Official Statistics

Benefit sanctions statistics to October 2022 (experimental)

Published 14 February 2023

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

The latest release of these statistics can be found in the collection of benefit sanctions statistics.

This quarterly release of statistics on Benefit Sanctions includes data up to October 2022.

Statistics covered in this bulletin include data for sanction decisions during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Although legislative changes to disapply work-search and work availability requirements were effective between 30 March 2020 and 30 June 2020 (in response to the pandemic), some sanction decisions for these types of failures could have been made during this time period. This is because decisions are often made and processed after the date that the claimant failure occurred. This means that it was possible for sanction decisions to be recorded after legislation changes came into effect, in instances where a claimant prior to 30 March 2020 has failed to meet the work requirements set out in their claimant commitment. Additionally, sanction decisions were also possible for some failures which occurred after this date, for example, for leaving a job voluntarily without good reason or for misconduct.

Conditionality was reintroduced from 1 July 2020 on a phased approach and as capacity allowed.

This affects data for Universal Credit (UC) and Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) sanctions.

The next statistics release will be in May 2023.

We are seeking user feedback on this statistical bulletin. Send comments to: epass.team@dwp.gov.uk.

There should be no comparisons made across benefits.

The data sources used to produce these statistics are very different and while we have attempted to use consistent methodology, there are differences in methodological approaches between benefits. Additionally, the benefits themselves are very different and require interpretation based on the rules of the specific benefit.

1. Main stories

The statistics show:

• in November 2022, 6.51% of UC full service claimants subject to conditionality at the point where the sanction was applied had a deduction taken from their UC full service award as a result of a sanction. This:

  • is up by 0.15 percentage points from August 2022

  • is up by 4.16 percentage points in the latest 12 months

• the UC sanction rate reached a new peak of 6.86% in October 2022 when compared to the 11 months preceding the COVID-19 pandemic

• prior to legislation changes made on 30 March 2020, the UC sanction rate was 2.51%

• over the course of the roll-out of UC (live and full service), the balance of individuals in conditionality regimes subject to sanction as a proportion of the caseload has changed

• in November 2022, 31.4% of UC claimants were in the conditionality regimes that could be subject to sanction (this includes claimants in the “searching for work”, “planning for work”, “preparing for work” or “unknown” conditionality regimes). This proportion:

  • was 44.7% in March 2020. In October 2022, this proportion was 31.2%, rising to 31.4% in November 2022. October 2022 has the lowest percentage of claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction when compared to the timeseries from the 11 months preceding the COVID-19 pandemic

• adverse sanction decisions on UC full service have decreased from March 2022, where they reached a peak of 59,000, which is the highest across the whole timeseries. In October 2022 the number of adverse decisions was 42,000

For further information regarding how this is calculated, see the “Sanction Rates” section of the background information and methodology document.

In the latest 12 months the UC sanction rate has generally increased and reached a peak of 6.86% in October 2022

UC full service claimants with a sanction deduction, as a proportion of UC full service claimants who are subject to sanction, at a point in time, November 2021 to November 2022

Source: Benefit Sanction Statistics data tables

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. In July 2020, DWP reintroduced conditionality.

DWP gradually reintroduced face to face appointments for all claimants from April 2021. 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 is a 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. The UC sanction rate generally increased between June 2021 and October 2022 where the rate reached 6.86%. In the latest month (November 2022), the rate then decreased to 6.51%.

2. What you need to know

If you do not meet one or more conditions of your benefit claim without good reason, your benefit could be stopped or reduced. This is a benefit sanction. However, not everyone that is initially referred for failing to meet the conditions of their claim will receive a sanction. Where a claimant’s benefit is reduced, the claimant may be eligible for a hardship payment.

Further information about the sanctions process and source of these statistics can be found in the background information and guidance documents. Figures in this bulletin are rounded in accordance with the DWP rounding policy for statistics, details of which can be found in the “Rounding” section of the background information and methodology document. Unrounded figures from the underlying data available on Stat-Xplore or in accompanying tables may not sum exactly to the rounded totals accordingly.

