House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts
Department for Work and Pensions: Responding to change in jobcentres
Fifth Report of Session 2013–14
Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence
Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 13 May 2013
HC 136 [Incorporating HC 1028 of Session 2012-13] Published on 19 June 2013 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £12.00
Committee of Public Accounts The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine ‘‘the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid before Parliament as the committee may think fit’’ (Standing Order No 148).
Current membership Rt Hon Margaret Hodge (Labour, Barking) (Chair) Mr Richard Bacon (Conservative, South Norfolk) Stephen Barclay (Conservative, North East Cambridgeshire) Guto Bebb (Conservative, Aberconwy) Jackie Doyle-Price (Conservative, Thurrock) Chris Heaton-Harris (Conservative, Daventry) Meg Hillier (Labour, Hackney South and Shoreditch) Mr Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough) Sajid Javid (Conservative, Bromsgrove) Fiona Mactaggart (Labour, Slough) Austin Mitchell (Labour, Great Grimsby) Nick Smith (Labour, Blaenau Gwent) Ian Swales (Liberal Democrats, Redcar) Justin Tomlinson (Conservative, North Swindon)
Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk.
Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/pac. A list of Reports of the Committee in the present Parliament is at the back of this volume. Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only.
Committee staff The current staff of the Committee is Adrian Jenner (Clerk), Sonia Draper (Senior Committee Assistant), Ian Blair and James McQuade (Committee Assistants) and Alex Paterson (Media Officer).
Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk, Committee of Public Accounts, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 5708; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]
1
Contents
Report Page
Summary 3
Conclusions and recommendations 5
1 Understanding the performance of jobcentres 7
2 Supporting the needs of claimants 9
Formal Minutes 13
Witnesses 14
List of printed written evidence 14
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 15
3
Summary
The Department for Work and Pensions (the Department) is responsible for the management of jobcentres which play a central role in helping people into employment. In 2011-12, the network of 740 jobcentres cost £1.4 billion to operate, with nearly 37,000 staff helping 3.5 million people to leave Jobseeker’s Allowance and setting up around 3.6 million new claims. Jobcentres coped well with the higher claimant numbers and increased demand for their services during the economic downturn. The number of Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants increased from 0.9 million in September 2008 to 1.5 million in March 2009 and has remained broadly constant since then. Jobcentres responded to the increased demand for their services by prioritising checks over eligibility for benefits and making sure that payments were processed, while adjusting other services such as the proportion of work-focused interviews and the issuing of sanctions.
The Department measures the performance of jobcentres by the number of people that stop claiming benefits. The Department does not measure, however, how many people each jobcentre has helped into work or have a complete understanding of why claimants have left the benefit system. Yet the Department does know that around 40% of individuals claim benefits again within six months and around 60% claim again within two years.
Clearly there should be consequences for claimants who do not meet their obligations to look for work. The focus on how many people stop claiming benefits, however, raises the risk that jobcentres may unfairly apply sanctions to encourage claimants off the register. Citizens Advice has seen a sharp rise in enquiries from people needing advice about sanctions applied by their jobcentres, particularly from vulnerable claimants. The Department acknowledges the difficulties of ensuring that sanctions are applied consistently.
We welcome the principle that jobcentres should have some flexibility to determine the best way to support claimants in their local area. But the Department lacks the information it needs to challenge performance effectively, learn what works in what circumstances, and so improve value for money. For example, there is a wide variation in the way jobcentres’ district managers choose to deploy personal advisers and assistant advisers and the extent to which administrative tasks are split, but there has been little evaluation to understand what models are working best and why.
Local flexibility also raises the scope for jobcentres to ‘park’ harder to help claimants such as those with disabilities. The Department’s own evaluation of jobcentre services found that Employment and Support Allowance claimants were getting a worse service than those on Jobseeker’s Allowance.
Jobcentres will need to adapt their services to cater for new claimant groups as a consequence of the introduction of Universal Credit and in response to people increasingly managing their benefit claims and job searches online. Some claimants will inevitably struggle to understand their responsibilities and may find it difficult to deal with online applications. DWP has a responsibility to ensure that more vulnerable individuals are able to claim the benefits to which they are entitled. It is not acceptable to depend solely on
4
libraries and Citizens Advice when local advice services are already stretched.
On the basis of a Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General,1 we took evidence from the Department for Work and Pensions and Citizens Advice on responding to change in jobcentres.
1 C&AG’s Report, Responding to change in jobcentres, Session 2012-13, HC 995
5
Conclusions and recommendations
1. The number of people who stop claiming benefits is a flawed measure of jobcentres’ effectiveness. The Department measures performance by the number of people that stop claiming benefits. In 40% of cases Jobcentres do not know whether those who have stopped claiming benefits have actually found work, whether it is temporary or permanent, or whether they have left the benefit system for another reason. Around 40% of people reclaim benefits within six months and around 60% reclaim within 2 years. The Department should identify which indicators it will use to ensure it has a full understanding of the performance of jobcentres under Universal Credit and the destination of claimants, and use this information to better understand whether its interventions are delivering a long-term reduction in the number claiming benefits.
2. There is a risk that sanctions unfairly penalise the most vulnerable claimants and are applied inconsistently. Enquiries about sanctions to the Citizens Advice rose by 45% from October to December 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. Many enquiries were from vulnerable people, including those with learning difficulties, who found it difficult to understand their jobseeker obligations and why the sanctions had been imposed. Advisers do not always warn claimants that they may be sanctioned and the Department acknowledged that it can be difficult to impose sanctions consistently. The Department should give claimants written warning that they may be sanctioned and should monitor and publish the rate of sanctions by claimant group and jobcentre.
3. Jobcentres have increased flexibility to take local need into account, but the Department does not yet know enough about what works and why. For example, caseloads per personal adviser vary between jobcentres by up to 30%. The Department has identified links between the time advisers spend with claimants and how many people stop claiming, but is doing limited evaluation of what works in different circumstances and does not have robust measures of value for money. The Department should gather information on how different jobcentres are managing caseloads and play a stronger role in identifying, evaluating and disseminating good practice.
4. We are concerned that increased flexibility for jobcentres may leave greater scope for ‘parking’ harder-to-help claimants such as those with disabilities. We were surprised to hear that there are fewer disability employment advisers than jobcentres, with 522 advisers covering the 740 jobcentres. The Department’s own evaluation of jobcentre services found that Employment and Support Allowance claimants do not get the same level of support as Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants. The Department should review its ability to support disabled claimants, particularly in light of low outcomes for these groups on the Work Programme, and it should follow up in future evaluation work to test more rigorously whether ‘parking’ of claimants is occurring.
6
5. Technology can improve the services available to jobseekers, but some claimants will struggle with online access and need more support from third parties. Online services such as uploading CVs to Universal Jobmatch can make job searches easier for claimants, and the Department has added 2,000 new internet access devices in jobcentres. But some people will need help to manage claims and job searches online, and this is likely to increase the burden on third parties, such as libraries and Citizens Advice—at a time when council and third party welfare services are under pressure. The Department should ensure that there is sufficient support in place to assist vulnerable claimants. It should also include an assessment of the burden on third party advisers in helping people online as part of its monitoring of online take-up under Universal Credit and predecessors such as Jobseeker’s Allowance Online.
7
1 Understanding the performance of jobcentres
1. The Department is responsible for the management of jobcentres, which provide critical support to the unemployed, including those on Jobseeker’s Allowance. In 2011-12, nearly 37,000 jobcentre staff across 740 jobcentres supported a caseload of some five million people at a cost of £1.4 billion. In 2011-12, jobcentres helped around 3.6 million jobseekers set up new claims for Jobseeker’s Allowance and helped 3.5 million people to leave Jobseeker’s Allowance.2
2. At the start of the economic downturn the number of Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants increased from 0.9 million in September 2008 to 1.5 million in March 2009.3 Jobcentres responded to the increased demand for their services by prioritising activities to check eligibility for benefits and referring more people to other sources of support. The number of people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance has remained broadly constant at around 1.5 million since March 2009.4
3. The Department monitors the performance of jobcentres by measuring the rate at which people stop claiming benefits rather than the number of people who find employment.5 Between 250,000 and 300,000 people end their claims for Jobseeker’s Allowance each month, but in around 40% of cases individuals will reclaim benefit within 6 months, with 60% reclaiming within 2 years. The Department told us that in 40% of cases it does not collect data on those that find work as opposed to simply the number who stop claiming benefits. It also told us that employment was not the only objective of the Jobseeker’s Allowance regime and its purpose was also to cut the benefits bill by reducing the number of people who are dependent on benefits.6 In addition, the Department told us that it chose to monitor the number of people leaving benefits rather than track job destinations because it is less expensive to administer.7
4. The Department said it did not feel disadvantaged by not having information of the destinations of all leavers and that its administrative data is supplemented by periodic surveys on the destination of claimants.8 However, Universal Credit will only be fully implemented by 2017 at the earliest. The Department told us that under Universal Credit it will have much quicker access and more readily available information about the destinations of some of its claimants. To calculate Universal Credit payments the Department will have real-time income information from HM Revenue and Customs on the number of people that move into work.9
2 C&AG’s Report, para 1, 3 3 C&AG’s Report, para 4 4 Qq 67, 70; C&AG’s Report, figure 19 5 Q 30 6 Qq 30, 36 7 Q 38 8 Qq 36, 39 9 Qq 41-42
8
5. We were concerned that the Department’s emphasis on simply counting the number of people leaving benefits does not necessarily help cut the benefit bill as many who stop claiming benefit reclaim within a short space of time. Around 60% of claimants that started claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance in 2011-12 had also claimed in the past two years10 and 40% of leavers re-registered for benefits within six months.11 The Department does not consider the level of people reclaiming benefits to be material to the performance of jobcentres because it considered that the figure reflected the dynamism of the labour market rather than jobcentre performance.12 Without this information, however, the Department is unable to identify where it may need to take a different approach to its services, for example training or other support, to stop people from having to reclaim.13
6. The Department’s own research identified a link between the time jobcentres’ advisers spend with a claimant and how many people stop claiming, but the caseloads of advisers within jobcentres vary greatly across the country. The number of claimants an adviser deals with can vary by 30% even in areas with similar unemployment and job markets. For example, Merseyside had 155 cases per adviser in contrast to 196 in Durham and Tees Valley.14 The Department considers these variances to be attributable to different labour markets and told us that districts were resourced according to the number of claims that they deal with, with local managers deciding the staffing mix in their jobcentres. In some offices, the assistant adviser undertakes the administrative work for interviews with claimants, so the personal adviser can do more interviews a day. In other offices—in Wessex, for example—the district manager concentrates their budget on personal advisers, so they have to do more administrative tasks and fewer advisory interviews a day.15
7. The Department is increasing the flexibility given to jobcentre district managers to adapt the services they provide to claimants to meet local need. It operated a ‘dragon’s den forum’ until it was closed down because it was found to be slowing implementation of flexibilities and discouraged sharing of ideas, and is now running pilots across the country to assess the impact of increased flexibility in jobcentres. The NAO report, however, found that staff shared good practice through informal networks within their existing jobcentre districts rather than more distant offices.16 The Department told us that the introduction of local flexibilities is a big change for the organisation and it is working to ensure that information is shared both locally and nationally.17
10 Q 58 11 C&AG’s Report, Sustainable employment: supporting people to stay in work and advance, Session 2007-08, HC 32 12 Qq 54,56, 61 13 Q 61 14 Q 102 15 Qq 100, 102-107 16 Q 92 17 Qq 92, 143
9
2 Supporting the needs of claimants
8. Jobseeker’s Allowance is a conditional benefit. Each claimant has an obligation to look for work and to be actively seeking work.18 Jobcentre staff sanction claimants if they have not met their obligation to be actively seeking work.19 Claimants are either removed from the benefit or remain but do not receive money for a period of time.20
9. We were concerned that these sanctions may unfairly penalise the most vulnerable claimants. Citizens Advice told us that although the number of inquiries from Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants has reduced overall, the number of inquiries about sanctions had increased by 25% in the second quarter and 45% in the third quarter of 2012-13.21 It told us that the people with queries about sanctions were overwhelmingly from vulnerable groups and had no idea why they had been sanctioned, or why their benefit had been stopped.22 This particularly included people with learning disabilities or mild mental health problems who often did not fully understand what was required of them, or those who had limited literacy skills. Citizens Advice was concerned that jobcentres were pushing people into hardship without fully exploring with claimants why they were unable to meet their requirements for claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance.23
10. The Department told us that there are no targets for the rate or number of people who are sanctioned by jobcentres.24 Jobcentre managers monitor the sanctioning rate of staff in offices to ensure that those being applied are reasonable.25 While the Department does have information to identify which offices issue the most sanctions, it told us that it does not use this information to tell other offices to increase or decrease the sanction rate.26 The Department acknowledged that of the 1.5 million claimants jobcentres deal with there are bound to be some individuals who struggle to understand why they have been sanctioned.27 The Department told us that people should receive a verbal warning that they are about to be sanctioned, but accepted that this might not always happen in practice.28 The Department told us that the purpose of having face-to-face contact with Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants every fortnight is to remind claimants of their obligations and to check that these have been met, and it has been very clear to staff about how the sanctions regime should operate.29 It did not consider there was a need to formally write to claimants before they are sanctioned, but told us that it was working towards being much more
18 Q71 19 Q 72 20 Q 34 21 Qq 5-6 22 Q 27 23 Qq 5, 27 24 Qq74-75 25 Qq 90-91 26 Qq 86-87 27 Q 72-73 28 Qq76-77 29 Qq 79, 81
10
explicit about the conditions of Jobseeker’s Allowance, and the consequences for the claimant, at the start of a benefit claim as part of preparations for Universal Credit.30
11. The Department does not routinely collect data on who is most affected by the sanctioning system, for example how many are people who have mental health problems.31 In October 2012, the Department introduced a new sanctions regime for Jobseeker’s Allowance, and for Employment and Support Allowance in September 2012. It told us it is monitoring figures carefully to check Citizens Advice concerns that vulnerable claimants are disproportionately sanctioned.32
12. There is a risk that the emphasis on the number of people who stop claiming benefits when measuring performance may mean that the Department is ‘parking’ harder-to-help claimants. In 2011-12, 19% of long-term claimants were not referred to other sources of support and were not provided with additional support by the Department. The Department said that some offers of third party support had been reduced because it wanted to give jobcentres more flexibility to decide what is in the best interests of claimants.33 The NAO report, however, did not find evidence that additional jobcentre support had been provided for those claimants who were not being referred to other sources of support.34
13. The Department’s own evaluation of jobcentres’ services in 2012 found that Employment Support Allowance claimants did not receive the same level of support in looking for work as those claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance.35 30% of Employment and Support Allowance claimants did not discuss the possibility of working in the future in their interviews with personal advisers, and nearly half did not discuss what steps they could take to find work. These claimants were also significantly more likely to report that they left their initial meeting with their adviser without an appointment for their next meeting.36
14. The Department told us it had less interaction with Employment and Support Allowance claimants than it did with Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants.37 Advisers typically have face-to-face contact with Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants every two weeks, and every six months with Employment and Support Allowance claimants.38 It told us that the lower level of interaction is one of the reasons why it is reassessing the Incapacity Benefit caseload so that claimants who are able to work are moved onto Jobseeker’s Allowance and supported to find work. In addition, the Department told us that it has changed the referral
30 Q 73 31 Q 74 32 Qq 27, 94 33 Qq 134-135; C&AG’s Report, para 1.12, 2.7 34 Q 135 35 Q 136 36 Q 136 37 Q 140 38 C&AG’s Report, para 2
11
system so that Employment and Support Allowance claimants gain access to the support provided by the Work Programme much earlier.39
15. The Department has 522 disability employment advisers across 740 jobcentres, less than one adviser per jobcentre.40 The Department explained that it did not make economic sense to have a full-time disability employment adviser in very small jobcentres, which are largely kept open because of their geographical location, but did not explain how it was ensuring that the needs of disabled claimants, who are likely to require more support, are being met.41
16. The proportion of people applying online for Jobseeker’s Allowance is now 50%. The Department aims to increase this to 80% as part of plans to increase the number of claimants that apply and manage their benefit claims online.42 The Department told us that the ability to use online services is an important skill set for people to develop and that people are unlikely to find it easy to find work if they cannot operate online. 25% of job vacancies at present are only available online.43 The Department told us that it had put 2,000 internet access devices into jobcentres in the last six months to help people claim and search for jobs.44 It also told us that its work is part of a wider government aspiration to provide adequate digital support.45
17. While technology can improve services, some claimants will struggle with online access. Online services, including uploading CVs, can make job search easier for claimants. The introduction of Universal Jobmatch, for example, can reduce the threat of sanction for those claimants that have searched and applied for jobs online as it automatically provides evidence to jobcentre advisers that the claimant has been actively looking for work.46 Citizens Advice warned that the impact of changes to services was focused on the majority of claimants with little regard as to how the minority, often the most vulnerable or those most likely to struggle, were managing. Citizens Advice emphasised that moving to online services was a big change and some people had a long way to go before they would be able to use digital services confidently.47 It told us that the changes to the way people claim benefits would particularly affect vulnerable claimants, who are amongst the least able to communicate and need extra support.48
18. Citizens Advice told us that claimants are often referred to their local library or to Citizens Advice as somewhere they can get help with making and managing their claims online. This assumes that local organisations, in an era of funding cuts, have adequate
39 Q 140 40 Qq 153, 155-157 41 Q 155 42 Qq 17, 168 43 Q119 44 Q 111 45 Qq 116-117 46 Qq 119-123 47 Q 24 48 Qq 1, 19
12
infrastructure to assist people to undertake functions that jobcentres should be providing.49 The six-pilot trailblazer for claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance online resulted in many people urgently contacting Citizens Advice because they could not claim online.50
49 Q 19 50 Q 13
13
Formal Minutes
Monday 13 May 2013
Members present:
Mrs Margaret Hodge, in the Chair
Guto Bebb Fiona Mactaggart Chris Heaton-Harris Nick Smith Meg Hillier Justin Tomlinson Mr Stewart Jackson
Draft Report (Department for Work and Pensions: Responding to change in jobcentres), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 18 read and agreed to.
