Hi , i only require a literature review of: Theory of Constraints - only the effect cause effect and thinking process part of TOC -Cost of Quality/conformance - Crosby and Duran (first time resolution) -Gap Analysis model - Business Process Re-engineering
Michelle_Michy
Report20Title20Page20P220II2.docxReport Title Page (please include “Confidential” designation if needed)
Your name: Iram Ishtiaq
Project title
A critical review to assess the benefit award appeal process to identify why a significant number of reported, Personal Independence Payments (PIP) award decisions are overturned by the First Tier Tribunal.
Project Purpose
There will be detailed evaluation of the reasons why decisions are overturned; the availability of evidence used to support appeal decisions compared to evidence available at assessment and/or mandatory reconsideration stage; whether Capita PIP’s end to end processes (including complaints process and the re-work process) are correctly calibrated to prevent cases being referred to Tribunal and whether there is opportunity to gather the same level of information used by Tribunals at an earlier point in the process.
Project objectives
Project objectives for Capita
· To collate and review data on the number of decisions that are reported and overturned at First Tier Tribunal (publicly available data from national statistical releases including Paul Gray’s report and/or and Capita PIP’s internal data).
· To review and analyse the internal processes to compare the availability of information at assessment point compared to First Tribunal stage. This will also include a review of complaint processes to determine if there is opportunity for correct resolution at this point.
· To identify failures in the process including assessing the quality re-work process leading to cases taken to tribunal and overturned (high media reported that up to 65% of cases are overturned during the tribunal).
· To evaluate and identify the contributing factors that influence overturned cases. Some things to consider include the further evidence process, language barriers between the claimants and Disability Assessors, and the disparities between the tribunal judges’ decisions and the decisions made by the Disability Assessors.
· To provide recommendations to improve the process. The recommendations should encourage more accurate decision-making via reduction of the complaints process, referrals to ICE and looking at ways to reduce differences in decision-making.
Project objectives for DWP
· To identify if there are opportunities within Capita PIP processes to reduce the number of cases being referred to Tribunal.
· Understand the decision making framework of the First Tier Tribunals to determine and map levels of consistency in decision making.
· To reduce negative press and reputational damage to the client and Capita by providing recommendations to create a more efficient service this reduces the number of cases being referred to the First Tier Tribunal and through stakeholder engagement e.g forums.
Body of the Report
Scope of Masters Project
What is the research project being proposed?
The research project will look at in depth to quantify and analyse the reasons why benefit award decisions are considered and over turned at different stages of the reconsideration process. This report will analyse Capita PIP’s internal review processes which will include reviewing the complaints process, the further evidence process and re-work quality process.
This report will further analyse cases turned over by the Department at mandatory reconsideration stage and those by turned over at First Tier Tribunal. Any correlations or trends at these different stages will be identified and in turn recommendations to improve the process will be made. The project will have a clear focus on identifying factors that contribute to the overturned cases and provide recommendations on the processes to minimise the number of cases that go to tribunal via reduction in complaints and process efficiency.
What is the key research question?
Why are there a significant number of media reported, Personal Independence Payments (PIP) award decisions overturned by the First Tier Tribunal?
1) Is there a robust and suitable benefit award appeal process in place?
2) Is the internal re-work process appropriate and consistent (aligned to the client’s process)? (Re-work process)
3) Is the complaint process robust and fit for purpose?
4) Is further evidence being submitted at a later stage the only and main contributing factor in overturning significant number decisions over at the First-Tier tribunal?
What are the key strategic business challenges that you will address?
They key strategic business challenges include:
· Claimant experience and getting the correct outcome for the claimants – the purpose of the Welfare Reform Act, Work Bill and PIP is to ensure the correct people receive the correct benefit award. For people to have confidence in the system there must be demonstrable proof that systems operate correctly and that there are no underlying issues.
· Costs – The report will undertake a cost analysis to understand the potential costs of cases that are presented for review after assessment point either at through Capita PIPs complaint processes or through mandatory reconsideration and First Tier Tribunal. A comparison of costs will be made based the implementation/non-implementation of recommended actions for process efficiency.
· Negative Press/Reputational Damage – Capita PIP contract is a high profile public contract which is highly noticed in the media, this research report will assess the shortfalls in the reconsideration process by providing recommendations to reduce the number of cases that go to the First Tier Tribunal. Also, to reduce negative press through stakeholder engagement.
· Renewal of contract – The Capita PIP contract will expire in August 2019.The DWP will put the contract up for re-tender Capita most likely to re-bid for the contract. The re-bidding process will take place in 2018. This project will help identify any failings/ inconsistencies with the reconsideration process and appropriate recommendations will be made and steps to provide for more efficient processes in running assessments on behalf of DWP. This information will be beneficial to Capita PIP during the re-bid phase when negotiating Key Performance Indicators and direction of how the service will be run.
