|
Appendix B:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fig. B.1: Deprivation indices | ||
|
Social index |
Economic index |
|
| Richmond upon Thames |
0.34 |
3.44 |
|
Outer London |
2.34 |
0.71 |
|
England |
1.90 |
2.24 |
Source: DETR
Note higher or less negative figures indicate greater levels of deprivation.
During 1997/98 Richmond paid out over £35 million in HB and CTB. Rent allowance accounted for about 48% of all benefit paid during 1997/98, with high levels of benefit reflecting high local rents.
| Fig. B.2: Benefits paid by Richmond 1997/98 | ||
|
Benefit |
Value (£) |
Percentage |
| Rent allowance |
17,056,000 |
48 |
| Rent rebate |
12,274,000 |
35 |
| CTB |
5,988,000 |
17 |
| Total |
35,318,000 |
100 |
Source: Richmond
Over the past few years there has been a fall in the number of people claiming HB and CTB in Richmond, reflecting a fall in the level of unemployment in the area.
| Fig. B.3: Changes in HB and CTB caseload | |||
|
Benefit |
1996/97 |
1997/98 |
Stock change |
| Rent allowance |
4,578 |
4,275 |
303 ( 6%) |
| Rent rebate |
4,862 |
4,681 |
181 ( 4%) |
|
CTB |
10,735 |
10,228 |
507 ( 5%) |
|
Total |
20,175 |
19,184 |
991 ( 5%) |
Source: Richmond
Richmond currently employs approximately 30 full-time equivalent members of staff to administer benefits. The average cost of administering benefit was £115.88 per case during 1996/97, well above the reported GB average of £78.70 during the same period. In April 1998 Richmond restructured its Revenues and Benefits division with the aim of reducing the cost of administering benefit. This resulted in a reduction of approximately 33% in the number of benefit administration staff, which reduced the cost of benefit delivery. Richmond told us that estimated costs per claim are likely to fall by at least 5% in 1998/99 and further reductions are likely in 1999/2000. However, officers accept that this has had some impact on the quality of service the LA provides to claimants.
| Fig. B.4: Performance against the 14-day target | |||
|
1995/96 |
1996/97 |
1997/98 |
|
| Richmond |
87 |
95 |
96 |
| GB |
82 |
78 |
79 |
Source: DSS
Richmond reports a 93% performance on rent allowance new claims and a 91% performance on rent rebate new claims in 1998/99, according to its draft statistics.
Richmond currently employs the equivalent of fewer than 3 full-time fraud officers, who have responsibility for the investigation of potentially fraudulent claims for HB and CTB.
The level of fraud that Richmond claims to have detected as measured by WBS has increased since 1996.
| Fig. B.5: WBS 1996/97 and 1997/98 | ||
|
Benefit |
1996/97 |
1997/98 |
| Rent allowance |
£783,353 (78%) |
£921,137 (77%) |
|
Rent rebate |
£91,774 (9%) |
£148,687 (12%) |
|
CTB |
£79,319 (8%) |
£96,578 (8%) |
|
IS |
£49,041 (5%) |
£35,242 (3%) |
|
Other |
|
|
|
Total |
£1,003,487 (100%) |
£1,201,644 (100%) |
Source: Richmond
Richmond reports that it generates WBS in excess of the
targets set by DSS.
In 1997/98 Richmonds target was £427,000 and Richmond reported that it
achieved over £1 million, earning over £200,000 in additional subsidy.
|