Page 74 - Reforming Benefits Decision-Making -(updated - August 2021)

scrutiny from the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration
and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons.

2.99 An independent reviewer or regulator would help ensure that the DWP was
meeting the performance measures discussed above. Someone external to, and
independent of, the system would be better equipped to identify systemic
issues and ensure that changes are made in order to rectify these. It would
have more ‘teeth’ than internal monitoring and be much more transparent.
Having an independent body would also help restore trust and confidence in
the benefits system.

2.100 We therefore recommend that a permanent independent reviewer or
regulator for welfare benefits should be established. This should be a
statutory role with responsibility for assessing and reporting on
standards of decision-making in relation to benefits. Their functions
should also include monitoring the use of automated decision-making.

Training - reasonable adjustments

2.101 It is crucial that DWP staff are given appropriate training so that they
understand their legal obligations, policy and guidance and administrative
processes. We understand that assessors, work coaches and decision-makers
all receive training and are provided with guidance relevant to their roles.
However, given the gap that exists between policy and practice, we think that
this training should be looked at again in light of some of the recurring issues
identified. Identifying specific training needs is something that an independent
reviewer or regulator would be able to do. However, we consider that there
has been a failure to train in an area where this would be particularly
beneficial.

2.102 A concern that appeared to us at every stage of the decision-making process
was that assessors, decision-makers and work coaches are not properly
considering, and acting on, their duties under the Equality Act to make
reasonable adjustments. These might include, for example, (pre-pandemic)
conducting a health and disability assessment by telephone rather than face-
to-face, considering whether to obtain further medical evidence in respect of
claimants with mental health conditions, and setting appropriate claimant
commitments, easements and sanctions. Consultees stated that there was a
65