รายละเอียดกระทู้

The reassessment programme sparked huge controversy amid claims sick and disabled people are being forced to work on the basis of substandard evaluations Photo: ALAMY Almost half of the controversial "fit for work" reports carried out on disabled people are of "unacceptably" poor quality, a government review has found. By Steven Swinford, Senior Political Correspondent http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10195323/Disability-benefit-reports-found-to-be-unacceptably-poor.html The Prime Minister's spokesman said he is "concerned" by the failings of Atos, the company which carries out the tests, adding that new providers are being brought in to administer the scheme. The announcement follows months of criticism of the test, including a ruling by High Court judges that it "substantially disadvantages" people with mental illnesses, autism and learning difficulties. There have also been concerns that it is unfairly weighted against people with health conditions that fluctuate over time. Mark Hoban, the work minister, said: "I am committed to ensuring the work capability assessment process is as fair and accurate as possible, with the right checks and balances to ensure the right decision is reached. "Where our audits identify any drop in quality, we act decisively to ensure providers meet our exacting quality standards. "Since 2010 we have made considerable improvements to the system we inherited from the previous government. "However, it's vital we continue to improve the service to claimants, which is why we are introducing new providers to increase capacity." The scheme is intended to measure whether disabled people have the ability to work and should therefore be able to claim benefits. If they record low scores on the tests, known as Work Capability Assessments, they cannot claim Employment Support Allowance, a benefit which is worth up to £106.50 a week. About a third of those who appealed after being refused the support have been successful and subsequently been given the benefits. Since the scheme started in 2008, Atos has carried out more than 1.5million assessments. However, there have been more than 600,000 appeals at a cost of £60million. The Department for Work and Pensions audited 400 reports carried out under the scheme between October 2012 and March 2013, and graded them A-C. A total of 41 per cent of them were given C grades, meaning that they failed to give enough detail or explain the reasoning for the decisions. The DWP said it did not mean that the assessments were wrong, but rather the reports were of poor quality. Mr Hoban said he has directed Atos Healthcare to put in place a plan to improve the quality of the reports. The measures include re-training and re-evaluating Atos Healthcare professionals, with those who fail to meet the standards having their work audited until they do. The government also admitted yesterday that its flagship scheme to tackle youth unemployment has found just 4,600 placements for 18 to 24 year olds who have been out of work for more than six months. Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, announced youth contract 18 months ago with the intention of helping 160,000 unemployed young people find work. The scheme offers businesses a subsidy of up to £2,275 for taking on young people who have been out of work for at least six months. The department yesterday said that the incentives have been given to just 4,690 recruits between June 2012 and May 2013. Mr Hoban said: "Although take-up of the incentive got off to a slow start, it is now on a clear upwards trajectory – and of those employers who have already made use of the scheme, 86% said they would be likely to take someone else who is eligible for the scheme on in the future." The shadow work and pensions secretary, Liam Byrne, said: "The youth contract has utterly failed to get our young people back to work. This flagship scheme is on course to miss its target by more than 92% – no wonder there are still almost a million young people out of work." Atos Healthcare said in a statement: "We are sorry when we do not meet our own high standards but can reassure that a C-grade report does not mean the assessment was wrong and there are checks and balances throughout the system so that the correct decision on benefit is made by the department."