spending review 2019 lone parents and in-work supports for ... · from budget 2016 to budget 2019,...

1

Spending Review 2019

Lone Parents and In-Work Supports for Families with Children

ORLAGH LAVELLE

DEASP VOTE

AUGUST 2019

This paper has been prepared by IGEES staff in the Department of Public Expenditure & Reform. The views presented in this paper do not represent the official views of the Department or the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.

2

Executive Summary Key Trends

In – Work Supports

In 2018, €432m was spent on in-work support schemes, Working Family Payment (WFP) and Back to Work Family

Dividend (BTWFD), supporting over 61,100 recipients.

The largest in-work support is the WFP and expenditure on this scheme has increased by €240 million or 59% from

2008 to 2018. The majority of this was driven by higher recipient numbers, increasing by almost 50%.

Lone Parent Supports

In 2018, €695m was spent on lone parent supports, the One Parent Family Payment (OFP) and the Jobseeker’s

Transitional Payment (JST). This expenditure supported around 54,000 recipients in 2018.

OFP expenditure peaked in 2009 at €1.12bn, while recipients peaked in 2010 at over 92,000. OFP reforms have

resulted in recipient numbers reducing by 46,000 over the period 2012 to 2015, with expenditure falling by €610m.

The JST was introduced in 2013 and approximately 15,000 OFP recipients entered this scheme between 2013 and

2015. Since 2015, the number of JST recipients has stayed flat at approximately 15,000.

Key Findings

Table A below outlines the profile of scheme recipients in 2018.

Table A: Profile of Recipients on In-Work (WFP and BTWFD) and Lone Parent Supports (OFP and JST)

People on In-Work Supports tend to be: People on Lone Parent Supports tend to be:

Be in a couple with the female claiming

Be female

Have two children Have one child

Be aged 35-39 or 40-44 years Be younger; aged 25-29 or 30-34 years

Stay on the payment for mostly short term durations or very long term (5+ years)

Stay on payments longer, often until ineligible

Located in Dublin, Mid-East Located predominately in Dublin

Be in the €400-€499 income group Be in the €400-€499 income group

Be on one in-work support payment Not be in employment and not in receipt of an

in-work support payment.

From Budget 2016 to Budget 2019, a series of new measures were introduced across in-work and lone-parent

supports to increase financial incentives to work. These measures had a cumulative cost of €112m.

Scheme Budget 2016 Budget 2017 Budget 2018 Budget 2019 Total Cost

€m €m €m €m €m

OFP 8.7 15.5 15.3 39.5

JST 8 3.2 5.1 4.4 20.7

BTWFD 1.5 2.5 4

WFP 18 16 14 48

Total Cost 26 11.9 38.1 36.2 112.2

3

There continues to be a high concentration of OFP recipients in Dublin accounting for 36% of total recipients.

Dublin is the only region in which the reductions in OFP recipients were not outstripped by growth in WFP

recipients. Dublin is now the only county with more recipients on lone parent supports (OFP) than on in-work

supports (WFP), in all other counties there are greater numbers on WFP than OFP.

Individuals on lone parent payments, who have not taken up some form of employment, have been out of the

labour force and unemployed for a very significant amount of time. As a result, there is a cohort of lone parents

who have been inactive for at least 14 years.

WFP recipients are either staying on the payment for short periods of time (less than one year) or are staying on

the payment for very long durations (more than five years). The high proportion of individuals staying on the

payment for over five years may indicate that people are not increasing work intensity and exiting the scheme.

For both lone parents and two parent families in receipt of WFP, the largest number of recipients are within

the €400-€499 income group. This is despite two parent families having twice the earnings potential of lone

parents.

Future Considerations

1. Further analysis should be undertaken to identify the split of hours worked within two parent families on the

Working Family Payment scheme. This should consider the potential impact of the transferability of work hours

for two parent families and to identify if only one person in the household is working, what the labour market

status of the other adult is. This would provide insights for future policy on increasing female participation rates

and reducing labour force inactivity.

2. An examination of the number of hours worked by Working Family Payment recipients is required to determine

if the payment is effective in incentivising recipients to increase their work intensity beyond the minimum 19

hours per week. In particular, this research could focus on the hours worked by WFP recipients with older

children, and the impact of having no conditions that require WFP recipients to increase hours worked above the

threshold.

3. A consistent approach to the activation of, and engagement with lone parents is required to minimise the time

they spend out of the labour force or unemployed. This could focus on earlier and more frequent engagement,

particularly for individuals on the Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment.

