This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/23/work-assessments-atos-dwp-test
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| The problems with work assessments run deeper than Atos | The problems with work assessments run deeper than Atos |
| (2 months later) | |
| The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has announced that it will be contracting new providers to carry out work capability assessments (WCAs) alongside Atos Healthcare, after a recent review found assessments to be "of unacceptably poor quality". | The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has announced that it will be contracting new providers to carry out work capability assessments (WCAs) alongside Atos Healthcare, after a recent review found assessments to be "of unacceptably poor quality". |
| This is what campaigners have been saying since 2008 when employment and support allowance (ESA) was introduced by the then Labour government to replace incapacity benefit. Successful appeal rates are rising, with 39% of decisions now overturned. A September 2012 report from the Disability Benefits Consortium found that 85% of welfare benefits advisers did not believe that Atos report accuracy had improved. Claimants need to score 15 points under a tick box computer system, yet 83% of decisions overturned at appeal had originally been awarded six points or less. This indicates that something is still seriously wrong with the system. | This is what campaigners have been saying since 2008 when employment and support allowance (ESA) was introduced by the then Labour government to replace incapacity benefit. Successful appeal rates are rising, with 39% of decisions now overturned. A September 2012 report from the Disability Benefits Consortium found that 85% of welfare benefits advisers did not believe that Atos report accuracy had improved. Claimants need to score 15 points under a tick box computer system, yet 83% of decisions overturned at appeal had originally been awarded six points or less. This indicates that something is still seriously wrong with the system. |
| With Atos assessors now being audited for quality, and an admission from the DWP that things need to improve, one might think that campaigners would be celebrating this news. Far from it. We have warned for some time that replacing Atos, or adding in new providers, would not alleviate the problems inherent in the ESA system. | With Atos assessors now being audited for quality, and an admission from the DWP that things need to improve, one might think that campaigners would be celebrating this news. Far from it. We have warned for some time that replacing Atos, or adding in new providers, would not alleviate the problems inherent in the ESA system. |
| To score points, claimants must meet certain "descriptors". Can you sit for more than 30 minutes? Can you transfer from one chair to another? Can you raise your arms above your head? These descriptors are set by the DWP, not Atos, and campaign groups and charities alike have argued that they are inadequate at assessing fitness for work. They do not relate to "real life" work a claimant might be faced with and indeed ministers have strongly argued that they need not. | To score points, claimants must meet certain "descriptors". Can you sit for more than 30 minutes? Can you transfer from one chair to another? Can you raise your arms above your head? These descriptors are set by the DWP, not Atos, and campaign groups and charities alike have argued that they are inadequate at assessing fitness for work. They do not relate to "real life" work a claimant might be faced with and indeed ministers have strongly argued that they need not. |
| An "evidence-based review (EBR)" of the descriptors, designed by charities, is still stuck at the testing stage despite the DWP initially committing to a tighter timescale. In 2010, Atos was conducting about 25,000 assessments a month. Today, that figure has risen to more than 100,000, and there are still huge backlogs, with nearly half a million claims stuck in the "assessment phase" for well over the 12-week target. As campaigners have won concessions, so the process of each assessment has taken longer, with healthcare professionals now required to write a short summary of every claim and phone calls to claimants to discuss decisions and letters to explain the process now built into the system – although evidence is weak that some of these supposed improvements are taking place consistently. | An "evidence-based review (EBR)" of the descriptors, designed by charities, is still stuck at the testing stage despite the DWP initially committing to a tighter timescale. In 2010, Atos was conducting about 25,000 assessments a month. Today, that figure has risen to more than 100,000, and there are still huge backlogs, with nearly half a million claims stuck in the "assessment phase" for well over the 12-week target. As campaigners have won concessions, so the process of each assessment has taken longer, with healthcare professionals now required to write a short summary of every claim and phone calls to claimants to discuss decisions and letters to explain the process now built into the system – although evidence is weak that some of these supposed improvements are taking place consistently. |
