DWP’s chief medical adviser dismisses importance of her own department’s reviews into benefit deaths

The chief medical adviser for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is facing questions over why she dismissed the importance of hundreds of secret reviews carried out by her own department into the deaths of disabled benefit claimants.

Dr Gail Allsopp, who was appointed to the role 16 months ago, had been asked by an influential MP what the significant number of internal process reviews (IPRs) carried out by DWP showed about the scale of deaths of claimants.

DWP has carried out hundreds of reviews into deaths of claimants linked to its actions over the last decade, each one examining how the department handled the case, and they have led to countless recommendations for local and national improvements.

Debbie Abrahams, the Labour chair of the Commons work and pensions committee, told Dr Allsopp that the committee believed these IPRs were “probably the tip of the iceberg” when it came to deaths and serious harm linked to DWP’s actions.

Allsopp (pictured) was being questioned as part of the committee’s inquiry into “safeguarding vulnerable claimants”.

But when Abrahams asked her yesterday (Wednesday) for her view on “the actual scale of the deaths of claimants”, Dr Allsopp, who is responsible within DWP for the safety of the disability assessment processes, downplayed the relevance of IPRs.

She said instead that the “really key bit” when it came to claimant deaths was to learn lessons from the small handful of prevention of future deaths (PFD) reports that have been sent by coroners to the department.

She said these were “the absolute bit for me that are really important”, and that only five PFDs had “come through the door” since her appointment.

But Abrahams pointed out that PFDs from coroners were “incredibly rare”.

There have been serious concerns raised over the last 15 years about the reluctance of coroners to examine the role of DWP in the deaths of claimants, even when there was evidence of a strong link.

And DWP has also made efforts to persuade coroners during inquests that they did not need to issue a PFD.

Allsopp will also have been aware that coroners only examine deaths, whereas IPRs also scrutinise cases of serious harm caused to claimants where DWP’s actions may have “negatively contributed to the customer’s circumstances”.

Disability News Service (DNS) reported in November that DWP had admitted carrying out more than 30 IPRs in 2023-24 into cases of serious harm or deaths involving someone receiving universal credit.

Five years ago, DWP insisted in evidence to the National Audit Office that the recommendations made in its IPR reports were “the main mechanism through which the Department would share any lessons from individual cases and seek to make improvement”.

It is not clear why Allsopp dismissed the importance of IPRs in yesterday’s evidence.

Her response is particularly important because DWP has repeatedly admitted failing to monitor the implementation of IPR recommendations.

After the evidence session, Abrahams told DNS: “The committee was keen to hear from the DWP’s chief medical adviser on their role, and welcomed Dr Allsopp’s input to the committee’s Safeguarding Vulnerable Claimants inquiry.

“I was pleased to hear about the development of clinical governance structures within the department (see separate story), the appointment of a Caldicott Guardian to protect claimants’ data, as well as new safeguarding approaches.”

But she added: “We need more clarity on the role of the chief medical adviser in the internal process reviews of claimants who die or are seriously harmed and the serious case panel.

“For me, this is pivotal.”

DWP said the chief medical adviser was a member of the serious case panel, which reviews IPR themes and trends, as well as PFD reports, and that she works closely with the customer service team that leads on IPRs.

It also said that several important pieces of insight, research, and evidence are used to understand customers’ experiences, and gain a full picture, when making improvements and implementing learning, including PFD reports and IPRs.

A DWP spokesperson said: “Supporting claimants is a priority across the department, with support in place to ensure customers are treated with dignity and respect, and claimants with complex needs are given the support they need.

“The chief medical advisor oversees our clinical governance board which considers learning opportunities across the entire department and offers recommendations so that best practices are consistently used to the benefit of all customers.”

Last September, DNS reported that DWP had admitted failing to appoint a chief medical adviser for more than five years – between 2017 and 2022 – at a time when its policy decisions were causing countless deaths of disabled benefit claimants.

That failure was described by grassroots groups of disabled activists as “criminally negligent” and “absolutely shocking and appalling”.

The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…