The Universal Credit was crafted and outlined by works and pensions department and is a reform welfare system in the United Kingdom. Ian Duncan Smith mooted the idea at the conservative party during the yearly conference in 2010. In its plan, the conservative and liberal coalition aims at fully implementing the idea over for years and two parliaments. The coalition will incorporate the existing six benefits into a synchronized modern system, as well as cut on costs.

After fully implementing Universal credit it is to affect mainly affect the low paid self-employed individuals and anybody who incurs tax loss. There is a proposal that Universal Credit is to be meant for individuals who exceed the minimum amount of income and is to be influenced by national minimum wage. The Universal Credit will be good news to individuals who are not in a position to earn equivalent of what an employed person is remunerated based on the national minimum wage. With the Universal credit in place, there are high chances that several self-employed individuals will be forced to stop business given that there is likelihood of a financial hardship. The self-employed will divert into looking for employment and at the same time claiming allowance for jobseekers. In the end what will be realised include a shrinking or a reduction for smaller businesses, entrepreneurs and start-ups. In addition, the adoption of Universal Credit is to affect employees who receive remuneration below minimum wage and this would hit the poorest workers hardest.

Introduction to the Report

The report aims at an in depth analysis of Universal Credit, a reform welfare system in the United Kingdom. In carrying out the report analysis, the paper will focus on the brief background of the project; it will further raise main discussions on the two major topics of analysis. Lastly, the paper will look at the conclusion and give recommendations on the main topics assessed.

The Universal Credit is a modification welfare system based in the United Kingdom. Crafted by the department for work and pensions, Universal credit aims at substituting the tested benefits for households that are working. In accordance with the programme outline, the department and customs had an expenditure of £ 67 billion on the benefits that accrued in the year 2012 through 2013 (Daly, 2010). This expenditure is equivalent to less than half of spending on the transfer payments, credits due to tax and spending combined.

The state uses the Universal credit as a means of encouraging claimants to commence working or to earn more and then benefit the system. In the last month of 2012, the department forecasted that through the programme, an estimated 300,000 jobless households will get jobs (Daly, 2010). This is to be triggered by better incentives, simpler processes that are used to make one claim and tight work search requirements that are to be properly managed through claimant commitment.

Through the welfare system, the department has a high expectation that the Universal Credit will reduce the cost of administration, fraud as well as errors and overpayments that occur. The other advantage is that through the programme, there is a projection of increased take up of benefits. The benefits are estimated to be about £38 billion in a period of 12 years through to 2022 to 2023. This is to be informed by a yearly net benefit of £7 billion (Andre, 2013).

As part of its plans, the department has an estimated expenditure of £ 2.4 billion to be used for implementation of Universal Credit up to April 2023 (Brewer and Ratcliffe, 2011). However, against the plans of the department, it spent £425 million by April 2013 as opposed to £431 million that was planned (Andre, 2013). Most of the expenditure has been on the contracts that are mainly meant for design and IT system development.

The department in running the Universal Credit service has a plan to fabricate and make the service available to individuals. The customs and the revenue section have a system that provides crucial information on time, which updates the concerned parties within the system concerning earnings of all the claimant. Though the administration of the housing benefit has been one of the roles of the local authorities, it is now under the Universal Credit. While on the implementation stage for Universal Credit, the department is working hard to introduce or make other important changes like Personal independence payments, maintenance scheme for children, benefit cap and changes to state pensions (Hamnett, 2010). With such busy schedule and activities to undertake, Universal credit formed an important segment of the departments 12 programmes in the cabinet office from the year 2012 through to 2013.

Brief Background of the Project

The Universal Credit was crafted and outlined by Work and Pensions. Ian Duncan Smith mooted the idea at the conservative party during the yearly conference in 2010. In its plan, the conservative and liberal coalition aims at fully implementing the idea over for years and two parliaments. The coalition will incorporate the existing six benefits into a synchronized modern system, as well as cutting costs. Benefits like the income support have been 100% withdrawn, however, for the Universal credit there will be a systematic and a gradual tapering away (Andre, 2013). This will ensure that people take part time jobs and at the same time be in a position to keep most of the amount of money they get. However, the part time job are likely not to be very lucrative and a new system in place is to ensure that the self employment option is washed away given that there would be the idea of minimum income floor.

After full implementation Universal Credit is to affect mainly the low paid self-employed individuals and anybody who incurs tax loss. There is a proposal that Universal Credit is to be meant for individuals who exceed the minimum amount of income and is to be influenced by national minimum wage. The Universal Credit will be good news to individuals who are not in a position to earn equivalent of what an employed person is remunerated based on the national minimum wage (Hamnett, 2010). With the Universal credit in place, there are high chances that several self-employed individuals will be forced to stop business given that there is likelihood of a financial hardship. The self-employed will divert into looking for employment and at the same time claiming allowance for jobseekers. In the end what will be realised include a shrinking or a reduction for smaller businesses, entrepreneurs and start-ups (Pareliussen, 2012). In addition, the adoption of Universal Credit is to affect employees who receive remuneration below minimum wage and this would hit the poorest workers hardest.

Main Discussions on the two topics

Project organization and Structure

While coming up with the programme structure, the department gave a consideration of rather very ambitious schedule that was to be implemented throughout the country as from October 2013. With a keen approach on the policy, it is obvious that the credit would not be approved until 2012. The project adopted the so called waterfall approach. The waterfall approach is such that systems are developed only after a policy is set (Kerzner, 2013). With such a structure, the roll out of the project is only possible by April 2015. The choice of October 2013 as the date of scope is unfounded and only creates pressure on the department to work hastily and manage the progress of the project tightly (Kerzner, 2013).

