PIP claimant statistics are derived from the Personal Independence Payment Computer System (PIPCS). This information is updated overnight into an Atomic Data Store (ADS) and this is made available to analysts. PIP is made up of 2 parts, the daily living component and the mobility component. Each component can be paid at one of 2 rates, either the standard rate or the enhanced rate.

Variables available:

• Residential Geographies (2001 Census) (Great Britain, Country, Region, Local Authority, Westminster Parliamentary Constituency);
• Sociodemographic Characteristics (Age (bands and single year), Daily Living Award Status, Duration of current claim, Gender, ICD disease code summary group, Mobility Award Status, Primary Disability Category and Subgroup, Reassessment Indicator, Terminally Ill Indicator)

PIP clearance statistics are derived from the Personal Independence Payment Computer System (PIPCS), in the same way as the PIP Claims in Payment dataset. Variables available include:

• Residential Geographies (2001 Census) (Great Britain, Country, Region, Local Authority, Westminster Parliamentary Constituency);
• Claimant Characteristics (Age (bands and single year), Clearance Type Indicator, Daily Living Award Status, Disallowance Type Indicator, Gender, Reassessment Indicator, Terminally Ill Indicator)

PIP registration statistics are derived from the Personal Independence Payment Computer System (PIPCS), in the same way as the PIP Claims in Payment dataset. By registration we mean that the claimant has completed the initial PIP claim process, either by phone or, in exceptional circumstances, via a paper form. Variables available include:

• Residential Geographies (2001 Census) (Great Britain, Country, Region, Local Authority, Westminster Parliamentary Constituency);
• Claimant Characteristics (Age (bands and single year), Gender, Reassessment Indicator, Terminally Ill Indicator)

Before an eligible claimant applies for a PIP, they need to call the DWP in England, Wales and Scotland or the Personal Independence Payment Centre in N. Ireland, who within 2 weeks will send them a PIP claim form. Information that is normally collected on the form includes: list of health professionals, information about the condition, medication and treatments, ability to prepare and cook food, ability to independently eat and drink, managing treatments, washing and bathing, managing toilet needs, dressing and undressing, communicating, reading, mixing with other people, making decisions about money, going out, moving around. This is called the PIP1 form and it is not available online.

If terminally ill, they need to call the PIP claim line and ask for their doctor or other medical consultant to send the DS1500 medical form. The following information is normally collected at this stage: full name, address and phone number; national insurance number; bank or building society account details; nationality or immigration status; contact details of GP or other health professionals the customer works with; if stayed in a hospital or other type of residential care, the dates and details; if been abroad for 4 weeks or more in the last 3 years (the dates and reason).

The DS1500 form can only be completed by the doctor or consultant.

A health professional will be asked to comment on the claimant’s ability to carry out a range of daily living and mobility activities. They will write a report to DWP (DWP, 2016) or PIP Centre. Based on that a DWP decision maker or PIP Centre Case Manager will use a points system for each activity descriptor to decide whether a claimant is entitled to the benefit.

If successful, claimants will normally get their first payment within 4 months from the application date or as quickly as 2 weeks of applying if terminally ill.

There is no information on the data that the Social Security & Child Support Tribunal hold for appeals, but we can get some indirect information from the types of forms and documentation that the appellants and respondents have to fill in:

