This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Welfare to work'.

0x08 graphic

Annex A

Annex A

Dear Mr Rymer,

You e-mailed DWP on 5th January 2010 requesting the Department undertake an internal review of its Freedom of Information Act reply dated 4th January 2010 that responded to your question “How much money have welfare to work providers had to pay back to DWP in the last five years in Merseyside due to fraud?”

I have reviewed the response as requested and have considered it afresh. Your request for the review states:

“That is my FoI so I am asking from 28th November 2009 how much money have welfare to work providers had to pay back to DWP in the last 5 years in Merseyside due to fraud, from 28 November 2009 back 5 years, Yes? In your reply you go from January 2009 back 5 years, well you don't go back 5 years so in your reply you state " As information from January 2009 has been provided in earlier replies (FOI 2203-2206), this isn't replicated within this response.”

“YOUR REPLY TO FOI 2203-2206 WAS

Since January 2009 there have been 2 investigations by DWP into Welfare to Work Providers in Merseyside and none in Southport. One of the investigations found no evidence of fraud and the other investigation has not yet concluded. No providers in Merseyside have had to pay back funding to DWP since January 2009 as a result of fraud.

SO YOU HAVE NOT provided THE INFORMATION FROM 28 NOVEMBER 2009 TO JANUARY 2009 AS I HAVE ASKED FOR

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/welfare_to_work”

To avoid confusion, in my review I have assumed that the information requested is from 1st December 2004 up to and including 4th January 2010, the date your request for review was made.

The information you have requested is only available from 2006-07 onwards. Our data systems changed during 2005-2006 and the earliest date from which reliable information can be provided is April 2006. To identify, update, retrieve and extract the relevant data held prior to April 2006 by this system to meet this part of your request would breach disproportionate cost.

We estimate that the cost of complying with this element of your request would therefore exceed the appropriate limit of £600. The appropriate limit has been specified in regulations and for central Government it is set at £600. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 3½ working days in determining whether the Department holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting the information. Under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act the Department is not obliged to comply with this part of your request.

I can confirm that from 1st April 2006 until 4th January 2010, one Welfare to Work Provider in Merseyside has had to pay back monies to DWP as a consequence of fraud. The overpayment was £146 and was the result of fraud by an individual employee of the company.

If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely,

DWP Central FoI Team

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your right to complain under the Freedom of Information Act

If you are not happy with this response you may request an internal review by e-mailing [DWP request email] or by writing to DWP, Central FoI Team, 5th Floor The Adelphi, 1-11, John Adam Street, London WC2N 6HT. Any review request should be submitted within two months of the date of this letter.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner's Office for a decision. Generally the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted our own complaints procedure. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF www.ico.gov.uk

DWP Central Freedom of Information Team

e-mail: [DWP request email]

Our Ref: FoI 9

2 February 2010