Vulnerable in DWP ADM s

Guidance - Advice for decision making: staff guide
Advice for DWP decision makers on Universal Credit, PIP and contribution-based JSA and ESA for people who are eligible for Universal Credit.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/advice-for-decision-making-staff-guide

Extracts referring to the term: 'vulnerable'

Chapter K3   – Higher Level Sanctions

K3174   Sexual misbehaviour is not necessarily misconduct, but it may be where it affects
        the claimant's suitability for the employment concerned, for example working with
        children or vulnerable groups1   .
                                                                                        1 R(U) 1/71


Chapter K2 – Good reason


K2004 	 Good reason is not defined in legislation. DMs should take into account all relevant
        information about the claimant’s individual circumstances and their reasons for any
        failures when considering whether to sanction a claimant for any failure which
        results in the award of UC being reduced (also see K2021).

        Note: The DM should ensure they have checked all the claimant history and journal
        entries for any evidence that may be relevant to a good reason decision and not just
        rely on the information recorded in the referral from the work coach. This can be
        especially important if the claimant has indicated they could have complex needs or
        are particularly vulnerable or experiencing a personal crisis (also see ADM K2054
        regarding complex needs).


K2031 The DM should seek further evidence where it is considered necessary in order to

      1.   clarify reasons or

      2.   seek further evidence

      as sufficient proof to justify good reason or not.

      Note 1: The claimant does not have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that
      something is true. Corroborative evidence is not required unless there is
      contradicting or conflicting evidence or the claimants account of events is
      improbable. Also see K2036.

      Note 2:  A record of all evidence relied upon to reach a decision should be
      recorded for evidentiary reasons and a copy should be available in the event of
      reconsideration and/or appeal. Also see guidance on the ‘prior information
      requirement’, the burden of proof and evidence in ADM Chapter K1 – Sanctions –
      general principles.

      Note 3: The DM should ensure they have checked all the claimant history and
      journal notes for any evidence that may be relevant to a good reason decision and
      not just rely on the information recorded in the referral from the work coach. This
      can be especially important if the claimant has indicated they could have complex
      needs or are particularly vulnerable or experiencing a personal crisis (see further
      guidance on complex needs at K2054).

Complex needs

K2054 	 Claimant’s with complex needs may need additional support as their ability to
        undertake work-related activity could be disrupted for a period of time. Complex
        needs means the claimant is experiencing some difficult life event or personal
        circumstances that means it would be unreasonable to expect them to meet their
        current work-related requirements. In such cases the work coach can ‘turn off’
        conditionality requirements where

        1. 	 needs are recognised as requiring a specific easement (for example domestic
                                                              1
             violence) which is prescribed for in legislation    or

        2. 	 a discretionary easement can be applied as it is considered unreasonable to
             expect the claimant to complete their requirements for a temporary period of
             time.

        Note:The DM should be mindful that because a claimant’s circumstances can
        change, a requirement that was reasonable at the time they entered into their
        claimant commitment may no longer be reasonable at the time they failed to comply
        with a specific requirement.
                                                                           1 UC Regs, reg 95 - 99

Chapter K5: Low–level sanctions

        Public Sector Comparator (PSC)

K5076 	 PSC has been given the resource and flexibility to deliver a successful programme
        of Work & Health Programme (WHP) provision for the most vulnerable customers
        and long term unemployed alongside the WHP.

Chapter K1: Sanctions    – general

Inappropriate behaviour

K1016  Inappropriate behaviour can be

       1.	    any unreasonable act or omission shown towards any other person, for
              example a work coach, an employer, other employees or customers

       2. 	   a refusal to complete a specific task

       3. 	    where a claimant is particularly obstructive, antagonistic, uncooperative,
              disinterested, offensive or unwilling

       4.	    showing disinterest and not doing anything and/or not following instructions

       5.	     intimidating or bullying other staff or behaving in an unreasonable manner

       6.	     the use of offensive language, whether swearing or not, that is not appropriate
              in a work setting

       7.	    turning up for the interview or activity under the influence of drugs and/or
              alcohol or

       8. 	   any behaviour considered unacceptable or unreasonable by someone in a
              work setting.

