SWD ensures proper use of public money
************************************** In response to media enquiries on the procedures for processing disability allowance cases, a spokesman for the Social Welfare Department (SWD) made the following remarks today (October 17):
Disability allowance is divided into Higher Disability Allowance (HDA) and Normal Disability Allowance (NDA). A person is eligible for NDA if he/she is certified by a public medical officer to be severely disabled. To be eligible for HDA, in addition to meeting the eligibility criteria for NDA, the person must be certified by a public medical officer to be in need of constant attendance from others in his/her daily life and not receiving care in a government/subvented residential institution, or a medical residential institution under the Hospital Authority, or boarding in a special school under the Education and Manpower Bureau (EMB).
In the process of each HDA application and review case, our staff explain the above eligibility criteria to the applicant. SWD staff assess the eligibility of each case according to whether the applicant has been admitted to a government/subvented residential institution. The applicant is also reminded that he/she is required to report to the SWD immediately any change in his/her circumstances, including admission to an institution.
In the past, the SWD has discovered some cases in which the recipients have not reported their admission to government/subvented residential institutions resulting in overpayment. In these cases, the SWD staff will try to understand the reasons for not reporting and fix a repayment plan and installment amounts acceptable to the recipient.
Early this year, the SWD and EMB set up a Data Matching system and checked about 1,500 similar cases among which 71 recipients of HDA had not reported to SWD their admission to special boarding schools. The SWD is now taking steps to understand the reasons for this failure to report and discussing repayment plans with the recipients. Up to the present, 61 recipients have agreed repayment plans with SWD.
From June 2005, the EMB and SWD have established a regular reporting mechanism in which the EMB will pass on information on those newly admitted to subvented boarding schools to the SWD for data matching.
HDA is non-means-tested. Payments are public money, funded entirely from the general revenue. To ensure the proper use of public money, we should recover any overpayment incurred by the appointee as we do in other overpayment cases.
In response to media enquiries on a particular disability allowance case, the SWD spokesman said that according to the SWD's record, the recipient was certified to be suffering from total loss of sight and delayed development and was granted HDA with effect from May 1, 1990. She became a boarder in a subvented school on September 7, 1992 and should then have only been eligible for NDA.
As the recipient was below 18, her mother was appointed as her guardian to apply for the allowance on her behalf in 1990. In the process of her application, our staff explained the eligibility criteria to the guardian and asked her to declare in the application form whether the recipient had been admitted to a government/subvented residential institution. As the recipient was then living at home, she was eligible for HDA. The guardian was also reminded that she was required to report to the SWD immediately any change in her circumstances, including admission to an institution.
Once the recipient became a boarder of the subvented school on September 7, 1992, she should no longer be eligible for HDA. However, during the four case reviews conducted to review the recipient's continued eligibility for HDA, the guardian did not report the recipient's admission to the boarding school. Instead in the review forms which she signed it was stated very clearly that the recipient had not been admitted to any government/subvented residential institution and resided at home.
It was only revealed in March 2005 as a result of a Data Matching exercise between SWD and EMB that the recipient was a boarder in a subvented school during the period from September 7, 1992 to July 13, 2004. Since she should only have been eligible for NDA during that period, this led to an overpayment of $161,663.
The SWD has explained to the guardian the cause of the overpayment and discussed with her the possible repayment plan. In general, if a customer continues to be eligible for an allowance, an overpayment will be recovered by deductions from the customer's future entitlement. The repayment plan would be reasonable and in other similar cases we have been able to fix a repayment period and installment amounts acceptable to the customer.
Another option open to the guardian to relieve her financial situation, and which the SWD has suggested to her, is to apply for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA). Unlike the disability allowance, which is non-means-tested and is designed to provide a degree of assistance to the disabled to meet their special needs arising from disability, the CSSA provides means-tested assistance to bring the income of needy individuals and families up to a level to enable them to achieve an acceptable standard of living. It is a safety net for those in need. If the guardian is facing financial difficulties and meets the CSSA eligibility criteria this will help solve her problems.
