1. University of Manchester Seminar DWP Decision Making and Appeals May 11 th 2016

2. Principles of Decision Making Decisions on claims and applications are made by the Secretary of State (SoS) In practice the SoS does not make decisions or refer cases to a tribunal personally. Instead, under the Carltona principle officials act on the SoS’s behalf, provided that he is satisfied that they are suitably trained and experienced to do so. Decision makers must make decisions by considering all the evidence and applying the law, including any relevant case law, to the facts of each case. Where the legislation specifies or implies discretion, the decision maker’s judgement must be reasonable and made with unbiased discretion. Generally, each decision must be given on the facts as they exist at the date of the decision and not in anticipation of a future state of facts. There is a common law requirement that decision makers should observe the rules of natural justice. An unbiased approach is needed, reflecting the principle that impartiality is at the heart of the judicial process.

3. Appeals Reform - background Context The scale of DWP service delivery is huge (the Dept. makes over 12 million benefit decisions per year). The department is also undertaking important welfare reform changes. In a climate of fiscal challenges we need to balance the needs of claimants and tax payers – to deliver at scale, and use limited public money/resource in the most effective way. We aim to give an excellent “once and done” service, make the right decisions and protect some £170 billion of taxpayers money for which we’re responsible. Claimants and the people who represent them have an important part to play in helping us achieve this aim by ensuring relevant information and further evidence is supplied at the earliest opportunity.

4. Appeals volume position (prior to reform) Between 2007/08 and 2012/13, appeals against SSCS decisions increased by 121%. In October 2013 Appeals reform measures were introduced to help address this.

5. Appeals Reform measures 2012 Welfare Reform Act introduced three reforms: -Mandatory reconsideration – claimants must ask for a decision to be looked at again by DWP before an appeal can be made. -Appeals to be lodged direct with Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service rather than DWP. -28 day statutory time limit for DWP to provide its response to the appeal (42 days for child support cases) from October 2014. Changes introduced on 8 April and 29 April 2013 for Personal Independence Payment and Universal Credit respectively. From 28 October 2013 for all other DWP- administered benefits and child maintenance cases. The principles behind Appeals Reform were to: -resolve disputes at the earliest opportunity and prevent unnecessary appeals; -improve the efficiency of the end to end process for both DWP and claimants; -deliver better value for money for the taxpayer

6. Appeals Reform impact

7. Example - PIP decisions & disputes (data to Sept-15) (published data to September 15) 1,229,348 PIP decisions 235,900 PIP MRs registered (19%*) 171,400 awards unchanged at MR 66,484 PIP appeals lodged (5%*) 23,711 O/T 2%*

8. Appeals Reform – wider changes 11 nationwide Dispute Resolution Teams (DRTs) were created to support the Appeals Reform agenda. DRTs deal with Mandatory Reconsiderations for Primary Benefit and Labour Market Decisions. The Appeals Reform Programme was established to implement appeals reform measures in a rolling programme across DWP from April 2013. A Quality Project was set up within the Departments Operational Excellence Directorate with the objective to improve the departments decision making. Since April 2015 the Social Security and Child Support Tribunal started to provide DWP with summary reasons feedback for its decisions: -summary reasons provide crucial feedback to improve learning; -and provide transparency in judicial decision making for claimants and DWP.

9. Current Improvement Activity In response to feedback we’ve received from the Judiciary, HMCTS staff, claimants and the people who represent them we plan to make a number of improvements: We want to encourage DMs to take a wider view when considering and weighing evidence in making their decision. We want to ensure DMs address the points of dispute with a tailored, bespoke reasoned MR and Appeal response. We are currently re-looking at the level of information provided through the DWP decision letters. Improving the use and recording of telephone calls e.g. using T/Cs as a tool to clarify the points of dispute

10. Continuous improvement We have included questions on appeals processes in the annual DWP claimant experience survey. We are currently acting on insight we received from claimants, their representatives and the Judiciary received last summer. -e.g. recognised concern about withdrawal of ESA during MR – we have focussed on making this transition more effective. The Department has made a commitment to introduce a clearance time target for MRs, starting with ESA in April 2016 after a full year of internal reporting to test this. -We want the right balance between speed and making good quality decisions Further to Dr Litchfield’s review, the Department only makes an explanation call if the claimant (or their representative) asks for this – or if it becomes clear that doing so would help to address any misunderstanding. We have introduced SMS text messages with direct dial details. Claimants and their representatives can contact the DM responsible for their claim direct. The Department is strengthening the way in which it gathers and documents the claimant’s grounds for dispute.

11. Some of the challenges Obtaining supporting evidence from claimants and the people who represent them which would enable us to make the right decision earlier in the process. Operational data shows that between 8 to 10 per cent of Tribunal decisions to overturn benefit decisions were based on new cogent documentary evidence supplied at the appeal. Its still relatively early since summary reasons were provided on a national basis –it has improved learning, there are some areas where more specificity areas for improvement. Turning ESA management information into Official Statistics at the level of accuracy and quality demanded by the UK Statistics Authority has proved more challenging than anticipated. We aim to publish ESA MR data from Summer 2016. Data on JSA/ESA sanctions and PIP Mandatory Reconsiderations is already published in existing statistical bulletins

12. Looking Ahead We accept there are areas where our approach to making decisions and handling disputes can be improved and we are committed to getting it right. We are currently taking forward a range of improvement activities following insight we received from claimants and the people who represent them last summer HMCTS Reform As part of a proposed reform of the Tribunal system MOJ are seeking to shift tribunals to a digital by default appeal model. Potentially huge benefits to both the claimant and the Department in terms of speed of dispute resolution and in improving the transparency of evidence. HMCTS plan to run a “test and learn” exercise with DWP on a digitalised appeal system later this year. We are committed to making the improvements that are necessary to give claimants the best possible customer service.

13. Any Questions?