SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Funeral Payments
(a) Whilst
we accept that there have been many changes to the Benefit system
since 1997 which have taken priority, we believe that reform of
Funeral Payments is long overdue and recommend that the Government
increases the amount available to claimants for Funeral Payments
to a more realistic total, reflecting the current charges for
a funeral and that steps should be taken to ensure that the amount
is reviewed annually to reflect increases in funeral costs. (Paragraph
12)
(b) We
recommend that there should be greater flexibility in the rules
governing eligibility for funeral payments, so that payments can
be, for example, made to the parent of a deceased child, or to
a close relative or close friend if it is reasonable to do so.
The question of reasonableness should be decided at the discretion
of the decision-maker, subject to guidance (as opposed to inflexible
rules laid down in regulations as now); and with a right of appeal
to a social security appeal tribunal on the exercise of that discretion.
(Paragraph 13)
(c) In
the case of applications from people who wish to bury the remains
of the deceased overseas, we recommend that funeral payments (subject
to the usual maxima applied to other funerals for which a Funeral
Payment is available) should be allowed in respect of funeral
costs (or equivalent religious observance) which are incurred
in the UK, prior to transportation overseas. (Paragraph 14)
Winter Fuel Payments
(d) If
the arrangements for Winter Fuel Payments are changed in the future
to a more targeted benefit we will expect the fuel poor in other
groups to be included. The element of benefits which is intended
to cover fuel costs, to which the Minister referred in her evidence
to the Committee, should keep pace with any increase in the cost
of heating generally. (Paragraph 17)
Community Care Grants
(e) We
recommend that the Department should commission research to re-examine
the basis on which the Community Care Grant budget is currently
allocated to local offices, including the relative weightings
given to different client groups; the current accuracy of caseload
measurement; and the accuracy of measurement of 'legitimate demand'.
(Paragraph 38)
(f) We
recommend that claimants should be given sufficient information
to enable them to have a reasonable expectation of what is or
is not classed as a priority. (Paragraph 43)
(g) We
recommend that, failing more fundamental reform, the Community
Care Grant budget should be raised substantially to a level which
ensures that all applications which are classed as high and medium
priority are met to the full amount required. (Paragraph
44)
Budgeting Loans
(h) We
recommend that better information be made available to applicants,
to increase their awareness of their credit limit and the chances
of an additional loan application being successful. (Paragraph
55)
Crisis Loans
(i) We
recommend that the annual percentage of Crisis Loans paid for
"alignment" (37.3% in 1999-2000) is analysed in order
to assess the underlying problems leading to the need for those
Crisis Loans, how the causes could be addressed and that the results
be published by the Secretary of State in the annual report to
Parliament. (Paragraph 64)
(j) We
recommend that the direction dealing with eligibility criteria
for Crisis Loans be reviewed in order to increase access to Crisis
Loans when applications for Budgeting Loans have been refused.
(Paragraph 67)
Repayment and Rescheduling of Loans
(k) We
consider that the level of repayments and the repayment period
should be much more flexible in order to minimise the hardship
which claimants experience and to avoid them encumbering themselves
with further high-priced debt. (Paragraph
71)
(l) We
recognise that if the payment period was extended, in order to
sustain the current level of loans, the budget would have to be
increased. But we consider that, because the loans would still
have be repaid, there would be hardly any increase in net expenditure
in the long term. (Paragraph 71)
(m) We
consider that Benefits Agency staff should be expected to draw
the attention of applicants to the possibility of rescheduling
loans both at the time of application and subsequently if it becomes
clear that the claimant is suffering additional hardship as a
result of their Social Fund loan repayments. We recommend that
Benefits Agency staff be so instructed. The possibility of rescheduling
should also be more prominently displayed in publicity material
and on application forms. (Paragraph 73)
Administration of the Discretionary Social Fund
(n) We
recommend that a rule be introduced that, if it is later shown
that a person who has applied for a Budgeting Loan would have
been eligible for a Community Care Grant in respect of the same
need if he or she had been correctly advised at the time, a decision
to award a Community Care Grant should be substituted and if a
Budgeting Loan has been granted, the debt should be written off.
