Submission 2000

Supplementary Welfare Allowance Review

Introduction

Comhairle (See Note) welcomes the setting up of a Working Group to conduct a comprehensive review of the Supplementary Welfare Allowance (SWA) scheme.

The scope of the review is wide ranging and involves assessing the scheme in the context of a number of recent policy developments, including the National Anti-Poverty Strategy. Concurrently with this review a series of reviews and assessments are being conducted under the terms of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF), which will have an effect on the SWA scheme. The proposed benchmarking process to assess adequacy of social welfare payments and the examination of the cost of disability allowance are among the PPF proposals which will affect the operation of the SWA scheme.

One of Comhairle's functions is to contribute to the development of social policy through providing feedback from the users of social services to the relevant statutory agencies. Citizens Information Centres, now under the auspices of Comhairle, dealt with almost a quarter of a million queries from the public in 1999. Of the queries considered by centres to have a social policy feedback dimension, half were concerned with social welfare generally and one-quarter of these were concerned with Supplementary Welfare Allowance (SWA). The recommendations contained in this submission are substantially based on the problems identified by these cases.

Summary of Comhairle Submission

The effectiveness of SWA as an income maintenance scheme is dependent on having a mainstream income maintenance system which is itself effective. Its effectiveness as an anti-poverty tool is dependent on its interaction with all the other necessary interventions.

The original objectives of SWA are still valid as an essential component of a comprehensive income maintenance system. There is still - and probably always will be - a need for a supplementary system to cater for individual need. These objectives could be reworded to take into account other objectives set out in the National Anti-Poverty Strategy, the Health Strategy and other policy documents.

We consider that mainstream schemes should cater for identifiable group need - for example, the income maintenance needs of the short term ill and asylum seekers. These needs are not supplementary and should not be met from the supplementary scheme. We recommend that

• The Sickness Allowance that has been provided for in legislation but has not been brought into effect should be introduced.
  
• There should be provision for the direct payment of an asylum seekers allowance.

We recommend that responsibility for interim payments should be taken over directly by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs (DSCFA). While provision for this has been made in the Social Welfare Act 2000, detailed regulations have not yet been put in place.

The legislation governing SWA does allow for payment in kind in certain circumstances but we consider that the legislation may need amending in order to cater for groups such as asylum seekers. The arrangements may also need to be reviewed to comply with the Equal Status Act (which will come into effect later this year).

The SWA Rent Supplement cannot be regarded as a residual payment. It is a core payment. We welcome the proposals to transfer responsibility for the current SWA Rent Supplement to the local authorities where the question of rent supplementation can be seen and dealt with in the context of social housing generally. Significant changes are needed in the grounds for eligibility for Rent Supplement. In particular, entitlement should be based on housing need and employed people should not be automatically excluded.

When the new housing benefit arrangements are in place, the SWA system will again have a residual role in rent supplementation in that it will only deal with short term or emergency cases.

As the full Rent Supplement will be part of the SWA scheme for at least a few more years and there will then be a residual scheme we put forward suggestions for improvements. We consider that there is scope for greater co-ordination between Health Boards and local authorities in dealing with the question of sub-standard and non-registered accommodation and in ensuring a better social mix in housing.

Many needs met by Exceptional Needs Payments (ENPs) cannot be regarded as exceptional - clothing, furniture, cots, travel to hospital etc. We consider that:

• The examination of the adequacy of social welfare payments generally should include all aspects of SWA and should specifically address how the recurring needs of long term welfare recipients such as clothing, furniture, household appliances should be catered for.
• There should be a comprehensive travel package available to people in need, including travel to hospital arrangements.

The automatic exclusion of people in full time employment from the SWA scheme is not justified in terms of the aims of the scheme. The basis for qualifying for SWA should be need and need alone. Employment status should not be a factor.

There are a number of improvements to the SWA system which could be addressed at little or no cost. There are also issues within the social welfare system which create unnecessary SWA claims. We recommend that:

The means test for SWA should be aligned with the means test for Unemployment Assistance (UA).

