7 Interaction between ESA and employment
outcomes
Meeting the employment objectives
of ESA
120. When ESA was introduced in 2008,
the then Government said that its aim was to enable claimants
"to achieve their full potential through work and to help
them to gain independence from benefits".[180]
In oral evidence to this inquiry, DWP witnesses said that the
aim of the ESA process was to determine whether or not someone
is fit for work and that the WCA was intended to help draw a line
between people with health conditions and disabilities who can
work, and those whom it is not reasonable to expect to work.[181]
121. In our 2011 report we pointed out
that the Government's main objective for the IB reassessment was
to help long-term claimants move back into work.[182]
The Government said recently that, as a result of the IB reassessment
process, "720,000 more people are now being supported to
prepare or look for work". The latest statistics show that,
up to September 2013, 250,000 IB claimants were found fit for
work and 470,000 placed in the WRAG, out of 1.23 million reassessments.[183]
It is therefore clearly very important that the right employment
support is available for the significant number of people who
may have been out of the labour market for some time, as well
as new ESA claimants in these categories.
122. Claimants placed in the Support
Group are not expected to undertake work-related activity. For
those in the WRAG, there is an expectation that they will move
into work in the short or medium term, with appropriate employment
support. This support is currently provided through Jobcentre
Plus, the Work Programme (WP) (the unified mainstream contracted
employment support scheme introduced in 2011) or Work Choice,
the specialist programme for people with health conditions or
disabilities which have a more substantial impact on their capability
to work.
JOBCENTRE PLUS SUPPORT
123. Our report earlier this year on
Jobcentre Plus pointed out that over half of all working-age disabled
people were either unemployed or economically inactive. Jobcentre
Plus is the gateway for referrals to the Work Programme and Work
Choice but also provides direct employment support to claimants.
We examined the support available to ESA claimants through JCP
and identified a relative lack of Disability Employment Advisers
(DEAs) within Jobcentres to provide the specialist support which
disabled people and people with long-term health conditions require.
We regretted the fact that this meant that the vast majority of
ESA claimants received only very infrequent support from specialist
DEAs, which often amounted to no more than two face-to-face interviews
per year.[184]
WORK PROGRAMME SUPPORT
124. In our 2011 report on the IB reassessment,
we emphasised the important role the Work Programme would play
in meeting the needs of ESA claimants.[185]
In our 2013 report on the Work Programme, we examined how effective
it was proving to be in providing employment support for ESA and
ex-ESA/IB claimants. One of the problems we identified was a lack
of accuracy in the ESA decisions: Work Programme providers were
finding that a significant number of claimants with a "fit
for work" outcome were clearly not able to work. We also
observed that the Work Programme's differential payment system,
which was meant to incentivise providers to achieve sustained
job outcomes for more disadvantaged claimants, including ESA and
ex-ESA/IB claimants, was not having the desired effect. The first
set of official Work Programme statistics published in November
2012 showed that a sustained job outcome was achieved for only
0.3% of ESA ex-IB referrals (compared to 3.5% across all payment
groups).[186]
125. A recent analysis found that only
5% of claimants in the WRAG supported through the Work Programme
have moved into sustained work since 2011, against a target of
16.5%.[187] Analysis
of the latest Work Programme statistics, covering the period to
March 2014, by the Centre for Social and Economic Inclusion, found
that, although performance of the Work Programme had improved
overall, the only two groups which had not seen an improvement
were ESA ex-IB claimants and ESA volunteers. The "new ESA
claimants" group showed a substantial improvement; however,
ESA claimants overall continue to have low performance; people
with a disability are the least successful of the six groups of
disadvantaged jobseekers in the Work Programme and are less likely
to find sustained employment than lone parents, people over 50,
and black and minority ethnic people.[188]
Only 1 in 11 new ESA claimants joining the scheme in January to
March 2013 achieved three months in work after 12 months (compared
to 1 in 5 JSA claimants in the 18-24 age group, and 1 in 6 aged
over 25, achieving 6 months in work at the 12 month stage).[189]
126. When the Work Programme began in
June 2011, only ESA claimants with a short term prognosis (3 months)
were referred to it. From October 2012, this group was expanded
to include those with a prognosis of up to 12 months. DWP points
out that this means that, because WP job outcomes are measured
over a two-year period, "many ESA claimants [
] could
not possibly have registered a job outcome yet given the timescales
required" However, it acknowledges that "we must do
better for ESA claimants".[190]
WORK CHOICE
127. A number of witnesses in our inquiry
into the Work Programme pointed out that people with health conditions
and disabilities were better served by the specialist disability
employment programme Work Choice.[191]
However, most claimants referred to Work Choice are in fact JSA,
not ESA, claimants. The latest statistics show that in 2013-14,
out of a total of 27,170 Work Choice referrals, 18,120 were on
JSA and only 5,190 on ESA/IB. In the period since Work Choice
began in 2010-11, out of 69,440 referrals to Work Choice, 38,980
were JSA claimants and only 10,660 were on ESA/IB. There were
11,950 job outcomes for the JSA group and 3,320 for the ESA/IB
group.[192]
Effective assessment of health-related
employment barriers
128. As we have made clear, the WCA
plays a central role in determining the work-search conditionality
placed on claimants. It also has the potential to indicate the
level of support that a claimant might need to enter employment.
