Disability and Carer Benefits Expert Advisory Group minutes: February 2022

Attendees and apologies

Present

• Tressa Burke (Deputy Chair)
• Fiona Collie; Jo McLaughlin
• Bill Scott; Lucy Mulvagh
• Ed Pybus; Simon Hodge
• Frank Reilly

Apologies

• Jim McCormick (Chair)
• Sarah Hammond
• Lucinda Godfrey
• Jatin Haria
• Alan McDevitt
• Shaben Begum
• Ewan MacDonald
• Angela O’Hagan

In attendance

• David Hilber (Scottish Government)
• Kate Thomson-McDermott (Scottish Government)
• Jennifer Sinclair (Scottish Government)
• Joshua Mouldey (Scottish Government)
• R McC (Social Security Scotland)

Secretariat

• Kirsty Milligan (Scottish Government)
• Connie Penman (Scottish Government)

Items and actions

Welcome from the chair and group business

Tressa welcomed everyone to the meeting. The group confirmed there were no declarations of interest. Tressa asked the group to contact the Secretariat if they identified any errors or would like to propose making any amendments to the minutes of the previous meeting.

Action one: Review minutes from previous meeting and inform secretariat of any edits to be made

Action for: Group members

Action by: End of February 2022

Connie updated the group on the outstanding actions from the 20th quarterly meeting and confirmed that the Secretariat would progress these.

Action two: Follow up on remaining outstanding actions from the 20th quarterly meeting

Action for: Secretariat

Action by: May 2022

Connie reminded the group of the outstanding pieces of advice and advised the group that these were currently being drafted.

Action three: Send first drafts of outstanding advice to the group for comments

Action for: Secretariat

Action by: May 2022

Update on Case Transfer

Tressa welcomed officials to give an update on Case Transfer.

Officials talked through the Child Disability Living Allowance to Child Disability Payment, Personal Independence Payment to Adult Disability Payment and Working Age Disability Living Allowance to ADP Case Transfer processes and asked the group for any questions or comments.

The group raised the following:

• if a client’s award review date is set for a couple of years in to the future, will they remain on their Department for Work and Pensions benefit until their review date is closer?
• what happens to people that are due a Personal Independence Payment review before the Adult Disability Payment launch?
• if a client has a change in circumstance due to a terminal condition, the 13-17 week wait for Case Transfer could deprive them of the help they need in the last stages of their life. Are there any special arrangements for clients with a terminal illness?
• the group asked for clarification on the use of the term backdating and specifically if the regulations allow for backdating
• what would backdating mean for passported entitlements?

• if the client’s change of circumstance meant they were now entitled to the care component, would that be backdated alongside their award for their existing claim?
• would there be a time period where a client would have an award for Personal Independence Payment and for Adult Disability Payment, and where they would only be receiving the care component for Adult Disability Payment?

• if someone has an indefinite award on Working Age Disability Living Allowance that hasn’t been reviewed since 2013, would they stay on Working Age Disability Living Allowance and never transfer?
• the group raised concerns around clients who weren’t pension aged in 2013 but are now and are on indefinite awards. The Group discussed that this may mean they will be assessed under Adult Disability Payment rules to transfer with the potential that around half of them could then lose their entitlement considering the differences in the eligibility criteria

• telling clients they are no longer entitled years after they believed they were ‘set up for life’ would be devastating to them, particularly those with mental health issues or learning difficulties
• taking benefits away from people of that age would be a public relations disaster, therefore there needs to be consideration given to the consequences
• clients should have been reviewed by the Department of Work and Pensions with an age related transfer process long before now. It will be difficult to explain to them now if they are no longer entitled

• the group discussed if there was any real benefit to, unless there is a change in circumstances, reassessing people with an indefinite Working Age Disability Living Allowance award as this would create upset and anxiety for these clients

• if a client would like to have their award re-determined then it could be done, but if they don’t want that, the Group felt it wasn’t reasonable or fair to tell them they have no choice

• reassessing clients currently on an indefinite award, who could then potentially lose it, would increase poverty and inequality. However if they were indefinitely awarded by the Department of Work and Pensions, it is unlikely that they wouldn’t qualify for Personal Independence Payment or Adult Disability Payment
• the group would like to feed in to the policy development process around Working Age Disability Living Allowance case transfer
• the group felt that the name of the payment given to clients once they have transferred from Disability Living Allowance over to the Scottish system and are awaiting their assessment could be confusing

