Personal Independence Payments and Employments Support Allowance

Download (PDF 576.78 KB)

Summary of report content

During the second half of 2017, Healthwatch Brighton and Hove collated evidence from a number of local organisations to report on their experiences of supporting people through Personal Independence Payments (PIP) and Employment Support Allowance (ESA) assessment interviews. The report also contains a number of individual case studies and supporting organisational data and highlights the general issues and themes that emerged from this research.

Healthwatch approached four individuals and 29 local organisations that provide support to individuals going through these assessments. Some organisations existed as part of a wider partnership and in some cases a joint or shared response was issued; in other cases only some organisations within these partnerships responded to our request for information. Of the four individuals asked if they would be happy to speak directly to us, one individual agreed to do so.

The report addresses concerns around the assessors questioning styles, interpersonal skills, the level of specialist knowledge in the conditions to be assessed as well as the assessors approach to advocates. Concerns around the adequacy of current face-to-face assessments, cancellations of assessments and the increasing cost to applicants having to provide supporting medical evidence. The accessibility of the assessment centres and the failure to offer home visits is discussed as are the accuracy and quality of the PIP and ESA reports written after the face-to-face assessments. The refusal bias of assessment providers, and the number of these subsequently overturned on appeal is also noted.

Healthwatch Brighton and Hove believe that a number of the above concerns could be addressed through the provision of better, ongoing, and more comprehensive training of assessors. In this regard, a number of local organisations expressly stated that they would be happy to help deliver some focussed training to the assessment providers. Training should provide a good knowledge of so-called ‘hidden’ or non-physical conditions and their impacts; as well as training in specialist areas such as: mental health conditions; suicide awareness; visual impairment; complex needs, as well as LGBTQ affirmative practice. Improved training could also help to improve the quality and content of reports.

Healthwatch encouraged the assessment providers to undertake immediate reviews in the following areas and publish any outcomes:

- how requests for home visits are actioned. It is of paramount importance that reasonable adjustments are always made were these are justified.

- how cases are reviewed at Mandatory Reconsideration. It is important that a separate, review is undertaken by a different assessor and that the outcome clearly demonstrates how any additional evidence has been considered.

As there was no response from either of the assessment provider organisations, the report has been published and provided to the Brighton and Hove Health and Wellbeing Board without provider input.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Local Healthwatch
Healthwatch Brighton And Hove
Publication date
Date evidence capture began
Date evidence capture finished
Type of report
Report
Key themes
Access to services
Administration (records, letters, results)
Booking appointments
Building, Decor and Facilities, including health and safety
Cancellation
Communication with patients; treatment explanation; verbal advice
Complaints
Public consultation and engagement
Health inequality
Prevention of diseases, including vaccination, screening and public hygiene
Lifestyle and wellbeing; wider determinants of health
Written information, guidance and publicity
Accessibility and reasonable adjustments
Other
Caring, kindness, respect and dignity
Staffing - levels and training
Service organisation, delivery, change and closure

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken in partnership with another organisation?
No
Name(s) of the partner organisation(s)
None
Primary research method used
General feedback
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced?
N/A

Details of health and care services included in the report

Name of service provider
ATOS; Maximus

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views
30
Age group
All
Gender
All
Types of disabilities
Long term condition
Does this report feature carers?
Yes
Seldom heard groups
People on low incomes
Did you find this attached report useful?
0
No votes have been submitted yet.