Child Dependant Allowances (CDA) should be payable with SWA in respect of children over 18 and in full time education.

The 3 day waiting period for Disability Benefit (DB), Unemployment Benefit (UB) and UA sometimes leads to SWA claims.

There should be an alignment of the different payment dates for different payments which sometimes leads to a loss for the claimant.

It is opportune at this stage as part of the review of SWA to look again at the CWO role in the current context. This context includes commitment to the development of integrated information and service delivery models; the development of Money Advice and Budgeting Services; the development of independent information, advice and support services; and the development of family support services. CWOs are ideally placed to have a co-ordinating and integrating role in that they are involved with individuals and families who are also using other services. They could also have an important role in promoting statutory-voluntary/community collaboration in local communities.

We suggest that the following improvements in the delivery of SWA should be considered:

• there be uniform opening hours for CWO services;
• the availability of the service be more widely advertised;
• premises be improved and, where necessary, made accessible;
• the CWO service develop a proactive approach to information provision;
• all CWOs have access to the Citizens Information Database as an essential tool of their work;
• in the longer term a universal ID card system be introduced as a ‘passport' to services, as provided for in the Social Welfare Act, 1998.

Detailed Codes of Practice governing dealings between citizens and service providers should be introduced. In particular, there should be such a code for dealings between Community Welfare Officers and their clients.

1. Objectives and Development of Supplementary Welfare Allowance

The SWA scheme came into operation in July 1977. It replaced the Home Assistance scheme which itself was the successor to the Poor Law Relief scheme.

The initial legislation was the Social Welfare (Supplementary Welfare Allowance) Act, 1975. The current legislation is contained in the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993, as amended. The principal regulations are contained in the Social Welfare (Consolidated SWA) Regulations, S.I. 382 of 1995, as amended.

When introducing the legislation in 1975, the then Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Welfare, Frank Cluskey T.D., said that the Bill was designed to "meet pressing need in a flexible and speedy manner while at the same time guaranteeing to all persons ……a standard basic minimum income as a right". He also stated that the problems of those who would need to avail of supplementary welfare allowances would in most cases be of a nature calling for more than a mere cash response. "Social services, social work support and genuine community care are also needed which can help the recipients to cope with the situations in which they find themselves and to find a place of dignity and full integration in our society" (See Note)

During the debates in the Dáil and Seanad there was considerable emphasis on:

• ensuring a basic minimum income for everyone,
• uniformity of application of basic rates and means tests throughout the country,
• removing the stigma attached to recipients,
• helping to alleviate poverty and prevent its recurrence,
• the need for flexibility and speed of response.

Current Purpose of SWA

The main purposes of the SWA scheme are described by the DSCFA as:-

• to provide a residual and support role within the overall income maintenance structure;
• to provide immediate and flexible assistance for those in need who do not qualify for payment under other State schemes;
• to guarantee a standard basic minimum income;
• to provide people on low incomes with a weekly supplement to meet certain special needs (e.g. rent and mortgage interest payments) or a payment to help with the cost of any exceptional needs they may have;
• to help those whose needs are inadequately met under the major schemes and those confronted with an emergency situation.

These purposes are broadly the same as was envisaged when the scheme commenced in 1977 and remain valid despite the significant changes in the socio-economic climate in the intervening period. This is obvious from the level of need which is currently addressed by the scheme. No matter how sophisticated an income maintenance system is, it is likely that there will always be a requirement for residual, supplementary and emergency payments. Income maintenance systems deal with categories of people - the unemployed, the sick, the old, lone parents etc. The SWA scheme, as is appropriate for a supplementary scheme, deals with individuals and their particular needs.

The original aims of the scheme, while expressed in slightly different language, are very similar to the current aims of the relevant departments' strategies and the National Anti-Poverty Strategy (NAPS). The SWA aims could just as easily be expressed as combating and preventing social exclusion, promoting health and social gain etc. The words may have changed but the underlying meaning remains the same.

