Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
A new IT system for Universal Credit?
Part of today’s announcement says
“... after asking major projects expert David Pitchford <He’s the one who resigned last week - GM.> to review it earlier this year, ministers have accepted his recommendation that they should explore enhancing the IT for Universal Credit working with the Government Digital Service. Advancements in technology since the current system was developed have meant that a more responsive system that is more flexible and secure could potentially be built.
This would marry with the best of the existing system – which has proved viable during Pathfinder testing. Any enhanced IT solution will need to be both cost effective and deliverable to original timescales.”
You might read “a more responsive system” to mean “a different system”, although, of course, I wouldn’t be so cynical. Nor would I take it that the possibilty of a “more flexible and secure” system implied that the current, new, system was inflexible or insecure.
People, like Gareth can knock it, but lets face it we now have the worlds finest, and most expensive, IT for dealing with Single Non Working Claimants anywhere in the western world.
I like the fact that the best they can say about the current IT system is that it “proved viable during Pathfinder testing”.
not a ringing endorsement really ...
one of my colleagues noted that the press release seems to have been drafted extremely ‘carefully’
” a more responsive system could potentially be built” ah what a splendid word that is ‘potentilally’
More reporting -
DWP finally admits Universal Credit IT not up to scratch @
National roll-out of the government’s flagship universal credit scheme has been hit by fresh delays @
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23262496
IDS refuses to commit to all claimants on working age benefits being on universal credit by April 2014 as planned @
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jul/10/universal-credit-suffers-delays
Coalition’s dramatic retreat over Universal Credit @
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/07/coalitions-dramatic-retreat-over-universal-credit
Welfare reform ‘has collapsed’ after latest delay @
[ Edited: 10 Jul 2013 at 08:27 pm by shawn mach ]The principle of what they say they’re doing - taking it slowly, testing, getting it right before going into large volumes - is correct. But of course it will take far longer than originally said (did anyone seriously think it wouldn’t?) - assuming they are allowed the time & the money to finish the job.
Perhaps the best that can be said for it is that, if their approach works properly, we should be spared the utter chaos which arose from the completely incompetent way in which Tax Credits were introduced!
Perhaps the best that can be said for it is that, if their approach works properly, we should be spared the utter chaos which arose from the completely incompetent way in which Tax Credits were introduced!
Hmm, I was talking about tax and the self-employed yesterday to a UC designer who mentioned that they’re considering an annual reconciliation process.
[ Edited: 10 Jul 2013 at 11:13 pm by Gareth Morgan ]Derek is of course quite right that a step by step or a phase by phase approach is preferable when rolling out a totally new system. However, the impression given is that this lack of progress is being imposed on the DWP because of surfacing design incompetence, rather than because of any underlying master plan of caution. I very much doubt whether the government planned to only to have processed four and a half UC awards (or whatever) by the end on June 2013. Its all a bit embarrassing.
I read that the compulsory digital claim element of a claim in the pathfinder/controlled start areas is then supplemented by a standard JC interview, with all the usual evidence requirements. Is all this therefore so different from telephone prompted claims for JSA etc, that are then followed up by a JC interview and so on? Are we being sold a digital pup?
Steve
I read that the compulsory digital claim element of a claim in the pathfinder/controlled start areas is then supplemented by a standard JC interview, with all the usual evidence requirements. Is all this therefore so different from telephone prompted claims for JSA etc, that are then followed up by a JC interview and so on? Are we being sold a digital pup?
Steve
Or is a digital application, in which the average claimant will make say one or more significant entry errors, (which then of course requires identification and correction) better than an advisor loaded application, which will be right 95% of the time.
The question is Do you want it on RIGHT first time….??
The big IT savings are premised on that you need less front line imput staff. However if there are needed lots of back room “tidier uppers” sorting out the mess, is this a net saving?
Lets not forget,the harder complicated claims, are yet to come, the more entry errors that get made, the more difficult the tidying up will be. The back room will grow, and grow.
The IT solution is the design a smarter data entry system. To deal with these more difficult claims.
I am afraid from the sidelines that does not look easy.
The problem is that simple transactions work well online. Difficult ones do not.
Or is a digital application, in which the average claimant will make say one or more significant entry errors, (which then of course requires identification and correction) better than an advisor loaded application, which will be right 95% of the time.
Q. How many £50 civil penalties does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. None, we’d rather they stayed in the dark.
IDS - “I’m determined to get this right and will not follow the old ways of governing - launching with a big bang and having to clear up the mess afterwards. I will bring in this radical reform safely, and I’m committed to doing it by 2017 and to budget.”
So that will be launching UC with lots of small bangs and clearing up lots of small messes afterwards? The difference between being an elephant keeper or a dog owner - but there are a lot more dogs!
I’m also intereted to know why the are not extending the ‘roll out’ (or is it a ‘cow pat’?) to the direct payment and UC project locations - one might have thought DWP would want to build on the experience gained in the project areas and the significant additional resourses already invested in those projects to support the roll out?