Users can also:

• produce their own tables and access demographic breakdowns using Stat-Xplore

• access the supporting data tables that accompany each release of statistics

The data in this publication is the latest available for statistics on sanctions for UC. Statistics are available from:

• August 2015 to July 2020 for UC live service sanction decisions

• May 2016 to October 2022 for UC full service sanction decisions

• April 2019 to November 2022 for UC full service rate

Definitions

Sanction decisions

A claimant is referred to a sanction Decision Maker when they do not meet a condition of their benefit. The Decision Maker looks at the available information about the claimant and their referral and decides on an outcome. The decision made can be:

• Adverse – they decide to sanction the claimant

• Non-Adverse – they decide not to sanction the claimant

• Cancelled – they decide that the referral was not appropriate and cancel it

• Reserved (UC live service only) – a decision to sanction the claimant cannot be made, since the claimant is not currently on benefit, so the sanction cannot be applied. The claimant will be re-referred to a Decision Maker if they begin to claim benefit again

Within this publication, we refer to all of these outcomes as decisions. Many sanction decisions can be made during the course of a claim where the claimant has failed to meet the conditions of their benefit claim more than once.

Sanction stages

Each UC live service decision can have a maximum of four stages, beginning with the Original Decision made by a Decision Maker. If the claimant does not agree that their benefit should be reduced, they may request a Decision Review, Mandatory Reconsideration, and Appeal. UC full service has a maximum of three stages as there is no Decision Review.

In the statistics, only the latest decision is kept, meaning that any previous decisions for each sanction referral are updated with every publication.

Sanction durations

We count the length of time that each claimant is receiving less benefit because they were being sanctioned and calculate the median duration of all sanctioned claimants.

The median is the middle number when all of the sanction lengths have been arranged from smallest to largest. Durations are counted up to and including the last month in which a deduction is taken. If someone has multiple sanctions which are served without a break in deductions, this will be counted as one sanction in the statistics. The underlying figures can be found in the supporting tables that accompany each release of statistics.

Sanction rate

For UC, the rate is calculated by dividing the number of claimants with a sanction deduction by the number of UC claimants who are subject to sanction, at a point in time (claimants who are subject to sanction include claimants in the “searching for work”, “planning for work”, “preparing for work” or “unknown” conditionality regimes). These figures are calculated differently to the decisions figures, which are based on the number of decisions made in a full month. The underlying figures can be found in the supporting tables that accompany each release of statistics.

Destinations

We track what happens to claimants after they receive an original, adverse sanction decision. The figures show the amount of time spent on different working age benefits (UC, JSA, Employment Support Allowance (Work Related Activity Group) (ESA (WRAG)) and Income Support (IS)) in the 180-day period following the decision. In addition, we have developed statistics to show who has had a period of earnings after their sanction. Further information can be found in the destinations methodology document.

UC full service

At present, we only hold data on original, adverse sanction decisions for claimants on UC full service and cannot differentiate between non-adverse, reserved and cancelled outcomes. Prior to May 2016, UC full service was being implemented as a trial in a small area of the UK only (Sutton, Southwark, Croydon, Hounslow and Musselburgh) so data on original, adverse decisions is included from May 2016 onwards.

UC live service

New claims to UC live service ceased in January 2018, and since then the remaining live service cases have been gradually migrated to UC full service. This has resulted in a gradual decrease in the number of live service sanction decisions. By 1 April 2019, the systems that were used to administer live service cases were shut down. Due to this, data for any original UC live service sanction decisions has been frozen from this point.

3. Universal Credit Full Service (UCFS)

There should be no comparisons made across benefits.

The data sources used to produce these statistics are very different and while we have attempted to use consistent methodology, there are differences in methodological approaches between benefits. Additionally, the benefits themselves are very different and require interpretation based on the rules of the specific benefit.