The policy climate in which SWA now operates is different from the 1970's. It is now accepted that poverty cannot be addressed by income maintenance schemes alone. A concerted approach is required to deal with the many causes of poverty. Income maintenance is clearly a major tool in combating poverty but it must be used in conjunction with other interventions - especially in the area of educational disadvantage, childcare and spatial planning and housing.

Effectiveness of SWA

The effectiveness of SWA as an income maintenance scheme is dependent on having a mainstream income maintenance system which is itself effective. Its effectiveness as an anti-poverty tool is dependent on its interaction with all the other necessary interventions.

We consider that SWA is an essential component of a comprehensive income maintenance system. There are a number of changes which we believe would enhance the scheme and would make better use of the Community Welfare Officer resource. We set out these proposals for change below.

2. Operation of SWA Scheme

The basic legislation governing SWA has not changed significantly since 1975. The SWA scheme operates under the aegis and general direction of the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs and is administered by the Health Boards. Guidelines are drawn up by the SWA section in the Department and are administered by Superintendent Community Welfare Officers and Community Welfare Officers in Health Board areas.

The SWA scheme has the following main features:

Basic minimum weekly payment

The scheme sets the basic weekly minimum income which should be available to everyone. Anyone whose income does not reach this minimum is entitled to a payment to ensure that it does. The basic weekly payment is generally paid to people who do not qualify for any of the core social welfare payments, e.g., asylum seekers, people awaiting a maintenance decision or payment, people who are ill but do not qualify for Disability Benefit or Disability Allowance. People who are awaiting decisions on core social welfare payments sometimes get basic SWA - these are called interim payments. (See Section 7 below).

Supplements

SWA Supplements may be paid to people who incur particular expenditure and whose remaining income would be insufficient to meet their needs. Rent/Mortgage Interest Supplements are the main supplements and are discussed in some detail below. Diet and heating supplements are also available to people with special dietary and heating needs.

Exceptional Needs Payments (ENP)

These are designed for exceptional or unusual need. In practice, they are mainly granted for clothing (for example, winter clothing and clothes for Communions and Confirmations), furniture and household appliances, funerals and for arrears of electricity bills (the latter usually following intervention by MABS).

Urgent Payments

These generally cover unforeseen events such as fires or other loss of goods.

Entitlement to SWA

Every citizen whose means are insufficient to meet his/her needs and the needs of any adult or child dependants is entitled to SWA. The following categories of people are, however, excluded: full-time students, full-time (30 hours per week or more) workers, people involved in trade disputes, spouses of claimants, child and adult dependants, people in institutions, people absent from the State.

Rent/Mortgage Interest Supplement is a secondary benefit and is retained by people on the various back to work and education schemes.

3. Previous Reviews

Over the years, the operation of the scheme has been analysed on a number of occasions, notably in

• Report of the Commission on Social Welfare, 1986;
• "Scheme of Last Resort - A Review of Supplementary Welfare Allowance", Combat Poverty Agency, 1991;
• Report of the Review Group on the Role of SWA in relation to Housing, 1995;
• Comptroller and Auditor General's Value for Money Report on the Administration of SWA, 1998.

The scheme also features in almost all the reports dealing with poverty, the Commission on the Family Report, the Working Group on Childcare and various other reports.

While some of the issues identified in these reports have been addressed in the intervening period, others are ongoing and are pertinent to the current Review.

The Report of the Commission on Social Welfare referred to problem areas in respect of the SWA scheme which related to "the delays in processing claims for social welfare payments with the resultant increase in the volume of substitute payments being made, the lack of agreed interpretation within and between Health Boards of the guidelines for discretional payments and the appeals procedure" (p.13). The Report also concluded that some of the increase in demand for SWA arises out of the inadequate levels of existing social welfare payments.

Referring to interim payments, the Commission stated that "it is inexplicable that a person should have to make two separate applications in different offices and submit himself/herself to two different means tests especially since the money paid out by the Health Boards under these circumstances has subsequently to be recouped from the Department of Social Welfare."

The Commission recommended that the SWA scheme should revert to the role originally intended, i.e. a residual and support role within the social welfare system.

The Combat Poverty Agency Report concluded that the scheme was being used to cover up deficiencies in the mainstream social welfare services to a much greater degree than was originally envisaged. It was critical of the way in which the scheme was administered, the lack of information available about the precise criteria used, the differences between the treatment of people in different parts of the country and the inadequate income provided to all social welfare recipients which resulted in their having to claim exceptional needs payments under the SWA scheme.

The issues identified in the CPA Report have been echoed by a number of voluntary and community groups, including Tallaght Welfare Society (1985) the Independent Poverty Action Movement (1986) and Focus Point (1988).

The Report of the Review Group on the Role of SWA in Relation to Housing deals with the Rent and Mortgage Supplement aspects only. It concluded that the scheme was an efficient mechanism for providing Rent Supplements but that this would be more appropriately dealt with in the context of housing policy.

The Controller and Auditor General's Value for Money Report is concerned with administration. The Report was critical of the duplication of means tests being carried out by the Community Welfare Officers and other services. It concluded that there was scope for savings in the administration of means tests. The REACH initiative is now addressing this issue.

4. Transparency of the SWA Scheme

From the beginning, one of the major criticisms of the scheme was the lack of information about the underlying guidelines. It was many years before accessible information on criteria became available. Even now, when the Freedom of Information Act requires the publication of all circulars and other instructions, it is still difficult for the applicant to get easily understood information on the criteria. For example, feedback from CICs indicates:

• different practices around the country regarding the payment of deposits in respect of private rented accommodation where SWA rent supplements are payable and a lack of clarity about entitlement;
  
• an absence of clear information on criteria for the payment of SWA as an interim payment to people awaiting a decision on an application for a mainstream payment;
  
• different practices in different parts of the country in respect of Exceptional Needs Payment, e.g., a person on a Disability Allowance received an ENP towards the special clothing and footwear she needed in one part of the country but was refused it when she moved to another area;
  
• lack of information about (a) people's right to be given reasons for refusal of SWA in writing and (b) right of appeal;
  
• the non-availability of appeal forms in some community welfare offices;
  
• application forms that are complex and difficult to complete, particularly for people with literacy problems.
  

The DSCFA Section 16 FOI Manual does not include all relevant circulars (e.g. SWA Circular 3/00, 4^th April 2000, implementing Budget 2000 changes in rent supplement provision, Rent Supplement Administrative Procedures Manual issued to Community Welfare Officers). It is also the case that such circulars are not readily available in CWO offices.

5. The Role of Community Welfare Officers

Community Welfare Officers implement the SWA scheme. Their job description defines their role as "to relieve social distress and where possible prevent its recurrence" and "to help determine eligibility for the health and welfare services administered by the Health Board".

The non-SWA element of the CWOs' work varies from one Health Board to another. For example, they carry out the means test for medical cards in areas other than the Eastern Regional Health Authority (ERHA). They also implement schemes such as Mobility Allowance, the Infectious Diseases Maintenance Allowance, the Blind Welfare Allowance and the Domiciliary Care Allowance in most Health Boards. Sometimes they are involved in assessing means for the nursing home subvention scheme. In some Health Boards they have a role in the home help service and they are increasingly becoming involved in services for older people in rural areas.

In the ERHA, there are CWOs who only deal with specific groups such as travellers or asylum seekers. In other Health Boards, CWOs tend not to specialise.

The REACH initiative should result in a significant reduction in the means testing function of the CWOs and free them up for wider welfare work.

The CWO service, as presently structured and organised, has the advantage of being community based. The degree to which this advantage has been utilised for broader community benefit varies. Other advantages are that the service is available throughout the country and in terms of service delivery, it operates a model which assesses on the basis of individual need rather than group or category need.

A broader role was envisaged for the service than that which subsequently emerged. This role would have involved working in a Health Board context within multidisciplinary teams to identify needs, gaps and service overlaps. An information role was also identified. It is opportune at this stage as part of the review of SWA to look again at the CWO role in the current context. This context includes commitment to the development of integrated information and service delivery models; the development of Money Advice and Budgeting Services; the development of independent information, advice and support services through CICs and other providers and the development of family support services.

CWOs are ideally placed to have a co-ordinating and integrating role in that they are involved with individuals and families who are also using other services. They could become involved in a range of community-based services and initiatives aimed at promoting social inclusion and enhancing the quality of life of individuals, families and communities. They could play a key liaison and co-ordination role in local communities and facilitate more effective collaboration between the statutory and voluntary/community sectors in the provision of services and development opportunities.

The legislation underpinning the CWO service is enabling and could provide for pro-active co-ordination with other relevant services.

6. Numbers Receiving SWA (See Note)

In 1998, there were just over 30,000 people in receipt of the basic SWA weekly payment. This figure included almost 11,000 children. In 1999, the number had increased to 38,000 (including almost 13,000 children). Much of this increase was due to greater use of the SWA system for interim payments. Some of the people who were receiving the basic payment were also receiving other SWA payments - for example, 7,000 basic SWA recipients (including 4,500 asylum seekers) were also receiving a Rent Supplement. In total, over 76,000 people received SWA payments in 1998; the equivalent figure for 1999 is not included in the DSCFA statistics. There were nearly 42,000 in receipt of Rent Supplement in 1999 and just over 8,500 receiving a diet supplement.

Two-thirds of those in receipt of Rent Supplement are single people. Half of the recipients are short-term, i.e., they remain on the supplement for up to a year, 8,000 receive the supplement for 3 years or more and 4,000 receive it for 5 years or more. Approximately 13,000 receive unemployment payments and a further 5,000 receive employment support payments with which they retain Rent Supplement as a secondary benefit. (It is likely that these figures will change as long-term unemployment continues to decline). Over 8,000 recipients are on One Parent Family Payment, 4,000 recipients are in receipt of disability payments and 1,200 are aged 65 or over.

Total expenditure on SWA was nearly £189m in 1999. Of this, over £53m went to basic weekly payments, over £100m to Rent Supplement, almost £22m went to Exceptional Needs (ENPs) and Urgent Needs Payments and over £9m to the Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance.

Within ENPs, household appliances were the major expenditure item (nearly £4m) with other household expenditure - furniture, bedding, floor covering almost the same. Cots and buggies for children cost over £1m. Clothing cost over £4m. Funeral expenses were also a major item (£1.5m).

The estimate for overall expenditure on the SWA scheme is £240m in 2000, £268m in 2001 and £299m in 2002. The estimate for expenditure on ENPs over these years is £24m, £26m and £28m respectively.

7. Mainstreaming Current SWA Payments

Mainstream social welfare payments should cater for identifiable group need - for example, the income maintenance needs of people who are awaiting a decision on a mainstream payment, the short term ill, and asylum seekers. In the case of lone parents who are deserted/separated, there is normally a waiting period of 3 months between application for and payment of One-Parent Family Payment (OFP).

Interim Payments

Originally, basic SWA was designed for people who did not qualify for mainstream payments. The use of basic SWA as an interim payment was not planned or foreseen

At present, in any week, 10,000 recipients of the basic SWA are awaiting a mainstream payment; about 4,000 of these are awaiting a decision on UB or UA; 3,500 are waiting for a disability payment and about 2,000 are waiting for the One-Parent Family Payment.

We recommend that responsibility for interim payments be taken over directly by the DSCFA. While provision for this has been made in the Social Welfare Act 2000, detailed regulations have not yet been put in place.

Sickness Allowance

Of the people receiving basic SWA each week, approximately 1,500 are sick and do not qualify for any mainstream payment. These people would all qualify for the Sickness Allowance which has been provided for in legislation but has not been brought into effect. In a number of submissions, the NSSB pointed out that a sickness allowance scheme is necessary for this group of people.

Asylum Seekers

Asylum seekers are another identifiable group who should be catered for by a mainstream payment. Virtually all asylum seekers have no means so means testing is not an issue.

(See Section 10).

Back-to-School Clothing and Footwear Scheme

Consideration should be given to integrating payments under this scheme with basic social welfare payments in a particular week.

Retention of Secondary Benefits

People who retain secondary benefits, e.g. Rent and Mortgage/Interest Supplements, as a result of participation in back to work/education programmes, are currently required in some instances to visit the CWO to receive payments. Provision should be made by the Department for direct payment of such benefits as, for example, in the case of the fuel allowance.

Rent and Mortgage Interest Supplements (See Note)

The SWA Rent Supplement is a core payment. We welcome the proposals to transfer responsibility for the current SWA rent supplement to the local authorities where the question of rent supplementation can be seen and dealt with in the context of social housing generally.

8. Rent Assistance

Significant changes are needed in the grounds for eligibility for Rent Supplement. In particular, entitlement should be based on housing need and employed people should not be automatically excluded.

When the new housing benefit arrangements are in place, the SWA system will again have a residual role in rent supplementation in that it will only deal with short term or emergency cases.

As the full Rent Supplement will be part of the SWA scheme for at least a few more years and there will then be a residual rent supplement scheme, it is important that issues arising out of the current operation of the scheme be addressed. These refer to eligibility and entitlement, variations in practice across the country in respect of payment of deposits, issue of ‘reasonable rent', amount of rent supplement, participation by landlords and availability of information about the scheme. Guerin (See Note) (1999), in a study carried out for the Combat Poverty Agency, concluded that "the lack of information about the eligibility criteria has (also) contributed to an impression by potential claimants that they may not be entitled to rent supplement"(p.15).

The National Administrative Procedures Manual issued to each Community Welfare Officer states under the heading "Where Standards of Accommodation do not Comply with the Housing Regulations Standards for Rented Housing, 1993" as follows:

"A client may be considered not entitled to rent supplement if the accommodation he or she resides in does not meet the standards laid down in the above regulations".

The CWO is not the person competent to decide whether or not those standards are met. Failure to pay a supplement may result in the client becoming homeless so it would appear that the CWO usually opts to pay the supplement. This issue is primarily a matter for local authorities to resolve. There is, however, considerable scope for co-ordination between CWOs and the local authorities on the issue.

9. Exceptional Needs

Many needs met by Exceptional Needs Payments cannot be regarded as exceptional - clothing, furniture, cots etc.

Travel costs are a significant element of the SWA ENPs. A comprehensive travel package including travel to hospital arrangements for welfare recipients is required, thereby reducing the need for assistance under SWA .

Comhairle welcomes the commitment in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness to set up a working group to examine a benchmark for adequacy of social welfare payments generally. This examination should include all aspects of SWA and should specifically address how the recurring needs of long term welfare recipients, such as clothing, furniture and household appliances, travel, should be catered for. It should also look at models used in other countries to determine appropriate standards of living, e.g. Household Budget Standards in Sweden. (See Note)

10. Different Treatment of Asylum Seekers

The legisl¨ation governing SWA does allow for payment in kind in certain circumstances.

Whenever it appears to a health board that by reason of exceptional circumstances the needs of a person can best be met by the provision of goods or services instead of the whole or part of any payment to which he would otherwise be entitled under this Chapter, the health board may determine that such goods or services be provided for him under arrangements made by the board (See Note).

A strict interpretation of this section would require that the Health Board make a decision in each individual case about the appropriateness of direct provision. In practice, a decision has been made to have direct provision to all new asylum seekers. We consider that the legislation should be amended to cater for direct provision for groups or categories of people.

There is a possibility that direct provision for asylum seekers and not for other SWA recipients may contravene the Equal Status Act which is not yet in force.

11. Exclusion of lower paid workers

The basis for qualifying for SWA should be need and need alone and employment status should not be a factor. While the national minimum wage legislation should result in few people in full-time employment being eligible for SWA, they should not be excluded per se.

12. Anomalies

There are a number of improvements to the SWA system which could be addressed at little or no cost. There are also issues within the social welfare system which create unnecessary SWA claims. The following are examples:

The means test for SWA was originally very similar to that for UA but the UA test has become much less rigid in that there are various disregards. The assessment of capital is now much less generous for SWA purposes than for any other scheme. We recommend that the SWA means test should be aligned with the means test for UA.

There are no Child Dependant Allowances (CDAs) payable with SWA in respect of children over 18 as it is a short term payment. All children of welfare recipients should be treated in the same way.

The 3 day waiting period for DB, UB and UA sometimes leads to SWA claims. Certain part time workers qualify for less than the full rate of DB and UB. They then have to get a top up from SWA. This should be addressed directly by the DSCFA.

There are different payment dates for different payments which sometimes leads to a loss for the claimant.

13. Administration of SWA

Research (See Note) carried out on behalf of Comhairle and based on users' perspectives and experience of accessing social and information services identifies a number of shortcomings in the delivery of SWA, including short and varying opening hours, inaccessible premises, unmarked entry points to buildings, and absence of information on other schemes. The study also identifies a level of what was perceived by users as unnecessary visits between and to and from different services, particularly the CWO, Social Welfare and FÁS. Several respondents expressed frustration about repeated requests for identification in the form of passports or long birth certificates. Feedback from CICs also points to difficulties experienced by people in relation to having to move backwards and forwards between the CWO and other services in order to get benefits.

In order to address the above deficiencies, we suggest that:

• There should be uniform opening hours for CWO services;
• The availability of the service should be more widely advertised and promoted, including details on how and when it can be accessed;
• Provision should be made for written claims in some instances;
• More systematic streamlining and communication mechanisms should be introduced to minimise the number of visits required to avail of services;
• The CWO premises should be improved and all premises should be accessible;
• The CWO service should develop a proactive approach to information provision and should develop links with other statutory services and with independent information services in this regard.
• All CWOs should have access to the computerised Citizens Information Database as an essential tool of their work.
• A system for the provision of some form of universal ‘passport' for a number of services should be put in place prior to the implementation of systems arising from REACH.

Administrative Costs

The Comptroller and Auditor General'sReport on Value for Money Examination - Administration of Supplementary Welfare Allowances drew attention to the proportion of SWA expenditure going towards administrative costs (approximately 10% as opposed to 5% in the DSCFA).

We do not consider that the comparison is valid. Many SWA clients have to be dealt with individually on an ongoing basis. Most DSCFA clients have their claim processed and there is no further need to deal individually with them - for example, Child Benefit and Old Age Pension recipients. We consider that the CWO service is more akin to a social worker service and the administrative costs are necessarily higher.

14. Dealings between CWOs and their clients

In the NSSB Budget 2000 Submission it was stated that "there should be codes of practice governing dealings between citizens and service providers. In particular, there should be such a code for dealings between social welfare officials and clients, between the various authorities and asylum seekers and between health board officials and applicants for various services, e.g. between Community Welfare Officers and their clients." Feedback from CICs throughout the country indicates citizens reporting on an ongoing and regular basis difficulties in relation to their encounters with CWOs. CICs also report difficulties encountered in some instances when they contact CWOs on behalf of clients.

We recommend that there should be a detailed Code of Practice governing dealings between service providers and citizens. This could be based on the Code of Practice for Social Welfare Inspectors drawn up by the Department of Social Community and Family Affairs in 1998.

Footnotes