Recent DLA Applicants: Sample Characteristics

In this chapter we describe the composition of the adult sample in terms of basic demographic characteristics and socio-economic circumstances. This includes an examination of sources and levels of income, respondents' subjective views of their financial situation, and additional expenditure arising from disability. The nature of their disabling conditions and the severity and types of disability are also described, including evidence of the degree of social handicap or disadvantage.

The chief aim is to provide a context for examining the distribution of DLA awards in later chapters. In addition, the description of the sample is set alongside some of the discussion in The W ay A head which led to the introduction of DLA (DSS, 1990). Where appropriate, comparisons between the sample and the OPCS surveys are also drawn. These show whether, and in what ways, DLA applicants differ from the disabled population as a whole.

3.1 Rate and length of award

Table 3.1 Structure of the adult sample

Result of claim (N) (%)

Higher/middle rate only 282 17

Lower rate plus higher/middle rate 451 28

Lower rate only 439 27

Unsuccessful applicants 454 28

Total 1626 100

Source: DLA database.

The sample of adult claimants comprises 1626 respondents. These include 890 respondents with at least one lower rate award and 454 whose claim for DLA had been rejected on disability grounds. An additional 282 respondents received middle or higher rate awards only. Among the lower rate recipients, 451 (51 per cent) received a middle or higher rate of the other component, 115 (13 per cent) received

a dual lower rate award, and 324 (36 per cent) received only one lower rate. Table 3.1 shows the structure of the adult sample.

Table 3.2 Sample distribution of DLA awards

Mobility component Care component Higher rate mobility (N) Lower rate mobility (N) Rejected claims (N) Not claimed (N) Total (N)

Higher rate care 20 38 1 1 60

Middle rate care 60 104 15 2 181

Lower rate care 309 115 194 81 699

Rejected claims 67 23 265 19 374

Not claimed 116 26 170 312

Total 572 306 645 103 1626

Table 3.2 shows further the distribution of awards in the sample when it was drawn in March 1994. Altogether there were 1,005 lower rate awards to 890 respondents. Of these, 66 per cent (584) had been awarded lower rate care only, and 21 per cent (191) lower rate mobility only. The remaining 13 per cent (115) received dual lower rate awards.

Respondents not receiving one of the DLA components are classified in two ways: those who were `rejected' as not satisfying the disability conditions and those who had`not claimed' the particular component. The latter respondents are so classified because they had not completed the section of the claim form relating to the component in question. Where applicants complete the claim form for one component only, adjudication officers are instructed to determine the claim on the basis of both components if the evidence suggests that there is, or may be, entitlement to the other component. Where there is no evidence that entitlement exists to the other component, the officer need only consider the component for which evidence is provided.

Overall, 312 respondents had not applied for the care component and 103 had not applied for the mobility component. The disproportion between the two components in the number of non-claimants might reflect the differing prevalence of care and mobility needs in the disabled population. Whatever the reason, the group of non-claimants is problematic for the analysis because we do not know who was actually considered for the component for which they did not apply and were then rejected, and who was not considered at all. Nor do we know whether they would have been rejected on disability grounds had they completed both parts of the claim form. Non-claimants, therefore, are retained as a separate analytical category.

When an application for DLA is successful, the adjudication officer can make the award for life or for a fixed period, after which the award will be reviewed. Fixed term awards apply only if the evidence suggests that care or mobility needs will

decrease. In fact, DLA awards are typically for life, reflected in the outcomes for

two-thirds of the respondents in this survey. Fixed term awards were said to be typically for one, two or three years, the minimum period being six months. Three- quarters of awards at the lower rate only were for life, compared with 60 per cent of those containing a middle or higher rate award.

Clearly, the achieved sample reflects the study's focus on the targeting of lower rate awards and the boundary between lower rate recipients and unsuccessful applicants. It is a stratified sample of recent applicants, as described in Chapter 2. No claim can be made, therefore, that it is representative of all recent applicants for DLA. Nor can it be claimed that the sample of recipients is representative of the caseload of all DLA beneficiaries. However, the sample is broadly representative of applicants who were awarded one or both lower rate components of DLA in the first four months of 1994. Further discussion of the representativeness of the sample in relation to the age, sex, region and main disabling condition of respondents can be found in Appendix 2.

Of particular interest to this study are those who would not have qualified for the former attendance or mobility allowances, that is, those receiving only lower rate awards. In the remainder of this chapter, therefore, respondents are divided into three groups: those receiving any riddle or higher rate award (733) irrespective of whether one component is awarded at the lower rate; those receiving lower rate awards only (439); and those whose application was disallowed altogether (454). This grouping combines the first two categories of Table 3.1.