During this inquiry we have tried to assess whether the WCA does
this effectively, or whether trying to combine an assessment of
employment support needs with a test of benefit eligibility means
that neither task is performed effectively.
129. A number of witnesses believed
that the WCA did not provide an accurate assessment of an individual's
health barriers to employment. Scope argued that "It conflates
the idea of what benefit someone should be on with what support
people need to move back into the workplace. This is a fundamental
flaw". Mind made a similar point. [193]
Witnesses agreed that one solution to this would be to replace
the WCA with two tests; one simple test to determine an individual's
eligibility for benefit, and another more sophisticated test,
to assess their particular employment support needs.[194]
130. In this context, it is worth reiterating
that when the expert panels involved in the Evidence Based Review
assessed WCA outcomes, they identified that 83% of claimants deemed
fit for work would need "on average, two or three" adjustments;
50% would need flexible working hours; and 24% would need a support
worker.[195] If this
is the case, a process needs to be in place to assess what these
support needs are and how they can best be provided. When we put
this point to DWP witnesses, they were not able to provide any
clarity on what the implications of this finding were, in terms
of assessment of a claimant's employment support needs.[196]
WORK-FOCUSED HEALTH-RELATED ASSESSMENT
131. The support an individual needs
to get back to work was previously considered as part of the Work-focused
Health-related Assessment (WFHRA). This assessment was carried
out by Atos, at the same time as the WCA. It focused on "what
the individual was capable of doing and how to manage his/her
condition at work" and its purpose was to "explore customers'
views about returning to work, what difficulties they faced in
doing this, and what they thought they could do to move back into
work." Based on the WFHRA, the HCP would recommend
steps to be taken to improve a person's functional capacity and
to help move them closer to entering employment. A report of the
discussion in the WFHRA was sent to the claimant and their JCP
adviser, for use in the Work-focused Interviews that claimants
in the WRAG are required to attend. [197]
132. The Government suspended the WFHRA
in July 2010 for two years as it was "not delivering the
intended outcomes". DWP announced in April 2013 that the
suspension would continue for a further three years "to properly
evaluate the impacts of both the Work Programme and Universal
Credit systems."[198]
133. Scope acknowledged that the WFHRA
was "one way of having that conversation" about employment
support needs, but believed it needed to go further, "in
terms of looking at the package of support that people need and
a more sophisticated and nuanced approach to exactly what support
looks like and how people can access it".[199]
Lisa Coleman from Atos told us that its assessors had found
the WRHFA "very useful and enjoyable work". Although
she did not disagree with the decision to suspend it, she believed
that it remained important to separate "somebody describing
their condition and how it affects them in their daily life"
from looking at "the barriers to employment, which can often
be different from their particular health conditions".[200]
SHARING INFORMATION WITH EMPLOYMENT
SUPPORT PROVIDERS
134. As we have noted, claimants deemed
fit for work and who then claim JSA are likely to be supported
to find work by Jobcentres and/or referred to the Work Programme.
Claimants in the WRAG may also be referred to the Work Programme,
depending on their prognosis. Work Programme providers have reported
receiving little information about those who have been referred
to them after making an ESA claim.[201]
135. Professor Harrington recommended
in his second review that "DWP consider ways of sharing outcomes
of the WCA with Work Programme providers to ensure a smoother
claimant journey."[202]
This was explored in pilots between July 2012 and August 2013.
