Who are ESA claimants and what are their needs?

Who are ESA claimants and what are their needs?

Paul BivandAssociate Director of Analysis &

StatisticsInclusion

Setting the stageFirst part of presentation a 2005

presentation to EU conference organised by British Presidency of EU – indicating the priority given

Analysis of change since thenJob performance and what impacts

What does the media think?

How did we get to 2.7 million?

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Aug 95

Feb 96

Aug 96

Feb 97

Aug 97

Feb 98

Aug 98

Feb 99

Aug 99

Feb 00

Aug 00

Feb 01

Aug 01

Feb 02

Aug 02

Feb 03

Aug 03

Feb 04

Aug 04

Feb 05

Thou

sand

s

Musculoskeletal etc.Other physical

Other, incl. injuries, drugsMental etc.

Working Age IB/SDA: May 1995 to May 2005

2,350

2,400

2,450

2,500

2,550

2,600

2,650

2,700

2,750

2,800

2,850

Cla

iman

ts (T

hous

ands

)

But many want to work One-third of inactive long term sick and disabled

want to work – but had not been looking One-third of incapacity benefits claimants

800,000Long-term sick and disabled who want to work, not

looking

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Jan 9

5

Jan 9

6

Jan 9

7

Jan 9

8

Jan 9

9

Jan 0

0

Jan 0

1

Jan 0

2

Jan 0

3

Jan 0

4

Perc

enta

ge o

f all

inac

tive

long

-term

sic

k

Significant regional differences

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

South East

East of England

London

South West

East Midlands

West Midlands

Yorkshire and The Humber

Scotland

North West

North East

Wales

Percentage of working age population

But recent claims show changing pattern

Some regions have large numbers, yet low percentage of the population – and everywhere mental and other, including injuries, drugs great majority of claims

New incapacity benefits claims by condition and region

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000

Eastern

North East

East Midlands

South West

Wales

South East

West Midlands

Yorkshire and The Humber

London

Scotland

North West

Number

Mental etc Musculoskeletal etc. Other physical Other, incl. injuries, drugs

SolutionsMany experiments since 1997 –

finding out what works – now moving to implementation

Work-focused interviews New Deal for Disabled PeoplePathways to WorkOthers, JRRP, WorkStep, Access to

WorkSupported by enhanced in-work

benefits (Tax Credits)

Work-focused interviews Oct 2001 in integrated Jobcentre Plus areas – all

GB by end 2006– Start of claim– Every three years thereafter– And if assessed as ‘incapable of work’ at medical

assessment What happens –

– Job goals– Skills– Strengths and abilities– Rehabilitation and barriers

New Deal for Disabled People• Voluntary and

private sector job brokers

• Customers can choose job broker

• Jobcentre Plus informs customers, does not refer them

Pathways to Work Seven pilots now -

extending to areas with 1/3 of all claimants by Oct 2006

Programme of work-focused interviews

Condition Management Programmes

New Deal for Disables People

Other choices

I.B. six month off-flow rate

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Apr

-01

May

-01

Jun-

01Ju

l-01

Aug

-01

Sep

-01

Oct

-01

Nov

-01

Dec

-01

Jan-

02Fe

b-02

Mar

-02

Apr

-02

May

-02

Jun-

02Ju

l-02

Aug

-02

Sep

-02

Oct

-02

Nov

-02

Dec

-02

Jan-

03Fe

b-03

Mar

-03

Apr

-03

May

-03

Jun-

03Ju

l-03

Aug

-03

Sep

-03

Oct

-03

Nov

-03

Dec

-03

Jan-

04Fe

b-04

Mar

-04

Apr

-04

May

-04

Jun-

04Ju

l-04

Aug

-04

Sep

-04

Oct

-04

Nov

-04

Dec

-04

Month of benefit start

Off-

flow

rate

National

Phase 1

Phase 2

The off-flow rates presented are produced from the Working Age Statistical Database (WASD). WASD does not include a proportion of short-term Incapacity Benefit claims, therefore the off-flows presented will be lower than actual rates. However, trends over time will be consistent.

