During March, our SWF team
- responded to 58 enquiries
- made 47 decisions
- 12 community care grants
- 35 crisis grants
- upheld 4 (33%) of community care grants and 6 (17%) of crisis grants
- signposted an additional 38 applicants to other sources of assistance. 87% of these were calling us instead of their local council in error and the remaining 13% noted accessibility issues as their council had no freephone number
- received 16 enquiries from local councils seeking advice on the guidance
Stakeholder engagement
Our new Scottish Welfare Fund information video is live! This animation explains what support the SWF can offer and gives an overview of the application and review process.
Accessibility is a key focus for us this year, ensuring our service is as inclusive as possible. We plan to develop leaflets for advisors and hold information sessions with the third sector.
To support councils with the rollout of the new statutory guidance, we recently delivered ten training sessions, reaching over 600 council staff. We look forward to running in-person workshops later this year, focused on improving written communication and decision recording.
Case studies
This month, we received several cases where councils had not followed the guidance on handling evidence. Some applicants were asked for evidence that was either disproportionate or not required. We also noted examples where applicants were not given the opportunity to respond to inconsistencies in the evidence.
Evidence gathering
C applied for a crisis grant for food and utilities. They were recently granted refugee status but support from the home office had stopped. This left them with no funds for living expenses until they could apply for benefits.
The council asked C for their national insurance (NI) number and details of their benefit claim. However, C had already advised that they did not have a NI number and had not made a benefit claim.
The council awarded two weeks of living costs to allow time for C to apply for benefits. Two weeks later C asked for additional support as they were having issues accessing their E-Visa so could not yet make an application for benefits. The council made a further award for two weeks expenses, bringing the total award to £120.00.
C then asked the SPSO to review the council's decision to decline further support.
We reviewed the council's file and spoke with C. We agreed that the award of 2 weeks expenses was reasonable as C was not aware of when they would receive their first benefit payment when they requested additional funds. However, we could not establish how the council reached their decision on the value of the award. We assessed that the householder rate should be used as C is currently in homeless accommodation. We instructed the council to pay the difference between what C should have received and what had already been awarded.
Recommendations
- Award an additional £97.28.
Feedback
- The council requested information from C which we felt was not necessary as C had already provided details about why this information was not available.
- We were critical of the recording of the decision making process
- We noted the council's decision letter contained inaccurate and misleading information
- The council failed to record the details of the applicant's first tier review request
We have asked the council to provide us with confirmation that the award was made within one working day.
You can find more examples in the searchable case directory on our website.