· Sustainability – maintaining a competitive advantage over other competitors by identifying shortfalls in the reconsideration process and implementing changes to provide for an efficient process that will reduce internal costs, build relationships with authorities such as citizen advice bureau which is a free network of independent charities that provide advice including legal advice on PIP appeals (https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sick-or-disabled-people-and-carers/pip/) to gain an advantage at re-bid stage and to improve the process for claimants.
Why is this work important to the client?
This research project will help Capita PIP identify any shortfalls in the internal processes. Any shortfalls identified, realistic recommendations will be provided to ensure the service is run efficiently to enhance the claimant experience and gaining the correct outcomes for the claimants before getting to the tribunal stage. Furthermore, this project has the potential to reduce costs and give Captia PIP a competitive advantage at the re-bid stage as this is an area where Capita lacks visibility. Importantly, it will help Capita PIP to understand the contributing factors to why a significant number of cases are overturned at tribunal.
What does the host organisation wish to do as a result of the Masters Project?
A view to implement any viable recommendations based on this research project to improve the process of undertaking PIP assessments and making the correct decisions for claimants.
What are the key deliverables?
The key deliverables will include delivering this project to the client with appropriate and realistic recommendations to ensure process efficiency to ensure the correct outcomes take place for claimants. Furthermore, recommendations for Capita and the Department to reduce negative press and increase positive press through stakeholder engagement and finding ways to reduce the number of cases that are overturned/taken to the tribunal.
Give an overview of main literature and theory sources you will use
What are the key literature themes that you will explore?
The research project will include looking at a range of literature review including journals, scholarly articles, books, media articles, reports found in academic journals and websites. Various sources will be read to be able to critically analyse the literature review taking into consideration different viewpoints and my viewpoint.
The project will explore operational process theory, which will look at operating a service in the most efficient way. This will include, looking at assessing the efficiency of the different processes within Capita PIP.
The models and concepts currently being explored as part of the literature review consist of:
Cost of Quality – Crosby (Quality is Free) the cost of quality and the cost of poor quality. The cost of poor quality affects internal and external by failing to meet the requirements. Internal failure costs can include reworks (rework process), external failure costs, appraisal costs and prevention costs (process reviews). External failure costs will relate to the complaints process and the number of complaints Captia PIP receives.
Gap Analysis Model - To identify gaps arising when the end user misinterprets service quality, highlighting a discrepancy between actual service and the promised service. Gap analysis is a relevant technique that allows organisations to consider key issues faced and how to bridge the gap between the status quo and the desired service.
Failure modes of effective analysis mode (FMEA) - The FMEA model aids in the identification of all potential failures in a given design or service. The process constitutes the decision to study potential consequences that could be introduced by those failures identified in the PIP system.
Business process-re-engineering - A model for reorganisation and redesign of a process is likely to reduce costs while increasing the quality and productivity of services that are provided. Dependent on the information provided from the FMEA, the PIP processes (complaints and rework) elements may need to be redesigned.
Theory of constraints-ToC is a logical and analytical tool that aims organistations to answer three fundamental questions: 1) What to change? 2) What to change to? How to cause the change? 3) How to cause the change?
By identifying the current reality tree which expresses the undesirable effect/problem and by analysing cause and the effect of the undesirable problems it helps determine the root causes. This in turns converts the identified issues into to defined operational tasks that can become more achievable to tackle the undesirable effects. By developing a CRT it identifies the connections between perceived symptoms and root causes.
The future reality tree, expresses the improved future state. The FRT changes the undesirable into desirable effects via the actions that are identified to correct the undesirable effects. Future Reality Tree depicts the could-be future, helps to close the gap between the Current Reality and the Future Reality.
This model will help identify the root causes of why such a significant number of media reported cases get turned over at tribunal. This will be essential information, to determine if further evidence being submitted at a later stage is the only contributing factor (reported by DWP) to why decisions get overturned at tribunal.