4. Additional analysis is required to better understand why Dublin continues to have more people on One Parent

Family Payment than on the Working Family Payment scheme. This should identify if employment barriers are

greater in Dublin when compared to other areas of the country, and what these employment barriers are.

4

Abbreviations

DEASP Department of Employment Affairs and

Social Protection

DPER Department of Public Expenditure & Reform

ESRI Economic Social & Research Institute

WFP Working Family Payment

FIS Family Income Supplement

BTWFD Back to Work Family Dividend

OFP One Parent Family Payment

JST Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment

LR Live Register

QC Qualified Child

IQC Increase in Qualified Child payment

GSW Genuinely Seeking Work

QA Qualified Adult

YOY Year on Year

ASCC After School Childcare Scheme

CCS Community Childcare Subvention

CE Community Employment

5

Introduction

DEASP has a primary role in the provision of income supports as a safety net for those most vulnerable

in society. A key objective for DEASP is to support lone parents and low income families while also

incentivising employment and reducing child poverty. These policy objectives are achieved through

payments which include, One Parent Family Payment and Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment, and

Working Family Payment and the Back to Work Family Dividend, which are the largest targeted in-

work support1 schemes for low income families and lone parents. The main focus of this paper will be

to review the objective of incentivising employment2.

Broadly, the purpose of a Spending Review paper is to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of

expenditure in specific areas. Targeted supports for lone parents and in-work supports collectively

represent a significant quantum of DEASP expenditure, approximately €1.13 billion in 2018. There

have been significant changes to these schemes over the last decade, which include changes to

eligibility and means assessment, and increasing income disregards and thresholds to further

incentivise employment. Budget measures between 2016 and 2019 have accounted for an increase of

€112m in both in-work and lone parent supports.

In recent years, there has been a large amount of research conducted on lone parents, financial work

incentives and the current provision of in-work supports by Indecon, the ESRI, DEASP, and an

Interdepartmental Working Group on the Working Family payment3. This paper will further add to the

evidence base in this policy area and will focus on the following elements:

1) An overview of trends in expenditure and recipients since 2008 and identify drivers;

2) A profile of recipients and families on these supports;

3) A review of recent policy changes to these supports;

4) Scheme inflows and outflows;

5) Further considerations arising from the analysis.

1 In work support can be classified as supports to keep an individual in work or to support people when taking up employment. WFP and BTWFD are the largest in-work support schemes but there are other DEASP that can be considered to be supports for people who are in employment for example, the part-time work incentive, which is intended as a stepping stone to full-time work. It allows certain long-term unemployed people to take up part-time work and get a special weekly allowance instead of their jobseeker’s payment. 2 Given that there are number of cross departmental measures aimed at reducing child poverty, the many factors involved and the

challenges linking impacts to the schemes under review, the objective of child poverty is deemed outside the scope of this paper. 3 Indecon Independent Review of Amendments to the One Parent Family Payment since January 2012. https://www.welfare.ie/en/downloads/DEASP_OFP_Review.pdf ESRI Lone Parent Incomes and Work Incentives https://www.esri.ie/system/files/media/file-uploads/2018-07/BP201901.pdf DPER Analysis of Replacement Rates 2018 https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/13.-An-Analysis-of-Replacement-Rates.pdf

https://www.welfare.ie/en/downloads/DEASP_OFP_Review.pdf

https://www.esri.ie/system/files/media/file-uploads/2018-07/BP201901.pdf

https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/13.-An-Analysis-of-Replacement-Rates.pdf

6

Overview of Schemes

Table 1 below provides a brief outline of objectives, eligibility/ criteria and other conditions associated

with the in-work support schemes; Working Family Payment, and Back to Work Family Dividend.

In-Work Supports

Table 1: Overview of Working Family Payment and Back to Work Family Dividend

Working Family Payment (formerly FIS)

Back to Work Family Dividend

Introduced 1984 2015

Target Group Low income families

Financially a better option for lone parents working part-time than JA casual.

Social welfare payment exits: Long-term unemployed, lone parents and people on employment supports.

Assessment Means assessed, Tax Free Payable alongside WFP

Key Objectives Incentivise employment, reduce child poverty.

Incentivise employment and the movement off a primary social welfare payment, reduce child poverty.

Amount Payable Amount payable is 60% of difference between income limit for family size and earnings.

Equivalent to an increase for Qualified Children (up to 4 children) for year one, and half rate applies for second year.