• the group suggested this be referred to as a transitional payment instead of lower rate to reduce some of the confusion
• if a lower rate Disability Living Allowance was created in the future then this would provide a clear distinction

• doing thorough and robust equalities impact assessment and human rights impact assessments at this stage of the policy development would be helpful to identify details that may cause issues and help identify potential mitigations and solutions
• what is the intended approach around equalities, human rights and intersectionality when it comes to the pilot?

• will there be data gathered and monitored on protected characteristics and resultant experiences?

• a lot of equalities organisations that are strategic partners to the Scottish Government could give advice on equalities monitoring
• the group reminded officials of the importance of looking beyond the protected characteristic groups contributing to why a broad human rights impact assessment is important

Officials answered the group’s questions and thanked the group for their questions and comments and then sought the group’s views on an ongoing issue surrounding payment cycles.

The group raised the following:

• changing a clients’ payment cycle from every four weeks to weekly will likely be more confusing than them having to wait an extra week for their first payment but then being paid every four weeks after that
• clients could be signposted to crisis support if the extra week would cause financial difficulty or hardship for them
• the group were largely of the view that clients would not want weekly payments if they were used to being on a cycle of payments every four weeks
• Social Security Scotland only allowing one bank account to be connected to each client will likely cause problems. Is there any scope for the system to be adjusted to change that?
• group members asked for a further explanation on why the 3 plus 1 payment cycle was stopping if it was the preferred option for clients. Why was the system not designed to account for that?
• communication around the new payment cycles needs to be very carefully thought through and tailored to varying needs of each client

• Social Security Scotland should make sure it is clearly communicated to the client to ensure they understand
• there needs to be a substantial notice period given to clients on any changes to their payment cycles as they will have bills and other payments that rely on these funds being available at a given time/date

• the problem with the new 4 weekly payment cycle is that the client will ‘miss’ a week’s payment which they could then be consistently chasing and never catch up

• would there be an option to have a transitional one week payment?

Officials answered the group’s questions and thanked the group for their questions and comments. They offered to contact a colleague from IT who could explain the working of the systems in more detail if the group thought that would be of value. Tressa thanked officials for their update.

Update on Child Disability Payment

Tressa welcomed officials to give an update on Child Disability Payment.  

The group and officials discussed the following:

• the published Child Disability Payment statistics and data, specifically first stage applications and unavailable data on ‘refusals’ or ‘no awards’
• the process when the Department for Work and Pensions pass applications for  Disability Living Allowance to Social Security Scotland and the effect that has on the individual’s entitlement and appeal rights
• the experience of kinship or foster carers that go through the application process
• the group commented that the digital channels are really useful to have and it is positive that they appear to be working well
• the group were glad to hear that digital forms for third sector organisations and other kinds of support advisors were on the radar and enquired what the timescales would be for the introduction of them
• the ways for advisors or applicants to contact Social Security Scotland to resolve processing issues with an application
• any issues that could be preventing individuals from proceeding with stage 2 of their application, such as requesting or preferring a welfare advisor to be there
• the relationship between agency staff and frontline Health and Social Care colleagues
• the positives of having a high number of digital applications, but equally the risk of information potentially not reaching the households that don’t have access to the internet, and any existing data to further explore this. There has been a lot of reliance on getting information across to people digitally but if clients don’t have access to the internet and libraries are closed. This potentially means they could miss out

Officials thanked the group for the discussion and confirmed that they would provide answers to the outstanding questions by correspondence.

Action four: Child Disability Payment officials to answer outstanding questions from the group by correspondence

Action for: Child Disability Payment officials

Action by: May 2022

Update on beyond a safe and secure transfer advice and DACBEAG review on continuation

Connie provided the group with an update on the Beyond a Safe and Secure Transfer proactive advice, thanked the group for their input on it so far and discussed proposed timescales for completing the drafting of the advice. Connie mentioned that the Secretariat were in the process of organising a meeting with international colleagues to discuss best practice examples of models of Social Security. She noted that the group would be invited to this.

