Research and analysis

Variation in the Universal Credit sanction rate between jobcentres from January 2017 to August 2024

Published 6 February 2025

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

Executive Summary

The Universal Credit (UC) sanction rate^{[footnote 1]} in Great Britain (GB) in August 2024 was 5.61%. This aggregate number does not provide information on potential local differences in sanctions rates. This report documents the geographic variation in sanction rates and updates the previous publication Variation in the Universal Credit sanction rate between jobcentres from August 2017 to August 2019^{[footnote 2]} which was published in October 2020.

This report includes the new sanction rate methodology^{[footnote 3]} which now only includes the four conditionality groups that are subject to a sanction^{[footnote 4]} and includes an extended time series covering the period January 2017 to August 2024.

The following key findings are established:

• when comparing sanction rate for jobcentres against the old and new methodology, the new methodology gives higher sanction rates to jobcentres for the period 2017 to August 2024
• the UC sanction rate of the median^{[footnote 5]} jobcentre in GB has reduced substantially from 12.48% in January 2017 to 5.70% in August 2024
• the degree of variation between jobcentres remains low across this period, however it should be noted that, since sanctions are behaviour driven, there will always be natural variation in sanction rates between jobcentres, so some degree of variation is to be expected
• the national pattern also shows a low variation when comparing at jobcentre region

Figure 1: Universal Credit sanction rate (January 2017 to August 2024)

Figure 2: The median sanction rate of jobcentres (January 2017 to August 2024)

1. Introduction

1.1 Report context

The roll-out of Universal Credit (UC) full service^{[footnote 6]} to all jobcentres was completed at the end of 2018. To help monitor the sanctions regime this paper assesses variation in the Universal Credit sanction rate across jobcentres in Great Britain.

It should be noted that, since sanctions are behaviour driven, there will always be natural variation in sanction rates between jobcentres, so some degree of variation is to be expected.

Figure 3: The roll out schedule of Universal Credit Full Service

1.2 Policy context

A sanction is a reduction of the UC award calculated with reference to the standard allowance. To be entitled to UC, claimants must accept a claimant commitment which may include mandatory work-related activities. These activities will be tailored to the claimant’s circumstances, including any health conditions, caring responsibilities, earnings, and ongoing work or volunteering, so they are reasonable and achievable. The aim of a claimant commitment is to support claimants in their journey towards work. Mandatory requirements may be applied to claimants who are subject to ‘all work-related requirements’, ‘work preparation’, and ‘work-focused interview requirements’ only.

Sanctions are intended to encourage claimants to comply with these requirements by having a deterrent effect. Sanctions also apply to leaving a job or for loss of pay, by choice and for no good reason, or due to misconduct, both pre- or in-claim. The Department for Work and Pensions has a legal duty to monitor compliance and to impose sanctions if the claimant has no good reason for failing to comply. Good reason is determined on a case-by-case basis and is not codified. Examples of good reason include suffering a temporary period of sickness or temporary childcare responsibilities.

Where a claimant has failed to comply with a requirement, the matter is referred to a Decision Maker for a sanction decision. This is known as a sanction referral. The Decision Maker looks at all the available information about the claimant’s circumstances, external factors at the time of the failure, and any evidence of good reason provide by the claimant, to decide whether they had good reason for failing to comply. If the Decision Maker considers the claimant had no good reason, a decision to impose a sanction is made. This is known as an adverse sanction decision.

If an adverse sanction decision is made and the claimant disagrees, they can request to have this reviewed by way of a Mandatory Reconsideration. If they further disagree with the outcome of the Mandatory Reconsideration, they can raise an appeal for the adverse sanction decision to be reviewed by an independent tribunal.

2. Data Sources

The documentation of the variation in sanction rates (see section 3) uses the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) publicly available benefits data on UC live and full service sanctions from Stat-Xplore released as part of the Official Statistics published on 15 November 2024^{[footnote 7]}. This data is available aggregated to the jobcentre and regional levels.

The sample period for the analysis is January 2017 to August 2024. There are around 700 jobcentres in GB across 11 jobcentre regions.

3. Documenting variation in the Universal Credit sanction rate across jobcentres in Great Britain (GB)

3.1 Methodology

3.1.1 Sanction measure

The report focuses on reductions made as a result of the decision to impose a sanction, rather than referrals. This is the measure used in the official UC sanction rate. The Department is currently unable to provide robust statistics on referrals^{[footnote 8]}.