Summary agreed to.
Conclusions and recommendations agreed to.
Resolved, That the Report be the Fifth Report of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.
Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 134.
Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the House for printing with the Report.
[Adjourned till Wednesday 15 May at 2.00 pm
14
Witnesses
Monday 11 March 2013 Page
Katie Shaw, Head of Welfare Policy, Citizens Advice Ev 1
Robert Devereux, Permanent Secretary, and Neil Couling, Work Services Director, Department for Work and Pensions Ev 5
List of printed written evidence
1 Department Work and Pensions Ev 25: Ev 34
15
List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament
The reference number of the Government’s response to each Report is printed in brackets after the HC printing number.
Session 2013–14 First Report Ministry of Defence: Equipment Plan 2012-2022 and HC 53 Major Projects Report 2012
cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 1
Oral evidence
Taken before the Committee of Public Accounts on Monday 11 March 2013
Members present: Margaret Hodge (Chair)
Mr Richard Bacon Fiona Mactaggart Guto Bebb Austin Mitchell Jackie Doyle-Price Ian Swales Meg Hillier Justin Tomlinson ______
Amyas Morse, Comptroller and Auditor General, National Audit Office, Gabrielle Cohen, Assistant Auditor General, NAO, Max Tse, Director, NAO, and Marius Gallaher, Alternate Treasury Officer of Accounts, HM Treasury, were in attendance.
REPORT BY THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL
Responding to change in jobcentres (HC 955)
Examination of Witness
Witness: Katie Shaw, Head of Welfare Policy, Citizens Advice, gave evidence.
Q1 Chair: Welcome, Katie. Thank you very much Q2 Chair: I was going to ask you about that. Let’s for agreeing to give evidence at the start. We had a take the parking issue first. There is a suggestion in colleague of yours here last week. This is rather a the Report and in other evidence from research that short session; it is simply for you to give the Jobcentre Plus have done on themselves that, because perspective of people who come to the CAB and their of the pressure on resources, they are tending not to perceptions of how the Jobcentre Plus reforms are give the wider range of back-to-work services, impacting on clients. Would you like to start by saying particularly to ESA claimants who will be ex-IB what key issues we should probe further when we get claimants and IB claimants who have gone on to the accounting officer and others in? JSA—those sort of people. Is there any evidence from Katie Shaw: Thank you for asking me to give your work that that issue is emerging? evidence today. I will start by looking at what the Katie Shaw: In our evidence, we see quite a lot of NAO Report found and how our evidence and people who are sanctioned. experience at the CAB relate to that. One of the main things was that, during the economic downturn, when Q3 Chair: More than you did? the demand on services greatly increased, they Katie Shaw: More than we did. Generally, people focused on paying benefit and reducing some of the come to us when something goes wrong, so if they other initiatives, such as the work-focused interviews, are really eager for support and they do not get it, they the work search support and sanctions, so they will come to us. Certainly, that is something we saw managed to keep paying benefits on time. Our during the economic downturn: the decision to say to evidence would concur very much with that; we had people, “Go home and claim on your own phone, rather than use Jobcentre Plus services” may have a massive increase in jobseeker’s allowance inquiries been an efficient use of services, but how it was done during that period, but we did not get a huge volume often left people a bit dissatisfied. They hadn’t been of inquiries about delays in paying benefit in a similar to Jobcentre Plus for many years, they’d made all that way to a few years earlier, when they changed the effort to go, and then when they got there they were way that benefit services were delivered. For us, how told, “Go home, you are better off at home doing it they choose to deliver services is one of the really key yourself,” without proper, detailed checking of things. That is one of the things it is good to focus on. whether someone could go home and do it Going forward, our services are already beginning to themselves—that they had access online or had a change in terms of the way you claim benefit as we land-line rather than a mobile. It is that discretion— move forwards towards universal credit. that checking whether what you are saying is The other thing is that the focus on the majority, and appropriate for everybody, or is just a general on it working for the majority, often means that we message—that is going out too generally. forget or do not pay such close attention to how the People coming off ESA and people claiming JSA with minority are managing those changes. They are the extra support needs is probably one of the groups of kind of people we see. Those people are often the biggest concern for us. We see a large number of most vulnerable, are less able to help themselves and people who are sanctioned. We have seen a 45% struggle with those changes, even when, as a whole, increase in sanctions over this past quarter, compared it is going okay. with the same quarter the previous year. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 2 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Citizens Advice
Q4 Chair: A 45% increase? That doesn’t come out figures for sanctioning over the past six months? Are in the Report, does it? you seeing less or more? Katie Shaw: The Report says that they went down Katie Shaw: In the first two quarters of last year, it during 2008–09, then jumped back up again, and then had fallen slightly compared with the same quarters have gone back down to the original common average. of the previous year. But from September to Obviously, we are more likely to see people who have December, we have seen a rise again—a 35% rise in been hit with sanctions and whose sanctions have the second quarter and 45% in the third quarter1. possibly been given unfairly. If people legitimately were not really trying hard enough and were pulled up Q7 Guto Bebb: Is there any regional variation? by a JSA sanction, they would not necessarily come to Katie Shaw: There would be some. I would need to us to seek help if they were able to help themselves. look at the regional figures and the Welsh figures. I know that is something my office in Wales is Q5 Chair: But you have seen a 45% increase in the concerned about. Whether it has fallen off slightly— use of sanctions. Is that across the board? it is just an ongoing issue. In the evidence they Katie Shaw: Not the use of sanctions: people seeking submitted about the Work programme recently, advice about sanctions inquiries. That can be different. sanctions seemed to be the biggest issue they were It has been a slow rise over the whole period. concerned about in that area too. But it is good to hear Obviously, JSA inquiries have increased overall and if it is dropping off in your area. we must remember that context. From 2008–09 to the last full financial year, our inquiries about JSA Q8 Ian Swales: I know that my council has cut down increased by over 100%; that is a reflection of the on its welfare and benefits advice service because of economic position we are in, rather than necessarily the pressure on its budgets. Do you know whether that of things going well or badly within Jobcentre Plus. has happened elsewhere and whether that is affecting Even when JSA inquiries overall slowed down—last the figures you are talking about? year we saw a 2% fall in inquiries about JSA Katie Shaw: It is, yes—both welfare and benefits overall—we still saw an increase in sanctions advice from the core funding for local authorities; and inquiries. That has been fairly steady. A 45% increase from April, we are very worried in particular about when we have already seen an increase in previous the huge drop in funding from the legal aid cuts. It quarters is quite significant. In the three or four will have an impact on our figures, and it is months before last Christmas, sanctions got tougher. interesting, as we go forward from April, to look at A full sanction was introduced for ESA claimants for the whole raft of welfare reform changes that will the first time. Leading up to Christmas, it was tougher come in. We might not see rises in inquiries, because rises assume this capacity to deal with increases. That sanctions for JSA claimants, who could end up with a would be a big concern with how we report the impact three-year sanction. on advice services and, more importantly, on We have heard many times the Secretary of State say claimants. that the sanctions are not expected to be used except in a small handful of cases, but they are given Q9 Ian Swales: In terms of the historical precisely for the things that we see people come into information, are you saying that you think you may CAB with every week and every day. They are where have had more inquiries because councils have less the claimant has failed to follow a direction, which resource, and then in future, you are concerned that means they failed to apply for a specific job or take a your figures may not be accurate because only so specific action. Our evidence shows that people who many people can get through your door? Is that what have learning disabilities or mild mental health you are trying to say? problems often come in and say that they didn’t Katie Shaw: They only reflect the people whom we understand what was required of them, or were unable can see, so they don’t reflect unmet demand. Some to do it because of literacy issues, or the claim was of our figures say that, overall, benefits have dropped required to be made online and they were not able to slightly. Over the years from 2008–09, benefit do that. inquiries increased every single year when overall That kind of understanding of why someone hasn’t inquiries have not. That has dropped down again now. complied is what we don’t see in the cases that people seek advice about. We are not yet confident that there Q10 Chair: Has it dropped down as a proportion? has been that conversation that fully explores why Katie Shaw: As an overall number. Benefits have they haven’t been able to do that. That is why we are risen as a proportion overall. concerned, going forward, that those safeguards with tougher sanctions don’t seem to be in place and are Q11 Chair: So it has risen as a proportion. Because very much up to the discretion of the adviser. you are able to do less work, they are taking a bigger slice of the cake. Q6 Guto Bebb: Just on an anecdotal basis, I work Katie Shaw: Yes, that’s right. Debt was our biggest very closely with my citizens advice bureau in north area of inquiry. Benefits followed shortly behind, and Wales, and there was a period when people were now it has swapped round. coming through regularly and I was supporting them 1 in terms of CAB and sanctions. That has fallen off Note by witness: My answer should have said that ‘In the first quarter [not the first two quarters] ... The rise in the quite dramatically recently. What you are saying second quarter was 25% (not 35% as written) and 45% in contrasts with what I am witnessing. Are there any the third quarter. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 3
11 March 2013 Citizens Advice
Chair: Oh really? Q17 Austin Mitchell: What help do you provide Katie Shaw: Yes. Obviously, they are closely related. them with? We gather that the proportion of people But you can’t keep reporting rises because, as I say, it applying online for jobseeker’s has risen to 40% to does hit a plateau. We had extra funding for the first 50%. Do you provide them with help in applying two to three years of the recession, which enabled us online? to help more people. Now that has plateaued, dealing Katie Shaw: Some bureaux no doubt will. You can with more benefit inquiries means dealing with less of still claim on the phone. Certainly some recent something else, but they tend to be the more urgent evidence from bureaux is that they have tried to help ones. that person claim on the phone. If they are not able to manage the claim on an ongoing basis on their own, Q12 Ian Swales: Figure 8 in the Report makes it they will help them to do a phone claim instead. It clear that jobcentre resources are variable across the is a mix, to be honest, but yes, they will help them country, with a 30% difference between the staff in the to claim— most heavily loaded area compared with the lightest loaded. You may not have had time to check it, but Q18 Austin Mitchell: So some centres will and do you see any correlation between that data and the some won’t? pressure on your officers? In other words, in areas Katie Shaw: Some will, yes. It will in part depend on where the jobcentres are most hard-pressed, does that their confidence in the ability of the claimant to result in a bigger load for you? manage the claim on an ongoing basis in that way— Katie Shaw: I haven’t done the comparison, but I to interact with Jobcentre Plus through the internet. would not be surprised if that were the case. Certainly, we do get a lot of inquiries from people who have Q19 Austin Mitchell: To pursue Ian’s point, you are referred directly to CAB for help. providing something of a public service, in the sense that you are sending them into the jobcentre better Q13 Ian Swales: From the jobcentres? armed as to what they need and how they should be Katie Shaw: Yes. That is often for help with claiming. treated. Is that correct? There is now a six-pilot trailblazer, I think it is called, Katie Shaw: Yes, I think that is possibly slightly more for claiming JSA online, and we are seeing a lot of typical than helping them to claim. Most bureaux people who urgently come to CAB because they can’t would strongly assert that the very basis of making a claim for jobseeker’s allowance or other benefits is claim online— something they should be able to do through help from Jobcentre Plus. Q14 Ian Swales: This is something I find particularly For example, in a recent case, the bureau had had a interesting. A lot of people in the third sector, like letter saying, “We’re going to make a push to yourselves, are concerned about lower funding. They encourage people to claim JSA online, and this will come and see me, and I often say to them, “Well, talk be the preferred route. Claims made online will be to me about what you’re doing.” In a case like that, processed more quickly than those made over the you are actually providing a public service, no doubt phone, but you can still do it over the phone if that is for nothing. You are not getting money from the what the claimant really needs.” jobcentres to help people to fill in their forms, are The bureau knew this claimant could not manage an you? internet claim, so they sent them equipped with Katie Shaw: No. exactly what they needed to say and what they needed to ask when they made the call to insist that they Q15 Ian Swales: So this is something I think we should be able to make a phone claim, and the want to explore with them. If they put a difficult claimant still came back to them and said, “No, I was system in place, they can’t then offload dealing with forced to make the claim online” or said they couldn’t it to the third sector. That does not seem right, unless manage it themselves. some money changes hands and you become their You have to remember that somebody who struggles advisers or whatever. and is more vulnerable in expressing themselves or Katie Shaw: We very much agree with that. communicating is the least able to argue that they need extra support to do something. They came back Q16 Austin Mitchell: Do they tend to come to you to the bureau because they had not been able to do it, first or go to the jobcentre first, get baffled and come so then the bureau made a complaint to the jobcentre to you? but also helped that claimant to make the claim over Katie Shaw: It is a complete mixture of both, to be the phone. honest. In the early stages of the recession, when The person would be referred, on the phone line, to people were needing help to claim for the first time, their local library or to their CAB—somewhere they they would usually go to a Jobcentre Plus office; they might get help—but it might be that the library is not would only come to us if they had difficulties. Often, necessarily equipped to do that. I was at a conference there were people who were quite able to self-manage, recently. The local authority person was saying, “But but there are others who struggle with Jobcentre Plus we’ve got one library with computers in the whole of services, particularly if it is about phone claiming. our local authority area and there isn’t someone to Some people will always need that extra support. But help.” That is the other thing you have to remember— generally they have tried to deal with Jobcentre Plus that making a claim online may be possible for first. someone if they have help and assistance to do it. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 4 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Citizens Advice
Obviously, the Government are reinforcing the slack, where there has been an influx of extra people. I importance of assisted digital. But you can’t assume do not think that the money advice service offers that. the two things are the same. Just because someone can Katie Shaw: They do not offer that detailed support, do it with help doesn’t mean to say they can do it on no. I think that we cannot over-emphasise just what a their own and feel confident about getting it right. It big change moving to digital services will be for some is important information you are giving across. people. The quality of service, hopefully—I am optimistic—will be good for those who can engage Q20 Austin Mitchell: I get the impression, from with it. talking to folk in Grimsby, that in the recession, There will be much clearer and much more accessible because of the pressures, the services have got a bit information than people have had before from DWP more perfunctory, a bit more conveyor belt-like and a in terms of letters and communications, but it is a bit less satisfactory. Is that your impression, too, and long, long way for a lot of people before they get to a have you needed to offset that to a greater degree? position where they are confidently using those digital Katie Shaw: In terms of the extra support that we services for private information and for detailed and provide? challenging information. Yes, we still see a lot of people with those carrier Q21 Austin Mitchell: Their treatment is less bags of paperwork, whether it be their debts or their personal and much more conveyor belt-like. benefits; they have everything together and they need Katie Shaw: Within jobcentres or within the bureaux? help getting that sorted out face to face. Austin Mitchell: In the jobcentres. Katie Shaw: Well, yes. JobCentre Plus is encouraged Q25 Chair: One of the issues is the relationship with to send people away to self-serve, to do it by the Jobcentre Plus and the Work programme providers phone or to do it online, and there is less where you can see there is a bit of competition. The encouragement to use the warm phones even in new system probably means that there is not an JobCentre Plus or at the JobPoints. Hopefully, that incentive for Jobcentre Plus to help the Work will change— programme providers very much because they do not get any credit for it. From your point of view, looking Q22 Austin Mitchell: What I am asking is whether at the case-load you get, has that been an issue? Have the jobcentre service has deteriorated because of the you picked it up at all? pressures. Katie Shaw: What we have seen sometimes is an issue Katie Shaw: I think they have focused on what they of administration and of clarity over who is consider to be priority issues. The clients that we see responsible and who a claimant should report to. If would benefit from more support to move closer to they cannot turn up to an appointment, they might the labour market. We see those who have had have phoned one and it should have been the other. sanctions when they could have done with support. There is that confusion of roles. That would have moved them closer, but the sanctions Again, we tend to see things when they go wrong in have moved them further away, because their needs terms of sanctions. It might be that they have been have not been picked up. If you punish someone when asked to do something, but they thought that they had you have not picked up their needs, you will push told someone else. It is just that confusion about who them further away from the labour market rather than is in charge. They sign on at the JobCentre Plus office, draw them closer. That has been our concern, but of but they meet with their Work programme providers. course we do see people most in need. So a lack of clarity about who is in charge of their job search is one of the issues that we see. Q23 Justin Tomlinson: On the point about digital engagement, I absolutely get everything you are Q26 Chair: The final thing is that they now have saying, so I will try not to lead you too much in this much more flexibility as to what to offer at the local question. Has the introduction of the money advice jobcentre. Have you picked up any view as to how service helped at all? that is played out to clients? Katie Shaw: I think it is difficult for me to answer Katie Shaw: I do not think we have, really. It is that one. I am sure that it has provided some help to something that I have looked at, thinking that it is people, and it has referred people on to face-to-face exactly what we have been asking for. It is hugely support, which many people with money issues need. positive. It would probably mean an absence of So, yes it does help, but it is only a part of the picture. inquiries coming into us about those issues that we would have seen otherwise. I do not think that it Q24 Justin Tomlinson: We also work very closely would be something that we would be very easily able with our local citizen’s advice, and we are finding that to pick up except by doing direct research with our those who are equipped to engage with the system as bureaux and clients about it. What I read about it is it stands are reasonably okay, though, sometimes, if it optimistic and it has the kind of approach that we have is their first time, they perhaps need a bit of support been looking at for them to be able to take. and help. Those who find digital engagement challenging, who Q27 Fiona Mactaggart: You said at the beginning have everything in a carrier bag and who do not know that your impression was that the online application what to do need that face-to-face support, which is process had most heavily burdened relatively where, I imagine, you have then had to take up the vulnerable applicants. Do you have any impression cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 5
11 March 2013 Citizens Advice about who is most burdened by sanctions, and whether there are people who will have to manage in different that same pattern is reflected in the sanctions regime? ways, and to claim in different ways to be paid. We Katie Shaw: From our evidence, the people we see would say that the main lesson is that things might who are sanctioned appear disproportionately from work for the majority, but you really have to look at vulnerable groups—people who have come off what is happening to the minority. incapacity benefit or who have sicknesses or Now, 40% of JSA claims are made online. I really disabilities, mild mental health problems, or learning wish we could pick up how many people have tried disabilities, which in many cases would mean they to claim JSA and gave up. Figures do not really show never qualify for ESA and are capable of working, but that and it is quite hard to pick up, just as the NAO would need significant support to do so. Report picked up the fact that off-flows are measured We also see people with language difficulties; they but not where those people go. That is crucially have not fully understood what is required of them. important, particularly to understand people who are We have seen cases where people have applied for more vulnerable and might give up and get lost. Those several jobs, but not for the exact job that the things are important. Jobcentre Plus adviser had suggested they apply for. Going forward, regarding the support that people will However, it was something very similar—the same need under the new system, I would say that many sort of job with a different company. people will need those alternative payment methods, We see people who have no idea why they have been which will be more frequent than monthly payments, sanctioned, or why their benefit has been stopped, on an ongoing basis and closely watched and until they come to us and seek advice and we are able monitored, and we should not assume that with a little to find out and get to the bottom of things. That is bit of support from an online budgeting tool, or even quite distressing, because how could a sanctions from a face-to-face meeting, they will be able to regime work if the people who are being sanctioned manage a single monthly payment to a household. do not know about it in advance—so it is not a Our concern would be that, yes, it is good to put that warning—and cannot avoid it? So all it can do is push support in, but do it early, do it thoroughly and assess people into hardship. There are some people we see how it is working before you take those sort of who are really trying hard to find work, but because supports away from people in terms of that weekly of their low levels of skills, or because of their payment. That weekly payment enables people to disabilities or sicknesses, the job market will be budget, and taking it away, or saying that you can narrower for them, and that is a real concern. have a weekly payment but after a short time you will go back to a monthly payment, is really worrying, Q28 Chair: Is there anything else you want to add, given that our experience in the past has been about which you think you have not been able to cover in how often the minority suffer when changes happen this short exchange? in the interests of the majority and of making Katie Shaw: Really, it is about going forward, and efficiency savings. looking forward to universal credit and to assisting Chair: Thank you very much indeed. That was really people. Again, more people are claiming online, and helpful and very clear.
