Citizens Information Board
Social Policy
Quarterly Report
October – December 2012
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 Report Overview 1
3 Social Policy Returns Breakdown 2
4 Report Focus – Delays 6
5 Social Policy Role of CIB 11
CIB thanks Citizens Information Services and CIPS whose Social Policy Returns have contributed to the formation of this Report. The case studies included in this Report are just a small selection of those submitted to us. All Returns received enable us to define which issues are causing concern and to determine the focus of the Social Policy Quarterly Reports and other relevant reports and submissions.
1
Introduction
Social Policy Quarterly Report (SPQR) – Quarter 4 2012
This Quarterly Social Policy Report (Q4 2012) charts the feedback received by the Citizens Information Board from Citizens Information Services (CISs) and the Citizens Information Phone Service (CIPS) during the period October to December 2012. The Report provides a statistical overview of the main social policy returns made by CISs and CIPS. It lays out an analysis of the main policy issues affecting users of these services and offers a number of case examples in order to highlight the issues facing many users of CISs and CIPS, in their attempts to access social and public services in Ireland.
There were 630 social policy returns (SPRs)[1] in total from the Citizens information Services (468) and from the Citizens Information Phone Service (162) during the last quarter of 2012. This was slightly down on other quarters during the year, and contributed to the annual total of 3,240 Social Policy Returns made by Centres and CIPS to CIB during 2012.
2
Report Overview
The Social Policy Returns submitted during this quarter were broadly consistent with those reported on throughout 2012. By far, the biggest category was social welfare-related, which stood at 67% of all returns. Within this category, Supplementary Welfare Schemes, Disability and Illness, Families and Children and Carers were lodged as the categories with the most common causes of concern. The vast majority of Supplementary Welfare Scheme returns relate to Rent Supplement, whilst the focus of much of the concern within the carers and disability & illness categories continues to be on processing delays for Carers Allowance, Invalidity Pension and Disability Allowance.
The second highest category of Returns was in the area of education, training and 3rd level, which registered at 9% of all SPRs from October to December 2012. Some 80% of these returns related to SUSI grant applications. As SUSI faces into a review process, an anticipated 100,000 applicants will move into this centralised process for September 2013.
The third highest category of Return made by CISs was Health at 7%. As is consistent with other Quarters, the vast majority of these Returns focus on medical card issues – although the focus has shifted in the reporting of concerns around delays in processing to a focus on perceived anomalies.
The continuing reference to administrative delays and barriers within the broad range of Social Policy Returns as a key focus of concern demonstrates the need to reform the unsatisfactory administrative processes for many schemes. The current modernisation programme that the DSP has embarked on within many schemes in creating new business processes, is also leading to ‘short-term’ consequences of compounded delays that have had a disproportionate effect on the many citizens who are dependent on timely access to a broad range of supports.
3
Social Policy Returns - Breakdown
3.1 Categorisation by Nature of Query
The Social Policy Returns submitted during this quarter were, by and large, consistent with those reported on throughout 2012.
Figure 1: Breakdown of Social Policy Return by Query Category
By far, the biggest category of queries in Q4 was social welfare-related, and these stood at 67% of all Returns (see Figure 1). This represents only a slight (1%) increase on the social welfare-related Returns made during Quarter 3. As noted in the table below, during 2012 this figure ranged from this high of 67% to the relative ‘low’ of 48% (but still a significant proportion of Returns at this level), averaging an overall total of 61% during 2012.
Figure 2: Social Policy Return by Main Query Category; Q1 – Q4 2012
Category / Quarter 1 / Quarter 2 / Quarter 3 / Quarter 4Social Welfare / 48% / 62% / 66% / 67%
Health / 15% / 9% / 7% / 7%
Money and Tax / 13% / <4% / 4% / <4%
Housing / 9% / 7% / 6% / 6%
Ed, training & 3rd level / <4% / <4% / <4% / 9%
The relative uniformity of Social Policy Returns made by CISs and CIPS during 2012 indicates that many core issues remain unfailingly problematic for citizens in their interactions with public services and supports. Nevertheless, it is possible to see the emergence (and in some cases, the subsequent fall-off) of specific issues as they cause concern for many people who then seek information and assistance from CIBs delivery partners. This was evident during 2012 - in particular, with the rise and fall in the recording of queries around medical card processing delays (due to the centralisation of processing), money and tax (due to the new household charge and communications from Revenue to pensioners around tax compliance), Rent Supplement (due to the impact of changes to maximum limits and the processing changes within the new Central Rent Units), and latterly, the problems associated with the processing of third level grant applications through SUSI.
A common thread running through these specific issues is an unsatisfactory administrative process. Whilst a broad range of returns are focused on problems that citizens have with the policies in themselves, a substantial element consistently refers to the way in which a particular scheme is administered. The evidence presented by CISs highlights not only the real hardship caused by administrative delays, but also the significant barriers to access that these administrative issues present. Such barriers, it could be argued, undermine policy intent.
3.2 Social Welfare-related Returns
As stated previously, 67% of the SPRs made by CISs were social welfare-related issues and they amounted to 420 during the 3 month period. Supplementary Welfare Schemes, and issues relating to Families and Children, each accounted for 10% of social welfare-related Returns. These were followed by Returns concerning Disability and Illness queries (8%) and Carers (8%). As is consistent with Returns throughout 2012, the vast majority (69%) of Supplementary Welfare Scheme Returns related to Rent Supplement. Concerns within the carers and disability & illness query categories continue to be on processing delays for Carers Allowance, Invalidity Pension and Disability Allowance.