Statistics covered in this bulletin include data for sanction decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic. For more information, see notes in the section on changes, revisions and known issues in this bulletin.

These figures are for full service claimants only and do not include live service data; full service data and live service data come from different sources, which is why this sanction decision data has been reported separately. Note that rates are calculated in a manner that is not affected. For further information, see the UC background information and methodology document.

The migration to UC full service will continue until legacy benefits have ceased. As of April 2019, 100% of UC live service claimants have transferred onto full service.

Data for numbers of original adverse decisions has been included from May 2016, for UC full service. This is because prior to this time, UC full service was being implemented as a trial in a small area of the UK only (Sutton, Southwark, Croydon, Hounslow and Musselburgh). More information about this is available in our UC background information and methodology document.

It should be noted that references to full service adverse decisions describe original, adverse decisions only. We are currently unable to provide statistics on original non-adverse, reserved or cancelled decisions, as this information is not captured on the administrative system. We are looking at ways of improving the way we collect sanctions information on UC full service.

3.1 UC full service: Sanction decisions and reasons – Experimental Statistics

At the beginning of the pandemic, conditionality was paused for UC claimants and face to face appointments were suspended, to enable the DWP to focus on processing the unprecedented volume of new claims. In July 2020, DWP reintroduced conditionality. DWP gradually reintroduced face to face appointments for all claimants from April 2021.

The number of claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction has decreased since April 2021 but is still higher than the 11 months preceding the COVID-19 pandemic

UCFS claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction, at a point in time, April 2019 to November 2022

Source: Benefit Sanction Statistics data tables

The number of UCFS claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction increased sharply from March 2020 (1.35 million) to May 2020 (2.65 million). In March 2021 (2.72 million), the number of UCFS claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction was over double that of March 2020. From March 2021 the number of UCFS claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction decreased to 2.01 million in January 2022 before increasing to 2.02 million in February 2022. The number of UCFS claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction then generally decreased to 1.79 million in October 2022, before rising to 1.81 million in November 2022.

After the reintroduction of face to face appointments in April 2021 the number of UC full service adverse sanction decisions generally increased until it reached a peak in March 2022. In recent months the number of decisions has shown an overall decrease

UC full service adverse sanction decisions by month, May 2016 to October 2022

Source: Benefit Sanction Statistics data tables

The numbers of adverse sanction decisions reached a pre-pandemic peak in July 2019 (23,000) after following an upward trend as UC full service was rolled out and the UC caseload built up. In March 2020 the number of adverse sanction decisions decreased to 11,000. The number of adverse sanction decisions continued to drop following the legislative changes to work requirements on 30 March 2020 (in response to the COVID-19 pandemic), reaching 0 adverse sanction decisions in July 2020.

At the beginning of the pandemic, conditionality was paused for UC claimants and face to face appointments were suspended, to enable the DWP to focus on processing the unprecedented volume of new claims. Conditionality was re-introduced from July 2020 (on a phased approach) as operational capacity allowed, and from April 2021 face-to-face interventions resumed in job centres.

In August 2020, the number of UC full service adverse sanction decisions began to gradually increase until May 2021, where they reached 1,700. From June 2021, a much larger increase was observed, continuing until November 2021, where they reached 38,000. Adverse sanction decisions then decreased to 32,000 in December 2021, before continually increasing to 59,000 in March 2022. This is the highest number of adverse sanction decisions on UC full service across the whole timeseries, and 159% larger than it was at its previous pre-pandemic peak in July 2019 (23,000). By October 2022 adverse sanction decisions decreased to 42,000.

