Did you know we have a dedicated powers and duties tool?
Available to LG Inform Plus subscribers, it provides information on what current legislation gives English and Welsh councils the power to do and what it requires them to do in law. Advanced searching and filtering options make it easy to find specific powers and duties based on legislation, business function and keyword, and results are easily exported in commonly used formats.
|
Number of adverse JSA sanction decisions resulting in high level sanction (3503) Metric type
- Help text
- Adverse (decision to apply a sanction): this a decision found against the claimant, i.e. a sanction or disallowance is applied. An adverse decision can be made at the original decision making point, at reconsideration, or on appeal. Statistical disclosure control has been applied with Stat-Xplore, which guards against the identification of an individual claimant. "Whilst claiming JSA, a customer can have a Labour Market doubt raised against their claim. LM doubts are normally identified by staff at the Jobcentre Plus office and are referred to the Sector Decision Makers SDMs). Once the SDM has made a decision on whether to sanction or disallow/allow a referral, they enter their decision on a system called DMAS (Decision Making and Appeals System). The decision is also sent back to the Jobcentre Plus office for entry to LMS (Labour Market System) and JSAPS (JSA Payment System) which then makes the appropriate changes to the actual payment to the customer. Table shows the number of sanction decisions made. Data for the most recent months will be subject to a high degree of revision. Numbers of sanction decisions and decision outcomes can change due to reconsidered decisions and appeals. Known Issues: An issue with the quality of the variable ""Duration on JSA"" was identified when preparing the data for Stat-Xplore. Consequently, information on this variable, which was previously available on the tabulation tool, is not available via Stat-Xplore. Following the publication of the JSA / ESA sanction decision official statistics on 19th February 2014, a data issue within the JSA sanction decision data, specifically to do with outcomes from appeals, was identified. Appeal outcome breakdowns were withdrawn from Stat-Xplore and the accompanying Excel summary tables. A review of the methodology for compiling the JSA / ESA official statistics was carried out. The result of the review was that a slightly wider set of circumstances in which the methodology was not processing data as expected was identified. The official statistics released on 14th May 2014 takes account of improvements to the methodology and contain revisions to historical data. The statistics contained in both the Excel tables and Stat-Xplore supersede all previously published official statistics on JSA / ESA sanction decisions. A summary of the revisions is contained below: 1. Official statistics on JSA / ESA sanction statistics are compiled from individual level data from a number of different administrative IT systems. Complex matching algorithms are used to identify the same cases across different IT systems and to identify any duplicate entries within the same IT system. The previous methodology did not identify duplicate records in all circumstances. Since April 2000, approximately 100,000 additional duplicate records have been identified and removed from the data from which the official statistics are compiled. This represents and 0.7 per cent of sanction decisions made, but has no significant effect on the proportion of sanction decisions in which the decision was to apply a sanction (adverse) or the decision was to not apply a sanction (non-adverse). 2. For a proportion of both JSA appeal and decision review (previously labelled as reconsideration decisions), the outcome was being mis-recorded. The effect of this mis-recording was that a higher number of both reviews and appeal outcomes were being recorded as 'decision not to apply sanction (non-adverse)' when they were, in fact 'decision to apply sanction (adverse)'. The effect of this mis-recording on appeal outcomes was more significant than for review outcomes. Between November 2012 and September 2013, the previously released official statistics indicated that 58 per cent of appeal decision outcomes were a decision not to apply a sanction (non-adverse). This figure has been revised to 18 per cent. For review decisions, the equivalent figures were 52 per cent having a decision not to apply a sanction previously, compared to a revised figure of 45 per cent.
- Modified
- 11 Nov 2020
- Data last updated
- 18 Aug 2022
- Short label
- Number of adverse JSA sanction decisions resulting in high level sanction
- Status
- Live
- Output precision
- 0
- Polarity
- a low value is good
- Measure
- JSA Sanctions
- Dataset
- JSA sanction decisions
- Collection
- Stat-Xplore: Sanction Decisions
- Source
- Department for Work and Pensions
- is found in the following lists
-
