Social Security Experience Panels: award duration and automatic entitlement

Summary

Automatic Entitlement and Award Duration

Automatic entitlement would be where people with particular disabilities are entitled to a benefit award without having to undergo a face-to-face health assessment or provide any further information beyond confirmation of their diagnosis with an elgiible condition. Automatic entitlement would reduce the effort required by individuals applying for benefits (for example, by simplifying the application process and reducing the amount of evidence they would need to gather). It could also help reduce the volume of health assessments carried out for disability benefits, whether face-to-face or otherwise.

There was a high level of support among the research participants for introducing a policy of automatic entitlement to disability benefits if an individual had a specific health condition. When asked who should be automatically entitled, participants tended to identify similar groups of health conditions and disabilities that should qualify, such as those who are deaf, blind, amputees, and those with terminal or progressive conditions.

We also asked participants for their views on how long disability benefit awards should be ('award duration'). Longer award durations would remove the need for unnecessary re-assessments, which Experience Panel members have told us are often distressing and frustrating for people whose circumstances are unlikely to improve or change^[1].

Participants were less positive about the suggestion of a five year award duration for unchanging conditions. When asked why, participants said they would prefer an indefinite award to be introduced in these cases.

Light Touch Reviews

A light touch review is a potential alternative to a re-assessment. Light touch reviews differ from face-to-face health assessments in a number of ways. The reviews would primarily be paper-based, however sometimes clients may need to attend a face-to-face review. Clients' benefits would continue to be paid throughout the review period at the same rate as before.

Participants generally responded positively to the idea of light touch reviews, with many viewing them as a significant improvement over the existing regime of face-to-face health assessments.

Participants were divided on whether Social Security Scotland should use previous evidence from health assessments carried out by the Department for Work and Pensions (for example, as part of their application for Personal Independence Payment). Some participants reported a positive experience at their Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) health assessment, feeling that their assessor had given a chance to demonstrate how their disability impacts on their day to day life. These participants were generally supportive of using evidence, such as the report written by the DWP health assessor.

For some participants, the health assessment had been a highly negative experience. They believed the report did not accurately describe their condition, they felt that they were not listened to and they did not want any evidence from DWP assessments to be used by Social Security Scotland.

When asked where light touch reviews should take place if a face-to-face review was necessary, participants suggested a number of local buildings. When asked about existing DWP buildings, participants talked about having negative experiences of buildings previously used for assessments by DWP. Most participants believed an agency building would be acceptable.