Although there is now some sharing of information with Personal
Advisers in Jobcentres, information is not shared with Work Programme
providers. Dr Litchfield pointed out that there were "clear
advantages" in sharing the information and recommended that
DWP address this issue with "some urgency".[203]
DWP accepted this recommendation "subject to the outcome
of further work on feasibility".[204]
136. There is a gap in the current
system which means that a claimant's employment support needs
are not being properly assessed as part of the ESA claims process.
In particular, claimants should not be found "fit for work"
where they would only be able to enter employment if significant
adaptations and support were provided. We recommend that DWP urgently
reassess where in the process an assessment of health-related
employment barriers could most appropriately take placeeither
by reintroducing the Work-focused Health-related Assessment (WFHRA)
as a second stage of the WCA, or at a later stage as an extended
version of the Work-focused Interview once the claimant is referred
to Jobcentre Plus (or to the Work Programme). In the meantime,
we endorse the recommendation made by both independent reviewers,
that information obtained through the WCA process should be shared
with Work Programme providers and JCP employment advisers.
137. The effectiveness of employment
support for people with disabilities and long-term health conditions
has been a concern for us throughout this Parliament. We have
closely followed developments since the independent review of
such support, carried out for the Government by Liz Sayce, was
published in 2011.[205]
We are conducting a separate inquiry into this area, beginning
with an assessment of the effectiveness of the Access to Work
programme. We intend to look at specialist disability employment
support more broadly once the Government's expected Disability
Health and Employment Strategy, following on from the Sayce recommendations,
is published.
180 Archived DWP content, April 2010, accessed 9 July
2014 Back
181
Qq439 and 443 Back
182
Work and Pensions Committee, The role of incapacity benefit reassessment in helping claimants into employment,
Chapter 7 Back
183
HC Deb 26 June 2014, col 319w; DWP, ESA: outcomes of WCAs -tables,
June 2014, tables 10-11 Back
184
Work and Pensions Committee, The role of Jobcentre Plus in the reformed welfare system,
paras 71-75 Back
185
Work and Pensions Committee, The role of incapacity benefit reassessment in helping claimants into employment,
Chapter 7 Back
186
Work and Pensions Committee, First Report of Session 2013-14,
Can the Work Programme work for all user groups?, HC 162,
paras 80-89 Back
187
Catherine Hale, Fulfilling potential? ESA and the fate of the WRAG,
June 2014, Executive Summary [statistic drawn from DWP statistics
tabulation tool] Back
188
Centre for Social and Economic Inclusion, Work Programme statistics: Inclusion analysis,
19 June 2014 Back
189
DWP, Work Programme Official Statistics to March 2014, June 2014,
Summary and Key Findings Back
190
DWP (WCA0196)
paras 105-109 Back
191
Work and Pensions Committee, Can the Work Programme work for all user groups?,
paras 98-99 Back
192
DWP, Work Choice Official Statistics, May 2014, table 5 Back
193
Qq5 and 17 Back
194
Qq84 and 85 Back
195
Q12; Submission
from charities involved in the Evidence Based Review of the WCA
(WCA0170), paras 38 and 39 Back
196
Qq442-3 Back
197
DWP, Employment and Support Allowance: Customer and staff experiences of the face-to-face Work Capability Assessment and Work-focused Health-related Assessment,
2010, p 2 Back
198
HC Deb, 25 April 2013, 75WS Back
199
Q6 Back
200
Qq349-351 Back
201
Oral evidence taken on 6 March 2013 on the Work Programme, Q312
[Employment
Related Services Association] Back
202
Professor Harrington, An Independent Review of the Work Capability Assessment - year two,
November 2012, Chapter 3,
para 72 Back
203
Dr Paul Litchfield, An Independent Review of the Work Capability Assessment - year four,
December 2013, Chapter 2, para 59 Back
204
DWP, Government's Response to the year 4 independent review of the WCA,
March 2014, Annex A, recommendation 1 Back
205
DWP, Getting in, staying in and getting on: disability employment support fit for the future,
A review for Government by Liz Sayce, June 2011
Back
|