House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 29 Nov 2005 (pt 35)

29 Nov 2005 : Column 417W—continued

Child Support Agency

Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the average time taken to resolve complaints to the Child Support Agency for (a) old scheme cases and (b) new scheme cases. [30033]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 November 2005:

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the average time taken to resolve complaints to the Child Support Agency for (a) old scheme cases and (b) new scheme cases.

The Agency has an internal target to resolve 68% of client complaints or agree a resolution plan within 15 working days of receipt of a complaint from a Child Support Agency client. I cannot provide the average time taken to resolve complaints but year-to-date information on performance against this standard is set out in the table below.

Percentage of CSA client complaints for which a resolution plan has been agreed within 15 days of the receipt of the complaint, by scheme, September 2005

Percentage

Old scheme 91

New scheme 87

Overall 88

	Percentage
Old scheme	91
New scheme	87
Overall	88

I hope you find this response helpful.

Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the total cost to date of the set-up and running costs of the Enforcement Directorate. [30035]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 November 2005:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the total cost to date of the set-up and running costs of the Enforcement Directorate.

The Enforcement Director was appointed on 1 November 2004 and the Directorate went live from 1 April 2005.

29 Nov 2005 : Column 418W

The set up costs were approximately £100k and the running costs for the period 1 April 2005 to 31 October 2005 amount to approximately £6.6m which includes legal costs and bailiff charges. This does not include the staffing costs for the Belfast Enforcement Team.

I hope you find this response helpful.

Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average administration cost per case on (a) the new scheme and (b) the old scheme was in each of the last four years. [30036]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 November 2005:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average administration cost per case on (a) the new scheme and (b) the old scheme was in each of the last four years.

Information is not currently available in the format requested. We expect information on administration costs for the Child Support Agency to be available after the Departments new Resource Management System is introduced in the Child Support Agency in 2006. In the meantime, the Agency does publish interim unit cost information in accordance with Public Service Agreement (PSA 9) which is contained in the Annual Report and Accounts.

As the new child support scheme was only introduced from March 2003 only data from then to October 2005 would be available.

Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the backlog of new claims held by the Child Support Agency. [30038]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 November 2005:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the backlog of new claims held by the Child Support Agency.

The information requested can be found in Table 2 of the CSA Quarterly Statistical Supplement which was published on the Departments website on 27th October. A copy of this table is attached as an annex to this letter.

I hope you find this useful.

CSA Table 2: New application intake, clearances and work on hand Number and percentage

2005

CSA intake and clearances—scheme to date January February March April May June July August September

New Scheme

Intake 557,000 582,000 608,000 632,000 657,000 682,000 708,000 731,000 755,000

Cases Cleared 298,000 318,000 342,000 366,000 393,000 419,000 444,000 466,000 494,000

Not progressed to calculation and schedule set up 155,000 166,000 180,000 195,000 213,000 229,000 245,000 258,000 276,000

of which:

Closed 129,000 138,000 150,000 163,000 180,000 195,000 208,000 220,000 236,000

Good Cause 8,000 8,000 9,000 9,000 10,000 11,000 11,000 12,000 12,000

Reduced Benefit Decision 5,000 6,000 6,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 8,000 8,000 9,000

Other 13,000 14,000 15,000 15,000 16,000 17,000 18,000 19,000 19,000

Calculated and schedule set up 143,000 152,000 162,000 171,000 180,000 190,000 199,000 209,000 219,000

of which:

Subsequently closed 6,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 9,000 9,000

Initially Nil Calculated 21,000 23,000 24,000 26,000 28,000 29,000 31,000 33,000 34,000

Initially Maintenance Direct 10,000 12,000 13,000 15,000 16,000 18,000 19,000 21,000 23,000

Initially Collection Service 105,000 111,000 117,000 123,000 129,000 135,000 141,000 146,000 153,000

of which:

One or more payments received 82,000 86,000 93,000 98,000 104,000 109,000 115,000 121,000 126,000

Awaiting payment 24,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 26,000 26,000 26,000

Uncleared applications 259,000 264,000 266,000 266,000 265,000 263,000 263,000 264,000 261,000

of which:

Prior to calculation 236,000 241,000 242,000 242,000 240,000 238,000 238,000 238,000 234,000

Calculated, awaiting schedule set up 23,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 25,000 25,000 26,000 26,000 27,000