• PIP Claimants in England, Scotland or Wales need to fill in form SSCS1, which includes the following fields: right to appeal; name of benefit appealing about; applicant details (title, name, surname, address, Date of Birth, National Insurance Number, Postcode, Full Address, Phone Number); details of person appealing on behalf of (same as above, applicable only when appealing on behalf of someone else); grounds for appeal (free text, open ended); is appeal in time (if not why); choice of attending a hearing or decision being on the papers; hearing needs and requirements (availability; special needs; signer or interpreter and language requirements; notice of hearing); signature and date of application
• PIP Claimants in N. Ireland, need to fill in form Enquiry Form Appeals form NOA1(SS), to appeal via the Appeals Service, which includes the following fields: about the decision being appealed against (received mandatory reconsideration; copy attached; write the date the mandatory reconsideration notice was sent; name of benefit appealing against); time limits for appealing (information about applying for an extension; reasons); grounds for appeal (why disagree with the decision); person information of claimant (title; first name; surname; address; Date of birth; phone no; postcode; email); information on the person acting on behalf of a child or another adult (if officially appointed to act on behalf of the person; title; first name; surname; address; date of birth; national insurance number; email; postcode); declaration
• Tribunals and gender recognition certificate statistics quarterly. These are issued by the Ministry of Justice Quarterly and include information on receipts (i.e., cases received by HMCTS), the outcome of cases by category (e.g., cases disposed of at hearing) and the caseload outstanding (snapshot of live cases at a specific point in time) for the 3 largest tribunals: Employment, Immigration and Asylum, and Social Security and Child Support. It also incorporates statistics on gender recognition certificates.
• Statistics on the use of language services in the courts and tribunals. The data presented in this series of bulletins are the face to face language services provided to HM Courts & Tribunals Services and National Offender Management Service (NOMS), covering requests for services made and completed.
• The Tribunal is normally recording the decision of the appeal, and issues a response, but we could not find an example to include in this report.

There is no metadata on the types of information that the Upper Tribunal holds on ESA appeals, but we can get some indirect information from the forms and supplementary documentation that the appellants have to fill in and the range of documentation that is submitted:

• PIP Claimants need to fill in form UT001 initially, to apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (UT). This is a .pdf form which contains the following information: about the decision appealing against (First-Tier tribunal reference, First-Tier Tribunal Decision Date); about the appellant (title, name, surname, national insurance number, Date of Birth, full address including postcode, phone number); details of the representative (if relevant, as above); reasons for any delay (if more than a month passed since First-Tier Tribunal decision); reasons for appeal (open ended question); preference of oral hearing and why; signature and date of submission; enclosed required documents
• DWP or DfC and other government departments, need to fill in form UT002 (Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber, 2012) initially to apply for permission to appeal to the UT. This is a .pdf form and contains the following information: about the appellant (name of department, information about the representative (name, full address including postcode, phone number, reference no.); about the respondents – first, second and third respondent (surname, other names, full address including postcode); about the first-tier tribunal (location where decision was made, date of first-tier tribunal, tribunal decision number; written statement for reasons of tribunal’s decision, date of tribunal decision); reason for appealing (open ended question, up to 2 pages); permission to appeal from the first-tier tribunal (did the first-tier tribunal refuse to admit the application because they were late; if more than one months have passed since the tribunal; if the appellant requires an oral hearing); signature, declaration and date of submission of the form.
• For Statistics on the use of language services in the courts and tribunals (MoJ); Tribunals and gender recognition certificate statistics quarterly (MoJ), see above.
• The Tribunal is normally recording the decision of the appeal, and issues a response, but we could not find an example to include in this report.

There is no metadata on the types of information that the Court of Appeal holds on first- and second-tier appeals, but we can get some indirect information from the forms and supplementary documentation that the appellants have to fill in and the range of documentation that is submitted:

• N161 form: Appellant's notice (all appeals except small claims track appeals and appeals to the Family Division of the High Court)
• N244 form: Application notice
• N460 form: Reasons for allowing or refusing permission to appeal (including referral to the Court of Appeal, Civil Division), and information concerning routes of appeal.
• N460HC form: Reasons for allowing or refusing permission to appeal and information concerning routes of appeal.
• previous decisions data; This is in the form of an online searchable data base of decisions, made available by the British and Irish Legal Information Institute. An example of a subset of the database focusing on decisions by the Court of Appeals for English and Wales cases is available via this link.

There is no metadata on the types of information that the UK Supreme Court holds on appeals, but we can get some indirect information from the forms and supplementary documentation that the appellants should fill in and the range of documentation that is submitted:

• CF1 - Notice of appeal Notice of appeal (or application for permission to appeal) Court form 1 (PDF)
• CF2 - Application form Court form 2 (PDF)
• CF3 - Notice of objection or Acknowledgment Court form 3 (PDF)
• CF5 - Bill of Costs Court form 5 (DOC)

If claimants disagree with a decision they can raise this with the office they have been interacting in the first instance, who are expected to respond to the request immediately. Claimants can request a written statement of the reasons.

If claimants are not satisfied with the resolution or do not agree with the decision, they can ask the office to consider it again. This process is called mandatory reconsideration. To do that, claimants need to submit an explanation of why they think the decision is wrong and include evidence to support their claims. They need to do this within 1 month of the date of a decision.

If unhappy, claimans can appeal to an independent tribunal, the Social Security and Child Support Tribunal in England, Scotland or Wales. They need to apply within a month of the mandatory reconsideration decision. Claimants can seek support from the Citizens’ Advice, who can support them with filling in forms or going to a hearing. Note that they cannot appeal to the tribunal if they haven’t asked for mandatory reconsideration. This requirement was introduced in October 2013 in England, Wales and Scotland and in May 2016 in N. Ireland. Appeals can be withdrawn at any time before the hearing has started.

The HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTSa) or the N. Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service (NI CTS)/The Appeals Service (TAS) will check the appeal to ensure it complies with all the legal requirements to be accepted as a valid appeal (HM Courts & Tribunals Service, 2015). They can then:

• if there are problems, they would return to the claimant with a letter, explaining what the problem is and how the issue can be resolved. The claimant would then need to address the issues and resubmit.
• if the claimant does not respond/address the issues, they can ‘strike out’ the appeal on grounds of receiving insufficient information. They can also decide to ‘waive’ that requirement – this is decided on a case-by-case basis
• accept the appeal as valid, and send an acknowledgement letter

HMCTS or NICTS sends the appeal to DWP or DfC respectively and ask them to provide a response to the appeal – this is usually in the form of a report outlining how they came to their decision. HMCTS or NICTS will also create a casefile for the appeal and transfer it to the regional centres which deal with the claimant’s area of residence, based in Birmingham, Cardiff, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, Newcastle; Sutton.

DWP or DfC can:

• Object to the appeal – on the grounds that the appeal is against a decision which does not carry a right of appeal; that it is late and the reasons for lateness are unreasonable; that it provides inadequate information to identify the decision or give grounds to appeal; on the grounds that it has no reasonable prospect of success. If that happens, HMCTS or NICTS will request that the case is reviewed by a Judge, who will decide if there is any merit in DWP or DfC’s arguments.
• Consider the appeal – DWP or DfC will look at their decision again in light of the information provided and change their decision. If this is to the advantage of the claimant, then the appeal will automatically lapse. The Claimant will be able to appeal that decision in the same way, but usually DWP or DfC would contact the claimant to discuss this and usually will only proceed if there is agreement. After a couple of weeks after the appeal submission, the claimant receives a copy of all the paperwork up to that point and a copy of DWP or DfC’s response to the appeal.

The claimant can then:

• Accept DWP or DfC’s response and withdraw the appeal. They need to notify HMCTS or NICTS by phone or in writing.
• Not accept the response and carry on with the hearing or tribunal appeal consideration on papers

After the tribunal is held, a notice setting out the decision of the tribunal is sent to both parties on the day of the hearing. Note that:

• The tribunal have no legal powers to enforce its decisions.
• DWP or DfC is entitled to suspend payment of any benefit awarded by the tribunal if they are appealing against the tribunal’s decision

The first-tier tribunal’s decision can be appealed further by either the claimant or DWP/DfC on the ground of ‘error of law’ to the Upper Tribunal. This is when it is thought that the tribunal applied the law incorrectly, conducted the proceedings in breach of the proper procedures or failed to make adequate findings or fact or to give adequate reasons for its decision. For this to happen:

• A statement of reasons for the tribunal’s decision needs to be requested from the judge, within one month of the date of issue of the tribunal decision
• A form (supplied on request)

The request will be considered by a Senior Tribunal Judge, who can:

• Grant permission, in which case the appeal can be forwarded to the Upper Tribunal
• Refuse permission, in which case the claimant or
• DWP/DfC can ask the Upper Tribunal directly for permission
• ‘set aside’ i.e. re-decide the case and have it heard by a fresh tribunal

If considered by an Upper Tribunal, they have the power to:

• ‘set aside’ the tribunal decision and refer the case to a fresh tribunal
• substitute their own decision

For DWP data, no information is currently available on the claimants’ data that the organisations hold, other than the number of complaints per year.