Summary of original UC full service adverse decision reasons from November 2021 to October 2022

Original adverse decisions made by reason group	Latest Year	Latest Year (%)	Latest Quarter	Latest Quarter (%)
Failure to Attend or Participate in a Mandatory Interview	515,430	98.4	129,340	97.6
Availability for Work	3,250	0.6	1,140	0.9
Employment Programmes	2,800	0.5	1,380	1.0
Reasons for Leaving Previous Employment	2,110	0.4	560	0.4
Other	390	0.1	150	0.1
Total	523,970	100.0	132,560	100.0

Notes:

1. Note that these are original, adverse decisions, not all decisions as with other benefits.

2. Disclosure control has been applied to this data for confidentiality purposes. Due to this, totals may not be the sum of the individual data breakdown.

3. For a full breakdown of the adverse decision reasons, see the methodology document.

4. Please note that in previously published statistics, mandatory interviews were referred to as Work-Focused Interviews.

Failure to attend or participate in a mandatory interview accounted for 98.4% of all adverse decisions in the last year. Availability for work was the next most common sanction reason, accounting for 0.6% of adverse decisions in the last year.

4. Universal Credit Live Service (UCLS)

There should be no comparisons made across benefits.

The data sources used to produce these statistics are very different and while we have attempted to use consistent methodology, there are differences in methodological approaches between benefits. Additionally, the benefits themselves are very different and require interpretation based on the rules of the specific benefit.

Please note that all sanction statistics for UC live service have been frozen, with no further updates being published past the November 2020 release of this bulletin. The frozen UC live service statistics are still available in this publication to enable consideration of the full timeseries for UC sanction statistics.

4.1 UC live service: Sanction decisions and reasons – Experimental Statistics

The volume of decisions processed has fallen to 0 because UC live service has closed to new claims, and the entire caseload has migrated to UC full service

UC live service sanction decisions by month, August 2015 to July 2020

Notes:

1. Data from 1 April 2019 includes mandatory reconsiderations and appeals only.

2. UC live service sanction statistics have now been frozen, with the final update having been published in the version of this bulletin released on 10 November 2020.

Source: Sanction Decisions Stat-Xplore tables

The total number of monthly decisions has varied since August 2015, with peaks in December 2016 (50,000) and October 2017 (46,000), falling to 0 in April 2020, where it has remained since.

Adverse sanction decisions make up the majority of outcomes for both original decisions and mandatory reconsiderations

Summary of UC live service decision outcomes at each stage, August 2015 to July 2020

Notes:

1. UC live service sanction statistics have now been frozen, with the final update having been published in the version of this bulletin released on 10 November 2020.

2. Percentages presented for one or more categories on this graph may not total 100% because data is not included for reserved and cancelled decisions.

Source: Sanction Decisions Stat-Xplore tables

53.1% of original decisions have resulted in a sanction being applied and 69.1% of mandatory reconsiderations resulted in a sanction being upheld since August 2015.

Summary of UC live service decision reasons from August 2019 to July 2020 (Frozen Data)

All decisions made by reason group	Latest year for which data is available (August 2019 to July 2020)	Latest year for which data is available (%) (August 2019 to July 2020)	Latest quarter for which data is available (May 2020 to July 2020)
Failure to Attend or Participate in a Mandatory Interview	30	53.3	0
Availability for Work	10	18.3	0
Employment Programmes	10	20.0	0
Reason for Leaving Previous Employment	0	0.0	0
Other	0	0.0	0
Total	60	100.0	0

Notes:

1. Disclosure control has been applied to this data for confidentiality purposes. Due to this, totals may not be the sum of the individual data breakdowns.

2. 100% of UC live service claimants were transferred onto UC full service by April 2019. There are no original decisions on UC live service past this point, hence any changes beyond this point refer to mandatory reconsiderations and appeals only.

3. Proportions are not given for the latest quarter, where the overall number of sanction decisions is low. This has been done because the disclosure control applied to the data could cause a misleading representation when calculating percentages.

4. For a full breakdown of the adverse decision reasons see the methodology document.

5. UC live service sanction statistics have now been frozen, with the final update having been published in the version of this bulletin released on 10 November 2020.

