× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Disability benefits  →  Thread

PIP success rates

Pete at CAB
forum member

Welfare Benefits Adviser’ for Citizens Advice Cornwall

Send message

Total Posts: 394

Joined: 12 December 2017

The attached graphs came up at a recent meeting. I think the source may have been our local council.

The top graph is not at all surprising but when I saw the bottom graph I couldn’t help but wonder about the apparently cyclical nature of the percentage of claims that were awarded.

To me this seems to be far too regular, the peaks and troughs are approximately the same distance apart. I am no statistician but if we make the reasonable assumption that there is no pattern to the claimant’s illness or disability ( that the sample is more or less random) then why are there these regular variations- has anyone else ever noticed them?

File Attachments

Gareth Morgan
forum member

CEO, Ferret, Cardiff

Send message

Total Posts: 2004

Joined: 16 June 2010

If registered means claimed then (a) you can’t compare a rolling 6 month mean against a month to month figure (b)  the numbers are too small for a statistically useful result (c) apart from year end there doesn’t seem any obvious seasonality.

Pete at CAB
forum member

Welfare Benefits Adviser’ for Citizens Advice Cornwall

Send message

Total Posts: 394

Joined: 12 December 2017

Thanks Gareth, It was only the bottom graph that puzzled me, it represents the success rate of claims and seems too cyclical but, as I said, my last stats lectures were over 20 years ago and maybe I am seeing something that isn’t really there (or after 30 years in Benefits I am just looking for conspiracies?)

Helen Rogers
forum member

Welfare rights officer - Stockport MBC

Send message

Total Posts: 238

Joined: 17 June 2010

I too find the bottom graph worrying in that the higher the peak, the deeper the trough that follows.
If the sample size is small, I would expect the figures to be more random, but there is a distinct pattern.