There is no data dictionary available as such, but appellants who would like to lodge a complaint are advised to use form EX343A (last updated October 2015), which suggests the following information is usually recorded:

• Date received
• Reference number
• Name and address of venue complaint is made about
• Name of appellant (surname and name)
• Address of appellant
• Daytime telephone of appellant
• Email of appellant (optional)
• Case or claim number
• Names of parties in the case
• The complaint (what the complaint is about; any facts and events relating to it; why the appellant thinks a mistake has been made; what loss if any the appellant has incurred as a result) – open ended can continue to another sheet.
• Appellant’s signature
• Date
• Appellant’s suggestions to improve the service they have received

Statistics data are available via the online statistics pages, for the years 2004 – 2013. Information included in the statistics cover: breakdown by venue; breakdown of complaints by category; breakdown of main categories of complaints received; complaints upheld; follow up action; how complaints were received; response time;

For complaints that have been escalated further, some statistics and results of decisions are available in the Annual Ombudsman Reports (NI) online, for the years 2012-2016. These are in a pdf format (not in a spreadsheet/tabular format) and some work might be required to use it for analysis.

At any point during the process, if a claimant is not happy with the service received from DWP or DfC, they can lodge a complaint through the office that has been supporting them, this is usually the officer named in the most recent correspondence. If This is reviewed by a Complaint Resolution Manager and the complaint will be addressed and a response issued within 15 working days or contact the claimant when to expect a response if it will take longer.

Note that it is not possible to complaint against a decision on a benefit or a sanction – these are considered as appeals against a decision or sanction and are dealt with under the Appeals process.

If the claimant feels that the complaint has not been resolved, the complaint can be further escalated to a senior manager, who will be asking for an independent internal review of the complaint. They would contact the claimant within 15 working days to report on the outcome, or when they can expect a response if it will take longer.

If the claimant is not happy with how their complaint was addressed, they can escalate their complaint with the Independent Case Examiner (ICE). This will need to happen within 6 months of the final response from DWP or DfC. The Independent Case Examiner can’t look at matters of law or government policy. If they accept to consider the complaint, they will look into what happened and what should have been done and can ask DWP/DfC to put matters right. They are acting as an impartial referee and will not charge for their service.

If their complaint has not been addressed satisfactorily on this occasion, they need to approach an MP, who can escalate their complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. Note that claimants cannot apply directly to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

The full complaints policy of the Department for Work and Pensions is available from the gov.uk pages. The complaints procedure of the Department for Communities (NI) is outlined on their Complaints pages.

HMCTS Complaints Correspondence and Litigation Team (CCLT) handles all complaints relating to procedure and conduct within the first and upper tier tribunals, their procedure is published on the HMCTS complaints procedure pages.

At any point during the process, if an appellant is not happy with the service received from a Tribunal, in particular (a) the way the case was handled by administrative staff and (b) the facilities at the venues, they can lodge a complaint through the office they have been interacting with.

Appellants can also complain using Resolver a platform that allows them to select the specific court or tribunal and the type of complaint that they would like to make. The service provides example emails and templates for the appellants to use. Note that it is not possible to complaint against a decision (they will need to appeal it to a higher court).

If the appellant feels that the complaint has not been resolved, the complaint can be further escalated to a senior manager, who will be asking for an independent internal review of the complaint. They would contact the appellant within 15 working days to report on the outcome, or when they can expect a response if it will take longer.

If their complaint has not been addressed satisfactorily on this occasion, they need to approach an MP, who can escalate their complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. Note that claimants cannot apply directly to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

Complaints can be submitted as soon as possible after the alleged incident for up to 6 months. Initially complaints can be resolved by the person dealing with the claimant, but can also be addressed to the Complaints Officer. If unsatisfied with the way the complaint was resolved, the complaint can be referred to the Head of Administration in the Appeals Service.