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Robert Devereux, Permanent Secretary, Department for Work and Pensions, and Neil Couling, Work Services Director, Department for Work and Pensions, gave evidence.
Q29 Chair: Welcome. This Report is not a bad read somebody who has been here for two years and for you. somebody who walked on yesterday. We are simply Robert Devereux: You must be happy. It says “value interested in whether people are leaving and, because for money” at the front, so I am in favour of it. of the strong relationship between how long you have been on benefits and your likelihood of leaving—as Q30 Chair: It makes a change in our exchanges. I you can see in figure 11—I do not think that it is hope you see the questions in that context. I want to obvious to me that the additional complication and start with the issue of your use of off-flows, rather apparent sophistication actually merited the than job outcomes, as a way of measuring the impact calculations. This is a straightforward way of of the work in Jobcentre Plus. Why did you do that? measuring something that we can all see. What has been the impact of that change to off-flows from job outcomes? Q31 Chair: But why did you do it? Robert Devereux: As the Report says, off-flows are a Robert Devereux: Because it is more straightforward relatively intuitive measure of the numbers of people leaving JSA in any one period. That was a conscious to understand. In order to do the previous one, you choice from the previous world, where we used to basically had to have the view— have a weighted average, so that certain people would get more points than others. We used to chase points. Q32 Chair: Has it changed behaviour in Jobcentre Mr Couling actually knows more about this than me Plus? because he was doing it at the time. We are not now Robert Devereux: I think it has sharpened up what it trying to calculate some equivalence between is we are asking, which is actually that we would like cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 6 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions anyone on benefits to be somewhere else—preferably we are getting a very consistent view that two thirds in employment. That is where we have gone with it. of the people who leave us are going into work and a third going elsewhere, which is either on to another Q33 Fiona Mactaggart: Are people who are benefit or something else. But we know that two thirds sanctioned counted as off-flow? are going to work. In the old days, I used to have Robert Devereux: If they are still on benefits, they are some quite expensive tracking teams, so if I referred still on benefits. someone to a vacancy, an administrator would ring the employer up and ask: “Did Mr Couling go for that Q34 Fiona Mactaggart: In my experience, if they job? Did he get that job? Has he started?” are sanctioned, they do not get their benefits. That is Unsurprisingly, employers found this an incredible what those who ask me for help say. overhead: the staff cost is quite high and, at the end Neil Couling: They are sanctioned on the JSA of the day, it does not tell you anything better than the element of their claim. For example, if you have JSA periodic survey. plus some other elements, you are just sanctioned on the single person’s entitlement of the JSA. It is Q39 Ian Swales: But you already have some extra possible to stay on JSA and be sanctioned. data, because you know who you have sanctioned and Robert Devereux: It depends on what your household you know where you have pursued benefit fraud cases. make-up is. You already know that it is not simply “work” or Max Tse: There are two types. There are sanctions, “unknown” from your own work, don’t you? which are often fixed or variable term, and you stay Robert Devereux: I thought that what the Chair was on JSA, but just lose it for a bit. There are also asking me was whether I feel disadvantaged by not disallowances, where you lose the entire benefit. having management information of where everyone was going. I do not feel so disadvantaged, because I Q35 Mr Bacon: Does the latter count as off-flow? feel that I have enough information from basic, good- Robert Devereux: Yes. If you are not receiving the quality research to know the answers to those benefit, you are not receiving the benefit. Correct. questions. May I say one more thing while we are at it? This Q36 Chair: One of the interesting things is that, will of course change in a world of universal credit. according to the Report, you do not know where they At the moment, if someone goes into low-paid work flow off to. According to the Report, you have no idea and is with the Revenue, all I know is that they have where 40% of people have gone. They disappear. gone into the Revenue. I may do some data-matching Robert Devereux: The Report says that we have two after the fact. In a world in which they go into low- ways of tracking them. We have ways of paid work and they are still on universal credit, they understanding what claimants are saying to us. Some will still be one of my claimants. I will have a whole people who get a job come back and tell my staff, bunch of people on the books who have either no “I’m really pleased with what you’ve done. I’ve got a earnings—typically, out of work—or some earnings job with Asda.” Other people just disappear. There is or a bit more earnings. So the information flow within a bit of a theme running through the Report, which is the system will be transformed by universal credit, about the only value of jobcentres being to help and that I regard as being a much more profitable line people into work. The whole point of the JSA regime of interest. is to place a clear obligation on the claimant to be looking for work and to be trying to get off benefits themselves. Actually, I am genuinely and perfectly Q40 Meg Hillier: You just mentioned, Mr Devereux, happy for them to leave benefit, because some of one of the things that I was puzzled about. If you have those people who are leaving—though it may be a got people going into work, because they will most small proportion—should not have been there in the likely be PAYE, surely you can cross-match on their first place. national insurance number whether they are working? Surely that is a fairly automatic match? Q37 Chair: I accept all that. However, accepting Robert Devereux: I could do, but that is not a standard your assumption that the most important thing is to part of the MI or management information basis for cut the benefit bill, surely it would be helpful to you in the jobcentres. I have survey-based information and to know where the 40% who disappear go to. some conception of how the economy in the labour Robert Devereux: I think all we are arguing about is market works, but I do not regard it as changing the whether or not I have an elaborate administrative price of fish in the Evesham jobcentre to know system as opposed to periodic, survey-based data. precisely where everyone went. Neil Couling: That is what we used to try to do. Q38 Chair: Do you accept what I said? Do you Between about 2005 and 2009, that is how we tried accept that it would be more helpful to you, if over to measure Jobcentre Plus performance. It was fraught time you want to control the benefit bill, to know with two difficulties. First, there were two different where they go to? sets of data from HMRC—one relating to the P45 data Robert Devereux: I am not sure I need to know where and one to its general records of national insurance every claimant goes to be able to run the system. I and tax—and they did not match up. There were great have a set of figures, as in figure 13, that says, on a time lags as well, so we were trying to drive a car by sample basis from 2004, 2008, 2009 and 2011, when looking in the rear-view mirror each time. We moved we actually went and tried to track down individuals, to off-flow therefore because it is a much more visible cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 7
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions and immediate thing for managers and indeed staff in take on?” They may well have already got rid of their the offices to work with. interview records and so on.
Q41 Meg Hillier: With real-time information coming Q48 Meg Hillier: I can see, from the point of view in HMRC, will this make it easier to do what we were of employers, that you have to work in a practical real doing? Is that something that is possible to do? Will world and there might be an issue there. There is also the system allow that? surely an issue for staff training and support, Robert Devereux: For real-time information, in a especially if you have someone long-term world of universal credit, I will know monthly for all unemployed. Now they would be with the Work those people who move into PAYE—not into self- programme. However, it is a way of monitoring what employment—exactly what their earnings are. I have the challenge is for Meg Hillier from Hackney in to know that in order to be able to compute the getting a job, and why she is repeatedly not getting universal credit, so the data source becomes much one, or whether, in this case, the Work programme is richer, much quicker. not delivering for somebody. If you give feedback— that they turned up and looked scruffy or were late or Q42 Meg Hillier: So you will have much more something like that—that would be useful. knowledge about the 40% who at the moment fail to Neil Couling: We do that slightly more subtly now. I sign on or are not known? You will know much more have about 2,000 employer advisers who try to about a percentage of them. maintain relationships with employers. Rather than Robert Devereux: I suspect that what I am actually chase down individuals by national insurance number, going to know is a lot more about the 60%. For the that relationship with the employer will mean that the two thirds going into work, because they are PAYE employer will say, “I’m sorry, but I don’t think you people, I will be able to know that positively, whereas are submitting the right people to my vacancies at the my current administrative data typically underestimate moment,” or, “The people you sent me last week are that by 10% to 20%. really good. I would like some more of the same sort.” We got rid of follow-up like this and we are trying Q43 Meg Hillier: With the ones you do not know to build a more positive relationship with employers, about, how many is it? Do you track people when they because they are vital to our work in terms of move areas? If someone left Hackney and went to placing people. Redcar, would you know that that was why they were not signing on in Hackney? Because, presumably, they Q49 Meg Hillier: To pursue that a little bit further, I would still be in the DWP national system, they have an organisation in my constituency—believe it should show up. or not, in the middle of EC2, an internet company— Robert Devereux: They would. It would depend a that has a huge warehousing operation on three floors little bit on whether or not they literally stopped and has employed 80 extra people in the past year. To claiming in Hackney and went somewhere else, or my horror, they get them through an agency in west whether they simply got their claim moved. I believe London. I am trying to get that changed, so they get them somewhere in east London. Presumably, that is that they can do either of those. something that the jobcentre would be willing to place people into. If that is the case, as I imagine it is, how Q44 Meg Hillier: If they stopped claiming in come that has not happened? Is there any way that Hackney and turned up in Redcar the next day to employers like that can be encouraged to come to the claim there— jobcentre because local people are more likely to be Robert Devereux: It would not be apparent at the applying for the jobs? moment, no. Neil Couling: It may not have happened in the past because employers might not have liked the previous Q45 Meg Hillier: So they would count as off-flow relationship they had with us, because of the follow- in Hackney? up issue I was talking about a few moments ago. Yes, Robert Devereux: And as on-flow somewhere else, we would like that employer’s business. Afterwards, yes. maybe we can speak about how we can facilitate that. I am doing quite a lot of work at the moment with Q46 Meg Hillier: So there is quite a lot of unknown Business in the Community to try to encourage potential. Just picking up on Mr Couling, you were employers to take unemployed people for their saying that you used to ring people up to find out vacancies. about their jobs. Does any of that go on now? If I Quite a lot of firms have employment practices that went to an interview, would you have a percentage of they do not realise militate against unemployed people who your advisers ring up to see? people. For example, they have knock-out factors at Neil Couling: No, because the feedback from the screening stage that say if someone has any gaps employers was that they did not want to work with us in employment they won’t take them. That is why and put their vacancies with us, because of the work experience is really important because it allows aggressive follow-up, as they saw it. people to fill gaps in CVs and show that they can work. So, perhaps afterwards we can talk about that. Q47 Meg Hillier: Aggressive? Neil Couling: We would be chasing them, saying, Q50 Chair: I want to stick to the job outflows. I have “We submitted 16 people to you. How many did you got Fiona, Austin and Ian. Before I go to Fiona, I am cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 8 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions trying to look at whether you have all the intended Q53 Chair: I do not know what dynamic means in consequences known when you measure job outflows. that context. For example, if the emphasis is on getting people off Neil Couling: Well, a lot of people are moving benefits, do you know how many go through a around, which is actually why I think you asked Ms revolving door? That is, come back, let’s say, within Shaw earlier whether there was competition between three months? Do you monitor that? the Work programme and jobcentres. In fact, there Robert Devereux: We do. If you turn to paragraph isn’t, because if somebody who is with the Work 2.6, you will see that the NAO got to the same worry, programme gets a job, then ceases to be in that if we set targets at 13, 26, 39 and 52 weeks, would employment, and then comes back and claims that be some sort of incentive for my staff to try Jobseeker’s allowance, they remain part of the Work particularly hard at 12 and a half weeks and 25 and a programme but count inside the jobcentre’s off-flow half weeks? Were that the case, the curve that you see targets. So the incentives are to work with the Work programme and jobcentres—working together there. in figure 11 for every one of the past four years would It is not a case of static— have spikes in it, because the offload, just at the magic Chair: We’ll come back to that later, because I am number, would actually rise. As you can see, that just trying to get the concept. It would be very good curve is as flat as a pancake. So it does not look to if you could let us have a note on how many you think the NAO or to me that there is any unintended there are. What proportion of your people coming off consequence by fixing on particular dates. It looks as benefits re-emerge within the three-month period and if—and this is the truth as you know from meeting then within the six-month period? Because I think any of my staff—they are passionate about doing this, they are a different bunch of people. so they get on and do things. The targets are there to ensure that we know what is going on, but there is no Q54 Mr Bacon: I am astonished that you do not evidence in that picture that those four particular know that off the tip of your tongue. I think the points are driving performance in a perverse way. National Audit Office does and it is quite surprising that you do not. If it really is, to use your words, as Q51 Chair: I accept that. I think I was asking a “incredibly dynamic” a beast as you suggest, with a slightly different question. The flow offloads remain quarter of a million people coming on and coming off, static, but out of those who flow off, how many come one of the first, most obvious things you would back on again? The case may be encouraged off, or it wonder is how much of that is the same people. Are may be somebody with a mental health problem. It is you really saying that you cannot tell us? usually with those sorts of issues that they are Neil Couling: What I am saying is just how material encouraged off, and then they actually do not cope is that to the work of jobcentres? and they reappear—I probably should have not taken an extreme disability case, but I am interested in the Q55 Mr Bacon: Quite. I don’t know, and nor revolving door. apparently do you. Is it 40%? Is it 3%? Robert Devereux: You are absolutely right. If we were Neil Couling: I am not sure it is because— pressing our staff and saying, “The only thing that really matters is off-flow”, all kinds of clever tricks Q56 Mr Bacon: You are sure it is what? Material? would turn up to have them off-flow, and they would Neil Couling: No, I am not sure it is material, because just come back again. I am afraid that I have not it is about the dynamism of the UK labour market. brought with me the rate at which people do reclaim— which, of course, is dominated by people trying short Q57 Mr Bacon: It might be, but we do not know to paid work and that work then not working out, so we what extent—because there are so many people going should not take the rate of reclaim as being evidence into new jobs, or because there are so many people of that, but you are right to spot it. We are trying going into jobs that do not work and are coming back. very hard, in working through the leadership of every The number we are looking for is this: of the quarter jobcentre, to make sure that they realise that that is of a million people who you are describing each not what we mean by successful off-flow. You can month, how many are the same people coming back? Correct me if I am wrong, but that appears to be what tell, as you go around, whether people are just cooking you cannot tell us off the top of your head, whereas the books, and advisers know whether they are being to me, that is a really obvious question that you would invited to cook the books. They do not want to do want to know the answer to. that; they joined this organisation in order to get good Neil Couling: Some people will be in jobs for a very outcomes for claimants, not to cook the books. short period, and some will be in jobs for longer periods, and so forth. We can give you that kind of Q52 Chair: Do you have the stats? Could you let breakdown, but the Department for Work and us know? Pensions does not run the UK labour market. Robert Devereux: I could let you have it. I am just not sure whether we have brought it—I haven’t brought it Q58 Mr Bacon: I did not say it did. I am talking with me, certainly. about the ones who you are dealing with because they Neil Couling: I might have it somewhere. The labour are jobseeker’s allowance claimants—and they are market is incredibly dynamic. There are anything not, and then others who are because they come back. from 250,000 to 300,000 people each month flowing Mr Tse, what is your estimate of this? Am I right that on to JSA and off it, so it is a very dynamic beast. it is 40%? cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 9
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
Max Tse: Of the people who came into jobseeker’s 90% of the same people are coming back, surely that allowance in 2011–12, around 60% had claimed in the is extraordinarily interesting information on how what past two years. you are doing in the broader sweep of things is Chair: Around 60% have claimed— working and whether it is helping towards Max Tse: Around 60% who had come in have claimed sustainable outcomes. in the past two years. Robert Devereux: Up to a point, because in that set Mr Bacon: Had previously claimed. of observations there was no reference to what the Max Tse: Had previously claimed—exactly. It is an nature of the British labour market is like. If, older statistic, but of the people who then leave hypothetically, there are a lot of short-term roles, a lot jobseeker’s allowance, around 40% subsequently of people will cycle back through Neil’s organisation come back within six months. through no fault of his. You are right to say that, if it is actually my staff who, through some jiggery- Q59 Mr Bacon: So I was right when I said 40%, off pokery, are taking people off and having them come the top of my head. How is that I have got it off the back again, there would be a problem. As I have just top of my head, and you have not got it off the top of established by showing the Chair the graph, there does yours? You run this thing. not seem to be such jiggery-pokery going on. Robert Devereux: Yes, but I do not come with every possible statistic for every possible— Q63 Mr Bacon: By the way, I did not say that, if they are coming back, it is necessarily Mr Couling’s Q60 Mr Bacon: I would not expect you to, Mr fault. I am sure he is a fine chap, but I was just saying Devereux. that this is such interesting information that one would Robert Devereux: You are effectively, because you expect that you would have it. have chosen one that I do not have, so my apologies. Robert Devereux: By the same token, if we are going to trade information that we are surprised the other Q61 Mr Bacon: I chose a really obvious one. It was person does not have, nothing in this Report even being discussed because it was so obvious. Anyway, starts to answer the question of whether the labour the answer is 40% apparently, but we would love a market regime is effective. Yet, as all the evidence more detailed note. suggests—figure 19 purports to show how poor the Amyas Morse: We bring these up, not because we are Department’s initial forecasts were on the recession— trying to pick up things that you might or might not the reason why our forecasters, who are very good know, but it does sound like quite a meaningful and who have a very good reputation in Government, number. Don’t you think it is? predicted the recession having such a high impact is Neil Couling: What kind of number would you want? that all past recessions had much stronger Amyas Morse: I am more interested, not in that you unemployment rates than we have now. There is should know what it is, but in that you should agree something about the labour market regime introduced that it would be a good idea to have a handle on it. by JSA, which jobcentres are operating, that has had Neil Couling: I do, and we do have the number, but I the effect of materially reducing the number of people do not think it drives the organisation. who are unemployed and the cost of that bill. Amyas Morse: I did not say that it did. Neil Couling: We have to respond to how the UK Q64 Fiona Mactaggart: How do you know it is the labour market is. Our job is to try to help— labour market regime and not a response of either Chair: Let me interrupt you. The reason we picked workers or employers? this up is that what drives the organisation is reducing Robert Devereux: It is a combination of both. the number of people out of work who are dependent