Annex A
Annex A
Dear Mr Newman,
You requested on 23 April 2012 that the Department for Work and Pension reviewed the handling of your freedom of information request dated 27 March 2012 relating to telephone calls made by a Decision Maker to Employment and Support Allowance claimants.
We have responded separately on the review and this response is to answer the following
additional questions you have raised:
2) What information do you have regarding:
a. No. WCA results (= target calls)
b. No. calls not made
c. No. calls successful on first attempt
d. No. first calls failing but successful on 2nd attempt
e. No. unsuccessful calls.
Obviously b+c+d+e = a
3) Where in the WCA/ESA Decision Making Guide is this new requirement documented with a sample of the “Desk Aide”? I wouldcertainly like a copy of the Desk Aide.
4) If relevant, do you specifically explain to a claimant if youhave concluded that their mobility and work opportunities would beimproved by use of a manual wheelchair if they do not ordinarilyuse one? Where is the instruction to DMs that they must do thisdocumented?
5) As regards monitoring this new procedure:
a. How is “success rate” defined and what are results to date?
b. What other quantifiable parameters have you been recording, howhas data for each
been collected and what are results to date?
c.What elements of additional cost have you identified, how are they being monitored and
what are results to date?
d. What claimant feedback have you gathered to date and in whatformat?
I have provided a response below to each of your questions.
2) From December 2011 we have been collecting data for internal departmental use on the telephone calls attempted by Decision Makers.Please note that this data is derived from unpublished management information and has not been quality assured to National Statistics or Official Statistics publication standard. It should therefore be treated with caution. The data gather is reliant on Decision Makers manually recording the information on an internal database after attempting the call, and may not be reliable as we cannot avoid human error.
The information below is the data for calls in March 2012.
Allowance calls (claimant entitled to ESA)
Number of WCA decisions made / 27318Number of successful calls made on first attempt / 4461
Number of calls successful on second attempt / 1135
Number calls not applicable (pre October cases) / 8133
Number of unsuccessful calls / 13619
Decision assurance calls (claimant likely to not be entitled to ESA)
Number of WCA decisions made / 28085Number of successful calls made on first attempt / 4080
Number of calls successful on second attempt / 1109
Number calls not applicable (pre October cases) / 13698
Number of unsuccessful calls / 9198
3) The requirement for the call is not covered in the Decision Making Guide. It is covered in internal procedural guidance which is regularly reviewed and updated. I have attached for your information copies of the latest desk aides, which have been updated from 4th May and are subject to ongoing review.
4) We do not specifically instruct Decision Makers to cover this point. However mobility may arise in a discussion with the Decision Maker when determining entitlement to ESA or it may be raised in terms of their readiness for work with a Personal Adviser in a Jobcentre ifthey are placed in the Work Related Activity Group or make a claim for Jobseekers Allowance.
5) The definition of a successful telephone call is where the Decision Maker has spoken to the claimant, even if the claimant chooses not to continue with the call.
Two attempts are made by the Decision Maker to successfully complete the call. There is no specific target (benchmark) for Decision Makers in terms of how many calls they must successfully complete as the success rate of the call will be dependent on the availability of the claimant. In addition, all claimants receive a notification explaining the decision and what will happen next regardless of whether the telephone calls are successfully completed or not.
The latest data available for March 2012 is as above.
In addition we are also capturing information on the percentage of decisions which vary from the advice provided by the Atos Healthcare Professional due to additional information being provided by the claimant. This may arise from the discussion in the decision assurance telephone call or it may be provided following the notification of the decision as part of a reconsideration request or an appeal, in March 2012, this was 5.98%.
Again this information is being collected for internal departmental use and is derived from unpublished management information and has not been quality assured to National Statistics or Official Statistics publication standard. It should therefore be treated with caution. The data gather is reliant on Decision Makers manually recording the information on an internal database after making their final decision, and may not be reliable as we cannot avoid human error.
All the changes introduced as part of the Harrington Review, are continuing to be monitored and evaluated. This is based on a range of information, including management information on the success rates of the telephone calls, feedback from staff delivering the calls, observations of the calls being delivered by Decision Makers and feedback from individual claimants who have received the calls.
The department will provide its evaluation findings to Professor Harrington to inform his third
review. Professor Harrington is also conducting his own independent review, including visiting
Benefit Centres unannounced to witness himself the impact of his recommendations.
Costs have been identified for the additional time for a Decision Maker to attempt and successfully complete the telephone calls. Timings are still being assessed and validated as part of wider evaluation, so no final costs are available at this time.
In terms of claimant feedback we have contacted a random sample of claimants who have received the telephone calls asking them questions on their experience and recording their answers. In February 2012, 66 claimants were successfully contacted out of a sample size of 160 and the findings were:
▪92% of claimants interviewed found the allowance telephone call helpful, only 15% felt that the call did not include all the information they required.
“Yes it was. I am not too good at reading forms and I find them confusing. The lady was very good at telling me what will happen next with my benefit”. February 2012
▪69% of claimants interviewed found the allowance call useful in explaining the next steps of their claim and 61% felt that during the telephone call they had the opportunity to ask questions to further aid their understanding of the next steps.
“Yes, they confirmed that I didn't need to send certificates and that I will need another medical in 6 months”. February 2012
▪65% of claimants found the decision assurance call helpful and aided their understanding of the reason for the decision.
“Oh yes he was very helpful and understanding and he explained everything so clearly. He told me that whilst he realised that I was ill that it was thought that I could do some work not necessarily what I had done in the past. He made it sound so good that I felt relieved that they were not righting me off as too ill to work. He had a very positive outlook” February 2012
▪71% of those claimants contacted were satisfied with the way the call was made; and fully understood the options available to them together with the next steps and also felt that the Decision Maker listened to what they had to say.
“Yes I understood the reasons they gave for their decision but I did not agree with their reasoning” February 2012
If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.
Yours sincerely,
DWP Central FoI Team
------
Your right to complain under the Freedom of Information Act
If you are not happy with this response you may request an internal review by e-mailing or by writing to DWP, Central FoI Team, 5thFloor The Adelphi, 1-11, John Adam Street, LondonWC2N 6HT. Any review request should be submitted within two months of the date of this letter.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision. Generally the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted our own complaints procedure. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF