Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Decision making and appeals  →  Thread

KPI’s for mandatory reconsideration

‹ First  < 2 3 4

 

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and Advice Resources, Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 921

Joined: 7 January 2016

They said The key measures which are used by the Department for Work and Pensions to monitor Mandatory Reconsideration (MR) performance are:
a) 90% to be cleared within target.
b) 80% of the original decisions are to be upheld.

Note, key measures used to monitor MR performance are 80% of the original decisions are to be upheld. That’s exactly what they say.

FoI enquirer asks (2) what precisely does the key measure that “80% of the original decisions are to be upheld” mean? Does it mean that staff under taking mandatory reconsiderations should uphold 80% of original decisions? Or does it mean that staff undertaking original primary decisions should aim to have their decisions upheld 80% of the time through the mandatory reconsideration process?

DWP Response is that (2) The 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.

Well hang on a minute, as noted above, DWP have explicitly stated in their first response that these are key measures to monitor MR performance - so how does that last sentence make any sense whatsover? Apparently, in the course of a couple of weeks, the 80% of original decisions upheld measure of MR performance has transmogrified into an internal indicator that has nothing to do with MR performance, even though they said that it was originally.

This is blatant obfuscation in my opinion - can they show us details of how they monitor this 80% internal indicator separately then? Exactly what procedures are there to monitor this and how, in fact, do they relate to the inclusion of the 80% target of original decisions being upheld to monitor MR performance? How does relating the 80% indicator of original decisions being correct to MR performance monitor the thousands of other decisions they make that aren’t subject to MR? It’s utter nonsense and back filling in my opinion.

     
stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 291

Joined: 21 March 2016

Penny Mordaunt responded to written questions on KPIs this week…

The department does not have a Mandatory Reconsideration target for upholding original decisions. The 80 per cent figure, which was used in the answer to a recent Freedom of Information request, is used to assess the accuracy of benefit decisions. In order to ensure we have consistently accurate decisions we track and monitor Mandatory Reconsiderations to assess the quality of our initial decision making and to help understand and improve our processes.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2017-06-27/1470/

and in response to a separate question on whether the DWP took legal advice…

Further to my reply [quoted above], the department does not have a Mandatory Reconsideration target for upholding original decisions. The 80 per cent figure is used to track and monitor Mandatory Reconsiderations to assess the quality of our initial decision making and to help understand and improve our processes. Therefore there was not a requirement to obtain legal advice.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2017-07-03/2401

 

     
Mr Finch
forum member

Benefits Adviser, Isle of Wight CAB

Send message

Total Posts: 315

Joined: 4 March 2011

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK - 06 July 2017 02:34 PM

Note, key measures used to monitor MR performance are 80% of the original decisions are to be upheld. That’s exactly what they say.

“It is a general principle of law that the earliest statement…”

     
Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and Advice Resources, Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 921

Joined: 7 January 2016

PLP received response to their request, see attached.

As I understand things, they’re currently working up a follow-up response to this.

     

File Attachments

stuart
Administrator

rightsnet editor

Send message

Total Posts: 291

Joined: 21 March 2016

Disability News Service reports views of a DWP helpline worker that decision makers have targets for ESA disallowances.

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dwp-whistleblower-from-esa-helpline-exposes-obscene-system/

     
past caring
forum member

Welfare Rights Adviser Southwark Law Centre Peckham

Send message

Total Posts: 596

Joined: 25 February 2014

Part of the response to the PLP request (specifically, the request for the number of appeals received following the MR decision being upheld) the DWP has responded as follows;

“3And also:

(1) The Department is unable to provide data on the number of claimants who have
lodged an appeal following an upheld mandatory reconsideration (MR) decision,
as not all appeals received are as a result of a MR being upheld.
We can however supply the number of appeals received as a result of MRs
decided and for April 2016 to March 2017 the DWP total was 34%.”

(my emphasis)

Maybe I’m being a bit dim or something (entirely possible) but how does one appeal without the MR having been upheld in the first place?

 

     
HB Anorak
forum member

benefits consultant/trainer, hbanorak.co.uk, east london

Send message

Total Posts: 1294

Joined: 12 March 2013

Where the decision is revised disadvantageously, or not fully advantageously presumably?

“Upheld” is a misleading term, it conveys to me a message that the claimant’s application has succeeded but it seems to mean “original decision confirmed and not revised in either direction”.

     
Oldestrocker
forum member

Principal, Forensic Accountants, Canterbury, Kent

Send message

Total Posts: 64

Joined: 26 September 2011

past caring - 08 September 2017 12:38 PM

Part of the response to the PLP request (specifically, the request for the number of appeals received following the MR decision being upheld) the DWP has responded as follows;

“3And also:

(1) The Department is unable to provide data on the number of claimants who have
lodged an appeal following an upheld mandatory reconsideration (MR) decision,
as not all appeals received are as a result of a MR being upheld.
We can however supply the number of appeals received as a result of MRs
decided and for April 2016 to March 2017 the DWP total was 34%.”

 

I do love the way that they play on words.

However I do have to admit that there is a good percentage of claimants that accept the DWP’s initial decision, whether it is the right one or not, because they cannot face further rejection at MR stage.
And there are many that go as far as an MR only to find that nothing is changed and refuse to go to a Tribunal hearing once again for the same reason.
I would love to know how many claimants there are where the original decision is clearly wrong but do not seek a review of that decision either by way of a MR or Tribunal hearing?

I find that the three main reasons given for this inaction is (a) the stress involved (b) the fear of having to argue their claim in a court setting and (c) not being able to obtain quality advice and assistance.