Conditions 19 hours per week or 38 hours fortnightly

Hours of work can be shared within a couple (since 1989)

No Genuinely Seeking Work requirement

Qualified Child increases not payable alongside WFP; assessed as income

Claim is paid for 52 weeks with no increase if hours/pay reduced.

Sunset clause (to 2021) removed in 2017

Limited for a maximum of 2 years.

Other Entitlements Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance payable

Not assessed for Rent Supplement

Housing cost disregard of €95.23 per week

WFP income not taken into account in means assessment for medical card

Taper withdrawal to incentivise work intensity

May be eligible for childcare supports.

Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance payable

Not assessed for Rent Supplement

Not taken into account for income assessment for WFP


Source: Citizens Information and Welfare.ie

7

Table 2 provides a similar overview for lone parent supports, One Parent Family and Jobseeker’s

Transitional Payment. Further information on all the schemes can be seen in Appendix A.

Lone Parents

Table 2: Overview of One Parent Family and Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment

One Parent Family Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment

Introduced 1997 (replaced Lone Parent’s

Allowance)

Incrementally rolled out between 2013-2015

Target Group Lone Parent, youngest child less than 7 years old4, transferred to JST once child reaches 7 years old

Lone parents, youngest child is aged 7-13 years (inclusive), eligible for JA a once child reaches 14

Assessment Means assessed, taxable Means assessed, taxable

Key Objectives income support

reduce child poverty,

employment is financially incentivised

income support

reduce child poverty

transition payment towards employment

Other Entitlements May be eligible for BTWFD while on OFP5

WFP payable

Housing costs disregard €95.23 and €150 earnings disregards per week

Maintenance disregards


Eligible for BTWFD after exiting JST

WFP not payable with JST

Housing costs disregard €95.23 and €150 earnings disregards per week

Maintenance disregards


Requirements Not subject to activation or INTREO case officer engagement

Is subject to engagement with INTREO case officer6, but is not required to be available for or genuinely seeking full-time work (GSW)

Source: Citizens Information and Welfare.ie

4 There are some exceptions to the age limits for OFP, which are discussed in Appendix A. 5 This may occur if recipient does not meet hours of work criteria for WFP. 6 JST recipients are required to meet with an INTREO case officer annually, additional engagement with case officers is on a voluntary or discretionary basis.

8

Data and Methodology7

The data used in the analysis section is primarily administrative data from DEASP for the years 2008

to 2018, where available. The methodologies employed are as follows:

i) Trend analysis

This is used to review the broad expenditure and recipient trends across schemes. This will primarily

help to assess key drivers of changes in expenditure or recipient numbers.

ii) Profiling

This will identify key characteristics of recipients on these schemes and any shifts to scheme

profiles over the period. This will help better identify who is being supported and the targeting of

these payments. Profiling will also include examining the number of recipients on more than one

scheme at the same time. This is performed by using DEASP administrative data for each scheme

and matching recipients across various schemes.

iii) Tracking

This involves examining patterns of movement and tracking individuals entering and exiting schemes

by matching scheme payment data to scheme closures data over the period 2014 – 2018. This allows

for a determination of where people entering the schemes are coming from (inflows) and what

schemes, if any, people are exiting to (outflows). Inflows and outflows were examined at a point in

time (end December) and are also tracked over time i.e. entries to WFP in 2014 were tracked to see

how many of the 2014 recipients were still in receipt of WFP in 2015 and in 2018. This analysis was

conducted with the following schemes: BTWFD, OFP, JST and WFP. Recipients of these schemes were

also matched to the administrative data used for the Live Register (LR), to identify any patterns

emerging for inflows to the LR. This analysis will determine if the schemes are still meeting core

objectives and will help to identify potential barriers to meeting these objectives.

7 The author would like to thank and acknowledge the Statistics and Business Intelligence Unit in DEASP for their support in

extracting the microdata that forms the basis of this paper, for providing access in DEASP to the microdata and the Python coding environments used to analyse it and for facilitating the author with both formal training materials and guidance.

9

1. Trend Overview 2008-20188

Programme expenditure for lone parents and in-work supports are primarily driven by recipient

volumes over the period 2008-2018. Expenditure for In-Work supports has been on an upward

trajectory with recipient numbers growing steadily over the period up to 2016, and has been declining

since. Lone Parent supports have been on a downward trend with falling recipient numbers and

expenditure.

