Page 71 - Reforming Benefits Decision-Making

Quality control, standards and oversight

2.94 The DWP has a Quality Assurance Framework which is a three-tier system –
the first two tiers report internally and the third to the National Audit Office
(NAO). It states that the framework ensures that decisions made are legal,
payments made are accurate and claimants are notified of their entitlements
and responsibilities and their appeal rights. Tier 1 seeks to identify errors in
individual decisions, tier 2 evaluates the effectiveness of processes and tier 3
evaluates whether processes have resulted in reductions to levels of loss in
197
DWP benefits through official error. We were also told that DWP staff are
provided with training relating to many of the issues we have identified, and
that ‘coaching’ was part of the Quality Assurance Framework.

2.95 However, in light of the ongoing systemic issues with decision-making, we
are clear that this framework and the current training and coaching
programme cannot be functioning effectively. For example, we were told that
part of the quality assurance standards for PIP, ESA and UC decisions include
ensuring that all evidence is considered. However, during our evidence
gathering we heard numerous examples where this had simply not happened.
We also asked the DWP about a number of issues with mandatory
reconsideration identified by CPAG’s early warning system (see Chapter 3
198
for further consideration of mandatory reconsideration). The DWP’s
response was that none of the examples should be happening. Whilst they
volunteered to look into any specific examples, there was no
acknowledgement that these are recurring and therefore systemic issues that
are not being picked up by DWP’s current monitoring and quality assurance
processes.

197 Plans are also in place to measure customer error and fraud in PIP and UC in 2021/22.
198 For example, claimants being required to follow a specific process for requesting a mandatory
reconsideration, contrary to DWP policy; claimants being dissuaded from making a mandatory
reconsideration request; DWP refusing to process mandatory reconsideration requests unless claimants
provide further evidence relating their claim; and claimants being advised to submit a ‘change of
circumstances’ rather than a mandatory reconsideration request as a ‘work around’ to the system (S.
Howes and K. Jones, Computer Says ‘No!’ Stage 2: challenging decisions (Child Poverty Action
Group, 2019))

62