3.1.2 Definition of the UC sanction rate

The UC sanction rate is a snapshot measurement made once a month^{[footnote 9]} of the percentage of UC claimants subject to conditionality that have a reduction taken from their UC award as a result of a sanction. The conditionality group of a claimant is defined at the point when the snapshot is taken. The precise calculation is as follows:

UC sanction rate = Number of claimants with a sanction reduction at a point in the month across all conditionality groups divided by Number of claimants in conditionality groups that are subject to sanctions at the same point in the month

UC work groups that are subject to sanctions:

• Searching for work (Intensive)
• Planning for work (Work Focused Interview)
• Preparing for work (Work Preparation).
• Unknown or missing regime

UC work groups that are not subject to sanctions:

• Working – with requirements (Light touch)
• Working-no requirements (Working Enough)
• No work requirements (No Work Related Requirements)

The UC sanction rate statistics include those sanctions which subsequently go on to be overturned. Claimants whose sanction is overturned will be repaid any reduction^{[footnote 10]}.

3.2 Results

3.2.1 Variation across jobcentres over time (GB level)

Figure 4 shows the change over time of the sanction rate of the median jobcentre, and the distribution of jobcentre sanction rates. The UC sanction rate of the median GB jobcentre has reduced substantially from a high of 12.48% in January 2017 to 5.70% in August 2024. The 5th and 95th percentile jobcentres have also decreased over this period.

The median sanction rate declined from 12.48% in January 2017 to 9.40% in August 2017^{[footnote 11]}, before increasing to 10.50% in November 2017. The median sanction rate steadily declined from November 2017, to 2.42% in March 2020 (pre-COVID-19)^{[footnote 12]}.

In July 2021 the median sanction rate increased, hitting its peak (post-COVID-19) to 7.14% in September 2023. Since then, the median sanction rate has declined reaching 5.70% in August 2024.

Post-COVID-19 indicators of variation across jobcentres regions have been more stable from August 2021 to August 2024, since the roll-out of UC full-service was completed.

Figure 4: Variation in UC sanction rate across GB jobcentre over time

3.2.2 Variation across jobcentres over time (regional level)

Figure 5a and 5b shows the change in the sanction rate of the median jobcentre in each region over time. The trajectory of the median sanction rate in each region is quite similar, and reflective of the GB time graph reported in section 3.2.1. Specifically, the median sanction rate in every region has decreased by five percentage points or more between 2017 and 2024.

Though the trajectories are similar, the order of different regions has changed over time, even if the range of difference between regions has remained small (three percentage points in August 2024).

In January 2017 the highest median sanction rate by region was North Central England with 13.85%, the lowest region was East and North Scotland at 11.08%. In August 2024 North Central England position is second from top with 5.57%, East and North Scotland position is third from top with 6.67%.

In August 2024 the highest median sanction rate is North West England with 7.04%, the lowest region is West Midlands at 4.11%. In January 2017 North West England position was third from bottom, West Midlands position was fourth from top with 13.09%.

Figure 5a: Median UC sanction rate by region (Jan 2017 to Aug 2024)

Figure 5b: Median UC sanction rate by region (Jan 2017 to Aug 2024)

3.2.3 Distribution of jobcentre sanction rates

Figure 6^{[footnote 13]} shows the distribution of Jobcentre sanction rates, averaged over the period June-August 2024. As presented in section 3.2.2 the median sanction rate over the period June - August 2024 is stable and relatively low, and differences in sanction rates between regions are quite small. A detailed analysis of the distribution of UC Sanction Rates for GB Jobcentres, averaged across June to August 2024, reveals that over 80% of jobcentres had a UC sanction rate average between 4% and 8% between June - August 2024. Less than 50% of jobcentres had a UC sanction rate average equal to or less than 5.61% (the GB UC Sanction rate August 2024).

Figure 6: Histogram of UC Sanction Rates for GB Jobcentres (avg. Jun to Aug 2024)

3.2.4 Jobcentre variation vs regional variation

Figure 7 shows the distribution of 35 jobcentre sanction rates within each region that are furthest away from their regions median sanction rate (averaged over the period June to August 2024^{[footnote 14]}. This shows that variation in jobcentre sanction rates for this period is driven more by variation within regions than across regions. Specifically, variation in the median UC sanction rate across the regions is just over 3 percentage points. Variation between jobcentres within a region is at least 2 times.

Figure 7: Sanction rates of 35 Jobcentres within each region that are furthest away from the median sanction rate (i.e. the 35 most extreme cases)  (avg. Jun to Aug 2024)

4. Conclusion

This report documents the geographic variation in sanction rates. The following key findings are established:

• the UC sanction rate of the median Jobcentre in GB has reduced substantially from 12.48% in January 2017 to 5.70% in August 2024
• this national pattern is repeated across each jobcentre region
• the UC sanction rate of the median at region level has also reduced from the highest region reaching 13.85% in January 2017 to the highest region reaching 7.04% in August 2024
• the degree of variation between jobcentres has also reduced substantially in this period
• UC Sanction Rates for GB Jobcentres, averaged across June to August 2024, reveals that over 80% of jobcentres had a UC sanction rate between 4.0% and 8.0%.
• it should be noted that, since sanctions are behaviour driven, there will always be natural variation in sanction rates between jobcentres, so some degree of variation is to be expected

5. More information

Statement of application of the Code of Practice for Statistics

The analysis in this report has been produced as far as possible in line with the Code of Practice for Statistics. The code is built around 3 main concepts, or pillars:

• trustworthiness – is about having confidence in the people and organisations that publish statistics

• quality – is about using data and methods that produce assured statistics

• value – is about publishing statistics that support society’s needs for information

The following explains how we have applied the pillars of the Code in a proportionate way.

