---

31 Mar 2003 : Column 602W—continued

Means-tested Benefits

Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will update the table on the number of households claiming means-tested benefits set out on 28 February 2001, Official Report, column 697W, broken down by household type and the number of children. [95226]

Malcolm Wicks: Updated estimates for the number of families claiming income-related benefits are in the table.

Income Support, Jobseeker's Allowance (income-based), Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit recipients by family type, May 2001Thousands

	Income Support/Income-based JSA	Housing Benefit	Council Tax Benefit
Single (no children)	2,932	2,247	2,704
Couple (no children)	394	443	733
Single parent (one child)	475	413	403
Single parent (two children)	324	294	298
Single parent (three or more children)	212	183	187
Couple (one child)	102	98	120
Couple (two children)	92	101	120
Couple (three or more children)	99	96	109
Total benefit units with at least one person receiving benefit	4,629	3,874	4,673
Total number of adults in benefit units where at least one person is receiving benefit	5,316	4,611	5,756
Total number of children in benefit units where at least one person is receiving benefit	2,507	2,278	2,393

Notes:

1. IS/JSA numbers are based on per cent. sample. HB/CTB numbers are based on a 1 per cent. sample and are subject to a degree of sampling variation.

2. Numbers have been rounded to the nearest thousand.

3. Figures relate to benefit units and not households.

4. A benefit unit may be a single person or a couple.

5. Children are defined as children aged under 16 and young persons aged 16 to 18 in full-time education.

6. HB figures exclude extended payment cases.

7. CTB figures exclude Second Adult Rebates.

8. The HB/CTB totals for Great Britain includes estimates for local authorities that have not responded. This estimate is based on historical and regional data. These types of estimates are standard practice in reporting totals where there have been non-respondents.

9. There will be a significant overlap between the figures as most people receive both HB and CTB, and a significant proportion also receive IS or JSA.

10. Single parents are defined as all claimants with dependants and without a partner.

Sources:

1. Housing Benefit (HB) and Council Tax Benefit (CTB) Management Information Annual 1 per cent. sample inquiry, May 2001.

2. Income Support (IS) Quarterly Statistical Enquiry, May 2001.

3. Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) Quarterly Statistical Enquiry, May 2001.

Medical Services

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his answer of 25 February 2003, Official Report, column 496W, on medical services, how many grade C medical reports were generated by random audits in each year since 1998; and how many have been judged to be fit for the purpose. [103117]

Mr. Nicholas Brown: A total of 134,144 cases have been randomly audited since 1 September 1998, of which 5,440 were found to be C grades, a proportion of 4.1 per cent.

Random audit is carried out before reports are sent to decision makers and any audited report found not fit for purpose is corrected before being submitted to the decision maker.

The figures for each year are:

	Number of C grades
September 1998 to August 1999	1,670
September 1999 to August 2000	1,590
September 2000 to August 2001	1,165
September 2001 to August 2002	709
September 2002 to February 2003	306

The information requested in relation to the number of C grade reports judged to be fit for purpose is not available. SchlumbergerSema Medical Services do not keep records of this information.

31 Mar 2003 : Column 603W

New Deal (Fraud)

Mr. Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his answer of 20 March 2003, Official Report, columns 925–26W, on fraud and the New Deal, (1) if he will make a statement on the nature of the frauds committed by contractors in relation to the New Deal; and what steps his Department has taken to prevent such frauds; [105351]

(2) if he will list, in each year in which an estimated total loss was given in his answer, the cases in which fraud was found to have occurred, and the precise level of the fraud in each case. [105352]

Mr. Nicholas Brown [holding answer 27 March 2003]: Allegations made against contractors delivering New Deal programmes fall mainly into two broad categories: allegations that the claimed outcomes were fabricated or mis-stated, and allegations that the claimed training delivered was not in fact provided.

New Deal providers are subject to thorough contractual and quality audits. These specifically consider the delivery of training against the requirements set out in the contract between Jobcentre Plus and providers. Contractual terms and conditions include appropriate clauses requiring parties to the contract to use all reasonable endeavours to safeguard Jobcentre Plus funding of the New Deal against fraud generally and, in particular fraud on the part of the provider's directors, employees or sub-contractors.

The Department investigates all such allegations, of which some are false, some are true but caused through clerical or administrative error and others are caused by fraud.

Where evidence of fraud is found, it is reported at the earliest opportunity to the police, who are responsible for any subsequent criminal law investigation. Some reported fraud is suspected to be corporate, but most cases are investigated as internal frauds by employees of the contractor.

Since the Department's action following investigation is often a referral to outside bodies, such as the police, it is not possible to state the outcome of each case.

New Deal for Young People

Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Northavon, on 26 February 2003, Official Report, column 609W, what assessment he has made of why the number of people leaving the New Deal for Young People for unknown destinations is growing; and what plans the Department has for increasing the information available about leavers. [103058]

Mr. Nicholas Brown: Jobcentre Plus and New Deal providers have mechanisms in place that aim to maximise information about the destinations of those leaving the programme and Jobcentre Plus is working to ensure that best practice is shared across different districts and providers.

31 Mar 2003 : Column 604W

Later this year we are planning to conduct further research into people whose destination on leaving NDYP was unknown. Previous surveys of this kind have shown that the destinations of this group mirror that of people leaving to known destinations, with a large number of these young people entering sustained employment.

However, individuals are not obliged to inform us of their destination on leaving the New Deal for Young People (NDYP) and following up all of these cases can be very time consuming. The priority is to provide the help and support that young people need to move into work. This may mean that less time has been spent following up and recording the destination of people after leaving NDYP.

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many and what proportion of those on each option of the New Deal for Young People went into a sustained job in the East Riding of Yorkshire (a) since the scheme began broken down by year and (b) in the last quarter for which figures are available. [104524]

Mr. Nicholas Brown: In the latest quarter for which information is available (October to December 2002) 40 young people left the New Deal Options for unsubsidised, sustained jobs in the East Riding local authority area. This is 43 per cent. of all leavers from the Options in that period. Due to the small volumes involved, figures for individual New Deal Options for the latest quarter cannot be published because of the risk of identifying individuals.

The information requested on the New Deal for Young People since the programme began is in the table.

New Deal for Young people in the East Riding of Yorkshire

Option/year(79)	Number of people entering unsubsidised, sustained employment(80)	Number of leavers(80)	Proportion of leavers entering unsubsidised, sustained employment (percentage)(81)
Employment
1998	10	20	55
1999	80	130	63
2000	70	100	67
2001	70	110	61
2002	50	120	45
	Education and Training
1998	10	10	38
1999	60	160	39
2000	70	190	37
2001	50	130	40
2002	40	110	37
Voluntary Sector
1998(82)	—	—	—
1999	30	70	47
2000	20	80	25
2001	20	40	49
2002	20	50	45
	Environment Task Force
1998(82)	—	—	—
1999	30	80	41
2000	20	60	34
2001	30	70	35
2002	30	60	48

⁽⁷⁹⁾ Years relate to January to December (except for 1998, which is April to December).

⁽⁸⁰⁾ All figures are rounded to the nearest 10.

⁽⁸¹⁾ Proportions are based on unrounded figures and hence cannot be derived from the rounded figures used in the table.

⁽⁸²⁾ Due to the small volume involved, the 1998 figures for the Voluntary Sector and the Environment Task Force Option cannot be published because of the risk of identifying individuals.

31 Mar 2003 : Column 605W

---