Action five: Send the Beyond a Safe and Secure Transfer advice first draft to the group for comment

Action for: Secretariat

Action by: May 2022

Action six: Invite the group to the international comparisons meeting

Action for: Secretariat

Action by: 28th March 2022

Connie provided the group with an update on the ongoing review of the Disability and Carer Benefits Expert Advisory Group. She noted that part of this work involved the group members providing their views on the continuation of the group as well as the continuation of their individual membership. Connie mentioned that the Secretariat would be setting up a separate meeting with the wider group and then intended to speak to each member individually.

Tressa asked the group to reflect on the role of the Disability and Carer Benefits Expert Advisory Group as an entity on its own without considering individual membership. Connie then asked the group for any questions or comments and they raised the following:

• the group have evolved since its inception and addressed skills gaps by getting new members
• The level of contribution the group can make is dependent on the quality and consistency of the Secretariat
• the Disability and Carer Benefits Expert Advisory Group is one of the most useful stakeholder groups as the members can have input on the agenda items. On other SG stakeholder or advisory groups officials lead the agenda items which means some pressing issues aren’t addressed
• a bonus of the Disability and Carer Benefits Expert Advisory Group is members are there as individual experts and not as representatives of their organisations
• connectivity is important with other stakeholder groups such as the Minimum Income Guarantee and Carer Benefits Advisory Group
• the process of providing written recommendations from the group to Ministers and then receiving a written response with an indication of which recommendations are accepted fully, in principle or not is a clear indication of the benefit and privilege of this group compared to some other advisory groups
• in the discussion paper, there is a section which states that it will be assumed that any member that does not respond or engage with this process does not wish to continue participating as a member of the group. This should be reiterated in future correspondence so that members are aware of it

Connie thanked everyone for their points raised. She shared that the intention is to have the review finalised and with the Minister ahead of the group’s next quarterly meeting which the Minister and Cabinet Secretary will be invited to.

Action seven: Set up a group to discuss the review

Action for: Secretariat

Action by: End of February 2022

Action eight: Invite the Minister and Cabinet Secretary to May's quarterly meeting

Action for: Secretariat

Action by: March 2022

Group discussion

The group reflected on the Ministerial response to their Indefinite Awards advice. Connie shared that the Minister had carefully considered this response.

The group discussed the following:

• the response given to recommendations 7 and 8 - in the current Department of Work and Pension’s system a review can be requested at any time
• an example scenario where an applicant has a physical health condition which they have outlined within their application. But, the applicant also has a mental health condition which they didn’t note within their application. This would likely result in them being on the correct award rate according to the information contained within their application but they also have needs associated with their mental health condition which wasn’t mentioned during the application process. Therefore, while there has been no change in their condition, there was information ‘left out’. The Group discussed their understanding of the route in the regulations to correct that. 
• their interpretation of the Ministerial response around routes to request an award review in the Scottish system
• a LEAP process currently ongoing which showed that the Department of Work and Pensions had been interpreting their regulations incorrectly and therefore they have to review all of the cases where they feel the law has been applied incorrectly
• the DWP current supersession grounds
• the group had recommended in their advice that the Scottish Government should collect initial data with a view to considering extending Indefinite Awards beyond just clients on a high award and would welcome assurance that this wouldn’t be forgotten about
• the group asked the Secretariat to note some of their concerns in regards to the Indefinite Awards response, specifically the response given to recommendation 7 and 8 and explore this with the relevant officials
• specifying a time limit on requests for redeterminations could be seen to limit the right to request a review at any time
• as the Case Transfer arrangements are proposed, if an applicant gets a determination under the transfer, there could be 6 months that pass before a redetermination on this award would conclude. This then restricts their right to appeal further extending the timescales
• for applicants who have notified a change of circumstance that makes them eligible for high mobility that is only awarded after case transfer, then re-determination and then overturned appeal, they will potentially have to wait a year before getting a Motability Vehicle, for example
• there are time limits set in statute that should be unaffected by the process of case transfer
• there could be issues between this and passported schemes such as blue badges
• these considerations could widen poverty and inequality as well as reduce applicant’s life opportunities

Action nine: Discuss the group's concerns in relation to the Indefinite Awards response with the relevant officials