With a keen look at the adoption of various structures, it comes out quite clearly that the department was so agile in developing various systems and concurrently defining the policy specifications. The approach that is adopted utilises combined project management to come up with IT and policy infrastructure (Kerzner, 2013). From the department it is apparent that it was the first attempt they made in adoption and execution of a project of such a magnitude. Incorporation of the project in the existing governance, contracts and assurance structures became quite complicated. In the beginning of 2012, the department came up with Agile 2.0, a hybrid approach that integrated aspects of both traditional and agile approaches to integrated technology management of programme.

While adopting the project, the department did not put in place a comprehensive analysis of the working of the Universal Credit. On several occasions, there were warnings on the deficiency of blueprint, the functioning mock-up and architecture for Universal credit. Even though the department made some progress concerning its mission, it did not mind to address the areas raised concerning the model and structure adopted (Hills and Waldfogel, 2004). Therefore, this situation exposed the department making it difficult for it to reach an agreement on the needed security for protecting monetary advances of the claimants. Further, it was not clear how the Universal credit would blend into the other programmes. This would see the cabinet office reject the proposed IT hardware and networks that were to be adopted by the department.

Project Leadership

Given that the programme operated under a very tight schedule, with quite unfamiliar programme management approach and ultimately poor project leadership it is imperative that the department have effective controls and good progress information. Put on practice, there wetre no sufficient instrument to gauge growth. Some of the limitations that were quite open and evident in the leadership of the project bordered mainly on integrity of the leaders.

There was the lack of transparency and challenge in the execution of the project. The department did not work closely with the team from the Universal Credit leaving it to work alone. It was quite clear that in developing the project there was a fortress like mentality that was a challenge to the execution of the project.

The project leadership had inadequate financial control over the spending of suppliers. The inadequacy included limited comprehension on how spending was proportional to progress. The project was also poorly managed and poorly documented. The leadership could not properly govern finance and sufficiently review the contractor performance before submitting payments.

The leadership could not effectively oversee department issues. It is apparent that the department is unable to measure the progress it makes effectively mainly because insufficient plan and information on management. The board in charge has had a wider scope and its inconsistency makes it to be ineffective and difficult for it to account. The best that has been done is to identify the problems that arise because of poor governance, continually changed the authority structures of the programme and during the reset period pendant the board as a whole (Pareliussen, 2012).

Recommendations

Owing to the findings, there are numerous recommendations that have been raised which include: The Company should consider producing a good plan with very vivid program goals, connected to the policy framework and service specifications. Moving forward, there should be a consideration for reviewing the options and a clear difference between the effects of changes to administrative systems and the major hard work to facilitate working (Allan and Scruggs, 2004). The department should put in place the least working mechanisms it requires in order to control and look on the required service for Universal credit and find out where structures needs to be in abundance in order to make changes to policy. The department should also consider identifying and tackling conflicting requirements as far as safety, level of computerization and admittance by claimants are concerned.

The welfare systems should set administration structure that allows policy gurus, the operational teams and individuals developing systems to work in sync (Lindsay, 2011). The department should mostly consider setting out the time and manner it manages handovers between the two teams especially if it still embraces the agile methodologies in development. In carrying out the activities, there should not be situations where department give in to capricious pressures due to time that drive decision-making or give a justification for lack of information.

The team should consider coming up with efficient governance processes and structures. This can happen when the team members as well as other stakeholders challenge the department in open ways.

The team should consider tightening the financial management and full control over spending. This can be carried out through improving management information that ties the links spending to progress. In carrying out this activity, the department should consider improving the checks and spending approvals. The reliance for decision making from suppliers should also reduce especially the critical decisions.

Conclusions

Now, it is apparent that the Universal credit programme does not have the worth for its money. It is clear that the Universal Credit has not been timely rolled to claimants and there have been very weak structures to make sure that the programme is controlled. The problems identified in the structure strongly signify an impediment to the Universal Credit and thus raise serious issues about the ability of the department to handle such projects. Such projects that apparently seem to be challenging are those that are over-optimistic in terms of the period coverage and lack openness about the progress (Meredith and Mantel, 2011). With the recommendations raised as a result of the problems realised in the execution of the project, the project can take place if strongly put in place.

Reference List

Allan, J. P., and Scruggs, L., 2004. Political partisanship and welfare state reform in advanced industrial societies. American Journal of Political Science, 48(3), 496-512.

André, C., Garcia, C., Giupponi, G., and Pareliussen, J. K., 2013. Labour Market, Welfare Reform and Inequality in the United Kingdom (No. 1034). OECD Publishing.

Brewer, M., and Ratcliffe, A., 2011. Does welfare reform affect fertility? Evidence from the UK. Journal of Population Economics, 25(1), 245-266.

Daly, M., 2010. Shifts in family policy in the UK under New Labour. Journal of European social policy, 20(5), 433-443.

Hamnett, C., 2010. The reshaping of the British welfare system and its implications for geography and geographers. Progress in Human Geography.

Hills, J., and Waldfogel, J., 2004. A “third way” in welfare reform? Evidence from the United Kingdom. Journal of policy analysis and management, 23(4), 765-788.

Kerzner, H. R., 2013. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. Wiley.

Lindsay, C., and Houston, D., 2011. Fit for purpose? Welfare reform and challenges for health and labour market policy in the UK. Environment and Planning-Part A, 43(3), 703.

Meredith, J. R., and Mantel Jr, S. J., 2011. Project management: a managerial approach. Wiley. com.

Pareliussen, J. K., 2012. Work Incentives and Universal Credit: Reform of the Benefit System in the United Kingdom (No. 1033). OECD Publishing.

Need assistance with this?

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW