The Wislang Case

IN HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH’S PRIVY COUNCIL, LONDON, ENGLAND
Welcome to The Wislang Case Sign in | Join | Help
in Search

WINZ Staff 'in scams to gain bonuses'

Last post 05-19-2006, 3:14 AM by WINZ. 2 replies.
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  05-18-2006, 8:20 PM 17

    WINZ Staff 'in scams to gain bonuses'

    Staff 'in scams to gain bonuses'

    15 September 2005
    By PAUL GORMAN

    Frontline Work and Income staff took part in widespread, targeted fraud to secure pay rises and bonuses, a former staff member alleges.

    The accusations are being levelled by former Ministry of Social Development (MSD) internal auditor and now whistleblower Graeme Wislang, who left the ministry in October 2003.

    Documents released to Wislang under the Official Information Act (OIA) through the Ombudsmen's Office support his claims and reveal concerns from Work and Income employees about the apparent manipulation of databases to qualify for pay rises and bonuses.

    The thresholds for the rewards were set by key performance indicators (KPIs).

    Scams included creating vacancies and claiming clients had filled them when they had in fact found their own work, changing the ethnicity of clients to Maori or Pacific Islander to gain extra KPI credits, and retrospectively offering grants or subsidies to employers to enable a vacancy to be added to the database.

    Wislang said that as an internal auditor he had talked to many frontline employees who participated in, or at least knew of, KPI fraud. "Hundreds" of staff members were involved in the scams, he said.

    One of the documents released under the OIA is a May 2003 email from a staff trainer, who says KPI fraud "is an ongoing problem".

    "In many instances, staff create a vacancy to place that client into work rather than self-place and receive no credit or KPI – this is widespread and not at the lower end of occurrence," the trainer said.

    "Other issues revolve around changing client records to obtain KPIs, such as changing ethnicity to gain KPIs for Maori and Pacific Island clients when the client is not either.

    "Lastly, I am concerned that we often purchase KPIs by paying taxpayer money in the form of subsidies and grants.

    "I see all above examples as fraud, as the main reason staff do this is to obtain a pay rise or bonus, and many staff feel trapped into doing these things as their performance is measured against those that cheat to obtain their outcomes."

    Another email, from July 2003, said: "Brokers have been setting up false vacancies, with several agencies stating approval has been given by region to create false vacancies for previous referrals.

    "I think this in itself is suspect, unless we have a clear process in place. This practice also puts me at unfair disadvantage when measuring my performance.

    "There have been lots of these non-vacancies filled this month by referring suspended clients. If I could do that here ... I too would achieve great results."

    Work and Income is brushing off the allegations of staff fraud, saying it investigated them about two years ago and found no evidence to support claims by concerned staff.

    Work and Income head Ray Smith told The Press the inquiry found problems with the computer system were to blame for the apparent creation of extra job placements and changes in ethnicity.

    "We found no evidence to substantiate the claims. We honestly haven't. What we did find was that there were some issues with the system," he said.

    "If they (staff) entered something in error, they couldn't go back and change it. On the face of it, what might look like someone doing something deliberately, wasn't. We did rectify it.

    "If they were (changing the database), I'd be really disappointed and would want to take the appropriate action."

    Smith said job placement had been only one of about 16 key staff measures and was not used now.

    National welfare spokeswoman Judith Collins last night called for an external inquiry into the allegations, saying "another internal inquiry from Winz to investigate Winz" was not needed.

    The allegations should be referred to the police or the Serious Fraud Office, she said.

    "If National leads the government after Saturday, I can promise the first thing on my agenda will be to get to the bottom of this," Collins said.

    A spokeswoman for Social Development Minister Steve Maharey said the matter was operational and not an issue for Maharey to comment on.

    About 3000 Work and Income staff shared $6 million of performance bonuses last year. The total was 8 per cent more than amounts paid the previous year.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/dominionpost/0,2106,3410845a6030,00.html
  •  05-18-2006, 8:22 PM 18 in reply to 17

    Re: WINZ Staff 'in scams to gain bonuses'

    Agency knew risk of abuse was high

    16 September 2005
    By PAUL GORMAN

    Work and Income knew the recording of client information was open to abuse several years before staff began speaking out about frontline fraud.

    Work and Income knew the recording of client information was open to abuse several years before staff began speaking out about frontline fraud.

    The government agency commissioned a risk study in 2000 that showed the two greatest uncontrolled risks for its business were the use of employment subsidy funding and the accuracy of employment recording.

    Documents released to The Press this week revealed frontline Work and Income staff appeared to manipulate databases to ensure they exceeded key performance indicators (KPIs) and earned pay rises and bonuses.

    Whistleblower Graeme Wislang, a former Ministry of Social Development (MSD) internal auditor, has put the spotlight on scams where staff created vacancies and claimed clients had filled them when they had in fact found their own work.

    Other alleged scams changed the ethnicity of clients to Maori or Pacific Islander to gain extra KPI credits, and retrospectively offered grants or subsidies to employers to enable a vacancy to be added to the database.

    Work and Income head Ray Smith said an investigation of the alleged fraud had found no evidence to support those claims.

    Wislang said yesterday that Work and Income senior management signed off both the original risk profile in 2000 and a reviewed version two years later.

    The study involved Work and Income staff and external consultants and used criteria where a risk score of 50 or higher was considered totally unacceptable.

    The risk that employment assistance subsidies were not appropriate or cost-effective scored 228.75, while the risk that transactions and outcomes were not recorded accurately was 259.5.

    "In other words, experts in the business itself were saying the risk level was off the planet," he said.

    "These scores did not change between the creation of the first profile and the 2002 review. So it was agreed by the people in the business that nothing had been done in that time to effectively reduce the risks. When I left in October 2003, no further review had been done."

    MSD spokeswoman Bronwyn Saunders declined to comment yesterday and said questions for Smith on the risk profile would be treated as an Official Information Act request.

    National Party welfare spokeswoman Judith Collins said feedback yesterday had made her even more convinced an external inquiry into the allegations was necessary.

    Wislang said he had been floored by the response from Social Development Minister Steve Maharey that the matter was an operational one. "Has it not occurred to him that systems manipulation creates shonky stable employment outcomes that feed through into the performance results he, as Minister, reports to Parliament on behalf of Work and Income?"

    http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3412013a11,00.html
  •  05-19-2006, 3:14 AM 22 in reply to 18

    Re: WINZ Staff 'in scams to gain bonuses'

    WINZ - their system is flawed - heres a sample of why.

    If you want to annoy them, ask for the Stable Employment Outcomes report written in September 2000 (and they buried).

    Ask them for the Work&Income risk profiles developed in 2000 and reviewed in 2002. And ask them why there was no change in the risk exposures reported between the two reviews.

    This information has already been released. And is therefore already in the public domain.

    You will see it has "RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT' all over
    it. Put there by Winz/MSD.

    A "lowest control rating" of 25% means there must be something, somewhere
    you're doing right to prevent us from giving you a rating of zero. We can
    but live in hope.

    A residual risk rating of 50 was 'totally unacceptable'. What does that
    make 259.5?

    It means theres a 5 times unacceptale risk that transactions and outcomes will be recorded inaccurately.

    Since the release of these documents, the MSD indicate they have made significant improvements since. The recent WINZ Staff fraud case indicates otherwise, and the question must be asked if the public are being told the truth by the public servants.

    The question ought to be asked perhaps;-
    have the WINZ/MSD really improved since the 2000 and 2002 reports
    have fun.
View as RSS news feed in XML