A. In-Work Supports

Rising recipients is the primary driver for the increase in WFP expenditure, which rose by €240

million or 59% from 2008 to 2018. WFP recipients increased by almost 50%, from 26,000 to almost

55,000 over the same period, which can be seen in Figure 1. The combination of rising recipient

numbers, and the transition of OFP recipients into WFP on gaining employment, are the main drivers

of the increase in expenditure. Median incomes9 fell by 20% or 9,500 between 2008 and 2012 as a

result of the financial crisis, and this would have resulted in more families becoming eligible for the

payment as the income thresholds stayed the same over this period.

Figure 1: Expenditure & Recipient Trends of In-Work Support Schemes, 2008 - 2018

Source: DEASP Administrative Data

8 BTWFD was only introduced in 2015. WFP was previously called FIS (Family Income Supplement). 9Median income data is nominal median income measures by national income, by total gross household (CSO SILC)

€170m

€411m

€29m €21m

13,198

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

No

. of

Rec

ipie

nts

Exp

end

itu

re €

m

WFP BTWFD WFP Recipients BTWFD Recipients

10

BTWFD (introduced in 2015) is a much smaller in-work support scheme. In 2015, there were 10,000

families in receipt of the payment. The number of recipients of BTWFD peaked at 13,000 in 2016 but

have reduced in recent years, falling to 7,000 recipients in 2018, a reduction of 46% from the peak.

BTWFD expenditure in 2015 was €14 million, peaking at almost €29 million in 2016 and has declined

to €21 million in 2018, or 28%. The increase in the QC rate in Budget 2018 has meant the decline in

expenditure has not been proportionate to the decline in recipient numbers.

BTWFD recipients are only eligible for the scheme for a maximum duration of two years. The decline

in the recipient numbers and expenditure since 2016 is likely to be reflective of the continual

improvements to the labour market and the reductions in the LR and a significant reduction in the

number of jobseekers. The slow-down in take up of in-work supports may also reflect the profile of

the remaining unemployed, they are more distant from the labour market and face significant barriers

to employment.

Figure 2: Number of Children supported by In-Work Support Schemes, 2008-2018

Source: DEASP administrative data (end year figures) and Author’s calculations

Figure 2 shows the number of children supported by WFP and BTWFD schemes, 122,056 by WFP and

14,688 by BTWFD. It follows a similar pattern to the recipient trends except the volume is bigger

which suggests that most families on in-work supports have more than one child. In 2008, there were

58,019 children supported under WFP, this grew by 64,037 or 110% over ten years. As a result of the

introduction of the BTWFD in 2015, an additional 14,688 children were supported by BTWFD in

58,01962,240

73,238

98,350

122,417129,274

122,056

16,82921,802

15,956 14,688

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Nu

mb

er o

f C

hild

ren

WFP BTWFD

11

2018. However, because recipients in receipt of WFP may also be in receipt of BTWFD a proportion of

the children presented here are supported by both these payments.

B. Lone Parent Supports

As seen in Figure 3, OFP expenditure peaked in 2009 at €1.12 billion, while recipients peaked a year

later at over 92,000. The reforms of the OFP resulted in a significant reduction in OFP recipients,

reducing by over 46,000 from 2012 to 2015 resulting in reductions in expenditure.

OFP expenditure reduced by €610 million or 54% in 2018 from its peak in 2009. JST recipients

increased between 2013 and 2015 as the scheme was rolled out. By 2015, there were approximately

15,000 JST recipients. Many of these recipients moved from the OFP scheme into the JST scheme.

The number of JST recipient have remained static since 2015. JST estimated expenditure10 has

increased since its introduction and continues to trend upward and by 2018 it is estimated to have

amounted to €184m. With recipient numbers flat, the increases in estimated expenditure reflects

successive rate increases to social welfare payments in Budget 2017 and Budget 2018 and other

budget measures including increases to income disregards from Budget 2016.

Figure 3: Expenditure & Recipient Trends for Lone Parent Supports, 2008-2018

Source: DEASP Admin Data

10 Jobseeker’s Transitional Payment is paid from the Jobseeker’s Allowance allocation and is no distinct account for JST in the annual estimates and appropriation accounts. JST expenditure over the period was estimated using the number of JST claims in the period multiplying this by the average JST payment value and the number of pay days for One Parent Family Payment

€1,121m

€511m

€184m

92,326

69,884

39,265

14,882

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

No

. of

Rec

ipie

nts

Exp

end

itu

re €

m

OFP JST OFP Recipients JST Recipients

12

The decline in median earnings as a result of the financial crisis mentioned earlier and recent budget

amendments11 to the WFP scheme appear to have resulted in gradual increases in WFP recipient

numbers, rising by over 23,000 within a 3 year period, 2012 to 2015, as seen in Figure 1. Over the

same period, there was a large reduction in OFP recipients and this may suggest that there was a

significant movement of recipients moving off OFP and onto WFP.

