Policy paper

Response to an inspection of asylum casework: June to Oct 2023

Published 29 February 2024

The Home Office thanks the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (ICIBI) for this long inspection report on asylum casework which took place between June and October 2023.

The Home Office acknowledges the volume and pace of change required to meet the Prime Minister’s commitment to clear the legacy backlog. We have taken action to speed up asylum processing whilst maintaining the integrity of the system. We intend to continue the momentum built  from the legacy backlog clearance and move this forward into dealing with the rest of the backlog, learning lessons from the experience of the past year.

We have already taken steps to address some of the issues raised by the ICIBI in this report and will continue to work to improve the system.  

The ICIBI identified several areas for improvement and has made six recommendations. Work was already in place to deliver some of the recommendations. The Home Office has accepted four recommendations (2, 3, 4 and 6) and partially accepted two (1 and 5).

Recommendation 1

Introduce, as a matter of urgency, a published service standard for deciding asylum claims.

Partially accepted - estimated delivery date within six months of commencement of the Illegal Migration Act

Introducing a service standard for asylum claims is a complex consideration which has to be balanced between the requirements of operational efficiency, the needs of service users and the integrity of asylum control measures, including implementation of the Illegal Migration Act. A project to review these considerations along with scope and potential implementation timescales will be undertaken. Once the project is completed a final decision will be taken on any potential asylum claim service standards.  

Recommendation 2

Identify vulnerable claimants in the asylum work in progress (WIP) queue and prioritise their claims.

Accepted – estimated delivery date within six months

As per the current prioritisation guidance Asylum decision making prioritisation: caseworker guidance - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk), the Home Office recognises that there are cases outside of the existing operational programmes which may require prioritisation due to the specific needs of the claimant. These needs may include complex or severe physical or mental health needs, or severe vulnerability. Many personal vulnerabilities rely on disclosure by the claimant or their representative. There is an existing mechanism for claimants or their representatives to request prioritisation of their case, and any requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Amendments to how safeguarding cases are dealt with have been made to allow safeguarding teams more time to prioritise the most severe cases, which means that decisions can be made more quickly. A dedicated safeguarding lead within Asylum Operations has been appointed, recognising the focus needed on this area.   

We will review the triage process with the aim of ensuring that, where we are aware of vulnerabilities, these can be prioritised without the need for a request from the claimant, although it is important to note that many vulnerabilities do not become apparent until the claimant is interviewed. It should also be noted that there may also be circumstances which may prevent progression of a case, for example where we are waiting for evidence that is important in deciding the claim so that full consideration can be given to all the facts.

Recommendation 3

a) Review the inadmissibility WIP (including the MEDP cohort) to ensure that only claims that have a realistic prospect of removal from the UK are considered under the process.

b) Ensure claimants are informed in writing when their claim is referred for consideration under the inadmissibility or Migration and Economic Development Partnership (MEDP) process.

Accepted and implemented

a) All cases in the inadmissibility WIP for which the Third Country Unit (TCU) has responsibility are cases which are either being considered for inadmissibility action, in line with all the relevant facts and representations in the cases, or which have been determined to be suitable for inadmissibility action and removal, subject to enquiries around removal arrangements with relevant safe third countries.

b) All claimants are advised of the possibility of third country inadmissibility action as part of the asylum process during the screening interview. All claims, where there is a possible third country connection or consideration under the MEDP, will be considered for inadmissibility action and an initial review of cases is undertaken to determine whether safe third country inadmissibility action is possible and appropriate. At this stage, some cases will be promptly sifted out and referred into the substantive asylum consideration process.

The cases that remain will be those which are considered likely to be appropriate for third country inadmissibility, on the basis of information available at that time. Following the initial review, we commit to informing all claimants whose case may be considered inadmissible, by means of a Notice of Intent (NOI) letter, and who may be appropriate for removal via the inadmissibility process. Responses to which will inform ongoing consideration of their suitability for the process, alongside other considerations such as legal challenges and the progress and status of enquiries with the relevant third countries.

Recommendation 4

a) Confirm and implement the delineation of decision maker training and consolidation responsibilities between the training team and decision-making units.

b) Use feedback from decision-making units and stakeholders to continually review and update the training provided to Asylum Operations staff.

Accepted and implemented

a) There is an existing consolidation pathway which clearly sets out the responsibilities of all parties, and work is ongoing to ensure that the decision-making units can provide the necessary support to new decision makers.

b) Feedback-based review of training materials is already underway. An extensive review of the Foundation Training Programme (FTP) has taken place, with feedback loops established including a decision-maker survey which will contribute to a continual review process. As part of the review, a customer panel was set up to enable collaboration with various stakeholders to assess the changes and allow for faster sign-off. A refresher training needs analysis was done, with a package of videos and animations created to enhance the existing offer.   In addition, the Asylum Transformation Programme are actively engaged with a commercial partner to initiate learning design and review for AHRO colleagues.  The ambition is to complete the first stage of the design work by the end of the second quarter of the year, and the new training model being available from 1 January 2025.  This will be built around three core pillars:  an operational learning offer for all staff, modular learning based on an employee life cycle, and a digital repository that enables self-directed learning.

Recommendation 5

a) Implement the routine collection of data on vulnerability and protected characteristics to inform equality impact assessments and the Home Office’s understanding of how policies impact protected groups.

b) Streamline the collation of management information to provide a single source of accurate and real time data.

Partially Accepted – estimated delivery date within twelve months

a) Much of this data is already captured through screening interviews, questionnaires, and asylum interviews, but there is currently no consistent mechanism to record and report on this. It is acknowledged that having a better understanding of protected characteristics would be helpful for policy development, and for complying with our legal duty to consider the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) without having to rely on assumptions and manual trawls.  Work is ongoing via the transformation programme and the streamlining intake project to improve data capture at screening, and as part of this we will ensure that the data can be recorded on Atlas, therefore becoming reportable. Similarly, we are able to (and do, where we have this information) raise vulnerability alerts on Atlas, and there is scope to develop and refine this function to ensure that this is consistently utilised.

b) We recognise the need for a simplified and streamlined system for the collection of management information, however one single system may not suit the needs of the operation, considering the need for both performance management and case management. We will look at options to ensure that the necessary systems are as streamlined as possible, and projects are already underway to bring us to a point where live data is utilised in all systems.

Recommendation 6

Ensure that routine quality assurance assessments are carried out on all asylum interviews and decisions, including withdrawn claims since December 2022, to ensure the 3.5% target is met.

Accepted – estimated delivery date within six months

To demonstrate our commitment to achieving consistent and effective quality assurance management and associated processes, in December 2023 a dedicated Quality Assurance function was created. The overarching remit of the team is to provide governance for all quality assurance activity across Asylum and Human Rights Operations which includes, but is not limited to, performance management and reporting, plus development of assurance standards and measures into non-decision-making areas of the customer journey.

We are committed to ensuring that routine quality assurance assessments are carried out, and sampling targets will be introduced for assessments on interviews and withdrawals. We will review whether 3.5% is the correct level of sampling to suit the needs of the business at this time and in the future. We will work with the central assurance team and relevant stakeholders to determine the appropriate target based on the National Audit Office guidance and industry standard sample size calculations.