Source · Select Committees · Work and Pensions Committee
Recommendation 16
16
Acknowledged
Paragraph: 65
We welcome efforts to reduce unnecessary reassessments for people whose conditions or needs are unlikely...
Conclusion
We welcome efforts to reduce unnecessary reassessments for people whose conditions or needs are unlikely to change. However, ESA/UC and PIP are different benefits with different purposes, and this must be reflected in any criteria for reassessment. The Department should adopt a version of the severe conditions criteria for PIP, effectively ending the need for reassessment as it does in ESA/UC. If this is achieved through the Severe Disability Group, which the Department is currently testing, the criteria must be developed to recognise the differences between ESA/UC and PIP, and not focus solely on a claimant’s ability to work.
Government Response Summary
The Department has made progress with its plans to test the Severe Disability Group, so that the relevant claimants can benefit from a simplified process.
Paragraph Reference:
65
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
In PIP, for those with long-term (severe) conditions and with an ongoing award, the Department’s intention has always been to have a light-touch review, appropriate to the needs of the claimant, at 10 years. The Department has made progress with its plans to test the Severe Disability Group, so that the relevant claimants can benefit from a simplified process without ever needing to complete a detailed application form, go through a full assessment or have frequent award reviews. This builds on existing successful measures such as the Severe Conditions Criteria for ESA or UC. The Department has worked with an expert group of specialist health professionals to draw up a set of draft criteria that focus on claimants who have conditions which are severely disabling, lifelong and with no realistic prospect of recovery. These criteria were shared with several charities and their feedback was used to further develop its draft criteria, which do not focus on a claimant’s ability to work.