Forum Home → Discussion → Decision making and appeals → Thread
KPI’s for mandatory reconsideration
I have had one - but that was where the health care professional had actually given enough points for an enhanced award and the decision maker had taken them away…
I have had one - but that was where the health care professional had actually given enough points for an enhanced award and the decision maker had taken them away…
i had one where they just added up the points wrong
i also enjoyed the previous dwp quote which said in essence “just because the decision got overturned at appeal that doesnt mean the decision was wrong”....sort of does.
I would be interested to know if there is a KPI for appeal overturn rates and if it’s being hit.
I have had one - but that was where the health care professional had actually given enough points for an enhanced award and the decision maker had taken them away…
no sorry Daphne, the correctnesss of the original decision is enough to show you’re wrong…...
Public Law Project have written to DWP seeking clarification on this http:// http://www.publiclawproject.org.uk/resources/257/plp-letter-to-secretary-of-state-for-work-and-pensions
Another blog post on this topic by Henry Brooke: https://sirhenrybrooke.me/2017/05/17/mandatory-reconsiderations-2-muddled-language/
The original enquirer on the FOI request has asked for further information - https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/kpis_for_reconsiderations_and_di_2#outgoing-654010
PIP MR’s weren’t included in the stats for the original FOI request.
79 per cent of reassessed DLA mandatory reconsiderations result in no change to PIP award
New DWP statistics also show that 84 per cent of PIP new claims reconsiderations result in no change to the award
Well there’s a coincidence eh?
<i>79 per cent of reassessed DLA mandatory reconsiderations result in no change to PIP award
well no - given that PIP is a wholly different benefit to DLA…...
Public Law Project have written to DWP seeking clarification on this http:// http://www.publiclawproject.org.uk/resources/257/plp-letter-to-secretary-of-state-for-work-and-pensions
The Public Law Project has written to the new Secretary of State for Work and Pensions David Gauke requesting a response to its letter about KPI issues raised with his predecessor.
http://www.publiclawproject.org.uk/data/files/Documents/170616_David_Gauke_MP.pdf
There has been a response to the FOI asking for further clarification -
he 80% of original decisions upheld measure is an internal one used as an indicator of the quality of the original decision made by the department against the expectation that we will get the decision right at the earliest part of the process. We use the information, including feedback on cases overturned, to inform our learning requirements for
the teams making the original decision. There is no target or standard for staff undertaking mandatory reconsiderations relating to how many of these are upheld.
[ Edited: 30 Jun 2017 at 11:33 am by Daphne ]
So they are using the fact that a decision was upheld at MR stage as an ‘indicator of the quality of the original decision’ and that they ‘[got] the decision right at the earliest part of the process’! Have they ever read an MR notice?
Using a process (MR) that results in poor quality decision making as a measure of the quality of original decisions!
Well yes but where does the line get drawn? One could argue that the quality of MRs could be measure against the outcome of subsequent appeals but a proportion of them are also appealed and over-turned in a wide variety of ways. Ultimately nothing is a perfect measure. What objective criteria would you use?