3.2 Age and sex

For social security purposes, adults are usually defined as 16 or over. Adults can claim DLA if they are under 66 and start to need help before their 65th birthday. In the event, the sample covers the full adult age range for DLA awards although a

few respondents had turned 66 between applying for DLA and the time of their interview.

Figure3.1 Age distribution for men and women

56-66 years 46-55 years 36-45 years 26-35 years 16-25 years 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Men Women

The average age of respondents was 47 years (SD 12.6) and there was little difference between men and women. Around 60 per cent of the sample was over 45 years and a third over 55, reflecting the association of disability with age (Figure 3.1). There were slightly more women than men, 53 and 47 per cent respectively. However, there were more men than women in the oldest age group: 36 per cent of men compared with 29 per cent of women were over 55. Compared with disabled adults under pension age in the British population, these DLA applicants were slightly younger on the whole, with over 10 per cent fewer in the 56-66 year age group (Martin and White, 1988).

Figure 3.2 shows further that lower rate recipients tend to be younger on the whole than other applicants: almost half were aged 45 or under. By comparison, 64 per cent of higher or middle rate recipients, and 62 per cent of unsuccessful applicants, were over 45 years. Men predominated among unsuccessful applicants: 54 per cent were men compared with 44 per cent of higher or middle rate recipients, and 45 per cent of lower rate recipients.

Figure 3.2 DLA awards by age

Higher/middle rate Lower rate only Rejected claims 16-25 years 26-35 years 36-45 years 45-55 years 56-66 years

3.3 Marital status

Two-thirds of respondents said they were married or living as married, 19 per cent were single, 13 per cent divorced or separated, and four per cent widowed. These proportions are broadly similar to those for all disabled adults under pension age ( Martin and White, 1988).

Figure 3.3 shows that there were more married respondents among those with a middle or higher rate award and more single respondents among those awarded DLA at the lower rate only. By comparison, there were more divorced and

separated respondents among those whose claims had been unsuccessful.

Figure 3.3 Marital status

Rejected claims

22

Single Married/cohabiting

3.4 Residence, tenure and household composition

Nearly all respondents, 97 per cent, were living in private households. The remaining 56 individuals lived in a variety of communal establishments, chiefly residential homes, hostels and group homes, or were temporarily in hospital. Just over half of those in private households were living in owner-occupied housing, one-third in local authority housing and six per cent each in housing association or privately rented property. Differences between DLA outcomes were small.

However, unsuccessful applicants were less likely to be living in owner-occupied housing and more likely to be renting from a local authority or housing association (Figure 3.4). The overall proportions of those living in owner-occupied dwellings or rented accommodation, 53 and 47 per cent respectively, are similar to all disabled adults under pension age (Martin and White, 1988).

Table 3.3 Household composition (adults living in private households)

Higher/middle rate recipients Lower rate recipients Unsuccessful applicants All Living arrangement (%) (%) (%) (%) Lives alone 13 14 21 15

Lives with partner only 35 27 26 30

Lives with partner and others 37 34 36 36

Lives with other relatives 13 22 17 16

Lives with non-relatives 2 3 2 3

Base (= 100%) 707 416 440 1563

Table 3.3 shows that a small minority of respondents lived alone. Most lived with a partner, either on their own or with other family or household members. Fewer DLA recipients than unsuccessful applicants lived alone, as might be expected among those with appreciable care or mobility needs.

Figure 3.4 Housing tenure (adults living private households)

50% ... 50%

40% - 40%

30% -

10% H

Lower rate only Rejected claims

Owns outright = Private rented With mortgage Social rented

3.5 Ethnicity

Ninety-three per cent of respondents described themselves as white. Two per cent each were Indian (38), black Caribbean (30) and from other Asian cultures (28). These proportions did not vary across DLA outcomes.

24

3.6 Social disadvantage

The exclusion of disabled people from mainstream society is well documented (Barnes, 1991) and in The W ay A head it was recognised that the social security system has a role to play in promoting their social integration and personal autonomy (DSS, 1990). It was decided to investigate the extent to which respondents felt unable to participate in, and maintain, social relationships and everyday activities because of illness or disability. To do this we used a well-known scale, the SF 36, of health outcomes (Jenkinson et al., 1993). This covers eight dimensions. We focused on those which describe the individual's normal role and usual social activities, exploring the extent to which physical health or emotional problems interfered with work or other daily activities. Each scale ranges from 0 (worst possible health state measured by the questionnaire) to 100 (best possible health state). The results are summarised in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 Social disadvantage

SP 36 Concepts