Because nobody knows—the Institute for Fiscal on benefit, because you want to cut the benefit bill. If Studies does not know, the Government do not know you know that a certain bunch of people keep coming and the Office for Budget Responsibility does not back through a revolving door, that ought to drive know—the National Audit Office felt unable to give your organisation because it might mean that you take us any credit whatsoever, but that seems intuitively a different approach to those particular people to stop improbable if we have a regime that is much more them coming back. It is not just a labour market active in asking people to look for work and is chasing issue—it may also be an issue about the sort of people that up with sanctions that are much more effective they are—so it might be about training or supporting than they used to be. them in work. I have no idea what the answer is, but By the way, our caseload now has many more people I am interested because I want to cut the benefit bill. who were previously classed as inactive in the benefit I do not want those people to keep coming back to system. We have single mothers with older children, my service and therefore requiring benefits again. ex-incapacity benefit claimants and various other people going into the regime. Neil’s teams are Q62 Mr Bacon: To be honest, I was not just trying arguably working with a more difficult group of to pick holes and be clever by finding a number that people than they previously worked with in terms of you do not know; it seems to me so central a thing to their labour market prospects, yet, as can be seen from want to know that it really amazes me that it is not at the picture we have just looked at in figure 11, the the top of your mind, as the Chair says. You are called off-flow rates are holding up. The absolute level of the Department for Work. If people are leaving the unemployment is much lower than it would have been benefits that you provide because they have work and in any previous recession. That seems to me to be a then the same people come back, or if only 2% or serious outcome-related measure about which I would cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 10 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions have thought the Committee would be interested, and Q68 Chair: It is not pretty much the same. You are it is what I came prepared to talk about, rather than down 5%. the rate. Robert Devereux: With a 10% harder caseload. It sounds like a profit to me. Q65 Jackie Doyle-Price: I agree with most of what you have just said. Obviously, for people who have a Q69 Chair: All I would say is that it would be really difficult job search, temporary contracts will interesting to have a better understanding of what is ultimately be a way for them to get a long-term job really happening. We are both making assertions, but outcome. You would expect for there to be some if one side had a decent analysis of it, it might be degree of churn, but the figure is quite large, and you grounded in fact rather than conjecture. also referred to self-employment earlier. Have you Robert Devereux: I am trying not to make an made an assessment of how many of those 40% who assertion. I was using the graph to demonstrate an come back within six months are people who are answer to an earlier question, and you have asked perhaps working in the black economy and claiming another one about the regime before the last election, benefits until it gets a bit too close so they withdraw what happened with long-term unemployment and and come back? Is there any way of analysing that? whether or not their claims were broken. That was Robert Devereux: Again, I don’t have the first figure, also a different arrangement, so we would have to go and I certainly don’t have the second figure, so you back over that too. When people went on to training will have to let me go away and see what I know allowances after certain points, their claim was about the make-up of the rapid reclaims. One of the physically broken. Consequently, you could not be on reasons why I was unapologetic in saying that off- benefit for as long as you otherwise could be. That flow is a good thing regardless of destination is that will manifestly have the effect of— some of them will be in precisely that position. The more that advisers make it difficult for people to work Q70 Chair: It would be interesting to get a proper and claim by requiring them to look for work and understanding of it. On the wider issue, I can accept attend things to support them, the better the answer that you do not want an administrator pursuing every will be. claim, and you will get better when you get to I was in Harrogate jobcentre the other day—I universal credit—I understand that. But if you really recommend it if anybody is passing—which had a want to test whether your interventions are working, really good story about giving front-line staff lots you should work a little bit at understanding it. more space to be innovative about the offers that they Robert Devereux: Well, we have done crate loads of make to people. They have worked out how to get analysis on this. Let us give you something about people down to the theatre, and they have worked out those few years. You can see that the difference is not how to get people into retail—lots and lots of offers. in the early months; it is in the longer durations. There The flip side of their having so many local offers that are elements in there that I am fairly sure are policy- they believe in is that they have greater confidence in related, and not to do with the efficacy of the sanctioning people who do not participate. That office jobcentres, but let us write you a note to explain it. has better offers than most places, and it sanctions a Neil Couling: The best bits of data are out of the higher proportion of the caseload than any other part benefit counts—how many people are actually on locally. Guess what? Their claimant count has fallen benefits. What people tend to focus on is the fact that like a stone. They also have one of the most engaged unemployment is broadly flat, but if you look from teams in the north-east. 2010, there are 230,000 fewer people on working-age benefits. What is going on is that the number of people Q66 Chair: Before we get completely carried away on benefits is coming down, the number of people that on figure 11, if you look at 2009–10—at the height of jobcentres are working with is about the same and we the previous recession—you were at 91% to 92% off- are having about the same success rate with a much flow. In 2011–12, when the labour market appears to more difficult caseload. be going in a different direction in the monthly stats, I think that is a really strong success story, but we you were at 86% or 87%—I can’t quite work it out. will do you a piece of analysis that will set that out So the percentage has gone down, to be fair. I do not for you. know what that means in total numbers. That is before we get too carried away. Q71 Fiona Mactaggart: Mr Devereux, you started Neil Couling: Unemployment is basically flat, so talking about the sanctions regime, and I want you to there were 1.4 million on the JSA count across 2010 tell us what it is for. to 2012. Robert Devereux: What the sanctions regime is for? Fiona Mactaggart: Yes. Q67 Chair: But I am saying that 2009–10 is when Robert Devereux: From first principles, JSA is a we were at the peak of the previous— conditional benefit. The claimant has got obligations Neil Couling: Of that 1.4 million, which is pretty to be looking for work and to be actively seeking constant, the make-up has changed. The 1.4 million work. The sanctions regime is there in the event that stayed like that, but in the make-up there is an those things are not happening. additional 150,000 people who were formally on incapacity benefit or are lone parents on JSA. So we Q72 Fiona Mactaggart: One of the things that we have maintained pretty much the same off-flow rate heard from the CAB, and that I hear in my with a much trickier caseload to place into work. constituency a lot, is that the people who are cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 11
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions sanctioned often do not understand why they have not applying for jobs and if they are not signing up to been sanctioned. Do you think that is sensible? the conditionality regime, they are going to fail Robert Devereux: If it were true, it would not be because they will not get jobs. sensible. Q76 Fiona Mactaggart: So do people get a warning Q73 Fiona Mactaggart: You think the CAB might that they are about to be sanctioned? be lying? Neil Couling: People do, yes. Robert Devereux: I think it is quite conceivable that since we are dealing with an organisation with 1.5 Q77 Fiona Mactaggart: Always? million different people who claim, there are bound to Neil Couling: Not in every circumstance, but my be some individuals who will struggle with this. advisers will say to people, “Your job search in the One of the things that we are doing—again, in past couple of weeks has really not been up to preparation for universal credit with the claimant muster.” I was in a jobcentre in Barnsley recently commitment that goes to the heart of it—is being where the adviser was quite careful to say to the much more explicit right at the start about what these individual, “Look, you have not fulfilled the terms of conditions are and what the consequences for you are. your jobseeker’s agreement. I understand that you If you look at a jobseeker’s agreement at the moment, might have misunderstood that, so I am going to let that is not made as explicit as it will be in the claimant that go this time, but in two weeks’ time I expect to commitment. We have been trying this already, and it see that you have made four applications.” is going very well in terms of people’s perceptions and comprehension. If there is any shortfall, the very Q78 Fiona Mactaggart: Mr Couling, I am absolutely standard fashion in which the claimant commitment certain that jobcentre advisers do that when the boss will operate would seek to address that. is there. I have no doubt at all about that. I think that they usually do it when the boss is not there, but I do Q74 Fiona Mactaggart: There are obviously groups not think that there is a process that guarantees that of people who will find it easier to understand the that happens—that an applicant knows that their consequences of particular behaviours, because their behaviour puts them directly at risk of being English is good, because they read well, because they sanctioned. are confident about using the internet and things like Robert Devereux: Let’s try this, then. I have got 30- that, all of which will mean that they are more likely odd thousand staff trying to do this, and 1.4 million to comply with behaviours that you expect from people on the count. At the end of the day, this is claimants. all going to get down to whether I, sitting opposite a Do you do any analysis about what kinds of people claimant, am communicating well. No amount of are most affected by sanctions—whether they are process definition in the world will get around that. people who do not have English as a first language, We must trust that well-motivated public servants who or people who have mental health problems and so are trying to do the right thing by people and on? Do you have any figures in the Department understand the rules are having those conversations. about that? The trouble is that you have only to find one to Robert Devereux: I do not know. I would have to go demonstrate that this is not happening, but it is not— and check for you. Neil Couling: We do track sanctions. We are quite Q79 Fiona Mactaggart: I am not looking for keen to avoid any misunderstandings that there are individual errors. I understand that any system has targets attached to these— individual errors in it, and you seem to think, Mr Devereux, that I want to pick on you. I absolutely do Q75 Fiona Mactaggart: Ministers have promised not, but what I am concerned about is that you have me that there are no targets. I have to say that people completely devolved to local offices how they do who work for you keep telling me that there are these things, as I understand it, although— targets, but there we go. Robert Devereux: No, that is a mistake. On the Neil Couling: We do have some understanding of the sanctions regime, because of the consequences that needs of people, for example, who do not speak flow from it, we are very clear about how it should English. I was in Glasgow—Laurieston—recently, operate. where an adviser and I were interviewing a Slovenian national who was here under the EU free movement Q80 Fiona Mactaggart: In the parity of operation rules, and who had very little English. We were there is no requirement for a written previous— carefully translating the jobseeker’s agreement and Robert Devereux: There is. There is a jobseeker’s checking back with the translator that the claimant agreement that the claimant will sign and will be understood her responsibilities, what she needed to do talked through by the adviser at the new claim and what evidence she needed to turn up with the next interview. time she signed on. My folk do some rather painstaking efforts here to try Q81 Fiona Mactaggart: Absolutely, but that to make sure that we apply the sanctions regime in a happened three months ago, and this month I am not fair way. I have always emphasised to them that it is applying for those three jobs you pointed me at. designed to help people get jobs, because it reminds Robert Devereux: The whole point of the fortnightly them of their responsibilities. The only way you are regime is to bring people in, to remind them of their going to get a job is to apply for it, so if people are obligations and to check that it has happened. If we cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 12 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions say even so they may not know, so in addition to Q89 Chair: It would be very interesting if there was everything else we must have a written warning of a a massive difference between the use of sanctions in possible sanction, is that really the regime you want Barking, Hackney and anywhere. It would be to run? interesting. Neil Couling: Sanctions are not an outcome. They Q82 Fiona Mactaggart: I think it probably is. will be a function of the nature— Robert Devereux: Okay. Q90 Chair: If we get a feel from our local jobcentres Q83 Fiona Mactaggart: If the point of a sanction is that there is some pressure in some jobcentres, you to change behaviour rather than to save money, yes I ought to be able to pick that up as management think it probably is. information. I just wonder whether you do, and Robert Devereux: But you were kind enough earlier whether you act on it. to say that you thought that most of the time they were Neil Couling: I do, and I have done. There was one probably doing it properly, so you are asking about a particular office where I felt there was more sanctioning going on than would be natural in a process point to make it secure. I am not persuaded normal labour market. That was a subjective personally that the elaboration and cost involved in assessment, because there is no right level of everything you have just described would be worth it sanctions, but they were sanctioning so many people for a problem that may occur in some cases, but I am that I thought they must have been wrongly not sure is systematic, given the staff I know. sanctioning them. I knew that because the interesting thing to track back is the success of the sanction. The Q84 Fiona Mactaggart: The problem is that the staff jobcentre—my folk—put the person in for a sanction you know tell me that they are given targets for and it goes to a decision maker. sanctions. Ministers tell me they are not given targets What was happening in that office was a very high for sanctions, and have given me their absolute overturn rate, when our decision-makers were saying, commitment that they are not. So something is “There isn’t the evidence to sanction this person— happening locally which is not what nationally we their excuses for not having complied with their have agreed should happen. jobseeker’s agreement are good cause.” Different Robert Devereux: Just try this thought experiment. labour markets will have different levels of sanctions Imagine you are the manager in a particular office and underpinning them—there is no right level. you can see that many of your advisers are sanctioning at a particular rate and by and large it is 5%, 8% or Q91 Mr Bacon: If you have an “unusually” high something like that, and Fred in the corner is doing level of sanctions—to use Mr Devereux’s example 2%. from Harrogate—but that is combined with an unusually high level of engagement with the local Q85 Fiona Mactaggart: But if Fred is doing 2% and labour market, so that you may expect there to be has a higher into-work ratio than all the others, then higher sanctions because so much is being done to let Fred carry on with his 2%. help people into work, and it is working, you would Robert Devereux: Okay, so what you are down to is not necessarily see a very high level of sanctioning as managers making judgments, but one of the things a problem. they would look at—this seems to me perfectly I have a couple of questions. First, where that is the reasonable—is do you think it is easy to do a sanction. case—to take your Harrogate example—should we It is much easier to just let it wash. People must put assume that when it went to the decision-maker, there themselves into a difficult place on the part of society was not an unusually high rate of rejection or to do a sanction, so all the manager is trying to do turnover, because they were found to be valid when looking at the rates at which people are sanctions? sanctioned is to try to think whether that sounds Robert Devereux: You should assume that, yes. reasonable. Q92 Mr Bacon: The thing that really interests me is Q86 Chair: Mr Couling, can you tell us which how you capture and spread out the Harrogate experience, if I can call it that. There is quite a lot in offices do the most sanctions? Do you have that the Report about the fact that you are trying pilots in management information? different places and working to assess the freedoms Neil Couling: Yes, we do. and flexibilities that local jobcentres are being given, but there is quite a bit more that you could do. Q87 Chair: Do you use it? Indeed, you have various things—see paragraph 2.29 Neil Couling: Not to go round to other offices and of the Report—a “‘bright ideas’ portal” and even a say they should be at this level, or that. “‘dragon’s den’ forum”, although that was closed down “because it was found to be slowing Q88 Chair: What do you use it for? implementation of flexibilities and discouraged Neil Couling: I do it mostly because people ask sharing of ideas”, which is perhaps surprising. parliamentary questions about it, and if I don’t have it The end of that paragraph says that during the NAO’s I am told it is terrible that I don’t have it. What I visits, it “found that staff shared good practice through want to try to get across to people is that there is no informal networks within their existing jobcentre right level. districts rather than more distant offices.” That was cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 13
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions the way things tended to happen, and I suppose that appropriately, in my view—if you suddenly find that is obvious when you think about it. If there is something is inadvertently starting to produce a result something really good going on, how do you then that you didn’t want, do you have a leading indicator capture that systematically and ensure that, if it is or some way of monitoring that that lets you know? working, it gets to more distant offices, rather than If so, how does that work? someone just talking to the person in the next office Neil Couling: Essentially, there are a whole range of because they know them? data sources that you will look at, as a manager. That Robert Devereux: A couple of things. In this is why we have avoided having targets. The old organisation, we are positively trying to get ownership regime had lots of targets and tried to calibrate off right at the coal face about the way in which people those. We have stuck with off-flow and we have a act and operate. We do not want everybody in the range of management information underneath that that front line to feel that their actions are entirely causes you to ask questions. They do not provide you dependent on Mr Couling making some decisions with the answers, but they cause you to have a back in Whitehall. discussion with managers. In the cultural change that The whole march of history about how the regime has we are embarked on, we are encouraging changed, which is set out very nicely in one of these conversations, rather than the sense of, “It is here and charts, has gone from being, “It’s Friday, it’s 13 it is 92.4, when it should be 92.8. For goodness’ sake, weeks—I’m going to see you for 40 minutes,” through make it that.” The short answer is: yes, we do have to “I’m going to look at Mr Bacon’s CV and think that kind of data. about it. I’m going to do something for you and then The other thing we have in the system is an internal one of my colleagues will do something else.” That check, which is that if my offices start to do things march of history is actually quite a big step and that cause pressure elsewhere in the system, that will change for my organisation, and the fact that they quickly become apparent. For example, my have now got as far as making sure that they compare operational director colleagues—the ones running the notes locally means that we are at least getting benefits centres or the ones running the contact somewhere with that. centres, for example—would quickly call out if I was You are absolutely right that we then need to ask just churning people off deliberately and causing them whether there is any evidence that something is to claim or creating lots of inappropriate sanctions, actually common across the piece. However, one of because that creates work in their part of the forest, the things that I think we will keep coming back to and they would immediately say, “What is going on is that this idea that there is some standard, perfect here?” information model—that so long as I knew all the Amyas Morse: But they would not have any idea what variables, I could go to Harrogate, hold it up and say, a standard amount of work for them would be, “Do this”—is not going to work. The Harrogate because everything is unique, is it not? labour market is unlike any other. The claimants in Neil Couling: But the jobcentres are linked into Harrogate are unlike any others, as are the interactions benefit centres and there is a lot of dialogue in the with the advisers. You need to be alive enough to operational support networks looking at what is going realise that there may be hints and prompts in what on, such as, “Is the claimant count rising? Does that other people are doing, but not so daft as to then say, mean that we need more resources in the benefits bit “I’m now going to do those as standard practice.” to cope with the inflow of benefits?” and so on. There are quite a lot of checks