6. Please note that in previously published statistics, mandatory interviews were referred to as Work-Focused Interviews. Failure to attend or participate in a mandatory interview is still listed as Work-Focused Interviews on Stat-Xplore.

Failure to attend or participate in a mandatory interview accounted for 53.3% of all UC live service sanction decisions from August 2019 to July 2020.

4.2 UC live service: Destinations of claimants receiving a benefit sanction - Experimental Statistics

The majority of sanctioned UC live service claimants spend more than 5 months after the end of a sanction in receipt of working age benefits

Distribution of number of months spent by UC claimants earning or on working age benefits in the 180 days (6 months) following a sanction decision from 1 August 2015 to 28 February 2019

Notes:

1. There were no original adverse sanction decisions made on UC live service after 31 March 2019.

2. UC live service sanction statistics have now been frozen, with the final update having been published in the version of this bulletin released on 10 November 2020.

Source: Benefit Sanction Statistics data tables

After receiving a UC live service sanction decision, claimants spent an average (mean) of 153 days out of the following 180 days in receipt of benefit (UC, JSA, ESA (WRAG) or IS). On average (mean), only 2 of the 180 days were spent on a benefit that was not UC.

In the 180 days following a UC live service sanction decision, 4.9% of claimants were not in receipt of any of the tracked benefits (UC, JSA, ESA (WRAG) or IS). 76.2% of claimants spent over 150 days (5 months) in receipt of benefit and 70.3% of claimants spent the full 180 days in receipt of benefit.

After receiving a benefit sanction decision, UC live service claimants spent an average (mean) of 51 days out of the following 180 days earning, with 9.0% of claimants earning for the full 180 days after they had been sanctioned. See the methodology document for further information on how earnings are calculated.

5. Universal Credit Live and Full Service

There should be no comparisons made across benefits.

The data sources used to produce these statistics are very different and while we have attempted to use consistent methodology, there are differences in methodological approaches between benefits. Additionally, the benefits themselves are very different and require interpretation based on the rules of the specific benefit.

Statistics covered in this bulletin include data for sanction decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic. For more information, see the notes in the section on changes, revisions and known issues in this bulletin.

Updates on suspension of measures

While carrying out a detailed investigation of the sanctions data to improve the methodology, it has been identified that the complex code used to process the data for UC sanction durations statistics was not performing as expected. This was complicated further by the combination and substantially different methods of processing data from the separate UC full service and UC live service systems. The measures affected are the sanction duration and median sanction length. While we consult with data engineers and architects to understand the complex data, and conduct further in-depth investigations into the code, both of these series have been suspended for UC live service and UC full service as of the November 2020 release.

We are carrying out further investigative work on sanction durations, and aim to revise the complete series for sanction duration and median sanction length statistics once we have completed work on an improved methodology. We will provide updates on progress through the quarterly bulletins and the DWP Statistical Work Programme.

Investigations into the UC full service rate code and methodology have highlighted that the methodology currently used to calculate the UC rate differs from that described in versions of the release published before November 2020, with open sanctions already being included in the measure for UC full service. Investigations to establish if this is also the case for UC live service are ongoing, so we are continuing to suspend UC live service data from the rate and are publishing sanction rates for UC full service from April 2019. We will reinstate the UC live service rate once we have completed work on an improved methodology, following the finalisation of investigations and successful completion of quality assurance processes. We will provide updates on progress through the quarterly bulletins and the DWP Statistical Work Programme.

Figures for UC full service adverse decisions, UC live service decisions and destinations (now frozen), and all legacy benefit measures (no longer reported on) are unaffected by this.

5.1 UC live and full service: Benefit sanction rates – Experimental Statistics

The sanction rate is calculated as the proportion of people on each benefit at a point in time (meaning on the same day that the claimant count is recorded) with a deduction from their benefit due to a sanction. This is different to the data on sanction decisions, which uses the total number of decisions across a whole month. UC live service data has been temporarily suspended from this section, and statistics have been provided from April 2019 for full service only. For further information, see the updates on suspension of measures.