       Note 1:  The DM, however, should be mindful of any mitigating factors or
       circumstances that may have impacted on how the claimant reacted or behaved (for
       example; complex needs or mental health problems) and whether that was
       reasonable in the claimant’s individual circumstances. Care should be taken to
       ensure all the facts and circumstances of the case are taken into account before
       deciding to impose a sanction (see full guidance on good reason in ADM Chapter
       K2).

       Note 2:  The DM should be careful to make sure all departmental records have been
       checked (for example journal notes and claimant history) to ensure the full picture is
       known,  particularly where there are indications the claimant may have complex
       needs, is suffering some personal crisis, is vulnerable or has mental health issues.

       Example 1

       Darren attends a work search review interview with his work  coach as required at the
       right time and place. He refuses to take part in the interview and discuss what work


          search he has completed in the relevant week. He is  uncooperative and intimidating
        to other people in the office. It is obvious to the work coach  Darren has been
        drinking.
        Darren’s behaviour is not acceptable and can be considered a failure to comply in
        the interview even though he has turned up for the interview on time at the right
        place.

        Example   2

        Em starts a work placement as required in a charity shop, but is asked to leave the
        placement on her first day because of her attitude and rude behaviour towards the
        other staff and customers. She continually uses obscene language. She refuses to
        sort clothes onto hangers when asked to do so complaining that it is menial work.
        The other volunteer employees in the charity shop complain to the manager they are
        intimidated and upset by her attitude.

        The DM can consider a sanction as Em’s loss of the placement is due to her
        conduct and behaviour.

        Even though she turned up at the right time and place to start the placement, being
        asked to leave the placement due to her conduct on the first day means these
        actions can be considered a failure to comply with a work preparation requirement
        as specified by the Secretary of State. Her behaviour is not considered acceptable or
        reasonable by someone in a work setting.

        Em is given a chance to explain her behaviour and the DM would fully consider all
        the individual facts and circumstances and the reasons given by Em for her
        behaviour when considering whether to impose a sanction.

        See ADM Chapter K2 for further guidance on good reason.


        Complex needs

K1169 	 Care should be taken with claimants who may indicate they have complex needs or
        are particularly vulnerable. For example; they indicate they are suffering from mental
        health issues, are homeless, are a drug or alcohol user, a victim of domestic
        violence,  sexual or physical abuse or are under 18.

        Note: This list is not exhaustive. The decision maker must always consider the
        individual claimant’s circumstances and whether any easements of their work-
        related requirements should apply.    This will depend on scrutiny of the individual
        circumstances of the case in consideration of   what is reasonable for the particular
        claimant (also see guidance on complex needs      in ADM Chapter J3    and K2).

K1174 	   The DM should scrutinise system records to be satisfied that  a work-related or
          connected requirement was validly imposed and that relevant and adequate
          notifications  were sent in order to go on to consider good reason and whether a
          sanction is appropriate. As long as the DM is satisfied

          1.	        a work–related or connected requirement(s)   was validly imposed and

          2.	   the claimant was adequately notifiedand

          3.	   there has been a sanctionable failure (i.e. the claimant failed to comply with
                the requirement)

          the DM can go on to consider whether the claimant can show good reason for the
          failure.


          Note 1: For further guidance see ADM Chapter K3 for higher-level sanctions, K4 for
        medium level sanctions, K5 for low-level sanctions and K6 for lowest-level sanctions.

        Note 2: The DM should ensure they have checked all the claimant history and
        journal entries for any evidence that may be relevant to the consideration of the
        sanction and not just  rely on the information recorded in the referral from the work
        coach. This can be especially important if the claimant has indicated they could have
        complex needs or  are particularly vulnerable or experiencing a personal crisis (also
        see K1169 and ADM Chapter K2 for further guidance on complex needs).

Chapter U2: ESA Limited capability

U2202 	 A claimant may not have returned a questionnaire. The DM can proceed without it if
        satisfied that there is sufficient information for a determination to be made whether
                            1
        the claimant has LCW without it . For example the claimant is considered to be in a
        vulnerable group, i.e. there is a diagnosis of a mental health condition. A decision to

           treat as not having LCW due to non-return of the questionnaire would not be made
        but the claimant referred for assessment.
                                                             1 ESA Regs 13, reg 17(2)

U2504 	 When considering whether the claimant showed good cause, the DM should ensure
        that they fully explain how they made their determination by recording

        1. 	 findings about the claimant’s state of health at the time and the nature of their
             disability

        2. 	 what evidence was considered

        3. 	 what findings were made on the evidence

        4. 	 what steps they took to contact the claimant

        5. 	 whether the claimant is vulnerable

        6. 	 whether there were previous failures and whether good cause was accepted

        7. 	 the reasons for their determination on good cause.