Start of phase 1 pilots

Start of phase 2

pilots

Other programmesDisability Employment Advisers -

nationwideWorkstep – 32,000 jobsAccess to Work – 35,000

beneficiariesWork Preparation – often unpaid work

placementsJob Rehabilitation & Retention Pilots –

six pilot areasWork-based Learning for Adults Occupational Health Assessments

What’s changed since 2005?

ESA introduced for new claimants 2008

Changing the bar between JSA and IB/ESA

IB reassessmentPathways to Work replaced by Work

ProgrammeWorkstep replaced by Work Choice

Overall, a slow fall

May 2000

May 2002

May 2004

May 2006

May 2008

May 2010

May 20120

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000 7% fall to May 2008 Recession rise

already turned round in 2010

Further 5% fall to May 2013

A total fall from peak of 325,560

But, changing the bar between ESA/IB and JSA moved them over

A lot going on underneath that

May 2000

February 2001

November 2001

August 2002

May 2003

February 2004

November 2004

August 2005May 2006

February 2007

November 2007

August 2008

May 2009

February 2010

November 2010

August 2011May 2012

February 20130

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

SDA IB Long term IB CreditsIB Short term (higher) IB Short term (lower) ESA Assessment phaseESA Work related activity group ESA Support group ESA Unknown

ESA and IB spending – real terms to March 2012

2000

/01

2001

/02

2002

/03

2003

/04

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

2008

/09

2009

/10

2010

/11

2011

/120

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000IB IS incap ESA

£ m

illio

n

ESA claimantsAbout 25% of ESA flow WCA are

WRAG30% leave before assessment – lower

than IB proportions leaving in 6 months

For Ex-IB about 40% of WCA are WRAG

Only 1.4% leave before assessment

ESA numbers by condition

Assessment phase

Work related activity group

Support group

Unknown

0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000

Mental Musculoskeletal Other physical Other incl. injuries, drugs

Previous performanceBefore

recession, JCP measured ‘job outcomes’ as target

Here shown as % of ESA/IB stock

Around 1 in 200 started work each month

Economy ...Jun

-06Oct-

06Feb

-07Jun

-07Oct-

07Feb

-08Jun

-08Oct-

08Feb

-09Jun

-09Oct-

09Feb

-100.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.3%

0.4%

0.5%

0.6%

Programme figures looked better because...

Covering inflows only – the largest reason

Substantially voluntary– Those wanting to return to work

volunteeredAt some periods, classification used

to determine referrals (Pathways)Programme and benefit figures used

in defining Work Programme targetsBut included those getting better and

going back to previous jobs

Work Programme performance

Contractual measure driven as much by inflow changes as actual performance

Cohort measures much betterSummarised in 12-month and 24-

month measuresAnd, later, sustainment analysis

Looking at cohorts (averaged)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 220%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%JSA 18-24 JSA 25+ JSA Early Entry ESA flow

Months since start

DWP 12-month measure

Jun-11 Aug-11 Oct-11 Dec-11 Feb-120

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

JSA 18-24 JSA 25+JSA Early Entry ESA Flow Performance

improved for other large groups

Not for ESA flow Maybe marginal gain Referral cohort

expanded to longer prognoses

And bar between JSA and ESA different from estimates bases on JSA/IB bar

Comparing cohort performance with prior JCP

JOT

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 240%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Constant job outcome rate like JCP JOTTo Mar 2013 DWP non-intervention

was 15% for completed cohorts

But for 3-month prognosis of fit for work

Not current referrals Longer prognosis

periods imply lower early job outcomes (at the least)

The task aheadAchieving job outcome success whileDealing sensitively with referrals for

people in early stages of treatmentParticularly mental health –

treatment in first few months may impede engagement