In October 2022 the UC sanction rate reached a new peak of 6.86% when compared to the 11 months preceding the COVID-19 pandemic

UC full service claimants with a sanction deduction, as a proportion of UC full service claimants who are subject to sanction, at a point in time, April 2019 to November 2022

Source: Benefit Sanction Statistics data tables

Prior to legislation changes made on 30 March 2020, 2.51% of UC full service claimants subject to conditionality at the point where the sanction was applied had a deduction taken from their UC full service award as a result of a sanction. In the latest month (November 2022), this proportion was 6.51%, this is up by 0.15 percentage points from August 2022 and is up by 4.16 percentage points in the latest 12 months. The UCFS sanction rate reached a post-pandemic peak of 6.86% in October 2022.

The experimental monthly rate of UC full service claimants with a sanction deduction remained largely stable from April 2019 until March 2020. At this time there was a sharp downwards trend, which coincided with an increase to the UC caseload during the COVID-19 pandemic.

At the beginning of the pandemic, conditionality was paused for UC claimants and face to face appointments were suspended, to enable the DWP to focus on processing the unprecedented volume of new claims. In July 2020, DWP reintroduced conditionality.

DWP gradually reintroduced face to face appointments for all claimants from April 2021. The volume of claimants subject to conditionality, and therefore subject to sanctions, increased. 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 is a 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. The UC sanction rate generally increased between June 2021 and October 2022 where the rate reached 6.86%. The rate then decreased to 6.51% in November 2022.

Over the course of the roll-out of UC, the balance of individuals subject to sanction as a proportion of the caseload has changed. In November 2022, 31.4% of UC claimants were in the conditionality regimes that could be subject to sanction (this includes claimants in the “searching for work”, “planning for work”, “preparing for work” or “unknown” conditionality regimes), compared to 44.7% in March 2020, just prior to changes made to work requirements as a result of COVID-19.

From here, the percentage of claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction temporarily increased to 50.0% in April 2020 and 50.4% in May 2020, coinciding with an increase to the UC caseload during the COVID-19 pandemic. The percentage of claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction then gradually decreased to 43.5% in January 2021 and then increased to 45.4% in February 2021, before gradually decreasing to 31.2% in October 2022, then rising to 31.4% in November 2022. October 2022 has the lowest percentage of claimants in conditionality regimes subject to sanction when compared to the timeseries from the 11 months preceding the COVID-19 pandemic.

5.2 UC live and full service: Benefit sanction durations – Experimental Statistics

UC durations data has been temporarily suspended from this bulletin. For further information, see the updates on suspension of measures.

6. About these statistics

The statistics in this publication are for Great Britain. We also publish a number of background and methodology documents.

Other National and Official Statistics

Read about other National and Official Statistics produced by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

Users can also:

• produce their own tables and access demographic breakdowns using Stat-Xplore

• access the supporting data tables that accompany each release of statistics

• find further information about the sanctions process, source of these statistics and the publication rounding policy in the background information and methodology documents

Changes, revisions and known issues

The following information is about changes, revisions and known issues with the statistics.

Statistics covered in this bulletin include data for sanction decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although legislative changes to disapply work-search and work availability requirements were effective between 30 March 2020 and 30 June 2020 (in response to the pandemic), some sanction decisions for these types of failures could have been made during this time period. This is because decisions are often made and processed after the date that the claimant failure occurred. This means that it was possible for sanction decisions to be recorded after legislation changes came into effect, in instances where a claimant prior to 30 March 2020 has failed to meet the work requirements set out in their claimant commitment. Additionally, sanction decisions were also possible for some failures which occurred after this date, for example, for leaving a job voluntarily without good reason or for misconduct.

Conditionality was reintroduced from 1 July 2020 on a phased approach and as capacity allowed.

This impacts data for UC and JSA sanctions.