(Paragraph 78)
(o) It
has become quite clear to us that Social Fund applicants need
more active and informed assistance from Benefits Agency staff
both in accessing appropriate Social Fund payments
and in dealing with their benefits more
generally at a disruptive period of their lives. We would like
to see better trained staff working directly and intensively with
Social Fund claimants for short periods, acting as 'champions'
to assist them in accessing the benefit help they need. (Paragraph
85)
(p) We
recommend that claimants should be able to telephone for an estimate,
which should be logged, of how much they are likely to receive
by way of a Budgeting Loan before an application is submitted,
and secondly, that more information is given to applicants to
explain a decision which has been made. (Paragraph 87)
(q) We
recommend that the Department use the opportunity offered by IT
modernisation to work towards a system where Social Fund customers
are sent statements of account at the start of a loan, and then
at six monthly intervals thereafter until the loan is repaid -
showing the repayments made to date; the amount of the loan still
outstanding; and the expected date when the loan will be repaid.
The opportunity should also be taken to remind customers at regular
intervals of the opportunity to reschedule their loans if they
are experiencing financial difficulties. (Paragraph 88)
(r) We
recommend that consideration be given to a review of the grades
and training of the staff within the BA who deal with Social Fund
claimants, in order that their expertise can be retained and channelled
to provide active and informed assistance to the maximum benefit
of claimants. (Paragraph 94)
(s) We
recommend that the Department take more active steps to monitor
the quality of service being provided to its Social Fund customers,
by funding qualitative research; by customer surveys; and by more
active liaison with welfare rights organisations. (Paragraph
99)
(t) We
think there is a case for ethnic monitoring of Social Fund applicants.
(Paragraph 100)
(u) We
therefore recommend that a pilot programme should be set up by
the Department of Social Security, in consultation with the Commission
on Racial Equality, aimed at trialling a system of ethnic monitoring
of Social Fund applicants. (Paragraph 100)
(v) We
will expect to see a significant reduction in administrative errors.
The increase of data-matching should make it possible for all
claimants to receive the benefits to which they are entitled and
better information should be made available to applicants in the
form of detailed reasons for a refusal and a clear statement of
the amount, repayment terms and period for successful applications.
(Paragraph 102)
Reviews and Appeals
(w) We
recommend that the Secretary of State sets a target time for the
handling of internal Social Fund reviews of a maximum of two weeks
and publishes figures in the Annual Report on the Social Fund
indicating both the performance of offices against this target,
and the average waiting time experienced by claimants awaiting
an internal Social Fund review. (Paragraph 105)
(x) We
recommend that applicants to the Social Fund should be able to
apply directly to the IRS for a review of their case, rather than
going through the Benefits Agency. (Paragraph
106)
(y) We
recommend that the contingency plans referred to by Sir Richard
should now be taken forward in order to make the Independent Review
Service compliant with the Human Rights Act and to provide assurance
to claimants and others that a review of their Social Fund claim
is truly and visibly impartial. (Paragraph 108)
Organisational Change
(z) We
recommend that claimants should continue to be able to claim Social
Fund payments through the same offices where they claim Income
Support or income-related Jobseeker's Allowance, not least so
they can benefit from the assistance of a Personal Adviser once
the use of such staff becomes widespread. (Paragraph
110)
Options for the Future
(aa) We
repeat the recommendations first made in our report on Integrated
Child Credit, that the Government should establish a specific
budget to fund research into the levels of income needed to avoid
poverty; and that it should set up a working party involving policy
makers, academics and other interested parties to assist the Government
to devise publicly acceptable measures of such levels. (Paragraph
114)
(bb) We
recommend that the Government review both the overall budget for
grants within the Social Fund system and the eligibility criteria
to overcome these weaknesses and to ensure consistency. (Paragraph
115)
(cc) Whilst
it is clear that people on the lowest incomes struggle to repay
even interest-free loans from weekly benefit, there does appear
to be the potential for the role of the Social Fund to be expanded
to a wider group of people, offering interest-free loans to people
excluded from normal credit markets. (Paragraph 116)
(dd) It
appears that little has been done so far by the DSS to take forward
the recommendations of the PAT 14 report. We welcome the Minister's
commitment to do so and recommend that this is done as a matter
of urgency. (Paragraph 116)
Conclusion
(ee) We
urge the Government to use the opportunity offered by the re-organisation
of DSS to take a radical look at the Social Fund, so that it may
work to enhance the strategy to reduce child poverty, rather than
work against it. (Paragraph 117)
(ff) At
the start of the inquiry, we asked ourselves whether the Social
Fund was achieving the aim set for it by past and present Governments.
In particular, we asked whether it was helping the poorest and
most vulnerable in our society. We have concluded that the scheme
in its present format needs urgent overhaul and an injection of
funds. Without such action, there is a strong possibility that
the wider social policy objectives of the Government will be endangered.
(Paragraph 118)
|
