Compensation Recovery Service
The report for the Compensation Recovery Service alpha assessment on 02 December 2021
Service Standard assessment report
Compensation Recovery Service
| From: | Central Digital & Data Office (CDDO) |
| Assessment date: | 02/12/2021 |
| Stage: | Alpha |
| Result: | Met |
| Service provider: | Department for Work and Pensions |
The panel was impressed by the work of the team and has taken into account the considerations the team have raised on points 1,2,3 and 4. There are still some outstanding recommendations that need attention, however the panel are happy for you to move forward into Beta, as long as you ensure those recommendations on the ‘not met’ points 1 and 2 are addressed for the Beta.
Service description
The Compensation Recovery Unit (CRU) team works with insurance companies, solicitors and citizens using DWP services, to identify and recover:
Amounts of social security benefits paid as a result of an accident, injury or disease, if a compensation payment has been made (the Compensation Recovery Scheme)
Costs incurred by NHS hospitals and Ambulance Trusts for treatment from injuries, from road traffic accidents and personal injury claims (Recovery of NHS Charges)
If following the relevant checks it is determined that there is no benefit is no benefit to recover a “Nil Certificate” is presented to the compensator and the case can be settled.
This MVP service will digitise the claim registration process and automate the presentation of nil certificates for clerical compensators dealing with motor liability claims.
Service users
There will be two main users of the MVP service: -
Clerical Compensators who will be looking to register claims relating to a case to understand if there are any benefits that need to be recovered.
CRU Operational staff who will need sight of individual case details that sit within the new service.
1. Understand users and their needs
Decision
The service did not meet point 1 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team were making good use of insights available from multiple sources including an existing service feedback survey and desk research to understand users and their needs
- the team had begun to include users with different access needs in their research
- the team showed examples of iterations based on user research
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- explore any variation within user groups of user needs. The team had done individual sessions with 10 compensators and presented one persona for this user group. The panel wanted to understand what sorts of compensators the team had done research with and any difference in compensator user needs and systems used - for example across different types of compensator or firm sizes
- for beta, continue to explore recruitment methods to mitigate volunteer bias and ensure they have understood and captured user needs. The team has found recruitment challenging and has now identified 12 compensator organisations who are happy to participate in user research. They should check whether any types of compensator organisations are missing from this group or any other characteristics that may be important such as region
- for beta, continue to research with both agents and other user groups to understand the needs of accessibility users
- capture and surface any differences between users of their service and E-sourcing users who make up a majority of CRU users and whether they need to plan to include these users and at which stage
2. Solve a whole problem for users
Decision
The service did not meet point 2 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team has shown a need to improve the way CRU forms are processed and the need there is for a digital service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- ensure they have included all primary user groups in research and testing or explore alternative options. Due to the pandemic the team explained they have not been able to do any research with NHS Trust staff, one of the service’s primary user groups, but are planning to do this soon
-
design, test and show the journey of what happens when an individual compensator leaves the company and the account is no longer active. Consider in what way CRU forms are stored against, i.e. are they stored against an individual user or the company or organisation who are submitting them. How would an organisation be able to access previously submitted forms if the person has left the company and they can not access that account
-
explore and show the overlap with the MOJ portal. This could be mapping the data captured in the MOJ portal compared to what this service will capture. Then show when and how the two services merge together to reduce the user potentially entering the same information twice. Although this is not part of the MVP it would be a worthwhile exercise seeing how the two journeys will align and plan for future enhancements
- explore the idea of making their roadmap public with dates on when service features will be released. As this service works across organisational boundaries and also impacts processes for citizens it needs a roadmap to be public to set user expectations and to allow them time to adapt their own processes
3. Provide a joined-up experience across all channels
Decision
The service met point 3 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the service team are engaging with the wider communications working group to improve communications with citizens in particular letters they’re not expecting from DWP
- the team have mapped out the user journey and identified the pain points across all of their personas
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
-
at beta assessment demonstrate how this service is different to the e-service Compensation Recovery Unitservice that is currently live. If this new service will replace that service then demonstrate the plans of decommissioning the old platform and replacing it with the new one. If both services will be running then demonstrate how the two services will work together
-
Display a roadmap with timelines and milestones.
4. Make the service simple to use
Decision
The service met point 4 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- there was a good amount of iteration of the service, especially the injury section. The iterative design was based on user research and analyse and showed positive improvements over the current paper journey
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- include error messages in the prototype and test the errors messages in user research
- at beta assessment, demonstrate that using other organisations API’s are not viable to enhance the journey
5. Make sure everyone can use the service
Decision
The service met point 5 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team have done internal user research speaking to CRU agents as well as policy and legal staff
- they have analysed a range of responses from CRUs annual feedback surveys and have use that information to shape the service
- the paper and phone channels will continue to be available for users unable to use the digital service
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- show the customer support model and the different ways a user both a compensator and the injured person can receive help with their claim
6. Have a multidisciplinary team
Decision
The service met point 6 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team have used a performance analytics framework and have also planned for there to be a performance lead as they progress into Beta
- the team have a range of skills available to the project and are looking to increase that as the project moves forward
- the team have identified the risk of the high proportion of the team being contractors are making efforts to mitigate the risk
- the team have started early engagement with non digital teams to start to plan work such as the support framework with customer service teams
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- identify a Service Owner as the Product Manager does not seem to have responsibility for the end to end journey the customer will experience (mention of a different product manager responsible for the payment part of the journey)
- even though the team explained they are mitigating the risk of such a large portion of the team being contractors or interims by ensuring documentation is captured to a high standard, this ratio of contract to perm should be reviewed
- the team would benefit from a separate interaction designer and service designer moving into Beta
7. Use agile ways of working
Decision
The service met point 7 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- team ways of working seem to be strong: ceremonies are in place
- the team have been using the Microsoft Teams task board to share visibility of activities during the Alpha stage, and they will move over to Jira for private beta.
- the risks are raised and managed regularly
- the team have met regularly with MOJ to understand similarities between their services and journeys, this needs to be built upon
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
-
Consider a tool where your roadmap can be created and shared widely with all stakeholders
- continue to work with MOJ and understand where there might be opportunities to collaborate in the future and how these services may interact with each other
- work with the NHS Trust to understand how their needs may impact the journey and roadmap, as with the MOJ consider including them into your show and tells
8. Iterate and improve frequently
Decision
The service met point 8 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team presented good quality design iterations, notably with the changes to the injury lists based on customer feedback, also the changes to the free text box
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- be able to provide more evidence how user research is informing your decisions and your roadmap
- continue to test with your users, the feedback so far has been good quality but low quantity
9. Create a secure service which protects users’ privacy
Decision
The service met point 9 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team is engaged with DPO for approvals on data privacy, retention and DPIA
- the team is developing data privacy and cookie policy
- the access to the data is controlled with user identity and access management
10. Define what success looks like and publish performance data
Decision
The service met point 10 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team are working with the performance framework team to understand their benchmarks, KPIs and success metrics
- the team have considered both digital and non digital KPIs
- the team have thought about how they will measure both qualitative and qualitative metrics such as customer satisfaction
- the team will have a dedicated performance analyst in the team moving into Beta
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- consider what you are classing as a “transaction”, whether it’s a paid claim or whether it’s a certificate being given, as this is going to determine what your Cost-per-Transaction is and may not accurately reflect its success. Perhaps consider having both
11. Choose the right tools and technology
Decision
The service met point 11 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- the team is using cloud and other appropriate tools for development and project management
- the team is using Azure tools and Postgres
- team is using APIs wherever required
12. Make new source code open
Decision
The service met point 12 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- team has not published the code in open
What the team needs to explore
Before their next assessment, the team needs to:
- for beta, the team should publish the code in open
- the team understood the value open source brings
13. Use and contribute to open standards, common components and patterns
Decision
The service met point 13 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- team is using open source tools and technologies
- the team is using common components like GOV.UK Notify and GOV.UK Pay and DWP development framework
14. Operate a reliable service
Decision
The service met point 14 of the Standard.
What the team has done well
The panel was impressed that:
- team is using CI/ CD pipeline using Gitlab and can deliver changes quickly
- the service is planned with appropriate DR and business continuity plans