Watchdog finds 'weaknesses' in sickness benefit system

Women holds temples The assessments determine whether people qualify for benefits through sickness or are fit to work

Related Stories

Auditors have found "weaknesses" in the contract between the government and Atos, the private firm paid to carry out fit-to-work medical assessments.

The contract underpins the Department for Work and Pensions's efforts to move people from sick benefits into work.

The National Audit Office said the DWP had failed to penalise Atos for "underperformance", and had not set "sufficiently challenging" targets.

Ministers said the terms of the contract were under "constant review".

French firm Atos was paid more than £112m in the last financial year to carry out about 738,000 face-to-face medical tests on benefit claimants.

Wrong decisions

The DWP used the test results, known as work capability assessments, to decide whether people were fit to work or eligible for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

The assessments were first introduced on a pilot basis by Labour in 2008 and rolled out across the country by the coalition government.

Officials at the DWP have got many decisions wrong, with nearly four out of 10 appeals upheld at tribunals. The NAO said it was unclear whether the quality of the tests was to blame for the number of wrong decisions.

Start Quote

This is a contract that really needs a lot more scrutiny to understand how effective it has been”

End Quote Tom Greatrex Labour MP

In a letter to Tom Greatrex, MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton West, the NAO's Comptroller, Amyas Morse, said it was hard to know whether changes to the tests were needed.

"It is difficult to assess, as the department does not routinely request feedback on the rationale for tribunal decisions," he said.

"Without such data it is not clear whether any changes in the medical process are needed."

The DWP had previously admitted that Atos had not carried out some fitness testing within the agreed time limits, and performance had been "below the standard" since mid-2011.

The NAO criticised the DWP for not seeking "financial redress" for these delays, saying just 10% of the penalties triggered by poor performance had been applied.

The spending watchdog added that the DWP's negotiating position has been undermined by "inaccurate forecasting" of the number of people likely to need a medical test.

'Paying twice'

Mr Greatrex said he had asked the NAO to review the contract after being told by ministers that the details, including information about financial penalties, were "commercially confidential".

"My underlying concern was the fact that the contract is worth £112m a year to Atos," he told Radio 4's Today programme.

"At the same time, through the Tribunals Service, the appeals are costing about £60m a year so effectively we are paying twice to try to correct the mistakes in the initial assessments or the process that leads to the assessments and decisions.

"That isn't good value for money and this is a contract that really needs a lot more scrutiny to understand how effective it has been."

Start Quote

It is a complicated area but we are committed to making it a success to ensure it is both fair and accurate for the user and value for money for the taxpayer”

End Quote Iain Duncan Smith Work and Pensions Secretary

Mr Greatrex urged ministers to reflect on the report and consider reforming the system.

Major changes to the tests were recommended in 2010 by independent adviser Professor Malcolm Harrington. Last month he told the BBC the system had improved but was still "patchy".

The DWP said the contract had "changed considerably" since it was signed by the Labour government in 2008 and ministers had twice - in 2009 and 2012 - demanded improvements.

Feedback from tribunals was now fully evaluated, it added, and in many cases new information was presented at appeal which was not available when the assessment was conducted.

"In 2010, the Work Capability Assessment was not working properly and since then we've substantially improved it," said Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith.

"It is a complicated area but we are committed to making it a success to ensure it is both fair and accurate for the user and value for money for the taxpayer."

'Challenging contract'

A spokesperson for Atos said it had worked very closely with the DWP on a "complex and challenging contract" to "fulfil all our contractual obligations".

"We have also been flexible within the contract, for example implementing changes and recommendations from the Harrington report.

"Where changes to the contract have resulted in slower processing times we have worked alongside the department to address this."

Regular complaints have been made about the medical tests since they were first introduced.

In May 2011, six charities - including the MS Society and Parkinson's UK - urged the government to make the tests fairer for patients whose symptoms varied in severity over time.

A month later, campaigners claimed in a letter to the Guardian newspaper that assessments were causing "huge" distress and had even resulted in suicides.


More on This Story

Related Stories


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 444.

    89 fredbmw
    No doubt there are people who abuse the system, but that is no reason to discriminate against those who are in genuine need and require help. That's what the Welfare State was set up for. I have never begrudged some of my tax being used to help others. Who knows, I might need such help one day. Or even YOU.

  • rate this

    Comment number 394.

    So over 60% of appeals are dismissed at tribunal, suggesting that savings in the long term, rightly or wrongly, will be made by this process. More funding could then be offered to those who really do deserve our support.

    The Paralympics will remind us that many of the disabled are remarkable people doing remarkable things.

  • rate this

    Comment number 389.

    Why is it so difficult to get this right? There are many people who genuinely need these benefits and so should get them. There are a few (still a minority) who play the system. I do not understand why it is so difficult to identify these people and why it costs so much money with private assessors. We just need to have regular doctor refferrals every 6 months to sort the the truth from the myth.

  • rate this

    Comment number 311.

    I am so lucky I do not need to claim, (I might be entitled I don't know if it's means tested or not). I wouldn't be able to stand the stress of it all. Some days I am OK for most of the day, most days not. I am writing this creased up in pain though if I were well enough to get to an interview on a good day I would fail. I wouldn't employ me, why should any employer be expected to?

  • rate this

    Comment number 103.

    As with G4S, incompetent contracting negotiations and oversight.

    If Atos do not correctly assess resulting in £60 million that amount should be deducted from their fee - what's difficult about that ?

    If private sector is used for these jobs the contract / incentives have to be correctly formed otherwise the taxpayer will be ripped off every time.


Comments 5 of 12


More UK stories



BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.