---

24 May 2007 : Column 1433W—continued

Child Support Agency: Advertising

Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much the Child Support Agency spent on (a) sponsoring newspaper or publication supplements and (b) funding advertorials in newspapers and other publications in the last year for which figures are available; and what the topic was of each. [136013]

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

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 24 May 2007:

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, how much the Child Support Agency spent on (a) sponsoring newspaper or publication supplements and (b) funding advertorials in newspapers and other publications in the last year for which figures are available; and what the topic was of each. [136013]

The Child Support Agency incurred no cost in the 2006-07 financial year sponsoring newspapers or publication supplement, or funding advertorials in newspapers or other publications

As part of the Agency’s Operational Improvement Plan an advertising press campaign was conducted in March 2007 highlighting the Agency’s enforcement powers and their use over a 12-month period. The total cost of this advertising was £126,465 in the 2006-07 financial year.

I hope you find this answer helpful.

Child Support Agency: Correspondence

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how long the Child Support Agency takes to respond to inquiries from hon. Members in the latest period for which figures are available. [135768]

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

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 24 May 2007:

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

24 May 2007 : Column 1434W

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how long the Child Support Agency takes to respond to inquiries from hon. Members. [135768]

The Agency aims to provide a response from an appropriate senior manager to all inquiries from hon. Members within 15-days. In 2006-07, 88.2 per cent. of inquiries from hon. Members were answered within this time.

I hope you find this answer helpful.

Child Support Agency: Pay

Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the salary range is for each staff pay grade at the Child Support Agency; and what the mean salary is within each grade. [136016]

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 24 May 2007:

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

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the salary range is for each staff pay grade at the Child Support Agency, and what the mean salary is within each grate. [136016]

The table below contains the information requested. The mean salary has been calculated based on staff costs in January

£
Grade	Payscale s cale m inumn	Payscale maximum	Mean
Administrative assistant	12,340	13,990,	13,142
Administrative officer	13,990,	17,250	16,257
Executive officer	18,160	23,510	21,038
Higher executive officer	23,930	28,920	26,886
Senior executive officer	29,570	35,420	33,050
Unified grade 7	38,390	51,910	42,792
Unified grade 6	51,790	63,510	55,230
Senior civil servants	56,100	205,000	87,090

I hope you find this answer helpful.

Children: Maintenance

Mrs. Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents with care in receipt of benefits were awaiting payment in (a) old scheme and (b) new scheme Child Support Agency cases in each month since January 2003. [122889]

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

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 24 May 2007:

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 how many parents with care in receipt of benefits were awaiting
24 May 2007 : Column 1435W
payment in (a) old scheme and (b) new scheme Child Support Agency cases in each month since January 2003.

There are two scenarios where a parent with care can be awaiting payment. Firstly there are those cases that are waiting for a maintenance assessment/calculation to establish if or how much the non-resident parent should pay for their children. Secondly, where a positive liability has been established, a parent with care can be waiting for the non-resident parent to pay maintenance.

The information requested can be found on the following tables.

Table 1 shows the number of new and old scheme cases (on the new computer system only) that have not had an assessment or calculation, where the parent with care was known to be in receipt of benefit. This information is not available for the old computer system; therefore it is not representative of the total amount of cases that have not had an assessment or calculation in the Agency as a whole. Also, it is important to note that cases that have not had an assessment/calculation will not necessarily result in a positive liability to pay maintenance. Whilst the table shows an increase in the number of new scheme cases awaiting assessment where the parent with care was on benefits, it should be noted that this is due in part, to the natural growth of the new system caseload over the period in question.

Table 2 shows the number of new and old scheme cases (on both computer systems) with a positive maintenance liability where the parent with care was in receipt of benefit but the non-resident parent was not paying maintenance. Although the number of new scheme cases where the parent with care was on benefits, and were not receiving payment, has increased, it should be noted that this is due in part, to the natural growth of the new system caseload over the period in question.

I hope you find this answer helpful.

Table 1: the number of cases (on the new computer system only) that have not had an assessment or calculation, where the parent with care was known to be in receipt of benefit at the end of the quarter, February 2003 to May 2006
Quarter ending	Old scheme cases operating on the new computer system	New scheme
May 2003	12,000	17,000
August 2003	16,000	44,000
November 2003	18,000	58,000
February 20404	19,000	65,000
May 2004	20,000	79,000
August 2004	21,000	86,000
November 2004	16,000	89,000
February 2005	16,000	94,000
May 2005	16,000	96,000
August 2005	15,000	99,000
November 2005	14,000	99,000
February 2006	13,000	101,000
May 2006	13,000	95,000
Notes: 1. To establish whether a parent with care was on benefit at a point in time the agency has to match its records to DWP benefit data. It is only possible to match data at the end of every quarter. The latest information available is for May 2006. 2. Due to restrictions of management information it is not possible to state how many uncleared cases on the old computer system have a parent with care on benefit. 3. The table does not include a number of “potential applications” received via Jobcentre Plus as the agency is unable to establish how many of these cases are genuine cases and how many are changes of circumstances on existing cases until the cases have been cleared. 4 Cases that have not had an assessment/calculation will not necessarily result in a positive liability to pay maintenance. 5. Numbers are rounded to the nearest thousand.

24 May 2007 : Column 1436W

Table 2: the number of cases (on both computer systems) with a positive maintenance liability over the three month period ending in the month shown, where the parent with care was in receipt of benefit at the end of that period, but the non-resident parent was not paying maintenance, February 2003 to May 2006
Quarter ending	Old scheme	New scheme	Total
February 2003	62,000	n/a	62,000
May 2003	64,000	1,000	65,000
August 2003	65,000	9,000	74,000
November 2003	59,000	21,000	81,000
February 2004	56,000	30,000	85,000
May 2004	53,000	35,000	89,000
August 2004	52,000	39,000	90,000
November 2004	59,000	40,000	99,000
February 2005	59,000	43,000	102,000
May 2005	56,000	47,000	104,000
August 2005	55,000	53,000	108,000
November 2005	52,000	59,000	111,000
February 2006	50,000	66,000	115,000
May 2006	47,000	68,000	115,000
Notes: 1. To establish whether a parent with care was on benefit at a point in time the agency has to match its records to DWP benefit data. It is only possible to match data at the end of every quarter. The latest information available is for May 2006. 2. The table shows the number of cases with a positive maintenance liability at the end of each three month period where the parent with care was in receipt of benefit at the end of that period, but the non-resident parent was not paying maintenance. 3. Numbers are rounded to the nearest thousand.

Mr. Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what discretion the Child Support Agency has to allow longer periods for the payment of arrears than the guidelines suggest; and if he will make a statement. [133410]

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

Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 24 May 2007:

---