Matters to consider when determining good
        reason

P6006 	 To determine if the claimant has good reason for non -compliance for either not
        providing the information required or not participating in a consultation, the DM
        should in every case  consider the individual facts and circumstances and in
        particular the

        1.   state of the claimant’s health at the relevant time and
                                                       1
        2.   nature of any disability the claimant has







- 3 -

Enlarge image
          For example, a claimant suffering from depression may not to be able to manage
        their affairs effectively. The consideration is whether the depression has contributed
        to the claimant not complying with what we are expecting them to do, i.e. provide
        information or participate in a consultation (also see  P6073).

        Note: The criteria for considering good reason are not legislated for specifically.
        The DM should not just consider one factor but should consider the overall picture
        of the claimant’s individual circumstances. See further guidance in this Chapter and
        also in ADM Chapter K2 – Good Reason.
                                                                        1 SS (PIP) Regs, reg 10

        Example 1

        Tracey has schizophrenia, but did not give this information at the initial claim stage,
        and when asked for more information did not comply. Further enquiries established
        that Tracey could be a vulnerable claimant because she was not able to complete
        the information required without help. When her social worker next visited Tracey,
        she found the request and helped Tracey to complete and send it in. The DM
        decided Tracey could show good reason and decided not to make a negative
        determination.

        Example 2

        Bill did not attend for a consultation and enquiries were made as to the reason. Bill
        stated he ‘slept in’, and could not supply any medical reason or evidence that would
        support this as a good reason. The DM decided Bill could not show a good reason
        and made a negative determination.

        Example 3

        Lionel was due to attend a consultation with a HP but he writes to them to request a
        consultation in his home due to severe agoraphobia. The HP does not receive the
        request and the consultation date is not postponed. Lionel does not attend the
        consultation. Lionel contacts the DM and provides a copy of the request that he sent
        for a consultation in his home and a supporting letter from his GP providing medical
        evidence regarding his agoraphobia. The DM decides that Lionel had good reason
        for not attending the consultation and a negative determination is not made.

P6072 	 The DM should consider each individual case on its own merits taking into
        consideration all the facts and evidence and whether the claimant understood what
        was required of them and their reasons for the failure taking into account in
        particular their mental health.

        Example 1

        Barbara has a long term mental health issue and was invited to a consultation with
        the HP after she made a claim to PIP. She did not attend for the consultation so
        enquiries were made as to the reason for this. Her support worker phones to explain
        that Barbara needed her to attend the consultation with her. She has psychotic
        episodes and can be violent towards people she doesn’t know because she feels
        vulnerable and frightened.

Chapter C1: Universal Credit

        Section 67 Leave To Remain

C1680 	 The UK Government is required1  to make arrangements as soon as possible to

        relocate and support a specified number of unaccompanied child asylum seekers
        who have been accepted for transfer from another European state to the UK
        (commonly known as the “Dubs Amendment”). The number of children must be in

          addition to the resettlement of children under the Vulnerable Persons Relocation
          Scheme.
                                                                                                 1 Immigration Act  2016,
 s 67

ADM Chapter A4: Supersession,

suspension and termination

A4123 	 A request to surrender benefit might not be effective where

        1. the claimant is vulnerable or incapable of deciding their affairs and there is no
           appointee or
ADM Memo 15/18

PIP – THE MEANING OF “SAFELY”  - AMENDED

 Example 5

The claimant has seizures, for which they receive a brief warning.
Although they do not result in falls, during and after the seizure the
claimant is in an extremely disorientated state for a significant period of
time. The claimant is able to make themself safe when in the home and
rest whilst the episode subsides. The decision maker decides that there is
not sufficient risk of harm for the daily living activities. However, when
outside the home the claimant cannot make themselves safe and is
deemed so vulnerable during the seizure and recovery period that they
would be at risk of harm.  Balancing the frequency of the events and the
severity of harm that could occur the decision maker decides to award
mobility descriptor 1f, as the claimant would need accompaniment on all
journeys in order to do them safely.