Figure 4: Number of Children on Lone Parent Supports12 from 2008 to 2018

Source: DEASP administrative data (end year figures)

In 2008, there were 145,723 children supported by lone parent schemes. There was a gradual decline

in the number of children supported from 2010 to 2014 followed by a sharp falloff in 2015, reducing

the number of children supported to 74,281. From 2016, the number of children supported has stayed

relatively flat at approximately 72,000 annually. While there have been significant reductions, there is

still a large quantum of children with a parent in receipt of lone parent supports.

11 These include consecutive increase to income thresholds from 2016 and promotion campaigns to encourage take up of

the payment. 12 The number of children supported by JST was not readily available.

145,723

119,169

74,281 72,168

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

No

. of

Ch

ildre

n

13

Summary of Key Findings on Trends

In-work Supports

In 2018, €432m was spent on in-work supports with over 61,100 recipients. WFP expenditure

rose by €240 million or 59% from 2008 to 2018 driven by an increase in recipients.

Recipient numbers increased by almost 50%, from 26,000 in 2008 to over 57,000 in 2016. Since

2017, recipient numbers began to decline.

The number of recipients of BTWFD peaked at 13,000 in 2016 but have reduced in recent years,

falling to 7,000 recipients in 2018, a reduction of 46% from the peak. BTWFD expenditure

peaked at almost €29 million in 2016 and has declined to €21 million in 2018.

Lone Parent Supports

In 2018, it is estimated that €695m was spent on lone parent supports with 54,000 recipients.

OFP expenditure peaked in 2009 at €1.12billion and recipients peaked in 2010 at over 92,000.

OFP reforms resulted in recipient numbers reducing by 46,000 over the period 2012 to 2015

with expenditure falling by €610 million.

In 2008, there were 145,723 children supported by lone parent schemes. There was a gradual

decline in the number of children supported from 2010 to 2014 followed by a sharp falloff in

2015, reducing the number of children supported to 74,281. From 2016, the number of children

supported by lone parent schemes has stayed flat at 72,000.

Approximately 15,000 OFP recipients moved to the JST scheme in 2015, and JST recipient

numbers have remained at this level since then. However, expenditure has increased as a result

of consecutive rate increases.

14

2. Profile of Scheme Recipients

A. Gender

i) Lone Parent Supports

Recipients of Lone Parent Supports are predominantly female; 99% of OFP recipients are female. This

pattern is mirrored in the JST payment with 97% of JST recipients female and 3% males, as of 2018.

ii) In-Work Supports

In-Work supports have more representation from males, however females still make up the majority

of recipients. The gender breakdown in 2018 for WFP recipients is 60% females and 40% males.

Similarly, in 2018 the recipients of BTWFD were 62% female and 38% males.

B. Age Cohorts13


In 2018, the greatest number of OFP recipients were in the 25-29 year age cohort at 10,272 and this

was followed by the 30-34 year age cohort at 8,982, see Figure 5 below.

Figure 5: OFP Recipients by Age Cohort, 2014 -2018

Source: DEASP Administrative Data (end year figures)

13 Appendix B (i) examines the percentage share of recipients across the schemes by age and gender.

14,31215,264

12,939

10,296

5,569

2,059

376

6,432

10,272

8,982

7,033

4,108

1,865

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

Under 25 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55+

Nu

mb

er

of

Re

cip

ien

ts o

f O

FP

2014 2016 2018

15

There have been significant reductions in all age cohorts of OFP recipients from 2014. The largest

reductions in OFP recipient numbers were in older age cohorts, 30-34 years; 35-39 years and 40-44

years with each age cohort declining by approx. 6,000 over the period. These reductions are likely

as a result of the tightening of eligibility for OFP in 201314.

The age profile of those exiting OFP in 2014 appears to correspond with the age profile of JST

recipients. Figure 6 shows that JST recipient numbers are highest in the 35-39 year age cohort, this is

an older age profile than OFP recipients where the majority are aged between 25-34 years and it is

likely to be reflecting the movement of OFP recipients into JST.