************************************** In response to media enquiries on the procedures for processing disability allowance cases, a spokesman for the Social Welfare Department (SWD) made the following remarks today (October 17):
Disability allowance is divided into Higher Disability Allowance (HDA) and Normal Disability Allowance (NDA). A person is eligible for NDA if he/she is certified by a public medical officer to be severely disabled. To be eligible for HDA, in addition to meeting the eligibility criteria for NDA, the person must be certified by a public medical officer to be in need of constant attendance from others in his/her daily life and not receiving care in a government/subvented residential institution, or a medical residential institution under the Hospital Authority, or boarding in a special school under the Education and Manpower Bureau (EMB).
In the process of each HDA application and review case, our staff explain the above eligibility criteria to the applicant. SWD staff assess the eligibility of each case according to whether the applicant has been admitted to a government/subvented residential institution. The applicant is also reminded that he/she is required to report to the SWD immediately any change in his/her circumstances, including admission to an institution.
In the past, the SWD has discovered some cases in which the recipients have not reported their admission to government/subvented residential institutions resulting in overpayment. In these cases, the SWD staff will try to understand the reasons for not reporting and fix a repayment plan and installment amounts acceptable to the recipient.
Early this year, the SWD and EMB set up a Data Matching system and checked about 1,500 similar cases among which 71 recipients of HDA had not reported to SWD their admission to special boarding schools. The SWD is now taking steps to understand the reasons for this failure to report and discussing repayment plans with the recipients. Up to the present, 61 recipients have agreed repayment plans with SWD.
From June 2005, the EMB and SWD have established a regular reporting mechanism in which the EMB will pass on information on those newly admitted to subvented boarding schools to the SWD for data matching.
HDA is non-means-tested. Payments are public money, funded entirely from the general revenue. To ensure the proper use of public money, we should recover any overpayment incurred by the appointee as we do in other overpayment cases.
In response to media enquiries on a particular disability allowance case, the SWD spokesman said that according to the SWD's record, the recipient was certified to be suffering from total loss of sight and delayed development and was granted HDA with effect from May 1, 1990. She became a boarder in a subvented school on September 7, 1992 and should then have only been eligible for NDA.
As the recipient was below 18, her mother was appointed as her guardian to apply for the allowance on her behalf in 1990. In the process of her application, our staff explained the eligibility criteria to the guardian and asked her to declare in the application form whether the recipient had been admitted to a government/subvented residential institution. As the recipient was then living at home, she was eligible for HDA. The guardian was also reminded that she was required to report to the SWD immediately any change in her circumstances, including admission to an institution.
Once the recipient became a boarder of the subvented school on September 7, 1992, she should no longer be eligible for HDA. However, during the four case reviews conducted to review the recipient's continued eligibility for HDA, the guardian did not report the recipient's admission to the boarding school. Instead in the review forms which she signed it was stated very clearly that the recipient had not been admitted to any government/subvented residential institution and resided at home.
It was only revealed in March 2005 as a result of a Data Matching exercise between SWD and EMB that the recipient was a boarder in a subvented school during the period from September 7, 1992 to July 13, 2004. Since she should only have been eligible for NDA during that period, this led to an overpayment of $161,663.
The SWD has explained to the guardian the cause of the overpayment and discussed with her the possible repayment plan. In general, if a customer continues to be eligible for an allowance, an overpayment will be recovered by deductions from the customer's future entitlement. The repayment plan would be reasonable and in other similar cases we have been able to fix a repayment period and installment amounts acceptable to the customer.
Another option open to the guardian to relieve her financial situation, and which the SWD has suggested to her, is to apply for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA). Unlike the disability allowance, which is non-means-tested and is designed to provide a degree of assistance to the disabled to meet their special needs arising from disability, the CSSA provides means-tested assistance to bring the income of needy individuals and families up to a level to enable them to achieve an acceptable standard of living. It is a safety net for those in need. If the guardian is facing financial difficulties and meets the CSSA eligibility criteria this will help solve her problems.
Ends/Monday, October 17, 2005
Issued at HKT 16:27
NNNN