Incapacity Benefit reassessment statistics

I have been searching for a while to find some statistics about the reassessment of Incapacity benefit onto ESA and finally I’ve found some however I am distinctly unimpressed at the paucity of analysis and am still looking for some more detailed breakdowns.

The DWP has given a brief breakdown that can be seen here http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/press-releases/2012/mar-2012/dwp026-12.shtml.

Figures for the first 141,100 incapacity benefits claimants to start the reassessment process show 37 per cent of those whose claims have been concluded have been found fit for work.

The remaining 63 per cent of claimants were entitled to Employment and Support Allowance (ESA):

34% were placed in the Work Related Activity Group, where they will receive personalised help and support to help them prepare for a move into suitable work in the future.

29% were placed in the Support Group and will receive unconditional financial support and will not be expected to work.

Distressingly this does not accurately describe what the percentages relate to and whether people who appeal their decisions are included in the figures nor how many of the appeals are upheld. However if you follow the link to this site you can find a video of the presentation of the results to the work and pensions committee on the 19 March http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=10552. In this you find that Chris Grayling quotes the rate of appeal at ~50% however despite his explanation I am still unclear whether this is 50% of the people assigned to the work related activity group and those found fit for work, although it seems likely that this is the case? If you follow it on you find that they discuss the fact that some people appeal the decision of being put into the work related activity group. Mr Grayling estimates this to be some 30.000 people who are appealing which seems an alarming number.

It is stated that 40% of the decisions are overturned (as quoted from a member of the discussion for 9months ago) however no current figure is forthcoming. It also seems that because the estimated time for an appeal to be heard is 24 weeks they actually don’t have the adjusted percentages.

However should all of these appeals be overturned it is estmates this would result in 30% of people being assigned into the fit for work group. A figure that is higher than the expected 23% however the question of whether this is realistic of the capability of the people put into this group remains to be seen. He goes to point out two other things that to him are significant in the data

·         The proportion of people put into the full support was significantly greater than was expected at 29% instead of 19%

·         Smaller size of work related group and the prognosis times within that group being much longer than expected (prognosis-estimated time it takes to return to the workplace).

It is also noteworthy that when asked about why people were not entering the work program Mr Grayling also says that the number of people who are deemed ready to attend the work program was much, much fewer than expected which just goes to show that actually they have no idea of the severity of the peoples’ problems within this group.

The other point feel import is that anyone who has not completed the process for any reason are not included in the figures they have presented however they do not give any indication of how many people this is or why they have not completed.

 One wonders how this is affecting the way in which people are assessed and the assessor’s ability to understand when someone is fit for work or not?

When asked about the statistics and in particular his surprise about the significant increase in the number of people in the work related activity group over his estimate he comments,

‘A lot of this is guess-timates within the department because we are dealing with an IB cohort that we know very little about.’

which seems a little bit surprising to me given the number of forms I and many others have filled in over the years for IB, however it seems that things are moving in the right direction.

Mr Grayling was asked to expand on the process and he runs through a number of changes that have been put into place to balance the process. He talks of them being more holistic so that no new evidence is coming forward at appeal however despite his assurances it seems unlikely that if it was balance that 50% of people would feel it appropriate to appeal.

When asked that given the changes in available evidence so that almost no new evidence is coming forward at appeal why were people still appealing? Chris Grayling replied,

“Well because in a nut shell if you’re saying to somebody that you’re getting £90 a week for your benefit and it’s going to £67 then people will choose to appeal and they will always choose to appeal.”

which to my mind just shows that he has no idea why people are appealing the decisions in such numbers. To me at least it seems quite clear that some reassessment of the reasonableness of people fitness for work might be in order as I find this unlikely to be the only reason for appeal.

Sadly I found far too many reasons to be cynical about the reasonableness of this process and a lot of fluffing over the figures which suggest to me that they are rather unreliable and it would be better to wait a while until these loose ends can be tidied up.

Since this time I have found the full report from the DWP here

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/esa_ibr/esa_ibr_mar12.pdf