This comes after Cambridge was ranked as the worst University in the country for the support it provides to disabled students, with only 27% of students declaring that they had the support they needed, and 35% saying that they had received all agreed adjustments provided.

Last year, the University also cut funding for autism and ADHD diagnoses for students. The NHS waiting times for adult screenings for these conditions can be incredibly long, which in turn can delay accommodations provided. In 2024, less than 5% of open referrals for autism resulted in a first appointment within the recommended 13 weeks.

However, the number of disabled students who rank the ADRC as satisfactory remains high (88%), with 72% stating that the service was either good or very good.

Some students have praised the work of the ADRC, saying: “All my emails to the ADRC have been responded to promptly, and I have felt very supported when I have been in contact with them.”

They added: “My experience with the ADRC has been overwhelmingly positive because of their responsiveness, and I now feel a lot calmer going into exams, knowing that the necessary arrangements are in place. However, I recognise that many of my peers have had more challenging experiences. I appreciate that this might be because my personal situation is not as complex as others.”

So far in the 2024-25 academic year, the ADRC has received £1,182,795.38 in funding. In the 2023-24 academic year, this figure was £2,509,890.99.

A spokesperson from the University said: “With demand for services increasing, the University has been reviewing the support available to disabled students. Among the recommendations under consideration are the streamlining of the production of support documentation to relieve pressure on disability advisers at the ADRC and a change in processes to ensure requests for adjustments are received more quickly.”

They continued: “Furthermore, the review’s recommendations stress the need for greater focus on designing teaching, learning and assessment in ways that reduce the volume of adjustments required.”