Sources and references
Bright Hub Project Management.(2016). Understanding FMEA and weaknesses and
Limitations. Retrieved from http://www.brighthubpm.com/risk-management/72064-
weaknesses-of-fmea/
Brown, S. (2000). Strategic operations management. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann
Dr.R.Ocker. (Slide Player). (2017). Re-engineering. Retrieved from
http://slideplayer.com/slide/3549490/
Goldratt, E. M., Cox, J., &Whitford, D. (2004). The goal : A process of ongoing improvement
(3rd rev. ed.). Gower: Aldershot
QualityDigest. (2014). Some thoughts on FMEAs and Unknown Risks. Retrieved from
https://www.qualitydigest.com/inside/quality-insider-column/some-thoughtsfmeas-
and-unknown-risks.html#
Slack, N., Chambers, S., & Johnston, R. (2010). Operations management (6th Ed.). Harlow,
England: Financial Times Prentice Hall
Dettmer, H. W., (1997) Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints: a systems approach to continuous improvement. ASQC Quality Press
(2) Dettmer, H. W., (1998) Breaking the constraints to world class performance. ASQ Quality Press
(3) Scheinkopf, L., (1999) Thinking for a change: putting the TOC thinking processes to use. St Lucie Press/APICS series on constraint management
Fedurko, Jelena (2011) Behind the Cloud, enhancing logical thinking, TOC strategic solutions
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604097/pip-assessment-second-independent-review.pdf - Paul Gray’s Report (the report looks at how effectively further evidence is being used to assist the correct claim decision and the speed and effectiveness of information-gathering).
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2017/04/30/benefits-process-broken-as-figures-show-thousands-of-pip-decis/ - News articles
Research scope, approach and methodology outline
What research methods will you use?
Semi Structured Interviews
Observations
Why have you chosen these and how appropriate and valid are these research methods?
Interviews will need to be conducted to understand the processes from a management perspective to ensure processes within the operation have been followed correctly and to identify any gaps.
Interviews will also appropriate when interviewing the case managers at DWP to understand how decisions are made.
Observations will be taken in the tribunals, stakeholder meetings and forums.
The research project will include primary data including: semi -structured interviews with the DWP case managers, Capita PIP complaints manager, Capita disability assessors, Assurance and Clinical Governance Directors, Senior Business Assurance Manager and citizen advice bureau personnel.
The interview answers could possibly lead to a focus group, focusing on why such a high number of media reported cases get turned over at tribunal stage. The defined topic will include further evidence, complaints and disparity of judge’s decisions (other contributing factors identified).
Observations looking at the behaviors of claimants and the advisor will be undertaken at citizen advice bureau centres and disability assessment clinics a non-participant observation will be undertaken.
Secondary data will include analysis of PIP data including complaints data and ICE data and reported data (by media data) on PIP, DWP data and Paul Gray’s report on PIP.
All participants will be informed the purpose of the interviews and information provided will only be used for the purpose of this report once they give consent. The participants will be informed interviews will be anonymised by name however their ‘job titles’ maybe be used as a unique identifier to differentiate responses.
The data will be analysed by transcribing the interview transcripts and coding the data from the transcripts into component parts to identify similarities and differences in the processes, this will also help identify any failures and or inconsistences.
Project Plan
Include a Gantt chart indicating what will happen when. This can be done on an Excel sheet. It is important to remember that data collection, analysis and writing up take considerably longer than estimated.
What resources will be needed?
· Self - time, sources of reference, books, articles, journals.
· Client – reports including ICE reports, complaints data, time complaints manager, case manager, Assurance Director, Senior Assurance Manager, Chief Medical Officer, access to DWP case managers.
· Ashridge- expertise and knowledge around process, guidance on project, platform for submitting work
Are there any cost considerations? N/A
· Self
· Client
· Ashridge
· Who are the key stakeholders in this Masters Project?
The audience will include Assurance Director (responsible for assurance and governance including complaints and negative press/reputational damage), the Chief Medical Officer and Managing Director, members of DWP specifically Case Managers. Ashridge through open data, academics in the field of process theory.
Who might be your main supporters and why?
Assurance Director and Chief Medical Officer because this project will fall under their remits the research project could prevail shortfalls in assessment consistency and gaps in the internal mandatory reconsideration processes which lead to overturned appeals in the First-Tier Tribunal. Therefore, this project will provide opportunities for filling and aligning any gaps identified.
How will the Masters Project "stretch" you beyond your present level of expertise?
This project will help me address strategic business challenges. It will continue to develop my academic writing and report writing skills that is useful to academics but also business unit Capita PIP to show this project will add value to current processes.
What do you expect to learn about yourself?
As I have not completed a dissertation before, it would be insightful to see how I cope with long –term projects. I do enjoy a variety of work, therefore I feel this will be challenging to stick to a project for a period 5-6 months with a clear focus; however it is an area I am interested in so I feel that will help me want to ensure the project is successful. Also, my resilience levels during the project and how I will deal with barriers.
What outcome would you consider to represent a success?
I would recommend success to be associated with the consideration and possible implementations of my recommendations.