Figure 6: JST recipients by Age Cohort; 2014-2018



Figure 7 shows the age profile of WFP recipients which are concentrated in the working age groups

between 35-39 years and 40-44 years. In 2018, recipient numbers were highest in the 40-44 year age

category. From 2014 to 2018 the age distribution of WFP recipients changed, as the number of

recipients in the 45-49 year and 50-54 year age brackets grew and the numbers of recipients in the

younger age categories declined.

14 Older OFP recipients are more likely to have older children and will therefore cease to be eligible for OFP.

3,221

3,489

3,106

2,440

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

Under 30 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55+

JST

reci

pie

nts

by

age

2014 2016 2018

16

Figure 7: Recipients of WFP by Age, 2014 - 2018


The age profile for BTWFD recipients (see Appendix B (ii)) has a similar age pattern to the WFP, with

the highest concentration of recipients within the 35-39 year and 40-44 year age categories.

C. Duration


Figure 9 below shows how long JST recipients are staying on the scheme before exiting due to

ineligibility, finding employment or transferring to another DEASP scheme. From 2016-2018, it

appears that the majority of JST recipients stayed on the payment for over six years. For JST

recipients with one child, eligibility will last seven years until the child turns 14 years old. For JST

recipients with more than one child, the duration of eligibility will be up to when their youngest child

turns 14 years of age and therefore may be in excess of seven years. In 2018, over 8,000 JST recipients

stayed on the scheme for over six years, compared to 1,500 recipients staying on the scheme for

between 1-2 years. There have been marginal improvements as more recipients are now exiting JST

earlier, however the majority of recipients are still staying on JST for their full duration of eligibility.

14,052

8,047

12,375 12,472

9,640

5,417

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

Under 25 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55+

Re

cip

ien

ts o

f W

FP b

y A

ge C

oh

ort

2014 2016 2018

17

Figure 8: Number of JST Recipients by Duration, 2016 - 2018



Table 3 shows the duration of WFP claims from 2015 to 2018. In 2018, there were 14,467 recipients

(approximately 27%) on the WFP for less than one year, and there were 11,487 or 21% of WFP

recipients claiming for over five years. Based on these observed patterns of durations on WFP and in

the absence of hours of employment data for recipients, it appears that there are distinct recipient

groups on WFP and these include;

(i) WFP recipients on the payment in the short-term before increasing their work

intensity/changing jobs and then becoming ineligible,

(ii) WFP recipients on the payment for a long period of time with no change to their

circumstances (staying in the same job and not increasing their work intensity), or

(iii) WFP recipients leaving the payment as a result of becoming unemployed.

It is also possible that individuals are increasing their work intensity, but due the family size they

remain below the threshold and continue to qualify for the payment.

The length of time a significant number of WFP recipients are staying and relying on the payment

for support may reflect the fact that recipients on WFP are not required to increase their work

intensity (hours worked) beyond the minimum threshold of 19 hours per week (38 fortnightly).

1,449

2,124

8,289

802

2,315

9,347

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

<3mths 3-6mths 6-12mths 1-2yrs 2-3yrs 3-6yrs >6yrs

JST

Re

cip

ien

ts b

y D

ura

tio

n o

n s

che

me

Duration

2018 2017 2016

18

All jobseeker payments have conditionality that requires an individual to be genuinely available and

seeking work opportunities (GSW) up to full-time employment (classified by DEASP as 30 hours per

week). The jobseeker payment is contingent on a person adhering to this GSW condition and it

similarly applies to those working only part-time, claiming a jobseeker casual payment while seeking

full-time work (underemployment).

Table 3: WFP Claim Durations, 2015 – 2018

Claim Durations

Dec-15 Dec-16 Dec-17 Dec-18 Change %

No. of Recipients

No. of Recipients

No. of Recipients

No. of Recipients

No. of Recipients

%

Less than 1 year

17,968 15,689 16,293 14,467 - 3,501 -19.4%

1-2 years 11,757 13,198 10,569 10,442 - 1,315 -11.1%

2-3 years 7,748 8,392 9,199 6,871 - 877 -11.3%

3 -4 years 4,738 5,767 6,021 6,388 +1,650 +35%

4-5 years 3,792 3,594 4,170 4,186 +394 +10%

5 plus years 9,996 10,973 11,058 11,487 +1,491 +15%

Source: DEASP Admin Data (end year figures)15

The WFP is a targeted support for families with children, therefore recipients may have caring

responsibilities which could impact incentives to increase work intensity. Families are eligible for WFP

once they have a child aged under 22 years and in full-time education. It is unclear if these WFP

recipients with older children are increasing their work intensity as they become available to work

more hours. The lack of conditionality for WFP recipients may be acting as a potential impediment for

recipients to increase their work intensity gradually over time. A review of hours worked16, particularly

for WFP recipients with older children, would be useful to assess if the WFP is effective in incentivising

recipients’ to increase work intensity.