| Finally, the DWP has insisted on continually reassessing successful claims. Reassessment rates can be set at just three, six or nine months, adding enormous strain on the system and causing further delays, when it is unlikely the person's condition will have changed. | Finally, the DWP has insisted on continually reassessing successful claims. Reassessment rates can be set at just three, six or nine months, adding enormous strain on the system and causing further delays, when it is unlikely the person's condition will have changed. |
| So we have a system where Atos assessors are asked to do more and more in less and less time. Is it any wonder accuracy may be compromised? | So we have a system where Atos assessors are asked to do more and more in less and less time. Is it any wonder accuracy may be compromised? |
| The real question is why, when a system has been shown to be failing, would a government not only roll it out nationwide, but then increase the rate at which claimants are assessed? Why, when the descriptors have been shown to discriminate against mental health and fluctuating conditions, would any government want to push over 2,500,000 of our most vulnerable citizens through it quickly before ensuring that the tests are fair and accurate? | The real question is why, when a system has been shown to be failing, would a government not only roll it out nationwide, but then increase the rate at which claimants are assessed? Why, when the descriptors have been shown to discriminate against mental health and fluctuating conditions, would any government want to push over 2,500,000 of our most vulnerable citizens through it quickly before ensuring that the tests are fair and accurate? |
| We knew from pilots in Aberdeen and Burnley, initially assessing new claims only, that the test was deeply flawed, yet ministers took the decision [paywall] to extend the WCA to those already claiming the old incapacity benefit. This group included the most sick and disabled (nearly two-thirds also claim disability benefits) who had been claiming for the longest periods and who faced the highest barriers to work. | We knew from pilots in Aberdeen and Burnley, initially assessing new claims only, that the test was deeply flawed, yet ministers took the decision [paywall] to extend the WCA to those already claiming the old incapacity benefit. This group included the most sick and disabled (nearly two-thirds also claim disability benefits) who had been claiming for the longest periods and who faced the highest barriers to work. |
| Politicians claimed they were "left on the scrapheap" to "fester" with no face-to-face contact from the DWP. In fact, about 94% of claimants drop their claims or find work within two years. There were always random assessments and these tests were even carried out by Atos too, yet never hit the headlines in the way WCAs do now. | Politicians claimed they were "left on the scrapheap" to "fester" with no face-to-face contact from the DWP. In fact, about 94% of claimants drop their claims or find work within two years. There were always random assessments and these tests were even carried out by Atos too, yet never hit the headlines in the way WCAs do now. |
| Today, there are still just over a million old incapacity benefit claims open, and the DWP deadline for reassessment is May 2014. With the system now grinding to a halt, mired in delays, this deadline looks increasingly unlikely. Yet politicians of all parties have been convinced for so long that this group contains the "scroungers" and "skivers" of DWP and tabloid rhetoric, perhaps it suits them to push this group through a test which isn't fair? | Today, there are still just over a million old incapacity benefit claims open, and the DWP deadline for reassessment is May 2014. With the system now grinding to a halt, mired in delays, this deadline looks increasingly unlikely. Yet politicians of all parties have been convinced for so long that this group contains the "scroungers" and "skivers" of DWP and tabloid rhetoric, perhaps it suits them to push this group through a test which isn't fair? |
| After all, if the DWP had been so unhappy with the work Atos was doing, it wouldn't have awarded it the bulk of contracts, worth a further £400m, to carry out similar assessments for PIP (personal independence payments, the replacement for DLA). | After all, if the DWP had been so unhappy with the work Atos was doing, it wouldn't have awarded it the bulk of contracts, worth a further £400m, to carry out similar assessments for PIP (personal independence payments, the replacement for DLA). |
| Despite the glow of the latest spin, only allowing healthcare professionals the time and space to do the job properly, with suitable descriptors, will improve the accuracy of assessments. Simply adding in new providers to implement a flawed test will only increase the fear and despair of those failed by it. | Despite the glow of the latest spin, only allowing healthcare professionals the time and space to do the job properly, with suitable descriptors, will improve the accuracy of assessments. Simply adding in new providers to implement a flawed test will only increase the fear and despair of those failed by it. |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |