I think that taking shortcuts is the name of the game in the present tick box based quality assurance culture. Suppliers are encouraged to promise the LSC or other funders that they can provide a first class service in return for third class funding. If they actually provided the kind of service they claim to they would go bust very quickly. They have to make the promises though because if they don’t someone else will do so and will get the contrat instead of them. The result is ersatz quality service. As with ersatz coffee it looks good from a distance but closer examination reveals that it is not the real thing.

It seems crazy that an organisation like yours should only have one benefits adviser which means that if that person does go off sick the service is crippled. Then again it seems crazy to expect you to be able to afford to have a second one who may not be needed as long as the first adviser is there.

I think that the solution is to move away from a tick box based quality system to one where the LSC or other enabling bodies take a constructive and supportive approach to service provision. Imagine a world where you could call the LSC and ask them to (help you to) arrange cover for your long term sick benefits adviser.

Advice rather than assistance

Only scratching the service at problems the Government doesn’t want tackled perhaps.