15 There is some marginal variation between the total figures on WFP for claims duration compared to the total WFP scheme

recipients, this is due to the backdating of payments and the different weeks in December the data is extracted from in the DEASP database. 16 Employment hours for WFP recipients over time was not readily available for this review.

19

D. Family Size & Composition


At present, lone parents with one child still make up the largest share (at 47%) of total recipients.

However, this share has reduced by 10 percentage points since 2008. The share of total OFP recipients

with two children was 32% in 2018, which increased by 4 p.p. since 2008. The share of larger families

(three or more than four children) has also increased, recipients with three children increased from a

10% share in 2008 to a 14% share in 2018. Those with four or more children increased from a 5% share

to a 7% share over the same period. (See Appendix B (iii)).

Figure 9 below shows that the vast majority of reductions in recipients between 2008 and 2018

occurred in a much narrower two year period, between 2013 and 2015, due to the OFP reforms17.

OFP recipients with one child fell by approximately 22,000 recipients, from almost 42,000 in 2013 to

just over 20,000 in 2015. Reductions in OFP recipients with two children were also significant, with a

decline of almost 11,000 recipients, from 24,000 in 2013 to 13,000 in 2015. After 2015, the recipient

numbers across all family sizes started to level off and there have been minimal reductions since then.

This shows that the lone parents that became ineligible for OFP after the reforms, mostly had one

or two children of school going age (over seven years old).

17 OFP reforms were introduced in 2013 on a phased basis which resulted in lone parents who’s youngest child had reached 7 years old to move into the new transition scheme JST.

20

Figure 9: OFP Recipients by Number of Children, 2008 - 2018



The majority of WFP recipients have one or two children and this is consistent with Ireland’s profile of

family size18. As of 2018, these families accounted for 65% of the total share of WFP recipients, with

the majority of families on WFP having two children.

Since 2012, the largest increases have occurred in the number of families with one or two children

as shown in Figure 10. The number of WFP recipients with one child increased by 9,000 or 47%, and

families with two children increased by 8,000 or 43%, over the period 2012-2016. From 2017, WFP

recipients across all family sizes have started to fall, which may reflect the improved labour market

and upward wage levels.

18 According to CSO 2016 Census the average number of children per family was 1.38 https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp4hf/cp4hf/fmls/

49,794

41,744

20,379 18,350

24,44024,035

12,998 12,654

9,135

5,528

4,442 2,7130

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

55,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Re

cip

ien

ts o

f O

FP b

y N

o.

of

Ch

ildre

n

With 1 child With 2 children With 3 children More than 4

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp4hf/cp4hf/fmls/

21

Figure 10: WFP Recipients by Family Size, 2008 - 2018


BTWFD has the same family size profile as WFP (See Appendix B (iv)). In 2018, most recipients were

families with two children at 38% and this was followed by families with one child at 32%.

E. Geographic Location

The majority of WFP recipients in 2018 are concentrated in Dublin, followed by the Mid-East and South

West regions. The geographic distribution of people in receipt of BTWFD are similar to WFP. For OFP,

the largest number of recipients is in Dublin with 36% of the total share in 2018.

While recipients in Dublin have reduced by 15,000 or 51% from 2008 to 2018, the percentage

decreases in other counties were greater.

Figure 11 shows the recipients of OFP and WFP in Dublin from 2008 to 2018. It highlights the large

number of OFP recipients, peaking at almost 36,000 in 2011. Recipient numbers then fell by 21,000 to

15,000 in 2015 and have stayed relatively flat since then. While there were increases in WFP recipients

in Dublin, there are still greater numbers of lone parents on supports.

In contrast, as seen in Figure 12, when the average of all other counties is used, it shows that there

are more WFP recipients than OFP recipients in every other county. Dublin is the now the only county

in which the OFP reductions were not outstripped by growth in WFP, in all other counties there are

greater numbers of WFP recipients than OFP recipients.