and balances in the system Q93 Chair: I do not agree with that, and neither does as well. the Comptroller and Auditor General, so I will let him come back on you. Q94 Amyas Morse: So you—not that you are Amyas Morse: I am not going to come back controlling it all from the centre; I am not trying to particularly forcefully. The suggestion in this get you to say that, because I understand what you conversation is that one wants everything to be done are saying—have reasonable warnings. We heard from on a standard lockstep basis, which as far as I know Citizens Advice that they were worried that there were is not a suggestion being made by anyone. On the disadvantaged people who were walking into other hand, there is some value in having good difficulty when it came to being online and so forth. management information as well as statistics. They admitted that they were only seeing people who I want to ask a factual question. Given the changes, had troubles, but they were saying, “We are concerned which we acknowledge in the Report, it is probably that there is an uptick of difficulty.” Would you have useful to have some information that allows you to a way of knowing that? keep track of whether there are any concerning or Neil Couling: We bought in a new sanctions regime undesirable effects. Let us take for example the for JSA in October and for employment and support sanctioning of what I will call vulnerable groups—do allowance in September, and we are watching those you have a way of telling from the centre whether figures carefully to see whether some of the things there is any unexpected uptick in vulnerable groups? that Ms Shaw was saying earlier are in fact true. I hasten to say that I am not telling you that you It is difficult. Ms Shaw and I have worked together should have a standard measure for them. There are a for years. She helped me solve some of the problems lot of things I am not trying to say; I am just asking back in 2006, so I have nothing but the highest a question. admiration for her. Citizens Advice are seeing just a As you move on to online and the various other snapshot, rather than the whole caseload. We are measures that you are putting in place—quite watching this very carefully, because we understand cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 14 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions that the reforms are quite controversial and there is a Grimsby and Cheltenham. Such regional breakdown lot of public and parliamentary interest in how they as is statistically significant, I will send to you. are proceeding. Amyas Morse: So there is something that you can Q99 Austin Mitchell: But could you give us a probably share with Ms Mactaggart that would let her measure of satisfaction felt by clients in high understand how you would do that? unemployment areas compared with low Neil Couling: Yes. unemployment areas? Amyas Morse: I think that is what you are looking Robert Devereux: If the level of sampling is such that for, isn’t it? I got a number other than a national number which I Fiona Mactaggart: Absolutely. I am concerned about can break down, then I will break it down as much as the differential impact on the most vulnerable people I can for you. that is a risk of the sanctions regime. If I can be assured that you have good systems that avoid a Q100 Austin Mitchell: It says at paragraph 1.17 that differential impact and bear hardest on the most the case loads range from a low of 118 cases per vulnerable, I will be satisfied. adviser in Wessex, wherever Wessex is, to a high of Chair: That is another little note. I have a whole list 213 per adviser in Birmingham and Solihull and that of people who want to ask questions: Austin, Ian, the Department feels that there is a link between the Meg, Guto, Justin. time advisers spend with clients and the off-flow from benefits. Surely that is just a result of the fact that you Q95 Austin Mitchell: Why do you use the fall-off have a higher throughput in an area of high from benefits as your primary performance measure, unemployment and therefore it is more difficult to get rather than getting people a job? It makes you look them a job. So it is a question not of the time they are like the department of shakedowns, rather than the spending, but of the difficulties in getting a job locally. Department for Work and Pensions. Can you dissociate the time spent on interviews from the level of unemployment in the area? Robert Devereux: It is largely for the reasons that we Robert Devereux: Probably not, no. Can I make have just been through. Measuring who leaves benefit another point about this because it is not obvious to and gets a job is a labour-intensive process that the reader? There are two sorts of staff in my employers do not want to participate in and which is jobcentres: people whom the National Audit Office not, in my view, adding more value to periodic, well and we call advisers, who typically do in-depth run sample surveys. Many things in life are measured interviews; and we have a lot of assistant advisers perfectly well by surveys. Not everything is measured who, typically, in an ordinary office, will do the by administrative data. My assertion is that this is one fortnightly signing. So the assistant adviser’s role is: of them. “Are you complying with your obligations? Where is your evidence of work search? Thank you very much. Q96 Austin Mitchell: That looks like an excuse. See you in a fortnight’s time.” The adviser’s role is Robert Devereux: It’s not an excuse. rather more, “Let’s see your CV. What jobs have you applied for?” That is the classic way in which it is Q97 Austin Mitchell: If you are using the number done. We are trying hard to stop having a view from going off benefit, it creates all kinds of perverse Whitehall that the right ratio is three of these to one incentives, like shakedowns, sanctions and shoving of those for all circumstances. So in practice what we them on to other benefits. are doing is distributing financial resources around the Robert Devereux: Again, we have just had a long system in relation to the stock of people on the benefit conversation about whether there is any evidence that and the flow of people on the benefit because those we are gratuitously using sanctions to meet our two things are both important variables. Then we get targets. There is no evidence that that is the case. If the local manager to decide the best potential mix of there were, this curve which we keep coming back to assistant advisers and advisers. So this picture here is would have spikes in it. I am not persuaded that the all about the adviser end. It is not about the total staff off-flow target, simple as it is, is itself driving perverse or anything else. performance in the way that you describe and nor is the National Audit Office. Q101 Austin Mitchell: I hope that means more resources coming to Grimsby. I have had complaints Q98 Austin Mitchell: It would be a better check on from people who feel that they are being treated in a local performance if you are giving local performance rather perfunctory fashion. One chap told me that it more flexibility, but let me move on. I see from figure feels like they just want to get you out of the place 10 that jobcentre satisfaction levels are high in this and off their books, rather than providing help and country compared with, say, France where they just support to get a job; they just want to give you the seem to tell them to “foutez le camp”, which is an bum’s rush. achievement. But how does that vary by regions of Robert Devereux: They should not be doing that for high unemployment? Could you give us the all the reasons that we have been through. satisfaction levels in Grimsby compared with those in Cheltenham or solid south somewhere? What’s the Q102 Ian Swales: Can I come in on this? I think gap? Austin has made some good points. What surprised Robert Devereux: Not off the top of my head. I am me was that the case load per adviser does not seem fairly sure that this is not measured at the level of to bear any relation to the type of area. My area falls cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 15
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions into Durham and Tees valley where there are 196 we are managing, given the labour market that you cases per adviser. Similar areas with similar represent, to serve your constituents well. unemployment and job markets would be Merseyside with 155 and the Glasgow area with 152. So advisers Q106 Chair: The only thing that comes out of it, Ian, in the area that I represent have a 30% higher case is the cost. These are the top guys we are seeing. They load than in areas that I would think of as quite are the more expensive guys, if I heard you right. In similar. Why is that? Wessex, they can only recruit the more expensive Neil Couling: This table reflects managerial choice guys. There will be a cost per off-flow—a bit of MI— rather than giving an exact understanding of the work that you will have, I hope. load of individual advisers. As Mr Devereux says, in Neil Couling: The resource pot is equalised. It is some offices, they use a plumber and mate system, driven by the volumes and activities. There is a table where the assistant adviser does all the administrative in the back of the Report setting out some of the times work around the advisory interview, so the adviser can that we use to calculate resourcing, but the choices do lots more interviews a day. In other offices—in that the district manager then makes about what to do Wessex, for example, the district manager has decided with that financial resource are driven partly by what to put all his resource into advisers, so his advisers he can recruit and do in that particular location and have to do all the administrative tasks and do fewer partly by his judgment about what will work best in advisory interviews a day. that location.
Q103 Ian Swales: Surely, as the top people in the Q107 Ian Swales: I am only using Merseyside and organisation, you must have some sort of view about Teesside because I happen to represent one of them, what the right scheme of the organisation is. I but I think that the two areas are similar in terms of understand local discretion, but I would have thought high unemployment and similar job markets. If you that it was a matter of fairly basic principle. are telling me that they get similar financial resources Neil Couling: It also has to do with the local labour per metric, as I think you are saying, then the market. In Wessex, which is effectively Wiltshire and managers in Merseyside have taken a completely Dorset, it is very difficult to recruit people at our different view of how to run their show than the administrative office level because of the wages managers in Teesside. That will not be to do with compared to what is offered in the local labour availability of administrative staff, I can tell you. market. The district manager there has decided to go Given that they have taken such a different view, do after executive officer advisers and has put his money you not have any view, as manager of the Department, there. In other parts of the country, the wages that we who has the best approach? I do not believe it should pay for administrative officers are much more be so fundamentally different. I do not understand competitive in the local labour market, and managers why it would be. there have gone to the plumber and mate system as I Robert Devereux: If it were genuinely, on the ground, have described it. fundamentally different you might expect that the off- flow rates between these two similar labour markets Q104 Ian Swales: Merseyside has 155 cases per would be wildly different, but they are not. adviser, according to the table, and Teesside has 196. Explain to me why you think people in my area will Q108 Chair: One must be more efficient than the get a similar level of service to people in Merseyside, other or cost less. There must be something. I cannot or won’t they? believe the NAO has just put it in because it is a Neil Couling: What you would need to do is compare pretty table. the off-flow rates rather than the inputs. You cannot Max Tse: We recognise that there will be other factors conclude from the table that people in Birmingham than performance driving this variation. I think we and Solihull are getting a very different service from were trying to encourage better understanding of what Wessex. What you may find in Birmingham and choices had been made locally, what effects that has Solihull is that there are a lot more advisory both on cost and on performance. If you look at just interviews going on because the advisers just spend off-flow, it is hard to see what is happening. If you time in the advisory interviews and all the look at just cost, you cannot see what is happening. administration is done for them. In Wessex, there are more advisers, but they have to do more of the Q109 Chair: Is there are difference in cost? administrative tasks. You cannot draw that conclusion Amyas Morse: We make this clear. In paragraphs from this table. 1.18, 1.19 and 1.20 we explain the basis of this. We Robert Devereux: You are picking up one variable: do say that there are different assumptions that you the number of one class and salary bracket of use—in some cases you are using different staff employee. You are not picking up the financial mixes—so we make that clear. I know you are resources going into your area. working on benchmarking it yourself. All we are trying to say is, even when you do clustering among Q105 Ian Swales: I am not picking it up; the apparently comparable authorities, there is quite a National Audit Office has decided that this is a useful wide range of variation. We think it is an interesting table to have. If you are telling us that it does not area to understand better. We think that it is likely mean anything, we can move on. that—the variation looks a bit more than coincidental Robert Devereux: We are pretty much saying that. and it might be significant and indicative of The question that you should be asking is whether something. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 16 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
I agree with you about off-flow, but there is a question other problems at those terminals, if necessary? Not about quality of service being delivered as well as everybody is IT-literate. simply off-flow. I guess it is interesting just to Neil Couling: Indeed. As I said, in Glasgow, understand that. Laurieston—I was there because of a Slovenian claimant—we use translation services and we try to Q110 Chair: And value for money. help people through. Some cases, though, are Robert Devereux: I agree with all that. incredibly complex, especially when you get into In paragraph 1.18, the NAO has given an exhaustive benefit queries. We don’t have benefit experts in all list of the five variables that we are already using to jobcentres at the level they have in the benefits try to do clustering. With those five variables, we still centres. In some cases, people will need to go out and cannot find a standard pattern. One of the variables is seek some advice elsewhere. not, for example, the average duration on benefits. So in an area that has long-term unemployment that is Q113 Ian Swales: So, if somebody gets told to go to not one of these variables. The only thing that I am their local library because they do not have internet trying to say is that real life is actually quite access, you would regard that now as a fault in your complicated. system; they should be helped. I am not wholly sure there is—just for the want of Robert Devereux: No, I don’t think I would actually. another regression—a way of saying the following 93 factors actually produce happiness in all Q114 Ian Swales: If they are not capable of doing it. circumstances. We are trying. You can see that we That is the point. have at least got as far as eight factors here. We have Robert Devereux: If they are not capable of doing it, not yet managed, even with eight, to get to an answer. sure. What we have got—if you divide the number of Some things in life are complicated. internet access devices by the case load, you will If I thought for a moment that I was putting in realise there is a very small number. If people want to jeopardy your constituents’ chances of getting off come to our buildings and ask staff to sit with them, benefit after 13, 26 or up to 30 weeks, because they we will do that. In the modern world, there are lots of had way lower than anywhere else with higher, we other offers: one-stop shops in the library, their would be straight back and that would be an obvious friends, their children, whoever it might be. Different factor. But that clearly is not the case, otherwise we people will get help in different ways. We are trying to ensure that we can do translation and internet would have found it in the benchmarking. access in our offices if that is what people prefer. If they prefer to take it somewhere else— Q111 Ian Swales: Okay. Can I just raise one other issue, then I will let other people come in? We heard Q115 Ian Swales: As MPs, we do not want a single from the earlier witness about some of the difficulties case where somebody fails to get the benefits that they of filling in forms and so on and how people deserve because they can’t cope with your system. sometimes are getting referred by your people to the That is the top and bottom of it. third sector, in the case of citizens advice bureaux. I Robert Devereux: Nor do I. have even had them referred to me directly by jobcentres. What are your comments about that aspect, Q116 Meg Hillier: I want to go back momentarily to where you have this big resource and then it seems, sanctions. I have certainly seen an increase in the for some difficult cases, or cases where people are number of people coming to see me who have been struggling with your systems, you are quite happy to sanctioned, who would previously have been rapped push them into other areas, in some places? What is on the knuckles. They are often confused. Going back your response to that? to the online point Ian Swales raised, they often find Neil Couling: I have heard that said, too. My it a struggle to work online and get proof that they experience in jobcentres is that we do not do that. have applied for a job. The system online goes on and Back in 2006, we were trying to move people off they don’t know how to print off a receipt. There are postal claim forms on to the telephone to claim, rather some very basic things and they get very anxious. successfully, and we were concerned about some of MPs are not fools and we have to take people who the vulnerable people who could not cope with the come to our surgeries on trust. In the past, it was telephone then. We are doing a similar thing now rarely applied. People would try to justify to me why online. We have just put 2,000 internet access devices they couldn’t possibly apply for a job. They didn’t get into our jobcentres in the last six months to help much patience. Now, people who are really trying but support people claim and support their job search, are not in tune with the modern way of applying where they have not got the internet at home, and so online—online is the worst—are really distressed. It forth. So we are on to some of that, but there will be is often older men and people with poor English. You some people who will want to go for what they would talked a lot about support just then that you can offer, call independent advice, because they will see us as but it is quite a lot of work for a DWP assessor with the person they are dealing with. an average case load of 193 or whatever—I think it is 153 in Hackney or east London—to take someone Q112 Ian Swales: If they want to, that is one thing. through all of that. I am pleased to hear about this move, that sounds For all that you say, Mr Devereux, that people can go positive, but will your people, for example, be helping to their children or other people, you try walking into those who might have the odd language difficulty or a library, finding a hard-pressed librarian and saying, cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 17
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
