­
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: The DWP took 233 pages to analyse a new benefit reform. ‘B*llocks’ would have done.

The DWP took 233 pages to analyse a new benefit reform. ‘B*llocks’ would have done. 14 Sep 2018 20:37 #10186

  • TheFinnster
  • TheFinnster's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 334
  • Thank you received: 536
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has released the results of a trial into increased support and sanctions in Universal Credit. It took 233 pages to sum up what most people could do in one word: ‘bollocks’. But the implications of the trial for the DWP are actually far more damning.
The DWP: if at first you don’t succeed…

Here’s what the DWP said about its latest trial:

"DWP’s in-work progression randomised controlled trial ran between April 2015 and March 2018. The trial tested the effectiveness of differing intensities of support and conditionality provided to current Universal Credit claimants in low-paid work or low-income households. In total 30,709 claimants passed through the trial and were available for analysis."

It said the trial had three treatment groups:

“frequent support claimants, who met with their work coach fortnightly to get support and review agreed actions”
“moderate support claimants, who met with their work coach every 8 weeks to get support and review agreed actions”
“minimal support claimants, who had an initial telephone appointment and a follow-up telephone call 8 weeks after starting the trial”

It did three analyses of it: its own impact assessment, one it outsourced to Ipsos MORI and a summary of the two. The 233-page Ipsos MORI one was staggering. Because it may as well have said: ‘This trial was a complete waste of everyone’s f***ing time’.

www.thecanary.co/uk/2018/09/13/the-dwp-took-233-pages-to-analyse-a-new-benefit-reform-would-have-done/
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Paul-UB40, comply or die, El-dudeareno, Dizzy, Warrior

The DWP took 233 pages to analyse a new benefit reform. ‘B*llocks’ would have done. 15 Sep 2018 11:04 #10189

  • comply or die
  • comply or die's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 2369
  • Thank you received: 2420
These `trials` that are actioned just tell us that people claiming JSA or UC are basically there to be looked on as experimental subjects to see how best they can use us all. Not so much how they can HELP us all. While they try to save money, they leech it away by carrying out these trials and paying private companies a few quid to do them. Money that could be SAVED if the government just accepted that there will always be people claiming, no matter how they manipulate their figures.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Paul-UB40, TheFinnster, Dizzy
­