ESA work programme

Ok apologies this is probably a really stupid question but I think I read somewhere that
the work programme is no longer necessarily a compulsory part of ESA for the WRAG group?
Is this correct or misinformation? Am I right in thinking the "work programme" means those activities such as work focussed interview and CV filling with a "job coach" arranged by private companies like LearnDirect, Sarrina Russo, etc? Or is that something else?

If that is all that is meant by the Work Programme and it's no longer compulsory I can imagine the process being a lot more manageable.

Again apologies this is very elementary stuff I know but I'm not quite clear on this.

Thanks Gordon. This makes for a bit of a dilemma, then, as I don't know what will be expected of me. As mentioned in previous posts, the work programme with L.D., Russo, etc put me in real difficulties, as when you have a neurologic condition which is psychosomatic in nature, you can get into a vicious circle very quickly of course which can be difficult to get out of.
If they're not going to make the same kinds of demands then getting into the support group becomes less urgent and important. Perplexing situation.

Thanks Gordon, that's very useful information. It creates a big dilemma though - does anyone have any recommendations as to what I should do?

The experience of the work programme was completely intolerable in my specific circumstances, and I would dread going through all that again. The most logical thing, in theory, would have been to use the 'threat to the client or other(s)' provision with regards to work related activity. (Sorry of course that is not quoting directly, but you know the one I mean.)

However, since neither I nor the DWP now know what might be involved in said 'work related activity,' since no plans have been drawn up as yet, it's hard to see how either myself or the DWP could make that judgement.

I can see now, having read in detail the Maximus report, what they have done, and what has happened is that I have been given plenty of 9's, just below the level at which the support group would automatically apply. (Though of course some of the semantic distinctions between the 9 and 15 point descriptors are highly questionable, if not to say spurious).

Perhaps I should just ask for a mandatory reconsideration anyway and see what comes of it?