FOI 248/25 Ill Health Retirement and Injuries on Duty

Enquiry Reference: FOI 248-25                                                                                

 

I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request.  Below is your request and our response.

 

For the past five years: (2020-2025)

1. The number of police officers who have started the Ill Health Retirement (IHR) process. 
1. (i.e., those referred to Occupational Health for IHR consideration).

 

Between 01.01.20 – 31.12.24

At least 47 (one person asked for consideration and then withdrew) (two people asked for consideration but misconduct proceedings meant applications could not progress – so resigned / got dismissed) (several cases where criteria not met – and they went to PMAB and lost / or they did not make any appeal).

 

Cases of potential EMR have only been recorded on case management in the last 2 – 3 years, prior to this only cases where an actual retirement took place got listed.

 

1. The number of officers who have retired on ill-health grounds as a result of the IHR process.

1. a) 38

 

1. The number of officers who have submitted Injury on Duty (IOD) claims under the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006.

1. a) Not all cases that may have been submitted will be recorded on case management – due to the way in which the use of the system has evolved - the number below is what we can see have been recorded as making an application. Additionally, it is not necessary to retire on the grounds of ill health to be awarded an IOD award - people can apply for these if they have left after completing full service.

Some of these figures will relate to retirements / leavers from before 01.01.20, that have been processed in the time frame – officers often apply much later than when they have retired (on whatever grounds) for an injury award.

32 on the case management system

 

1. The number of officers whose IOD claims were successful.

1. a) Not all cases are yet completed (officer registered to submit and have not yet completed the application – at least 2 of those, 1 former officer withdrew their application - a21 successful.

 

1. The number of officers whose IOD claims were unsuccessful.

9. a) 9.

 

1. A breakdown of the IOD banding decisions for successful claims,

1. (bands 1-4 as defined by PIBR 2006)

Band 1 – 3

Band 2 – 5

Band 3 – 8

Band 4 – 5

 

1. A copy of the force’s policy on the IOD process 

1. (not the IHR, sickness, Attendance Management or similar policy, but specifically how the force manages IOD claims after an officer has left).

1. a) We do not have a policy but have a process:

 

There are 2 different ways of lodging an IOD award application , whilst some of the steps are the same in both - there is a big difference if the person has retired / resigned, and they have not left by means of an early medical retirement process .

• A) Left force not by EMR ( age or service retirement/resigned )
• B) Those who left by EMR

 

• Always check ORACLE re how the person left the force as former officers who retired normally can make IOD applications many years later
• In all cases of IOD award applications we need to be consistent in how they are recorded in case management , this will assist at a later point in time .

 

Steps to take – to make a referral – former officer not medically retired (1)

• There is a need to record the case on the case management system
• The person needs to be referred to the SMP for them to make a decision as to whether they would ( if still in the force) meet the threshold to be considered as disabled due to an IOD
• Complete BUT do not embed any documents into these forms- could be important later if there is a PMAB
• HTWEM 208 (V2)
• HTWEM 200 (V2)
• The former officer does not receive an ill health pension ( some think that they will receive this )

 

Steps to take – to make a referral – former officer not medically retired ( 2)

• Wellbeing have to receive these forms and then seek updated medical information prior to sending off to OPTIMA - this can significantly lengthen the process .
• If the report comes back as they meet the criteria. Then provide the SMP with comparator roles – and form HTWEM 209 (V2)and the IUE (impact upon earnings matrix ) these will be used to determine the banding / % IOD award.
• The former officer can appeal to PMAB if

1. a) The initial report is not in their favour b) if the % IOD banding is less than they think they should have been awarded .

 

Steps to take – to make a referral – former officer not medically retired (3)

• Ensure that XPS are notified of the award ( basic award and then % award )
• There are templates.

Steps - making a referral / decisions - former officer medically retired (1)

• Create case on case management system
• These former officers cannot request consideration of IOD prior to leaving the force
• Complete
• HTWEM 209(V2)
• HTWEM 200 (V2)
• Send to wellbeing – they will send on to OPTIMA , having added on any medical information necessary, with IOD reports/ SMP reports and previous certificates/ relevant medical reports / any other relevant information

 

Steps - making a referral / decisions - former officer medically retired (2)

• The SMP will advise if the person meets the threshold for an IOD award - the report will be sent to the HR Rep making the submission by wellbeing
• There are three potential out comes
• They do not meet the criteria – write to the officer, they can appeal to PMAB
• They meet the criteria and the SMP needs comparator roles and the IUE - the comparator roles need to be suitable for a) the hours the person is deemed able to work and b) their medical condition at the time of their retirement .
• The officer is deemed to have met the criteria and the SMP considers that they are due a 100 % IOD award

 

Out come processes – former officer medically retired

• If awarded 100% do letter to person , do XPS notification NO comparator roles are needed in these cases ( template documents on S drive ) and record if the award is time limited
• If the SMP needs to see Comparator Roles send HTWEM 199(V2) and IUE and the roles selected – select the roles carefully – then the SMP can make a determination of the % banding . The SMP can reject the roles put forward.
• When determination of % banding is made - write to the person advise XPS they can lodge a PMAB

 

 

1. The length of time taken to process each IOD claim.

1. a) For straight forward cases – where there is a successful application and no appeal on the banding The ER case managers time will be approx. a day – taking into account the various elements of the process. The wellbeing team time will be in addition to this.

In cases of unsuccessful applications and then PMAB applications - the time could easily run into 8 – 10 days (total time – as the activity is not in distinct blocks, and there is liaison with PMAB/ staff side / wellbeing / legal services etc – every case is bespoke) The wellbeing team time will be in addition to this.

 

1. Average time to process IOD claims. 

No information held we do not record

 

1. The resources/personnel/team/department allocated to managing IOD claims (including the number of personnel assigned).

7. a) See answer to Q7.

 

1. Whether the force conducts any follow-up or impact assessments to understand the long-term effects of the process on officers who have retired due to IOD.

1. a) The HR/ ER team would not need to make contact unless the person concerned had issues with pension scheme provider, in which case we this would be until the matter was resolved.

 

Please breakdown of the data by borough, district, or department

Due to the various changes in force structure over the recent years, these are very generic headings – of those approved for EMR (not IOD)

Crime - 8

Crime & Justice - 1

Specialist Role - 13

People & Development (includes executive and staff organisations) – 2

Local policing (Response/NPT/ CID) – 9

Fore Control Room - 5

 

Having made enquiries within the Force above is all the information we hold.

 

The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.

 

If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice

 

 

Yours sincerely

Information Rights Decision Maker