Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

425. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if an exceptional needs’ payment will be approved for a person (details supplied). [57400/22]

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Applications for Exceptional Needs Payments (ENPs) are made under the Supplementary Welfare Allowance (SWA) scheme administered by Designated Persons in the Community Welfare Service in the Department.

The purpose of the ENP is to assist people with essential, once-off, exceptional expenditure, which cannot be met from any other source and which a person could not reasonably be expected to meet out of their weekly income.

The ENP is demand led and payments are made at the discretion of the officers administering the SWA scheme taking into account the requirements of the legislation and all the relevant circumstances of the case in order to ensure that the payments target those most in need of assistance.

According to the records of my Department, the person concerned applied for an ENP for assistance with dental costs. The Designated Person disallowed the claim on the basis the need was not exceptional as the person should have put in place financial arrangements prior to the dental work being carried out.

A decision letter issued to the person concerned advising her of the outcome of her application and affording her the option of seeking a review of the Designated Person’s decision.

Determinations made in relation to claims made under Sections 200, 201 and 202 of the Social Welfare (Consolidation Act) 2005, namely allowances-in-kind, ENPs and UNPs, can be reviewed by a SWA Reviewing Officer under Section 323 of that Act.

The person subsequently requested a review of the Designated Person’s decision. A SWA Reviewing Officer reviewed the person’s application and having considered all aspects of the case, upheld the original decision to refuse the ENP as no new information had been provided, and on the basis, there appeared to have been alternatives which were not explored by the person concerned. The person concerned was advised of the outcome in writing on 15/10/2022.

I trust this clarifies the matter.