Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether she has made an assessment of the adequacy of specialist input in PIP Reviews.

I have interpreted your question to refer to the adequacy of the input provided by the assessment supplier (AS) health professional (HP) during a PIP review. All decisions on entitlement to PIP, whether at initial claim or review, are made by DWP case managers (CM).

CMs, whilst not medically qualified, do receive extensive training to enable them to evaluate a claim and assess the individual’s needs. They have access to expert advice from HPs, if required, and can make requests for supplementary advice at any stage in the decision-making process. Advice should be clear, succinct, justified and in accordance with the consensus of medical opinion. Where a CM is then still unable to make a decision on the PIP review, the case will be referred to the AS for an assessment.

During the assessment stage the HP is able to source additional evidence from professionals such as the individuals GP, occupational therapist, community psychiatric nurse and/or any other health professionals involved in the individual’s care. They have access to guidance and support (such as Condition Insight Reports and Continuous Professional Development modules) on how certain conditions present and how they might affect function. The APs also have access to Mental Function Champions (MFC) who can provide advice and support to HPs on health conditions and disabilities affecting mental, cognitive, intellectual, and behavioural function.

The quality of any advice provided by the HP, whether via supplementary advice or the assessment report is a priority for all AS’s and the department. The department works extensively with ASs to make improvements to guidance, training, and audit procedures to ensure a quality service, supported by an independent audit function that continually monitors performance and provides feedback to its ASs.