Page 31 - Reforming Benefits Decision-Making
P. 31

claimants with intellectual, cognitive and mental health conditions and have
               access  to  “Mental  Function  Champions”  who  have  specific  mental  health
               expertise.

          2.14  However, there are numerous reports of claimants with rare or mental health
               conditions not being properly assessed and we heard various examples of this
                                          58
               during our evidence gathering.  One medically qualified tribunal member we
               spoke  to  was  so  concerned  about  the  poor  quality  of  PIP  assessments  they
               were seeing, that they started to collect data to try and understand what was
               happening.  They  analysed  50  consecutive  PIP  appeals  between  November
               2019 and April 2020 and found that of the group of assessments classified as
                           59
               ‘substandard’  60 per cent involved a primary diagnosis of a mental health
               condition.  The  President  of  Appeal  in  Northern  Ireland  has  also  raised
               concerns  about  the  expertise  of  health  care  professionals,  in  particular  in
                                                            60
               respect of claimants with mental health conditions.
          2.15  The Working Party is also concerned that, despite HCPs receiving training in
               the  assessment  of  fluctuating  conditions,  assessors  do  not  have  sufficient
               knowledge of these conditions to assess them properly – giving undue focus
               to claimants’ abilities on the particular day of the assessment.
                                                                     61








          58  C. Hodgson, ‘‘Cruel and humiliating’: why fit-for-work tests are failing people with disabilities’ (The
          Guardian, 22 May 2017); B. Geiger, A better WCA is possible (Demos, 2018), p. 40. We were told by
          an advisor that during one telephone assessment the assessor admitted to “just googling” the claimant’s
          condition.
          59  Defined as a difference of greater than 12 points between the assessor’s points and the Tribunal’s
          points.
          60  J. Duffy, Report by the President of Appeal Tribunals on the Standards of Decision Making by the
          Department for Communities 2017/18 (May 2021).
          61  Z2K survey respondents said that the assessment processes fails to understand fluctuating conditions,
          reducing  how  a  condition  effects  someone  to  a  snapshot  on  a  particular  day.  Z2K
          “#PeopleBeforeProcess’  (see  n.  57  above);  N.  Bond  et  al.,  The  Benefits  Assault  Course  (see  n.  50
          above) p. 28.


                                                                                  22
   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36