Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Minister for Social Protection the waiting times for appeals in her Department; the measures she has taken to address this issue; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20570/12]

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am advised by the social welfare appeals office that, based on figures for the first quarter of 2012, the average waiting time for appeals dealt with by summary decisions was 22.4 weeks, and 40.9 weeks for those that required an oral hearing. The comparable times for 2011 were 25 weeks and 52.5 weeks, respectively. In this regard I have already circulated to all Deputies a report on the performance in the first quarter.

These processing times are calculated from the registration date of the appeal to the date of its finalisation. They include all activities during this period including time spent in the Department for comments by the deciding officer on the grounds of appeal put forward by the appellant, and any further investigation, examination or assessment by the Department's inspectors and medical assessors that is deemed necessary. A considerable period of time is added to the process when an oral hearing is required because of the logistics involved in this process. By its nature and because it is a quasi-judicial function, the processing of appeals takes time even at the best of times and reflects the fact that, by definition, the appeal process cannot be a quick one. It is also necessary to arrange locations for interviews and so on.

In an effort to reduce the processing times, the Department appointed 12 additional appeals officers between 2010 and 2011. In addition, a further ten appeals officers, formerly employed by the community welfare service of the HSE joined the office as part of the integration of the community welfare service appeals services into the social welfare appeals office. This brought the total number of appeals officers to 39. In addition to this, the office has improved its business processes and IT support.

I am assured by the chief appeals officer that she is keeping the methods of operation by which the social welfare appeals office conducts its business under constant review, and that the processes are continually being enhanced to reduce the backlogs in the office and, overall, to reduce the processing times for dealing with appeals. Progress is being made.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand that appeals take time. One of the main issues with which we deal in our constituency clinics is the amount of time it takes for an oral hearing especially when a medical report or additional medical information is required. Some time ago a report indicated that in approximately 50% of the cases going to the appeals office, something is granted by that office. In other words, the decision is changed to some extent. That begs the question for the poor individual who was left depending on a community welfare officer payment for the extra 44 weeks or a year or more as the case may be. They need to pay for what according to the appeals officer was possibly a wrong decision by the Department in the first place. Can the Department learn from the cases being decided in an appeals office to try to get the right answer the first time around? That would be the best way to reduce the delays in the appeals office. It is not just about staff but to reduce the volume of cases going there, which can be done by getting a more accurate decision by the Department in the first place.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In 2008 there were 15,700 appeals and in 2011 there were 34,000, indicating that the volume of appeals has more than doubled. For the first time since 2008, in 2011 - particularly in the latter part - we have begun to make serious improvements in the processing times, particularly on new applications. IT improvements are being made and much of that work will be completed by June. Because of the quasi-judicial function, in 2011 a root and branch review of the process within the appeals office was carried to identify causes of logjams and to ensure the operating model in the appeals office is fit for purpose. The basic principle underlying the review was to gain efficiencies and improve the services to customers. The outcome of the review indicated that the process where there is a two-stage consideration of each file, where the file is vetted and either a summary decision is made or where an oral hearing is required, the placing of the file in a new queuing arrangement to be listed for oral hearing, was causing unnecessary delay and lacked transparency.

A new model was devised and has been implemented. An officer is now assigned a caseload and he or she will either decide the case summarily or if an oral hearing is warranted will take the case to oral hearing. The benefits of the new process are that it will be quicker for the person applying and there will be no second queue. The appeals office will be in a position to give an appellant an indicative timeframe for a decision once a file has been assigned. There is less file movement and ownership of a caseload by an appeals officer carries an incentive to process the caseload in the most effective way. However, it is still a work in progress to try to improve it.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My question is on a related issue. Because appeals take so long, people then approach the community welfare officer thereby adding to the bureaucracy. The sooner those backlogs in appeals are dealt with the less the bureaucracy in the Department as a whole. More reviews of different payments happen resulting in a logjam in them also. There are logjams in internal reviews in benefits such as the domiciliary care allowance and family income supplement. In some cases the payments stop and people go without a payment, which is a bad habit.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would be very concerned about the domiciliary care allowance because I know it is so important to parents. We have already introduced new arrangements. For instance when a case is due for review, the parents now get three months' notice that the review is to take place. They will then get a further two months to make submissions through their medical advisers or other advisers. From now on when a person is granted a domiciliary care allowance and if there is to be a review date, that review date is indicated. The system I found when I came to the Department did not provide for that. The first stage when parents get the domiciliary care allowance is advising them there will be a review and when that review is likely to take place. When the review date is approaching they are then given three months' notice and then two months. That should considerably improve the capacity of parents to be able to deal with this in a reasonable period of time because I am aware how important it is. We are also carrying out other in-depth reviews and I will revert to the Deputy when that work is complete.