“I don’t understand how to do this.” It is quite a lot people to register. It is the new internet-based vacancy of work for a librarian to do that. I don’t think there system that we are running now. You asked a question are a lot of places you can go. about how I can improve my job search if I am not Robert Devereux: To answer that, this is a really very good at using the internet. Well, there is a important skills set that, right across Government, we functionality in the system that if the claimant grants are interested in people developing. People are not us access to their job search—so not their personal going to find it easy to find work if they can’t apply details—it is visible to the advisers. So when the online. People are not going to find it possible to person comes to sign on, the adviser can click on and transact in lots of other things with HMRC if they say, “Yes, I can see you have applied for four jobs.” can’t understand online. Q121 Meg Hillier: That is if they do it through Q117 Meg Hillier: But they don’t. your portal. Robert Devereux: There is a general sense that how Neil Couling: That is if they do it through our portal. you make adequate provision to give assisted support The technology will help with some of these for digital is a Government aspiration, not just a responsibilities. It is a question of supporting DWP one. individuals through to use that and to get familiar with it. Q118 Meg Hillier: Good. I am glad it is a Government aspiration. So now, what are you doing? Q122 Meg Hillier: That is good news. What I am Robert Devereux: Within our offices, we are trying, concerned about is the fact that the first thing someone within the resource levels that the Treasury gives us, who is clearly confused and worried about the system to ensure that we can do that. But this is not an infinite faces is a sanction rather than being given support. It elastic amount of resource. The advisers are trying to feels like that. I am sure that the cases my colleagues make judgments about where they can best support are receiving show that as well. people. I have seen with my own eyes, as Neil has, Robert Devereux: Certainly in respect of online, the people sitting down and helping people talking challenge was that they were unable to demonstrate through this, doing it in group sessions, being that they had done their online activity properly innovative in different ways. because they could not get a bit of paper out. If that The whole point about trying to have empowered is the nature of their problem, but they are diligently local staff is that they are also very good at making searching online, our staff will be able to see that if connections around the place. The other day I was in they are using universal job match. It is a particularly Glasgow in Shettleston road, where the staff have good regime for that, because it takes a lot of the bits created a youth hub for young people and they have of paper out of the system and you can see exactly brought in lots of different providers who bring what is going on. Better than that, you can see that different things to the party, all of whom say that their they were successful in getting to interview. own performance in terms of getting people into work has gone up as a consequence of working together. Q123 Meg Hillier: To be clear, that applies only to They have also been very positive about being able to jobs advertised at the jobcentre, and not other jobs. move people around between different providers and Neil Couling: There is a notes facility that allows you give different opportunities. I don’t want it to come to record things such as, “I went round six shops and across as though there is only one answer to this asked whether they had any jobs.” Yes, it records what question, which is that these people do it. Different is on universal jobs match, but it also allows you to staff are thinking differently and innovatively about record when you have been on other sites. different ways to support people. Q124 Meg Hillier: It sounds great, and I am not Q119 Meg Hillier: I don’t doubt that. There are good knocking any of that. I think that that is all good news. people. The Peabody Trust has a jobcentre on the But I do know people who have been around shops Pembury estate in my constituency that does some saying, “Here’s my CV. I would like work” and that very good work. I think sometimes it is does not count and they have been sanctioned. embarrassment. I come back to older men, as I seem Perhaps I will raise some individual cases with you. to have seen a run of them recently. They are Robert Devereux: That should not be the case. If you embarrassed to say that they don’t know quite how to have examples of people who have a perfectly diligent do it. They think they have done it right, and then job search that is not being counted as a job search, they cannot get the relevant bit of paper that proves let us know. they have done something to show to the jobcentre adviser. Some of them are used to getting jobs that do Q125 Meg Hillier: I will certainly do so. I have a not require them to apply online. In the old days, they really important issue about courses, and it relates did not have to do that. possibly to the Work programme and to jobcentre Neil Couling: Twenty-five per cent of job vacancies advisers as well. A number of people from my local at the moment are only available online, and that is community college have been on a course that was growing. So we have to help people make that change. getting them to a qualification or getting them to be more employable and they were told to come off it Q120 Meg Hillier: And 75%— or they would be sanctioned because they were not Neil Couling: Yes, but 75% is a shrinking number. available for work. That happened to somebody a With universal job match, we have been helping week before they finished their course. That seems to cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 18 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions be completely counter-intuitive. I would hope that that Q130 Guto Bebb: My questions relate to the way in has never been the intention of the DWP. If it is, tell which the jobcentre works with the Work programme. us now, but otherwise why is that happening so often? On the sanctions, to start off with, one of you made I have a raft of cases which I will certainly share with the comment that the sanctions often depended on the you, because it is a matter of real concern. extent of the support being offered to the clients. I Neil Couling: I probably write back to Members of am just wondering. Let’s say that somebody has been Parliament on some of those cases quite regularly as referred to the Work programme. Is there a higher well. It is a very complex area of social security law— level of sanctions for people on the Work programme, how the social security system interacts with the as compared with those who are not yet on the Work education system. Social security is not there to programme? provide support for people studying. Robert Devereux: It was me who made the point. I wasn’t quite saying that it depended on the extent of Q126 Meg Hillier: But the Work programme is. help. What I was saying was that where our front- Neil Couling: In terms of how the rules work, line staff have put a lot of energy and innovation into availability and actively seeking tend to trump any of supported offers— those other aspects, and that has long been the case. Guto Bebb: I am not being critical, by the way. There was a concern in the 1980s or early 1990s that Robert Devereux: I have noticed that they are then the social security system was effectively being used much more confident in the difficult act, on behalf of to support people in education when there were other society, of sanctioning somebody. I am not saying that forms of support. In those days, it was grants and now because there’s more offer, there’s a higher rate of it is loans. Each case is tricky to advise on on behalf sanction. I am observing that it is not surprising; it is of my folk, and to make decisions on. human nature that if you are confident that you have really pushed the boat out and given people lots of Q127 Meg Hillier: You talked about empowering opportunities, you are a bit more confident about staff at the front line and giving them discretion. If doing the sanction thereafter. That was the point. someone is within a week of finishing their course, it seems bonkers to take them off. Also, many students Q131 Guto Bebb: The point I am making is that say to me, “I study, but I still want to work; I still Work programme providers will often feel that that is have time to work up to 16 hours or even more a the case in terms of the support that they offer. Is there week,” because there is a lot of shift work available any differential between Work programme for supermarket workers and so on. You can do both. providers— Robert Devereux: All my staff are trying to do is to Neil Couling: Broadly—and this comes out in the apply the law as passed by Parliament. If Parliament Report as well—there is a link between frequency of asks that as a condition of JSA, people must be sanction and duration of claim. Typically, at the start available for and actively seeking work and there are of a claim, there is a very low level of sanctioning, definitions of what both of those mean, it should not and that grows; it is not intuitively the wrong way be the case— round, I don’t think. That is a rough rule of thumb. If you are thinking about the Work programme, they are Q128 Meg Hillier: But if they are taken off the already getting people who have been on benefit for course because the Work programme is putting them at least a year, so you might see in the data a higher on another course, that is just bonkers, isn’t it? That sanctioning rate than if you look at the whole JSA is happening. population. Robert Devereux: You are asking me about the JSA regime. All Neil and I are trying to say is that— Q132 Guto Bebb: Is that the case, then, that there is a higher sanctioning rate? Q129 Meg Hillier: But people on the Work Neil Couling: I do not think it is that marked. It would programme are on JSA, too. depend on which cohort of jobseekers you compared Robert Devereux: If you want to give me a pot of it against. cash from Parliament to say, “Do good things with the people who come through your offices,” I will happily Q133 Guto Bebb: The point I was going to make do that, but that is not the way you have set it up. was that, having visited several Work programme Meg Hillier: No, but if you are on the Work providers, the feeling I had was that that would be the programme, you are trying to get work and the Work final resort in any situation. I was just wondering, out programme can put you on courses. They are taking of interest. people off existing courses that are actually in their Robert Devereux: First, it is not wholly in the gift of line of specialism or that they are nearly finishing and the Work programme to sanction somebody. As we putting them on something else, so they are on a have discussed previously, sanction decisions are course and in receipt of benefit, but not on the course made by members of staff trained in understanding that is actually going to help them. It just seems whether there is good evidence, so it is true that the bonkers. Work programme provider may recommend Chair: I am going to move us on, because this is the somebody for a sanction—just like one of my sort of flexibility you would hope local jobcentres— members of staff—but unless there is evidence in [Interruption.] I think probably you should front of that decision maker, they will decide that correspond between the two on the particular issue. I actually that does not work, either because the am just conscious that we have to get a move on. evidence is not there or because there is a very good cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 19
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions reason—“My mother died yesterday”; “good cause” ridiculous. I’ve already got a CV. I don’t want to be reasons. The check and the balance in the system is in that space.” that I have not given either Neil’s staff or Work The other thing comes back to the bottom line. Where programme staff the facility to make a sanction, only is the evidence that that significant change, apparently, to recommend such a thing to a third party, on behalf as has been referred to, is showing up in these data? I of society, who tries to make a reasonable judgment. am not sure it is, actually. They are well trained in doing that. Q136 Chair: Your own research and evaluation of Q134 Guto Bebb: Okay, that’s fine. The second point the Jobcentre Plus offer—the DWP’s own is that figure 12 in the Report seems to imply that evaluation—suggested ESA claimants do not seem to there is possibly an element of parking occurring with discuss or receive support to the same extent as some claimants. Whether that is the case or not, I jobseeker’s allowance claimants, with that being wouldn’t mind a comment on that. It does reflect some particularly a concern for those who are currently of the comments I have had from Work programme looking for work around 16% of the year, said providers, who claim that they are having increasingly claimants surveyed. You go on to say that, although it difficult clients to deal with. I just wonder whether is true that the majority of ESA claimants—70%— you would care to comment on that issue—whether discuss the possibility of working in the future, this that figure is indicating parking and whether that means that a substantial minority of 30% did not. reflects the fact that Work programme providers are Similarly, nearly half of all ESA claimants did not complaining of having difficult clients to deal with. discuss what steps they could begin to take to find Robert Devereux: I do not think this figure does work in future in the new work-focused interview. All demonstrate parking. The best that the NAO could I am doing is reporting to you your own research. In come up with was the risk that it might be. Let’s just addition, ESA claimants were significantly more explain what is going on here. This is a chart trying likely to report that they left their initial meeting with to record what proportion of the case load of long- their adviser without an appointment for their next term jobseekers are actually being, as it were, referred meeting. to a third party. It is not trying to measure the amount There are three bits. I am sure your Mr Couling, in of effort that my own staff are putting into this. It is particular, will be familiar with your own research, only to do with whether there was a third-party which suggests that ESA claimants are getting a worse opportunity there. deal from Jobcentre Plus. If you take yourself back to 2009–10, at the height of Robert Devereux: So this is a Report wholly about the new deal, the future jobs fund and the six months jobseeker’s allowance. The data in here— offer, there was a whole bunch of prescription that basically said, “When you get to this place, you shall Q137 Chair: This is about Jobcentre Plus. do this.” As a consequence, the proportion of people Robert Devereux: Just to be clear, everything you who seemingly were not being sent to them was very read out about ESA, which is indeed our own low. Wind yourself on to 2011–12, when some of research, is about claiming ESA. All these pictures we those offers have disappeared precisely because we are looking at are about JSA, so I will— want to give jobcentres more flexibility to decide what is in the best interests of somebody, rather than Q138 Chair: It does not matter. The point is the treating them just as a statistic, actually they are same. The ones who are on JSA in the longer term making different choices. will tend to be the same people—those who have To get this into perspective, this chart talks about come off incapacity benefits and gone on to having sampled 10,000 jobseekers. Those 19% in jobseeker’s allowance—which is fine. But what is 2011–12 boiled down to 43 people. By the time you happening is that those more vulnerable and distant have taken the long-term out, and taken everything from the labour market in two bits of research—it else out, these are quite small numbers. My own view seems your own evidence is suggesting they are is that this is picking up a tiny piece of the having less support. You are parking them. arrangement— Neil Couling: “Parking them” is an emotive term, and I do not think we are. Prior to ESA we were not doing Q135 Chair: Do you agree with that, Max? anything with incapacity benefit claimants in Max Tse: I agree it is a relatively small sample and jobcentres. there may be other things going on, so we state that in paragraph 2.7. But we did try to check whether Q139 Chair: You are doing less with them than you there was more personal adviser activity for the group are with people who are closer to the labour market. that were not seeing referrals, and we did not see any Neil Couling: We are doing less— difference between them and the other groups. Robert Devereux: They are close to the labour Robert Devereux: So the question you need to ask market; they are on JSA. The whole point of the yourself is whether or not—what about the quality and change of ESA is to make sure that we are trying to appropriateness of the referral? It is easy, particularly find out who should be subject to the full JSA and if in the world where looking busy is the way to be, to they do not— just refer everybody, but whether that helps anybody—I answered as many letters as you have Q140 Chair: Either your own evidence is right or it from people saying, “I was sent on this course. It was is wrong. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 20 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
Neil Couling: I was just coming on to explain that we Neil Couling: I looked at how freedoms and do less with ESA customers than we do with flexibilities were running out—I think it was Mr jobseeker’s allowance customers. That is one of the Bacon who said that we had had a dragon’s den, and reasons why we are reassessing incapacity benefit I wound the dragon’s den up. Basically, a very caseload. We are encouraged when we put somebody competitive regime was going on and people were not on to JSA, even though they personally, themselves, sharing. So I set up a whole series of mechanisms to might not be encouraged, because we know that is a allow and encourage sharing. A lot of local sharing is good way of getting people into work. We know the going on, but there is also now quite a lot of national JSA regime is successful. sharing. Some of the jobcentre performance in In addition to that, we have also changed the referrals London at the moment is extraordinarily strong. I into the Work programme, so that ESA customers go notice that Mr Swales has gone now, but there are much earlier into the Work programme now, and quite a lot of people coming down from the north- effectively access extra support there. The fact that east, for example, to look at what people are doing in jobcentres are not working with ESA customers, London and learn from it. which is what that piece of research said, was a policy response—they were moved over into the Work Q144 Justin Tomlinson: Crucially, what about programme, which is where they are now being dealt organisations? We as Members of Parliament might with. deal with this, as might job clubs or whoever. How can they put in what they see as best practice, because Q141 Chair: We did not see that in the early stats, when you speak to the people who are doing it, they so we look forward to seeing it in the later stats. are all going to say, “We’re doing it the right way; Neil Couling: No, it was a change we made some ours is the best way and we are happy to share it.”? eight or nine months into the operation of the Work Neil Couling: I would encourage a warm and close programme. relationship with the jobcentre district managers. They ought to be very open to building those kind of Chair: It might have been picked up in the early stats. relationships, because finding somebody a job is not Sorry Guto, I interrupted. just something that a jobcentre does—it is about being in the community and working in that community, and Q142 Guto Bebb: Specifically on the ESA, are they understanding it. I would just encourage that to being compulsorily or voluntarily referred? happen. Neil Couling: They are being compulsorily referred at three months now, in the main—after they have had Q145 Chair: I am just going to go through some their work capability assessment decision. issues that I do not think we have covered. One of the Chair: We look forward to seeing that in the stats. things that your own evidence says is that the more time you spend with people, the more likely they are Q143 Justin Tomlinson: A couple of quick things. to find a job—that is on page 18, at paragraph 1.17. First, some real credit to Jobcentre Plus. My Yet elsewhere in the Report, it says that less time is constituency heard recently the announcement of being spent, for example, on work-focused interviews. Honda job losses, and Jobcentre Plus has been Fewer are being done—it has gone from one in four fantastic in helping proactively to co-ordinate support to one in five. So you appear to know what works— ahead of those workers entering the unemployment individuals spending more time with the adviser—yet market. Also, my wife volunteers helping to run a job probably one of your main vehicles for doing that is club and she was also full of praise about the universal your work-focused interviews and you are doing less job match. People are now able to put their CVs of them. Can you explain that? online so that employers can proactively contact them. Robert Devereux: So if I am correctly guessing how Some of the people for whom they found it difficult you are doing the sums, your one in five is coming to find jobs have suddenly got hold of things out of the from figure 4. blue. Also, the inclusion of alternative listings, such as Monster and others, all in one place has made a huge Q146 Chair: I looked at page 8, paragraph 9, where difference. However, she said that the big challenge is it says that work-focused interviews fell from one in that nobody can ever remember their own password four to one in five. Yet your analysis on page 18, to get on to the gateway system and that that takes up paragraph 1.17, says that there is “a link between the a big chunk of their time. time advisers spend with clients and off-flow from One other point, referring back to figure 8, I benefits.” completely understand that that obviously shows Robert Devereux: So if we have a peek at figure 4, outcomes. During this meeting I have heard from my which is where the data sits for that bit of the office. My Swindon constituency has just transferred summary—I need to explain something about how the from Wessex, which is at 118, to Thames Valley. We case side matures when you make a big shock to it. have already found a different approach to things. The In the picture in figure 2, you can see that the National co-ordinators we are working with are saying that they Audit Office has identified that the claimant count do not have the right tools, cannot access the same rose very quickly in the back end of 2008–09. The information and that the authority to provide help is nature of the interventions that we do with people not available. I understand about the different ways of typically leaves them pretty much to get on with it in doing different things, but what emphasis is being put the first few weeks. We do progressively more with on sharing best practice? them the longer they are on benefit. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 21
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
What you then find, effectively, is that if you change chief executive. That seems fine. When it comes to the nature of the make-up of the caseload very something that is absolutely mission critical to the quickly, as we did in 2008, you would expect to see Secretary of State and me—how the labour market something reducing in the proportions over 2009–10 functions—I am not persuaded that I get the right and then coming back in 2010–11. If you try the same return in this austerity climate by setting it up as an thing a bit further down in the sanctions paragraph, agency. I have saved cost, but also liberated a degree which is 1.11, it appears to suggest that sanctions fell of working across boundaries that previously was not off a cliff and have gone back again. Actually, there. however, if you track through when it is more likely that you would be sanctioned because of the length Q150 Mr Bacon: Just briefly, in parentheses, is the of time on benefit, you find that that is an entirely same now true of the Child Maintenance and standard pattern. Enforcement Commission? Is that now fully back I am not sure I am with you that we have somehow under the Secretary of State directly? or other wilfully taken time away from things that Robert Devereux: The Child Maintenance and work. The nature of the caseload was moving very Enforcement Commission used to be a Crown non- sharply in those three years. As soon as you go back to 2010–11, we are back to pretty much the same departmental public body. It is now part of the ratios that we had in the previous staple period. It is Department. a rather complex answer, but that is the answer. Q151 Mr Bacon: So it never actually became an Q147 Chair: Right. So why does the Report say executive agency? There was an announcement that it otherwise? was going to, but it never did. Robert Devereux: The Report does not say otherwise. Robert Devereux: Sorry, I am stating a difference. I You have brought together a statement that I am not think it is technically a Crown NDPB. It is a slightly reneging on, which is that more adviser time, all odd category thing. It was definitely out there away things being equal, is probably better. from the Department. Neil Couling: It was an agency, and then it became a Q148 Chair: Okay. Good. Let me ask another Crown NDPB. question. Jobcentre Plus is no longer an agency and Robert Devereux: Now it is back in the Department. comes under your direct control. I do not know what At the moment, there is no substantial difference benefits were intended, but have you achieved the between the staff in Falkirk running the child benefits that you wanted? maintenance system and the staff in the Swansea Robert Devereux: Yes, I have. pensions centre.