The level of Social Policy Returns relating to social welfare queries was mirrored in the general business of CISs and CIPS nationwide during 2012 – 47% of all queries made to CISs and CIPS were social welfare-related.
3.3 Education & Health Returns
The second highest category of Returns was in the area of education and training, which when combined with 3rd level, registered at 9% of all SPRs from October to December 2012. This is the first time that these categories registered so frequently in SPRs in 2012. The overwhelming majority of these returns (80%) related to SUSI grant applications.
This issue first emerged as a significant concern in the 3rd Quarter Returns, when first year students were making grant applications to the new online grant application system. At this stage, CISs, in their Returns, noted that many students had difficulties in contacting the SUSI helpline and in getting clear information on what was required for the application process. As the academic year progressed and the backlog and communication problems remained, CISs reported in Quarter 4 2012 on the hardship and frustrations that many students were experiencing as a result of the change in the processing of grant applications.
The third highest category of Return made by CISs was Health at 7%, the majority of which were medical card-related. This percentage has halved compared to the first quarter of 2012, when the health-based SPRs made by CISs peaked at 15%. In January 2012, there was a backlog of over 57,000 medical card applications (both new and renewals) which was created when medical card processing was centralised. The frustrations caused by this administrative logjam were evidenced in the levels of support being sought through CISs and CIPSs by applicants who were reporting significant stress and difficulties caused by the change in processing.
During the last quarter of 2012, the majority of health-related Returns were still reflecting difficulties that people had with the medical card application process but the nature of the policy issue was focussed more around anomalies rather than with delays in the application process. Many of these Returns also reveal a significant number of older people who were struggling with the system as they are being asked to engage in the renewal process for the over-70s Medical Cards.
The HSE now reports that 96% of all medical card applications are being processed within 15 days, and that there are some 2 million medical cards and GP-only cards in circulation. This represents a 38% increase in the number of cards issued by the HSE in 2008. Clearly, this increase in the number of eligible people reflects both the rise in the levels of unemployment and in the numbers of working poor, as wages and working hours continue to be reduced.
This huge increase in volume has placed a major strain on the processing and funding of this element of the health budget. With the HSE reporting a resolution of the processing problems, the Irish Examiner reported in February 2013 that up to 40,000 people are expected to lose their cards due to income eligibility changes in Budget 2013. Nearly 20,000 of these are expected to be people over 70 who earn over €600 per week (formerly €700/week), who will be switched to a GP-visit card instead.
3.4 Policy Issues
Throughout 2012, 27% of all social policy returns described systematic delays in either the application or the appeals process. The Ministers for Social Protection, Health, and Education have, on a number of occasions during 2012, acknowledged that the processing of applications for many schemes within the remit of their respective Departments has been problematic. During this past year, the Social Policy Returns made to CIB have consistently highlighted the extent to which delays in processing applications and appeals have become almost commonplace within the delivery of social services in Ireland.
Figure 3: Breakdown of Social Policy Return by Nature of Policy Issue
During 2012 Minister Joan Burton, in response to complaints about these systematic delays, drew attention to the major service delivery modernisation projects that have been undertaken in many sections of the DSP, including the Social Welfare Appeals Office. The stated aims of this modernisation project have been to reduce backlogs, and to ‘optimise output and customer service’ – i.e. to improve processing times and customer satisfaction[2]. Whilst the long-term aim is necessary, it would seem that the short-term by-product has been to frustrate and confound an already-strained group of citizens who are seeking to access supports.
4
Report Focus
4.1 Delays in obtaining benefits and supports
Many of those who deliver and receive social services in Ireland experience delays in processing applications as an almost routine aspect of the delivery of many of these services. But to suggest that these delays are routine may belie the frustrations and difficulties caused – to those who deliver these services, to those who apply for them and to those who assist in this process.
Undoubtedly, staff in the many Departments have been working under significant pressures as demands made by citizens for state supports have increased exponentially during the past number of years – whilst resources to deal with these demands have been limited and, in some cases, cut back.
Whilst the pressures being placed on many public servants within the system are significant, staff within CICs throughout the country continue to report the effects of these pressures on the many people who are reliant on state support in so many aspects of their daily lives – whether it is to access income support, education and training opportunities, health care or adequate housing. In the past 12 -18 months, it would appear that the introduction of new processes and systems for the administration of particular schemes has served to act as a further obstacle to many citizens as they try to access the relevant benefits.
4.2 Delays in obtaining student grants
In 2012, a new body to assess and administer student grants was established. City of Dublin VEC was awarded the contract by the Department of Education and the new body – Student Universal Support Ireland - was introduced in June 2012 by Minister Ruairi Quinn. During this first year, SUSI was set to process only first-time applicants – whilst all non-first time applicants were to continue to be processed by the 33 County Councils and VECs.
The intention for the new system - a streamlined, centralised processing system for the grant applications - was not matched by the reality for many students. Over 65,000 first-time grant applications were received (a 20% increase on the previous year), with the preliminary checking of documents being completed by a private company, Abtran, on behalf of SUSI. An initial staff of 65 was engaged to process these applications and this increased to 180 in November 2012. The means-test had up to 15 financial indicators. It is estimated that at one stage, SUSI staff were dealing with 1.2 million pieces of documentation from students.[3]