Assessment process
Functional descriptors
Each functional descriptor comes with a score of 6, 9 or 15 points that is intended to reflect the relative severity of the disability. A total score of 15 points or more will qualify the claimant for ESA. If the healthcare professional deems that none of the functional descriptors apply, the total score will be zero. Descriptors are grouped into 17 activities. For example, the activity 'Manual Dexterity' – hand function – comes with the following descriptors for the assessor to choose from: * The claimant cannot use a computer keyboard or mouse (9 points) * The claimant cannot use a pen (9 points) * The claimant cannot pick up a small object (15 points) * The claimant cannot press a button or turn a page (15 points and a place in the Support Group) Only one descriptor may be chosen for each activity, and it should be the highest-scoring option that still accurately describes the loss of function. Someone who ''can'' pick up a small object like a coin but cannot use a pen to make a simple mark will score 9 points for that activity. If a claimant ''is'' capable of carry out a particular action but cannot do so reliably, repeatedly, in a timely manner, safely and without significant pain, they should be treated as being ''incapable'' of carrying out that action. The physical functional descriptors cover these activities: * Mobilising * Standing and sitting * Reaching * Picking up and moving an object * Manual dexterity * Making yourself understood * Understanding others * Finding your way around * Continence * Consciousness The mental functional descriptors cover: * Learning tasks * Hazard awareness * Planning and problem-solving * Coping with change * Getting about * Coping with other people * Behaviour A 'top score' in one activity will usually qualify the claimant for the Support Group.Non-functional descriptors
The non-functional descriptors have no points attached but instead have a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer: * Is the claimant unable to eat or drink? * Is the medical condition life-threatening and uncontrollable? * Will the claimant probably die within 12 months? * Would the claimant's health be at substantial risk if they were found fit for work or for work-related activity? Other factors that ''might'' be taken into account here include: * The claimant is pregnant * There is a risk to others * Intravenous therapy is being administered * The claimant has cancer A 'yes' answer to a non-functional descriptor question will usually lead to the claimant being treated as though they were in the Support Group.Aftermath
After the interview and any examination the findings are summarised in free text using Standard English prose and the report, constructed mainly from the LiMA options selected by the assessor during the interview phase of the assessment, is sent electronically to the DWP. The whole report attempts both to record all the findings and to justify the recommendation on fitness for work. It shows the total points score and ends with a statement on whether significant disability is likely or unlikely, and a prognosis. After the assessment, a report in an official from the DWP decides on entitlement to Employment and Support Allowance (or to an enhanced rate of Universal Credit). The process also decides whether a ''successful'' claimant is able to take part in 'work-related activity'. In this way, the process sorts claimants into three groups: * Fit for work * Unfit for work, but fit for 'work-related activity' (the Work-Related Activity Group) * Fit for neither work nor 'work-related activity' (the Support Group)Outcomes
The core WCA generated high volumes of 'fit for work' recommendations from its inception. As the reassessment programme gathered steam, the proportion disregarded by decision-makers grew: 8% of 'fit for work' recommendations were disregarded in 2012; this almost doubled to 15% in 2013 and then increased again in 2014 to 20%. With initial decisions, almost two-thirds of claimants were declared 'fit for work' by the DWP in 2009 and 2010. This dropped to around half once the reassessment programme got underway in 2011; by 2013, it was a third; by 2014, only a quarter of claimants were declared 'fit for work' by the DWP at the first stage of the decision-making process. DWP data for the first quarter of 2016 showed that 9% of WCAs carried out at that point in time were reassessments of old Incapacity Benefit claims, while 21% were reassessments of successful ESA claims and the remaining 70% were new assessments of fresh claims. The outcomes, before any reconsiderations or appeals, were: * After Incapacity Benefit reassessments, 93% of claimants were found to be unfit for work * After ESA reassessments, 89% of claimants were found to be unfit for work * After assessments of new claims, 54% of claimants were found to be unfit for workHistory
The WCA was introduced in 2008. Prior to this, only a small number of Incapacity Benefit claimants were required to undergo assessment. In its last term of office New Labour began to phase out Incapacity Benefit and replace it with a new benefit: Employment and Support Allowance. The policy objectives for the new test were: to accentuate the positive by "looking at what you ''can'' do, not what you can't do"; to take into account new disability legislation, changes in the workplace and developments in occupational health; to make the test more stringent; to assess most new claims in person rather than on paper; and, once the new test had bedded in, to use it to re-evaluate virtually every established sickness benefit recipient. To facilitate these last two objectives testing capacity was increased fivefold by employing nurses and physiotherapists to work alongside doctors, and a semi-structured interview technique based on a computer-generated template was used for the first time. Initially, only fresh claims for ESA were assessed, but the sickness benefit caseload increased — partly a consequence of the banking crisis and its effect on the economy and on jobs. An overhaul of the test began soon afterwards. The Labour Welfare Secretary at the time, James Purnell, wrote that these and other changes would ensure that "only those who are genuinely incapable of work" would get full ESA. The DWP's in-house medical experts piloted the new criteria in 2010 and parliament gave them legal force in March 2011. Some of these changes would make it easier for some claimants with specific conditions to receive ESA, but most were intended to toughen up the test. The WCA then became the fulcrum for a reassessment of all recipients of Incapacity Benefit and all disabled people on Income Support. In 2011, after an external review by Professor Malcolm Harrington, Atos designated some of their assessors as 'mental function champions', who would provide mainly telephone advice to other assessors on mental health issues as they related to the WCA's criteria As well as this, in 2011 the DWP began to send decision-makers justifications to the claimants, which explained how the decision was made in plain English. In 2017, the DWP said that henceforth claimants placed in the Support Group after their WCA who have a "severe, lifelong disability" (as judged by the DWP) would no longer have to undergo periodic reassessment.See also
* Employment Support Allowance *References
{{Reflist, 2 Social security in the United Kingdom Controversies in the United Kingdom Disability in the United Kingdom