Q149 Chair: What are they? Q152 Mr Bacon: They are directly under the DWP. Robert Devereux: There are two things that have Robert Devereux: They are directly under the DWP. happened. One is that there is an overhead in having an internal organisation inside another organisation. I Q153 Chair: I am conscious about time. We have have non-executive directors, I have sets of accounts talked a little about employment and support and I have the attitudes of people in the agency versus allowance and the work that you are doing with the rest of the Department, all of which I might be disabled people. I was quite surprised to see in answer indifferent to in a world where I had plenty of cash. to a PQ that there are only 522 disability employment In a world where I have to take 30% out of my staffing advisers across the whole of Jobcentre Plus. That is a over the Parliament, that becomes an issue. recent one you will be familiar with. No doubt you More importantly in my view, as Mr Couling has have prepared for it. That means that there is not even made plain, there are so many connections in different one per Jobcentre Plus, per office. parts of our business that thinking I can hermetically Robert Devereux: Yes. seal the working aids from what is going on with Neil Couling: As we took the decision to move ESA disability or the world of parents splitting up and claimants over to the Work programme, we made trying to look after their children does not get me to a cultural aspect in the Department, where people are consequential changes to the number of people we looking at what we are managing to achieve as a have got working with that kind of caseload. Department. Last time I looked, all these people work Effectively, our work with that group shrank and is for me. I would quite like them to be thinking, “How now being done over in the Work programme. is this working for the claimant? How does this work for the taxpayer?” That is the only really interesting Q154 Chair: So the first three months they get question. There are days when, if you construct nothing. For the first three months they are on ESA agencies, you can get into a not good place. or whatever it is. The first three months they will get Let me be clear: this answer is in respect of my nothing because you haven’t got anybody. That is not Department as it stands now. I used to run the good for people who are on a disability benefit. The Department for Transport, and the Driving Standards quicker you can get it, the better, as always. Agency is a perfectly good agency. Neither the Neil Couling: Again, it depends which question you permanent secretary nor the Secretary of State spent a ask, as always. The disability employment advisers lot of time fretting about the DSA. It could be are not the totality of people we have got in jobcentres perfectly well run as an agency with a board and a working with ESA customers. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 22 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
Q155 Chair: No, they never were, but not having people’s behaviour to ensure that they are continually even one per jobcentre seems a bit harsh, to put it fulfilling obligations. mildly. There are 522, and 740 jobcentres. I hear that you have taken a decision. I am just making the Q164 Chair: I am just asking whether you think that observation that, knowing the sort of people who go is a sensible figure. on to ESA, if you don’t capture them early— Robert Devereux: It seems to me that if I wanted to Neil Couling: There are some very small jobcentres persuade you to be in work and checking what you that are probably non-viable in terms of their sizes are doing and supporting you, that is almost certainly but we keep them open because of their geographical done well face to face. That is why we have a location. In some of those it would not make distributed network. Whenever we seek to say to any economic sense to have a full-time disability MP that we are going to close the jobcentre in their employment adviser. area because we think we can do it remotely, the answer is always no, because actually it is a really Q156 Chair: Are there 220 like that? important part— Neil Couling: There are some very small jobcentres. Q165 Chair: Do you think it is a sensible figure, Q157 Chair: 220 out of 740? That is the number. If Mr Devereux? you have 522 DEAs and 740 jobcentres at the Robert Devereux: Yes. moment, that means 220 have not got a DEA. Robert Devereux: You are quoting a number I have Q166 Chair: Okay. We will check it against what not seen; is it full-time equivalent or the heads? banks spend. Robert Devereux: And why would you do that? What Q158 Chair: It is a PQ answer, which I do not have. is the nature of the banking business that is so similar It is 522 disability employment advisers. to the behavioural— Robert Devereux: Okay. If it was full-time equivalent there could be more heads. Q167 Chair: It is a similar one that does it face to face; that is what we thought. Q159 Chair: Are there? You should know that. Robert Devereux: I have a perfectly good bank Robert Devereux: I don’t recall that. account and go nowhere near the bank. But I am not trying to get work. Q160 Chair: Well, are there? Mr Couling should know; he is running it. Q168 Chair: You are trying to encourage 80% of Neil Couling: I do not know the answer. your people, for example, to apply for benefits online. Max Tse: Figure 1 has 560 FTEs doing employment Robert Devereux: Yes, to apply online. When it and support allowance and incapacity benefit. That is comes to eyeballing members of the public to make slightly different but it is probably for a different year. sure that I am confident they are doing the right thing Robert Devereux: 560 FTEs—full-time equivalents. and they feel that they can get the right support, that is not the same as applying online. By all means, let us take cost out of things to do with paper and Q161 Chair: But there are 740 jobcentres. telephony that are not needed for the claims process. Robert Devereux: That could well be a presence in But when it comes to behaviour change, all the most. It is definitely not the case that it is present in evidence shows that this labour market works better all of them. I have been to Malvern, where there are than many others around the world because we have three or four people, and I do not think there is one an active labour market, and we have good-quality there. I don’t think it is as pronounced as you are staff doing fortnightly job signing. Why is it that the implying by saying— British labour market performs well relative to others, and why do other people come and copy us? It is Q162 Chair: Okay, maybe you could do us a note because we do it well. on that. Robert Devereux: We could certainly do you a note Q169 Chair: We don’t know because you don’t on that. monitor it. Can I just ask one thing that really concerned me? On page 32, paragraph 2.24—I think Q163 Chair: Another question is about a quarter of this is the right reference—it says that one third of your expenditure going on offices at the moment. I claims are not pushed. A basic function in Jobcentre have no idea what it is in banks; we haven’t been able Plus is to be efficient about processing claims and to to check it. It seemed quite a lot to me. You are telling make sure you have the right info to go in. According me that some of the offices are supposed to be the to the Report, there is an extra cost to the Department front line, particularly as you are expecting more and of 450 full-time equivalents because of the more people to come to you online. That seems a lot inefficiencies in that bit of the system. That is a pretty of the money—I don’t know whether it is, but it is incredible figure if it is true. just a really interesting question. About 25% of your Neil Couling: I need to tell you the story of that expenditure currently is just on actually keeping the because you might draw the wrong conclusion. Ms offices going. Shaw can testify that the problem we sorted out in Robert Devereux: Okay, let’s think about the nature 2006 was exactly this one, and what to do. Essentially, of the business here. We are trying to interact with as part of the process, people in jobcentres receive the cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 23
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions evidence on a claim and verify what is in front of such a thing on the proper basis. If I decide that I do them. In 2006, the rule was that if you had not verified not want to give the business to Richard Bacon Inc. absolutely everything, you should hold on to the claim because I just don’t like him and I decide he is not fit and keep talking to the claimant until the verification and proper, that is not going to work very well. I need is done. What did that mean? Claim times doubled, to make sure that there is some sort of absolute test. and we had filing cabinets full of claims in offices and To my understanding, what the note is saying is that complaints from Members of Parliament and others there is not a way of doing that that will stand up in about the situation. As the then benefits director procurement law as a test. That is not the same as running the back-office operations, I turned that on its saying that we should not be really clear about what head and said that I would turn a blind eye to the fact it is that we are trying to find, and what sort of skill that some cases will come through to me as not sets and evidence we are trying to produce here. As I complete in terms of evidence, and I will process from understand it, you cannot simply introduce a “fit and the benefits centres because they have the experts who proper” test as part of the procurement. can interact with people and explain exactly what piece of information will do. Q172 Mr Bacon: If you are saying that there are What happened? As Ms Shaw will evidence, the claim indeed characteristics that you would look for, would times fell not just back to where the targets were, but you support the creation of an industry-wide code, by another third. Customer satisfaction with us which sets out what the characteristics are for being improved, and we pushed cases through. This issue is fit and proper, and using that to assess contractors? It about where you want your inefficiency. Do you want would surely help. it in the jobcentres or in the benefit centres? The best Robert Devereux: So long as it was consistent with place to put it is in the benefit centres because they the law for procurement, which I am not an expert in. can put the claims right, and can put the claims into payment. If you put it in the jobcentres and you put Q173 Chair: Whose law is this? pressure on them to try to get absolutely everything Robert Devereux: The law of the land. right, they will try their very best but it will slow the process up and put cost into the system because the Q174 Chair: Ours or European? claimant will ring up the benefit centre or come into Robert Devereux: It is ours. the jobcentre and say, “What is happening?” I made a pragmatic decision in 2006. I think it was the right one then and I think it is the right one now. The Q175 Chair: We cannot, in contract law, decide—it National Audit Office is right: it is 450 extra people. belies common sense a little bit. But that number would be a lot higher if I tried to do Robert Devereux: If it belies common sense, that may it by sticking it back into the jobcentres. be the effect. As to whether it is true, if I have written Chair: Okay. We are changing our tack a bit, and then it down here, my procurement people have clearly I have a couple of final questions. looked it up and checked what is possible.
Q170 Mr Bacon: I have just a couple of questions Q176 Chair: Sometimes we find that procurement relating to the previous Report on preventing fraud people go a little bit OTT on what they can and and contracted employment programmes. When the cannot do. Department gave its response, we had a Robert Devereux: I have brought it with me. It is a recommendation about whether there was a test for very thin sentence. It says, “A fit and proper whether someone is fit and proper. The Department’s contractor test is not a recognised statutory test in the answer was that there is no “fit and proper” contractor context of the procurement rules.” It goes on for three test; there is no recognised statutory test in the context more sentences to explain that even more. of the procurement rules. I have one or two quick questions about that. Plainly, even if there is not a Q177 Chair: Does it say we cannot put it in? Just statutory “fit and proper” test, that does not prevent think about it logically. Take it away from the law, you from providing transparent criteria about how you and think with a bit of common sense. It makes sense, assess contractors. Why are you not taking that particularly given the stir there has been around this forward? whole thing, to have some definition from you as to Robert Devereux: I think the answer we have given what level of poor practice, or intentional or you is that in order to be compliant with the public unintentional fraud, you will tolerate as the purchaser procurement rules, we have to stick to whatever they of contracts in the Work programme. It would make say you can do. One of the things they do not invite sense to have that, and it would also make sense for you to do is go around deciding whether somebody is that to be transparent. It surprises me that that rather fit and proper. common-sense approach is not allowed in the law. Robert Devereux: It may be because it is more Q171 Mr Bacon: But if it should turn out that they difficult to establish the test you have just loosely are not fit and proper— described as something that can apply in practice. Robert Devereux: Sorry, I hadn’t finished the sentence. What we must do is make sure that we make Q178 Chair: Why? the best possible decisions, consistent with the law, Robert Devereux: Because your view of what past about how to assess people. One thing—just to make fraudulent practice is, or of past service standards not sure we are clear here—is how you would establish being appropriate, may not be somebody else’s. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 24 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
Q179 Chair: No, it may not be, but that does not Q184 Mr Bacon: Would that be the issue if you were stop the Department and the Government having a to have a definition? You say in your response that view, and making that transparent, so that perhaps we there is no definition of systemic fraud, and that each round this table can understand at what level you will case needs to be considered on its merits. Are you start feeling it is inappropriate. saying the same about that? Were you to have a Robert Devereux: We have made it perfectly clear, on definition, would people be able to find a way of doing what must be the fourth time we have been round this things that were by definition not systemic fraud? buoy, that we are not in any way permitting anybody Robert Devereux: There is a risk in codifying things to commit fraud on our contracts. We chase after it. that it makes them sound simple. “Surely, Mr Devereux, you must have a definition of fraud.” Q180 Chair: In your letter to me, you talk about it Actually, it is not so obvious that I should. Surely we being only a small amount, so you are taking a view should both— that a small amount of fraud and mismanagement is acceptable. I want to know at what level—we had this Q185 Mr Bacon: Are you saying the same about a in a hearing last Thursday; it was the same thing—it definition of systemic fraud? becomes unacceptable. Is it £50,000? Is it £5 million? Robert Devereux: I think it is possible to define Is it £50 million? £500,000? I do not know. What is systemic fraud without it becoming a trigger point. I the level at which you will say to me, “Actually, this am not prepared to say that systemic fraud is x%, and is not acceptable”? if it is less than x% it is not systemic, because I would Robert Devereux: As a condition of bidding for any be straight back into the problem. Please do not get further Government contract? The only point of me wrong. If you have a great way of getting through having it in these tests would be to remove you from this, I would love to know, but I do not think the a competition. answer is, “Surely, Mr Devereux, you must have a definition,” because I suspect all that will do is Q181 Chair: Or stop an existing contract. What condone an acceptable level, which I do not condone. level? What level becomes unacceptable for HM Government? Q186 Mr Bacon: One of the other recommendations Robert Devereux: To stop an existing contract, it we made, because we concluded that there was no would be a matter of looking at the level of fraud. I obvious route through which clients, contractors, am afraid that that would be a matter of judgment, employees, MPs or members of the public could raise and I am not going to give you a simple answer that issues of concern relating to fraud or poor service, says, “If it is less than that, I am tolerating it.” My was: “The Department should publicise its basic attitude is that I am not tolerating this, but I do arrangements to enable whistleblowers to make not want to set a level and say, “So long as it’s less complaints and capture and analyse information about than 5% I will probably let you have the contract,” complaints made about providers.” What new work because what they have done may actually be quite have you done to publicise whistleblowing and egregious. complaints procedures? Robert Devereux: I may have to come back on that, Q182 Chair: How bad do they have to be before you because I do not know the answer to that question. think you have to intervene? I want to have some understanding of it. I do not think that is unreasonable. Q187 Mr Bacon: Is it likely that the answer is none? You are responsible for dispensing public money. Robert Devereux: The answer we gave you was that Through all this, we have discovered some fraud. You we believed we had already made all employment think it is trivial; at what level does it cease to be rights and service framework contractors provide that. trivial? Robert Devereux: I am afraid I cannot answer that Q188 Mr Bacon: Your response basically restates question. All I can do is deal with the allegations you your existing procedures, does it not? put in front of me. We have looked at those. They do Robert Devereux: Yes, it does. not seem to me to be material, in that “This contract must be taken off that person.” That must be the Q189 Mr Bacon: What I really want to know is judgment we are reaching; otherwise we would have whether, since we recommended you publicise your taken it off them. arrangements to enable whistleblowers to make complaints, any new work had been done on Q183 Chair: It is not unreasonable to say to you that publicising whistleblowing complaints procedures. you have got to be rather more transparent about the Robert Devereux: I suspect the answer is no, but I level at which they cease to be trivial. will check for you. Robert Devereux: I worry that the risk in doing so is that it condones a level of fraud. You are basically Q190 Chair: One very final question. There was a asking me to say, “Beyond this level, I will take the report in The Guardian last week on universal credit. contract off you; below that, it is okay.” Surely it Have you suspended the contract with Accenture? should depend on the circumstances and the nature of Robert Devereux: No. the contract. I am not trying to be clever, but I worry that a simple black-and-white rule will turn out to Q191 Mr Bacon: Is testing starting next month? I have something black in it, which you do not want have been asking you this question for about 18 any more than I do. months. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 25
11 March 2013 Department for Work and Pensions
Robert Devereux: Testing is already under way. Q196 Chair: Have you changed your relationship? Robert Devereux: No. Q192 Mr Bacon: It has started already. It started early, did it? Q197 Mr Bacon: Has the scope changed? Robert Devereux: Testing takes a long time. Robert Devereux: The pathfinder is still the pathfinder, and we are still working on the plans for Q193 Mr Bacon: Yes, but wasn’t it originally what will be rolled out, because that is what we are scheduled to start in April 2013 and go on for six doing now. months? Robert Devereux: You may be distinguishing between Q198 Mr Bacon: Has the scope of what will be what is necessary for what we described as the start rolled out changed? of a national roll-out from October, and the start of Robert Devereux: No. Universal credit is a system the pathfinders. What I have just answered is that in that Parliament has already legislated for, and we order for the pathfinder to start, there has to be some intend to implement it as legislated. IT present. That is already in testing now. Q199 Mr Bacon: Has the timetable for what will be Q194 Mr Bacon: So it is all going swimmingly, is it? rolled out changed? Robert Devereux: It is all going swimmingly. It is a Robert Devereux: No. If we had made changes to hard project. what we are going to do, we would have come back and told you. Q195 Chair: Have you in any way changed your Chair: Thank you. relationship with Accenture on universal credit? Robert Devereux: No. Accenture, HP and IBM are working with us to complete the pathfinder and take universal credit—
Written evidence from Department for Work and Pensions
During the evidence session on 11 March 2013 I promised to write to you with further details on some of the issues we discussed. I have also taken the opportunity to clarify a couple of points that Neil Couling and I made during the session.
