Query re Universal Support programme launched today

I notice from an (as ever) error ridden Daily Mail report that the launch of the Universal Support Programme, heralded in the spring budget has begun today.
I have included the link to the article below. As ever it isn't very clear and I wonder if the admins can advise me on the veracity of some of the content.
The article states that it will be current claimants on UC for sickness/disability reasons who will be the main targets of the ramping up of the programme nationwide as of today .
The figures to be honest seem a drop in the ocean , 25,000 this year to Sept 24 moving to up to 50,000 by 25/26. Given the 2.5 to 3 million on sickness benefits it hardly makes a dent, even if those on the programme actually manage to be placed in suitable jobs.
However, as ever with Daily Mail on these issues the article loses clarity as the reporter salivates over the anticipated cull of sick and disabled claimants from the benefits figures. My query is thus: is the programme aimed initially only at UC claims or will those on ESA (legacy benefit) be included in this new programme?
I ask because having looked at summary of white paper issued in spring it does seem to mention UC and those on "long term sickness benefits".
Can anyone confirm if ESA claimants will be subject to this and if so would it be those in the LCW or work related group only? Or will those in the support group of ESA also be subject to being included in this programme? Or have i got it wrog and oly those who are sick/disabled but on UC who will be subject to this?

Hi Micksville,

Putting aside, as you quite rightly say, the inaccuracies, gramar, spelling and the usual smattering of "sensationalistic journalism" that is rife in the rag you mention, does this snippet from the article help? (It doesn`t affect me, but I read it out of interest):

"This comes after the government found that only one per cent of people in the Employment and Support Allowance 'Support Group' leave the benefit every month.

Universal Support aims to overcome the complex barriers experienced by those who have 'limited capability for work related activity' but have said they would like to work at some point in the future."

Andy

Doh! I commented on spelling in the paper and failed to correct "innacuracies"

official press release here:

www.gov.uk/government/news/25-000-people...ersal-support-scheme

these are still quite spin-tastic, it looks like this particular thing is arranging a job for people then giving them in-job support, then another strand of employment within a primary care setting:

"Further Information

Universal Support is part of a £3.5 billion package of measures announced at the Spring Budget to get more people into work, of which £2 billion was set aside to target the biggest economically inactive group: disabled people and people with long-term health conditions.
There are two strands to the first phase of the Universal Support programme: 1. The Work and Health Programme Pioneer Support will place participants into work at the earliest opportunity after an initial work assessment, and then provide them with wraparound in-work support from a personal adviser. 2. Individual Placement and Support in Primary Care (IPSPC) provides employment support to people with mild to moderate mental or physical health conditions. Participants are referred to the service by healthcare professionals such as GPs and practice nurses, and employment support and advice are integrated with their normal health treatment.
The Department for Work and Pensions will review the evidence gathered during the first phase of Universal Support and will ramp up the programme to support at least 50,000 people a year from 2025/26.

Contact Press Office

Media enquiries for this press release – 0115 975 8781"

any journalists want to ask some questions? or perhaps a publishing company that specialises in benefit advice

what springs to mind straight away is that if people have been classed as LCW/LCWRA then I'm presuming there is something in the laws at the moment that says they can't be made to work or apply/train, maybe also receive employment support? I don't know, so these things might not be mandatory, but they might try to get work coaches to promote them aggresively, I think when universal jobmatch was introduced the DWP staffs union advised them that it wasn't compulsory for people to join this (it was a job website run by monster.com who had had massive data breaches etc so weren't really fit to run it), I remember I told my DEA this when she offered it to me and she said "I do like a rebel" - whether I was a rebel is in question, the DWP were sort of saying it was mandatory when it wasn't...

bonus points if the questions asked make them crap themselves and have a rethink.

I've just remembered that the plan is to abolish WCA and LCW/LCWRA, and base eligibility on the PIP assessment, that famously fair, accurate process.

so anything related that currently prevents those groups from being made to do things might not be there.

but... that may well come butting up against other laws, convention on human rights etc, there are bits of that they don't like so much that they keep trying to come up with their own "bill of british rights" etc to replace it, the last attempt to do this was officially shelved recently, I think successive ministers have tried this 8 or 10 times.

the big issue did a story about the PIP assesments this week, the DWP have specifically told me nobody is on performance related pay, it looks like the mechanism used is that the DWP claws back money already paid if assessment reports don't satisfy an auditor, so reports are written to keep auditors happy, and the assessor doesn't care about fallout because thats between the "customer" and the DWP, fact is that they've now lost 4 out of 5 contracts to do the assessments and are only in the running for the 5th because they've sued in order to be allowed to tender.

www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp...atos-maximus-capita/

Yes some reputable websites like Scope report it as being voluntary DWP press release however doesn't actually say that it's voluntary It skirts round the issue so any admins or readers that can clarify if it's mandatory or not that would be hepful. Again, as you suggest it metions people who are on LCWRA but that could refer to the LCWRA within UC rather than in ESA I think you're correct regarding ESA Support Group in that there would need tio be a change in primary legislation to make ESA support group recipients move mandatorily into work or work activity I'm sure that is coming down the pipelie though