IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v168y2005i1p63-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The quality of social security benefit data in the British Family Resources Survey: implications for investigating income support take-up by pensioners

Author

Listed:
  • Ruth Hancock
  • Geraldine Barker

Abstract

Family Resources Survey (FRS) data for April 1997 to March 2000 are used to estimate the take-up of income support (IS) by a subset of pensioners. We scrutinize the quality of FRS data for this purpose and describe a process of identifying and correcting inconsistencies in the data. Comparisons are made, before and after corrections to the data, of take-up estimates, logistic regression take-up models and predictions of take-up responses to changes in IS rates. Overall, the corrections do not have large effects on estimated take-up rates but suggest that non-take-up is marginally less serious than the uncorrected data imply. Logistic regressions using corrected and uncorrected data were in broad agreement on the factors influencing take-up. There were some differences in the scale of these influences, with implications for predictions of take-up responses to changes in the generosity of IS. Desirable improvements in the FRS are identified. Copyright 2005 Royal Statistical Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruth Hancock & Geraldine Barker, 2005. "The quality of social security benefit data in the British Family Resources Survey: implications for investigating income support take-up by pensioners," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 168(1), pages 63-82.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:168:y:2005:i:1:p:63-82
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2004.00336.x
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Stephen P. Jenkins & Emanuela Sala, 2012. "The impact of questioning method on measurement error in panel survey measures of benefit receipt: evidence from a validation study," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 175(1), pages 289-308, January.
    2. Pudney, Stephen & Zantomio, Francesca & Hancock, Ruth, 2006. "Estimating the impact of a policy reform on welfare participation: the 2001 extension to the minimum income guarantee for UK pensioners," ISER Working Paper Series 2006-21, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Ruth Hancock & Marcello Morciano & Stephen Pudney & Francesca Zantomio, 2015. "Do household surveys give a coherent view of disability benefit targeting?: a multisurvey latent variable analysis for the older population in Great Britain," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 178(4), pages 815-836, October.
    4. Panos Tsakloglou & Daniela Mantovani & Fotis Papadopoulos & Holly Sutherland, "undated". "Pension Incomes in the European Union: Policy Reform Strategies in Comparative Perspective," EcoMod2006 272100095, EcoMod.
    5. Stephen Pudney & Monica Hernandez & Ruth Hancock, 2007. "The welfare cost of means-testing: pensioner participation in income support," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 581-598.
    6. Pudney, Stephen, 2010. "Disability benefits for older people: how does the UK Attendance Allowance system really work?," ISER Working Paper Series 2010-02, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    7. Hernandez, Monica & Pudney, Stephen, 2007. "Measurement error in models of welfare participation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 327-341, February.
    8. Zantomio, Francesca, 2008. "The route to take-up: raising incentives or lowering barriers?," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-35, Institute for Social and Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:168:y:2005:i:1:p:63-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.