Trustworthiness

DWP analysts work to a professional competency framework and Civil Service core values of integrity, honesty, objectivity, and impartiality. Analysts have produced these statistics and conducted rigorous quality assurance in line to the standards usually applied to ad hoc releases. Background and methodology information is also included in the release.

The analysis has been signed off by the expert lead analyst and the Department’s Head of Profession for Statistics was consulted on the production and publication process and the timing of the publication was pre-announced.

Care has been taken to ensure only those who needed to see the analysis prior to publication had access to it.

Quality

The analysis uses the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) publicly available benefits data on UC live and full service sanctions from Stat-Xplore, released quarterly. The data on which the analysis is based therefore adheres to the rigorous quality process associated with its release.

Value

The publication of this ad hoc release ensures the statistics are equally available to all users as well as providing transparency and up to date data to the public. It also offers value to society by helping monitor the sanctions regime.

For more detail on how the sanction rate is calculated, see the Benefit sanctions durations and sanction rate calculation: explanation of methodology.

Where to find out more

The official statistics information regarding sanction rates, conditionality, sanction decisions and durations can be found in the benefit sanctions statistics publication.

Read the latest benefit sanctions statistics.

See other DWP management information and ad-hoc analyses.

See the list of upcoming DWP ad-hoc statistical releases.

Contact information

This is an analytical release carried out by the Department for Work and Pensions.

The Department for Work and Pensions team that produced this report is the DWP Conditionality and Sanctions Analysis Team.

For statistics enquiries only, email: labour.marketstatistics@dwp.gov.uk

For media enquiries please contact the DWP Press office.

1. (UC) sanction rate = Number of claimants with a sanction reduction at a point in time in the month, across all conditionality groups divided by Number of claimants in conditionality groups that are subject to sanctions at the same point in the month ↩

2. Variation in the Universal Credit sanction rate between jobcentres from August 2017 to August 2019 ↩

3. Universal Credit sanctions statistics: background information and methodology - GOV.UK ↩

4. Conditionality groups that are subject to sanctions: Searching for work (intensive), Working – with requirements (Light touch), Planning for work (Work Focused Interview), and Preparing for work (Work Preparation). Conditionality groups that are not subject to sanctions: Working-no requirements (Working Enough) and No work requirements (No Work-Related Requirements) ↩

5. Median = the middle number/rate of all the jobcentres in a sorted list of either ascending or descending order. ↩

6. When UC was introduced in 2013, claims were administered on the live service system. New claims to UC live service ceased in January 2018 and since then the remaining live service cases were gradually migrated to UC full service. At the end of March 2019, the syste6ms that were used to administer live service cases were shut down. As of January 2019, UC full service administers all claims. ↩

7. Benefit Sanctions statistics to August 2024 ↩

8. DWP is looking at ways of improving the way it collates sanctions information in UC full service. ↩

9. Specifically, on the second Thursday. ↩

10. For more detail on how the sanction rate is calculated, see the ‘Sanction Rates’ section of the background information and methodology document Universal Credit sanctions statistics: background information and methodology ↩

11. There was a peak in the UC sanction rate in August 2017 due to the allocation of more decision makers to deal with a build-up in referrals awaiting decisions. The rate decreased in 2017 and 2018 as the backlog was reduced. ↩

12. At the beginning of the pandemic, conditionality was paused for UC claimants and face to face appointments were suspended, to enable the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to focus on processing the unprecedented volume of new claims. While DWP reintroduced conditionality in July 2020, face to face appointments were gradually reintroduced from April 2021 for all claimants. As the return to face-to-face appointments was a gradual process and claimants were only subject to sanction when they failed to meet a mandatory requirement, there was delay between the start of the return to face to face appointments in April 2021 and the increase in the UC sanction rate in June 2021. Conditionality was reintroduced from 1 July 2020 on a phased approach and as capacity allowed.  ↩

13. To note that some jobcentres have been excluded from this data due to low caseloads resulting in high disproportionate sanction rates. ↩

14. The individual crosses indicate the sanction rates of 35 Jobcentres within each region that are furthest away from the median (i.e. the 35 most extreme cases). The omitted Jobcentres will be grouped around the median indicated by the dark circle. ↩