Old Scheme

Outstanding applications 103,000 92,000 87,000 86,000 82,000 78,000 76,000 75,000 73,000

Percentage cases for whom maintenance is due who have made one or more payments via collection service, or had an initial maintenance direct arrangement in place. 66 67 68 70 71 71 72 73 74

Percentage cases who have been charged via the collection service and for whom one or more payments received 77 78 79 80 81 81 82 82 83

Percentage of clearances which result in a initial calculation and schedule set up 48 48 47 47 46 45 45 45 44

Notes:
1. A case is defined as cleared if a maintenance calculation has been carried out and a payment arrangement between the parent with care and the non resident parent is in place; a case has been identified as claiming Good Cause or is subject to a Reduced Benefit Decision; or the application is identified as being a change of circumstances on an existing case; or the case has been closed.
2. Figures exclude new scheme cases which have been progressed and cleared clerically. This is because it is not possible to determine how many clerically progressed cases are still included in the Agency's work in progress, or were originally included in the intake figures.
3. New scheme uncleared figures include cases transferred from Jobcentre Plus which are awaiting processing and input to the main CS2 computer system (some 81,000 cases). These figures may be subject to revision in future issues of these tables.
4. Percentage cases for whom maintenance is due who have made one or more payments via collection service, or had an initial maintenance direct arrangement in place is arrived at by summing number of cases receiving payment via collection service or on maintenance direct and expressing as a percentage of sum of collection service cases, those on maintenance direct and those with a calculation and no charging schedule.
5. Volumes are rounded to the nearest thousand, and percentages to nearest whole per cent.
6. Robust data from the new IT system (CS2) covering the period March 2003-December 2004 is not currently available, and is under development.

29 Nov 2005 : Column 419W

	2005
CSA intake and clearances—scheme to date	January	February	March	April	May	June	July	August	September
New Scheme
Intake	557,000	582,000	608,000	632,000	657,000	682,000	708,000	731,000	755,000

Cases Cleared	298,000	318,000	342,000	366,000	393,000	419,000	444,000	466,000	494,000

Not progressed to calculation and schedule set up	155,000	166,000	180,000	195,000	213,000	229,000	245,000	258,000	276,000
of which:
Closed	129,000	138,000	150,000	163,000	180,000	195,000	208,000	220,000	236,000
Good Cause	8,000	8,000	9,000	9,000	10,000	11,000	11,000	12,000	12,000
Reduced Benefit Decision	5,000	6,000	6,000	7,000	7,000	7,000	8,000	8,000	9,000
Other	13,000	14,000	15,000	15,000	16,000	17,000	18,000	19,000	19,000

Calculated and schedule set up	143,000	152,000	162,000	171,000	180,000	190,000	199,000	209,000	219,000
of which:
Subsequently closed	6,000	7,000	7,000	7,000	8,000	8,000	8,000	9,000	9,000
Initially Nil Calculated	21,000	23,000	24,000	26,000	28,000	29,000	31,000	33,000	34,000
Initially Maintenance Direct	10,000	12,000	13,000	15,000	16,000	18,000	19,000	21,000	23,000
Initially Collection Service	105,000	111,000	117,000	123,000	129,000	135,000	141,000	146,000	153,000
of which:
One or more payments received	82,000	86,000	93,000	98,000	104,000	109,000	115,000	121,000	126,000
Awaiting payment	24,000	25,000	25,000	25,000	25,000	25,000	26,000	26,000	26,000

Uncleared applications	259,000	264,000	266,000	266,000	265,000	263,000	263,000	264,000	261,000
of which:
Prior to calculation	236,000	241,000	242,000	242,000	240,000	238,000	238,000	238,000	234,000
Calculated, awaiting schedule set up	23,000	24,000	24,000	24,000	25,000	25,000	26,000	26,000	27,000

Old Scheme
Outstanding applications	103,000	92,000	87,000	86,000	82,000	78,000	76,000	75,000	73,000

Percentage cases for whom maintenance is due who have made one or more payments via collection service, or had an initial maintenance direct arrangement in place.	66	67	68	70	71	71	72	73	74

Percentage cases who have been charged via the collection service and for whom one or more payments received	77	78	79	80	81	81	82	82	83

Percentage of clearances which result in a initial calculation and schedule set up	48	48	47	47	46	45	45	45	44

Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the average number of Child Support Agency staff who deal with each case brought to the agency by parents with care. [30042]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 November 2005:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the average number of Child Support Agency staff who deal with each case brought to the Agency by parents with care.