In all cases, the complaint will be acknowledged within 3 working days and replied to within 10 working days. If still unsatisfied the complainant can write to the Operations Business Manager or can ask their MPs to refer their complaint to the Assembly Ombudsman.

PIP claimant statistics are derived from the Personal Independence Payment Computer System (PIPCS). This information is updated overnight into an Atomic Data Store (ADS) and this is made available to analysts. Recording and clerical errors can occur within PIP - for this reason, no reliance should be placed on very small numbers obtained through Stat-Xplore.

PIP payment statistics exclude a small number of successful claims that are not in payment (because, for example, initial payment has been suspended for hospitalisation or other reasons), prior to any PIP payment - but will include a small number of cases where a payment has been made but subsequently been suspended temporarily.

The historic caseload time series are subject to minor changes due to retrospection within the source data - the impact on the overall caseload is expected to be negligible.

For a very small proportion of the caseload (0.1%), the combination of award rates (daily living and mobility) is reported as nil-nil. Investigations suggest that award rates may be temporarily shown as a nil rate in the data used to derive the statistics for a short period, whilst a claim review is in process, after which the new award rate is set. These cases should be treated with caution and may be revised in a subsequent release.

Researchers are advised to be cautious when using clearance type data at sub-national levels to calculate award rates, as due to small numbers and non-disclosure rounding the figures could be misleading and present a lot of variability.

Revisions have been made to the clearance and registration totals for September 2015, December 2015 and January 2016, that were previously published on 16th March 2016, due to cases being added retrospectively to the source data following an IT issue.

Note that total clearances include Decisions (comprising Awards and Disallowances) and Withdrawals and reflect outcomes prior to any reconsideration and appeal action.

The status of claims as normal rules or special rules for terminally ill (SRTI) is shown as at the point of clearance. Some claims may not be marked SRTI at the point of registration but become a SRTI claim at the point of clearance, and vice versa. This could lead to figures showing more SRTI clearances than registrations.

Between Jan 14 - May 14 an IT issue within the PIP computer system caused a fall in the number of disallowances pre-referral to the assessment provider (AP) due to non-return of the Part2 within the time limit for New Claims. Likewise, the resolution of the issue in June 14 caused a large increase in the number of disallowances pre-referral to the assessment providers in that month. We believe this led to an artificial increase in the New Claim award rates between Jan14-May14 and then a subsequent artificial decrease in New Claim award rates in June 14.

Between Feb 2016 and April 2016 a technical problem with the PIP computer system has led to a fall in the number of disallowances pre-referral to the AP due to non-return of the Part2 within the time limit for New Claims, so the number of disallowances in these months are lower than expected. We believe this has led to an artificial increase in the New Claim award rates from Feb 16 onwards. Once this technical problem has been resolved we are expecting a higher number of disallowances in future months which in turn may lead to an artificial decrease in the New Claim award rates. This will be seen within the next quarterly official statistics publication.

For all the data and tabulation available online via the Stat-Xplore platform, statistical disclosure control has been applied. While this safeguards against the identification of an individual claimant and allows versions of the aggregate data to be available online to explore, tabulate and create graphs with, random errors have been introduced to the data available via the Stat-Xplore tool, resulting sometimes in reduced quality. The following are worth noting:

• introducing random error is a technique developed to randomly adjust cell values. Random adjustment of the data is considered a satisfactory technique for avoiding accidental release of identifiable data.
• it is not possible to determine which individual figures have been affected by random error adjustments, but the small variance which may be associated with derived totals can, for the most part, be ignored
• no reliance should be placed on small cells as they are impacted by random adjustment, respondent and processing errors.
• similarly, rather than aggregating data from small areas to obtain statistics about a larger standard geographic area, published data for the larger area should be used wherever possible.
• when calculating proportions, percentages or ratios from cross-classified or small area tables, the random error introduced can be ignored except when very small cells are involved, in which case the impact on percentages and ratios can be significant.

Also note that if you were previously using the old DWP Tabulation Tool for analysis purposes, there might be small differences in the outputs displayed, precisely due to the new methodology. The latest methodology is outlined in the Data Confidentiality page of Stat-Xplore.