Suspension of UC sanction durations and median statistics

While carrying out a detailed investigation of the sanctions data to improve the methodology, it has been identified that the complex code used to process the data for UC sanction durations statistics was not performing as expected. This was complicated further by the combination and substantially different methods of processing data from the separate UC full service and UC live service systems. The measures affected are the sanction duration and median sanction length. While we consult with data engineers and architects to understand the complex data, and conduct further in-depth investigations into the code, both of these series have been suspended for UC live service and UC full service as of the November 2020 release.

We are carrying out further investigative work on sanction durations and aim to revise the complete series for sanction duration and median sanction length statistics once we have completed work on an improved methodology. We will provide updates on progress through the quarterly bulletins and the DWP Statistical Work Programme.

Figures for UC full service adverse decisions, UC live service decisions and destinations (now frozen), and all legacy benefit measures (no longer reported on) are unaffected by this.

Partial suspension of UC sanction rate statistics

Investigations into the UC full service rate code and methodology have highlighted that the methodology currently used to calculate the UC rate differs from that described in versions of the release published before November 2020, with open sanctions already being included in the measure for UC full service. Investigations to establish if this is also the case for UC live service are ongoing, so we are continuing to suspend UC live service data from the rate and are publishing sanction rates for UC full service from April 2019. We will reinstate the UC live service rate once we have completed work on an improved methodology, following the finalisation of investigations and successful completion of quality assurance processes. We will provide updates on progress through the quarterly bulletins and the DWP Statistical Work Programme.

Figures for UC full service adverse decisions, UC live service decisions and destinations (now frozen), and all legacy benefit measures (no longer reported on) are unaffected by this.

Comparison across different benefits

Users should be aware that there are differences between sanctions policy across benefits that will affect comparisons. Whilst the same methodology has been used to produce these statistics the benefits themselves are very different and require interpretation based on the rules of the specific benefit. The sanctions process means that the outcome of a sanction is subject to retrospective changes which should be considered when using the decision data.

Interpretation of data and the sanction process

Care must be taken when interpreting the duration charts and figures as, for fair comparisons, sufficient time must have passed before longer duration categories can be achieved. Deductions can end for a number of reasons, such as the claimant leaves benefit, transfers to a different conditionality regime, or the claimant is earning enough on UC that they no longer have any standard allowance from which a deduction can be taken. These statistics include those sanctions which subsequently go on to be overturned. Claimants whose sanction is overturned will be repaid any deduction. When a claimant leaves benefit following a sanction start, but before the sanction is served, the claim end date is taken to be the sanction end date. In the cases where a sanction end date is the same date as the sanction start (the claimant serves zero days of sanction), the cases are not counted as a sanction served and are excluded from the data.

Removal of Legacy Benefits

As of the November 2022 benefit sanctions statistics publication (15 November 2022), we ceased updating all statistics on legacy benefit sanctions. The legacy benefit sanctions statistics were last updated in the August release (16 August 2022) and last published in the November 2022 release. This includes sanctions for JSA, ESA (WRAG) and IS. Data will be retained in previous iterations of the published statistics. The quarterly benefit sanctions statistics will continue to report on UC full service adverse sanction decisions, and the UC sanction rate, along with the historical series for UC live service. Legacy benefit sanctions data can be found on Stat-Xplore and in the November 2022 release of the Benefit Sanction Statistics data tables.

Contact information and feedback

Authors: Harry Phasey, Luke Boyce, Craig Mejury and Sophie Martin

Lead Statistician: Tracy Hills

For more information on sanction statistics, contact the Employment Programmes and Sanction Statistics team at epass.team@dwp.gov.uk.

DWP would like to hear your views on our statistical publications. If you use any of our statistics publications, we would be interested in hearing what you use them for and how well they meet your requirements. Please email DWP at stats-consultation@dwp.gov.uk.

Users can also join the “Welfare and Benefit Statistics” community at StatsUserNet. DWP announces items of interest to users via this forum, as well as replying to users’ questions.

ISBN: 978-1-78659-475-4