I am unable to answer this question as we do not record information on the numbers of staff who deal with each case.

29 Nov 2005 : Column 420W

Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the compliance rate for the self-employed in cases with the Child Support Agency. [30065]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 November 2005:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made for the compliance rate for the self-employed in cases with the Child Support Agency.

In September 2005, the case compliance rate for collection service cases in which non-resident parent was classified as self-employed was 63%. This compares to an overall Agency case compliance rate of 70%.

A case is defined as case compliant if it was open at the end of the reporting period, and had paid all or part of any maintenance that was due (either regular or arrears) via the collection service over the preceding quarter.

29 Nov 2005 : Column 421W

Additionally, the Agency measures cash compliance, which is the total amount of maintenance received via the collection service over any three month period as a percentage of the total amount charged (both regular maintenance and arrears). In September 2005, the cash compliance rate for cases in which non resident parent was classified as self-employed was 60%. This compares to an overall Agency cash compliance rate of 68%.

These figures for self-employed reflect the status of the non-resident parent currently held on the system as at the last intervention by the Agency. This will not necessarily reflect the current status of the non-resident parent if the Agency has not been informed of, or not yet actioned, a change of circumstances.

I hope you find this helpful.

Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what definition he uses of (a) full compliance and (b) partial compliance in Child Support Agency statistics; and whether the definition has changed in the last five years. [30067]

Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 29 November 2005:

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what definition he uses of (a) full compliance and (b) partial compliance with the Child Support Agency and whether the definition for statistical purposes has changed in the last five

A case is defined as compliant if maintenance was due via the collection service (either regular maintenance and/or arrears) in the preceding quarter, the case was open at the end of that quarter, and any payment was received during the period.

A case is considered to be fully compliant if the amount of maintenance received over the reporting period is greater than or equal to the amount charged, and partially compliant if a maintenance payment is received that is less than the amount due.

The above definitions, for statistical purposes, have not changed over the last five years.

I hope you find this useful.

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) if he will break down the Child Support Agency's compliance figures by the income band of the non-resident parent for all Scottish claims; [31123]

(2) what proportion of Scottish claims under the Child Support Agency old scheme have been reassessed in the last three years; [31127]

(3) how many changes of circumstance have been reported by non-resident parents in Scotland on the (a) old and (b) new Child Support Agency scheme in each month of the last three years; [31133]

(4) what estimate he has made of the compliance rate for the self-employed in cases with the Child Support Agency in Scotland. [31134]

Mr. Plaskitt: The information requested is not available.

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when Tina Smith, a constituent of the hon. Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey, will receive the sum agreed to be owed to her by the Child Support Agency. [31480]

29 Nov 2005 : Column 422W

Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 24 November 2005]: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Mike Isaac, dated 29 November 2005:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. I am replying on behalf of Stephen Geraghty as Director of Parliamentary Business.

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when Tina Smith, a constituent of the honourable Member of Sittingbourne and Sheppey will receive the sum agreed as owed to her by the Child Support Agency.

As details about individual cases are confidential I have written to you separately about this case.

Tony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on his plans for reform of the Child Support Agency. [33186]

Mr. Plaskitt: The Child Support Agency's chief executive, Stephen Geraghty, is currently undertaking a root and branch review of the agency. He will report to Ministers and we will make announcements shortly.

Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many workarounds are Child Support Agency staff currently having to use in order to process a child support application on the CS2 IT system. [18788]

Mr. Plaskitt: There are procedural interventions or workarounds within the online procedures for many parts of the business process. But they are not relevant for all types of cases.

In a typical case, a caseworker might encounter between one and four workarounds in progressing the case to first payment. This depends on its complexity and the extent to which it is linked to an existing case or cases.

Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the cost of introducing a disregard of all Child Support Agency payments in assessing benefit entitlement; and if he will make a statement. [20162]

Mr. Plaskitt: The estimated cost of disregarding all Child Support payments, including those not arranged through the Child Support Agency, in assessing benefit entitlement is £230 million. This includes a full disregard in income support, housing benefit and council tax benefit and is based upon the current number of benefit units who are in receipt of Child Support payments.

Next Section

Index

Home Page