Q35—Off flows and Disallowance
During our evidence, we explained that off-flows include cases where an existing claim is disallowed through not meeting a condition of entitlement (for example, by not being available for work). In contrast a sanction does not count as an off-flow: it is a temporary measure designed to secure compliance with the conditions for claiming JSA.
The Committee will want to note that aspects of policy changed in 2010, with many areas of non-compliance with JSA conditionality moving from a disallowance to a sanction eg for failing to attend an interview. This will have had the effect of reducing measured off-flow rates from 2010–11 onwards, and will also reduce the level of rapid reclaims. This is illustrated in the accompanying charts (disallowance and sanctions), which show both the level of referrals to Decision Makers, and the resulting number of disallowances and sanctions by the Decision Makers.
Q44/45—Off flows from JSA following a claimant move
I would like to extend the evidence we gave as the question can be interpreted two ways, and we addressed only one.
If a claimant goes into Hackney Jobcentre and tells the office that they wish to close down their claim to JSA, this will count as an off-flow from benefit.
If they tell the office that they wish to close their claim to JSA because they are moving to Redcar, the office will advise them to go to the Redcar office before their next signing day to make a claim as they have moved to the area. Their claim in Hackney will not be closed (and there will be no off-flow), but will instead be transferred to Redcar. This ensures continuity of benefit for the claimant and is better customer service.
As a result, where claimants explain their plans, performance is not artificially improved by people being “more” pro-active in their jobsearch and moving to other labour market areas where they feel they have a better chance of finding work. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 26 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
Q52 & Q61 & 65—Rapid reclaim levels and analysis We agreed to provider further information about the extent to which claimants cycle onto and off from JSA. Benefit recycling indicators are one part of a variety of indicators available to jobcentre managers to understand their performance and inform their resource allocation. For the period April to October 2012, 32% of claims to JSA were from people reclaiming within three months of a previous claim ending, 41% within six months and 58% within two years of a previous claim ending. The accompanying table (reclaims) looks at this a different way: around 20% of new claimants have had three or more claims in the previous two years; and around 40% of new claimants have had no claim in the previous two years. A more detailed analysis of the claimant make up of the rapid reclaim group is not readily available. Drivers of these indicators include the extent of shorter term employment within the labour market, seasonal work, and action to close claims where claimants consistently fail to fulfil their obligations to be available for or actively seek work.
Q70—Analysis of JSA intervention regime/benefit Comparisons over time of the proportion of inflows that remain on JSA after 12 months need to be done with caution because of recent changes in policy: we offered to explain this in more detail. Before the recession, around 95% of new JSA claimants left within 12 months. However, this figure was affected by the operation of the New Deal which meant that young people were required to move off benefit— usually onto a training allowance—just before the 12 month point. This no longer happens, as people joining the Work Programme continue to receive JSA, and continue to be included in the claimant count, until they find a regular job. All else being equal this will make 12 month off-flow rates lower now than in the past; but without any real change to labour market outcomes. Looking at the proportion leaving within the first nine months of a new claim, a period less affected by this policy change, the report (Figure 11) shows the 2011–12 off-flow rate only slightly below 2010–11. This in turn reflects the policy choice to make more people claim benefits that require them to take steps to find work (for example lone parents with younger children). There is independent evidence of the impact such “activation” policies have played in supporting employment: The OECD states that “Activation Strategies help ensure that jobseekers have a better chance of finding employment. Key features of such strategies are to enforce work-availability and mutual obligation requirements, meaning that benefit recipients are expected to engage in active job search and improve their employability, in exchange for receiving efficient employment services and benefit payment.”1 Also in their “Employment Outlook 2011” they say “The progressive improvement of activation policies … achieved by a number of countries during the past two decades helped to dampen the increase in unemployment during the crisis (OECD, 2009a and 2009c). The Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom are examples of such countries.”2 The IFS also support the view that active labour market polices have depressed unemployment since the recession. “Changes to the benefits system have almost certainly been important. Work conditionality regimes are much tougher and more extensive than in the 1980s and 1990s, and it is much harder to get on, and stay on, incapacity benefits.”3 I have provided an updated version of Figure 9 in the report showing the latest off-flow performance (updated off flow data).
Q74/94—Analysis of sanctions applied We offered to set out what we know about the incidence of sanctions on different types of claimants. Our research on sanctions dates from 2006.4 In terms of education and disability profiles, there were very few differences between sanctioned and non- sanctioned customers, indicating that those who are sanctioned are not disproportionately disadvantaged compared with those who are not sanctioned. Sanctioned customers were no more or less likely to have qualifications, literacy or numeracy difficulties than their non-sanctioned counterparts. They were slightly more likely, but not statistically significantly different, to have learning difficulties. 1 http://www.oecd.org/els/emp/activelabourmarketpoliciesandactivationstrategies.htm 2 OECD Employment Outlook 2011 3 IFS Green Budget: February 2013 p74 4 A review of the JSA sanctions regime: Mark Peters and Lucy Joyce: DWP Research Report 313, p18 http://research.dwp.gov.uk/ asd/asd5/rports2005–2006/rrep313.pdf cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 27
The Department is currently drawing up an evaluation plan for the new sanctions regime introduced in October 2012. We are in contact with SSAC and will examine impacts on disadvantaged groups as part of the evaluation.
Q98/99—Further analysis of customer service results Unfortunately it is not possible to provide the Committee with an analysis of the customer service results comparing areas with a high unemployment rate against those with a low unemployment rate: the sample size for the survey is too small for such analysis. The table attached (customer satisfaction) shows available breakdowns of the overall satisfaction level recorded in the NAO report, by: — Jobcentre Plus Group. — Type of benefit claimed. — Gender. — Age of claimant. — Type of contact with Jobcentre Plus.
Q104–Q106—Analysis of off-flows by District We discussed the variation across districts in the ratio of claimants to advisors (Fig 8 in the NAO report), and we offered to provide further information. Starting with the allocation of funding, our resource model uses forecast on-flow and stock volumes as the basis for allocations and therefore delivers a broadly equivalent level of resource to similar districts. District Managers then decide their resource deployment to optimise performance for their local labour market— choosing between JSA and non-JSA resource and also between advisor, advisor support and non-advisor roles. The decisions made by District Managers also affect how advisors and advisor support work together. In some Jobcentres managers choose to deploy advisor support for the majority of fortnightly signing, focusing advisors on more in-depth interaction with claimants. In other Jobcentres, often the smaller ones, it makes sense for advisors to undertake more of the fortnightly signing work to provide a consistent relationship with the claimant. The latter would result in an apparently higher ratio of advisors to claimants, but this metrics ignores the cost/output of admin support. As an example, Birmingham and Solihull District allocates 30% of its resource to advisors, while Wessex allocates 39%: so it is not surprising that Wessex than have a lower claimant to advisor ratio, as shown in Fig 8; but Birmingham’s greater use of admin support means that advisors have more time for in-depth interviews with claimants. Taking the facts of the resource allocation model together with the choices then available to District Managers, the Department does not believe the metric in Fig 8 is especially informative: a much better comparison is the off-flow rates for similar labour markets. Birmingham & Solihull and Wessex are not comparator districts due to differences in the claimant to vacancy ratio, working age client group characteristics and deprivation scores.
Q161–162—Deployment of Disability Employment Advisor (DEA) Resource To help explain the use of DEAs, I have attached details from a sample of three Districts (DEA by Site)of how resource was deployed in 2011–12. This sample shows how 41.2 FTE DEAs were used across 67 sites. The allocation of resource rests on local managers’ knowledge of their area. Many DEAs are peripatetic, so small allocations will have been delivered by an advisor covering more than one site, and those sites shown with 0.0 FTE will in fact be covered by the DEAs based at larger sites with the resource being shown solely against the larger site. In addition to the DEA resource, in 2011–12 there were also 233 FTE delivering Access to Work. These advisors work with people with health issues and employers, either to help these people remain in work or to enter work through workplace adaptations etc.
Q186–189—Publicising “whistleblowing” policy within Contracted Employment Programmes The Treasury Minute explains what the Department has already done on whistleblowing and complaints. We are though exploring how the intelligence on complaints currently discussed at local, contract level can be pulled together to give a clearer picture of patterns and trends. 17 April 2013 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 28 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
Referrals to a Decision Maker under JSA Conditionality Doubt - Sanction or Disallowance 180 12% Referral for Sanction Referral for Disallowance % of JSA Caseload 160 10% 140
120 8%
100 6% 80 (Thousands) 60 4%
40 2% 20
0 0% Oct09 Dec09Feb10 Apr10 Jun10 Aug10Oct10 Dec10Feb11 Apr11 Jun11 Aug11 Oct11 Dec11 Feb12
Decisions Made - JSA Conditionality Sanction or Disallowance Applied 180 12% Sanction Applied Disallowance Applied % of JSA Caseload 160 10% 140
120 8%
100 6% 80 (Thousands) 60 4%
40 2% 20
0 0% Oct09 Dec09 Feb10 Apr10 Jun10 Aug10 Oct10 Dec10 Feb11 Apr11 Jun11 Aug11 Oct11 Dec11 Feb12 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 29
(Reclaims) Time since last claim (JSA)
0-3 months 3-6 months No previous JSA claim
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0% May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012
Claims in previous two years (JSA)
None More than 3
50%
45% 40%
35% 30%
25% 20% 15% 10% 5%
0% May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 30 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
JSA Off Flow Rates
26 weeks off flow rate 13 week off flow rate 52 week off flow rate 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Jul-10 Jul-11 Jul-12 Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Mar-10 Mar-11 Mar-12 Nov-09 Nov-10 Nov-11 Nov-12 Sep-10 Sep-11 Sep-12 May-10 May-11 May-12
(CUSTOMER SATISFACTION) SURVEY 2011—ADDITIONAL AVAILABLE ANALYSIS Overall Customer Satisfaction: 88% Satisfaction by: Contact Type % Jobcentre Plus Group % New Claims 88% Central England 89% Eligibility check 68% North East England 88% Reported problem 76% North West England 90% Review meeting 93% London & the Home Counties 87% Change of circumstances 91% Scotland 90% Job discussion 88% Southern England 88% Wales 88%
Satisfaction by: Results below group level are not available. Age & Gender % Male 84% Female 91% Benefit Type % Jobseekers’ Allowance 87% 16–24 92% Income Support 93% 25–49 88% Incapacity Benefit 88% 50+ 86% Employment & Support Allowance 82% cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 31 Average Total District JSA Adviser ** Flow Adviser Caseload JSA Stock & PERFORMANCE AND RESOURCE INFORMATION FOR JOBCENTRE PLUS DISTRICTS 2011–12 Black CountryDerbyshireEast AngliaLeicestershire and NorthamptonshireLincolnshire, Nottinghamshire and RutlandMerciaStaffordshire and ShropshireEssexKentNorth LondonSouth LondonWest LondonNorth East Yorkshire andNorthumberland, the Tyne Humber 190 and WearSouth Yorkshire 189West YorkshireGreater Manchester Central andGreater Cheshire Manchester 183 East andMerseyside West 154 979 181 819 171Glasgow, Lanarkshire and EastNorth Dunbartonshire of ScotlandWest of Scotland 172 949 830 30% 182 612 33% 1,147 177 148 158 155 147,944 158 204 136 133,383 34% 804 32% 152 30% 944 31% 172 202 1,101 1,136 137,202 188 1,591 903 116,032 1,223 1,232 816 159,472 87,910 31% 1,150 36% 1,116 32% 155 928 34% 1,467 121,452 34% 32% 155 31% 35% 152,421 32% 175 153,067 34% 151,877 34% 235,384 126,050 1,380 176,164 31% 173,350 33% 123,871 598 156,600 172,428 746 138,057 233,574 33% 32% 32% 181,078 83,004 103,215 Central England Birmingham and SolihullLondon & the HomeCounties Bedfordshire and HertfordshireNorth East England East London Durham and Tees ValleyNorth West England 213 Cumbria andScotland Lancashire 169 1,128 East and South East Scotland 792 30% 196 158 162,268 31% 160 1,004 1,404 118,015 1,170 179 29% 34% 133,786 190,079 30% 954 157,839 31% 140,976 Group District (from report) Resource Proportion (actuals) cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 32 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Average Total District JSA Adviser ** Flow Adviser Caseload JSA Stock & Gloucestershire and West OfHampshire England and Isle ofSurrey Wight and SussexThames ValleyWessexSouth East WalesSouth West Wales 159 145 759 164 168 844 184 118 163 34% 986 863 31% 115,920 764 784 732 30% 121,012 30% 145,697 31% 38% 29% 130,647 107,758 114,053 96,617 Southern England Devon and CornwallWales North and Mid Wales 164 733 164 29% 428 113,039 30% 61,055 Group District (from report) Resource Proportion (actuals) Note ** JSA Advice JSA NJI Advice JSA Work Programme Referral16/17 Advice Year Old SpecialistAdvisory Advice Team Manager Community Outreach Disability Employment Advice cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence Ev 33 Ormskirk JC PlusPreston JC PlusSkelmersdale JC Plus 0.0 0.8 1.5 Carmarthen JC PlusGorseinon JC PlusHaverfordwest JC PlusNeath JC PlusPontypridd JC PlusBridgend JC PlusLlanelli JC PlusSwansea JC Plus 0.6 0.9 0.7 Burnley JC Plus Colne JC Clitheroe Plus JC 1.0 Plus 1.0 1.1 Nelson JC Plus Darwen 1.1 JC Plus 1.7 Rawtenstall JC Plus Chorley JC Plus Leyland JC Plus 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.9 0.6 DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT ADVISER BY SITE 2011–12 (SAMPLE OF THREE DISTRICTS FULL TIME EQUIVALENT) Kent District(16 sites)Whitstable JC PlusHerne Bay JC PlusSheerness JC PlusDover JC PlusTonbridge JC PlusGravesend JC PlusDartford JC PlusTunbridge Wells JC PlusRamsgate JC PlusCanterbury JC PlusFolkestone JC PlusSittingbourne JC Plus 0.1Margate JC Plus 12.3Ashford 0.1 JC PlusMaidstone Milford 0.2 JC South Haven Plus West JC Wales Plus DistrictChatham (24 JC sites) Pembroke Plus Dock JC 0.5 Plus Mountain 0.5 Ash 0.6 JC 0.7 Plus Treorchy JC 0.6 Cardigan Plus JC Morriston Plus Aberdare JC JC Plus Plus 0.7 0.8 Tonypandy JC Plus 0.8 0.9 Aberystwyth JC Plus Port Talbot JC Plus Pyle Porthcawl JC JC Plus Plus 0.9 0.0 1.0 1.8 0.0 Maesteg JC 2.3 Plus Barrow Cumbria 0.1 JC Ammanford & Plus Llantrisant JC Lancashire Carlisle JC Plus JC Plus Plus Porth JC Cleator 13.0 Plus Moor JC Plus 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 (27 sites) 0.4 Maryport JC Kendal Plus Penrith JC 0.4 JC Plus Workington Plus JC Plus Whitehaven 0.4 JC Plus Blackpool North 0.4 JC Plus Blackpool South JC Plus 0.4 Lancaster JC Plus 0.5 0.4 0.6 Fleetwood JC Plus 0.8 St Morecambe 0.1 Annes 1.1 JC JC Accrington Plus Plus JC Plus 0.6 Blackburn JC Plus 0.0 0.6 2.2 0.8 15.9 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.5 1.5 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [14-06-2013 10:06] Job: 028720 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/028720/028720_w002_Mark_Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts.xml
Ev 34 Committee of Public Accounts: Evidence
Letter from the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee to Robert Devereux, Permanent Secretary to the Department of Work and Pensions You will recall that on 11 March 2013, during the Committee evidence session on Responding to changes in Job Centres, you were questioned by Fiona Mactaggart MP about whether staff at Job Centres had been given targets to enforce sanctions in connection with Job Seeker Allowance Claimants. Both you and Neil Couling were insistent that no targets are in place. I enclose the relevant exchange with this letter. I am sure that you are aware of recent media reports stating that sanctions have in fact been in operation at a number of Job centres across the country. In particular, on 26 March, The Guardian reported the existence of an email from Walthamstow Job Centre where an official referred to a “league table” of benefit sanctions in which Walthamstow Job centre was ranked 95th out of 109. This and other reports on this matter are naturally of concern to both me and the Committee and I would be grateful if you could clarify whether or not there is any basis to these media reports and specifically whether you are able to re-assure us that there are no targets for sanctions in operation at Job Centres. 3 April 2013
Letter from Robert Devereux, Permanent Secretary to the Department of Work and Pensions to the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee Thank you for your letter of 3 April 2013. I am happy to reassure you that the evidence that Neil Couling and I gave to the Committee on 11 March is correct. No targets have been set for Jobcentre Plus to sanction claimants. During our evidence Neil and I sought to explain that: — JSA is a conditional benefit, and the sanctions regime exists to respond to failure on a claimant’s part to meet the conditions; — A sanction is decided by an independent decision maker, not a Jobcentre advisor, but the advisor initially raises a concern (backed by evidence), that a claimant may not have fulfilled their conditions for receiving benefit; — It can, of course, be challenging for an advisor to take these steps, and subsequently explain them to a claimant: while the great majority of advisors manage to do so when the circumstances warrant it, some may not; others may, at the other extreme, be referring inappropriate cases for sanction; — One way to pick up either of these potential shortfalls in performance is for managers to look at the rates at which potential sanctions are referred to decision makers, and the extent to which the decision makers are persuaded by the evidence provided; — But even when a rate looks abnormally low (or high) the management action is then to observe the work of that advisor, to see if the management information simply reflects a more/less compliant caseload, or the need for further training to ensure that advisors are properly implementing the JSA regime. So, no targets exist. But we use information about sanctions to make sure Jobcentre staff are implementing JSA properly. 17 April 2013
PEFC/16-33-622 Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Office Limited 06/2013 028720 19585