10,925

9,882

16,878

8,827

10,743

19,046 17,794

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Re

cip

ien

ts o

f W

FP b

y Fa

mily

Siz

e

1 Child 2 Children 3 Children More than 4

22

This shows that there were more OFP recipients in Dublin and this concentration in Dublin is

continuing. There is likely to be a number of other factors influencing this. It may suggest that the

OFP cohort in Dublin are harder to reach and may be less likely to take up employment and avail of

in-work supports. Further analysis is required to help identify barriers to employment for this cohort

in Dublin.

Figure 11: Recipients of OFP and WFP in Dublin, 2008-2018

Source: DEASP admin data

Figure 12: Average recipients of WFP and OFP for all counties (excluding Dublin), 2008-2018

Source: DEASP admin data

35,835

13,954

6,586

12,614

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Nu

mb

er o

f R

ecip

ien

ts

OFP WFP

2,162

1,012993

1,655

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Nu

mb

er o

f R

ecip

ien

ts

OFP WFP

23

Table 4 below reviews recipients of lone parent supports and in-work supports (WFP)19 on a per capita

by county basis. It shows that in 2018, Longford, Waterford and Carlow had the highest number of

recipients on lone parent supports per capita at 2.5%, 1.7% and 1.5% respectively, followed by

Westmeath, Dublin, and Louth each at 1.4%. The per capita level of in-work supports across the

counties shows that Longford also has the highest proportion of people on WFP at 1.9% of its

population in 2018. This is followed by Donegal, and Monaghan, both at 1.7%, and Cavan, Carlow, and

Louth, all at 1.6%.

Table 4: Recipients of Lone Parent and In-Work supports per County Capita, 2018

Rank County Lone Parent Supports County WFP

1 Longford 2.5% Longford 1.9%

2 Waterford 1.7% Donegal 1.7%

3 Carlow 1.5% Monaghan 1.7%

4 Westmeath 1.4% Cavan 1.6%

5 Dublin 1.4% Carlow 1.6%

6 Louth 1.4% Louth 1.6%

7 Wicklow 1.2% Waterford 1.5%

8 Wexford 1.2% Wexford 1.5%

9 Mayo 1.1% Westmeath 1.3%

10 Monaghan 1.1% Offaly 1.3%

11 Limerick 1.1% Tipperary 1.3%

12 Laois 1.0% Laois 1.2%

13 Donegal 1.0% Limerick 1.2%

14 Tipperary 1.0% Leitrim 1.2%

15 Offaly 1.0% Roscommon 1.2%

16 Kildare 1.0% Mayo 1.2%

17 Kerry 0.9% Kerry 1.1%

18 Cork 0.9% Sligo 1.1%

19 Cavan 0.8% Meath 1.1%

20 Clare 0.8% Kildare 1.0%

21 Sligo 0.8% Cork 1.0%

22 Kilkenny 0.7% Clare 1.0%

23 Roscommon 0.7% Galway 1.0%

24 Galway 0.7% Kilkenny 1.0%

25 Leitrim 0.7% Wicklow 0.9%

26 Meath 0.6% Dublin 0.9% Source: DEASP Admin Data and CSO Census 2016

19 In order to avoid double counting of recipients, only WFP recipients by county is used in this due to the majority of BTWFD recipients in receipt of WFP concurrently.

24

F. Income by Family Type

Figure 13 shows the family composition of WFP recipients from 2009 to 2018. The number of lone

parents on WFP20 and in employment has increased significantly from 2009 to 2019 rising by

approximately 11,000 or 82%. The number of two parent families on WFP experienced the greatest

increase over the period rising from almost 12,000 to over 28,000, this is an increase of 16,600 or

140%. Since 2017, recipient numbers across both family types have fallen.

Figure 13: Composition of WFP Recipients, 2009 - 2018


As seen in Figure 13 above, the number of lone parents on WFP has declined since 2015, this means

that there is now less OFP recipients working21despite successive increases to income disregards for

this lone parent cohort. Further analysis is required into the employment status of OFP recipients as

some may be in employment but not working enough hours to be eligible for WFP.

Figure 14 below shows the percentage of lone parents on WFP recipients by income group22. The

share of lone parents on WFP in lower income groups, between €200-€299 and €300-€399 per week,

has increased from 2009 to 2018. The share of lone parents in the €200 -€299 income group went

from 5% in 2009 to 22% in 2018, an increase of 17 p.p. Similarly, those in the €300-€399 income group

increased from 20% in 2009 to 26% in 2018.

20 It should be noted that not all lone parents on WFP are in receipt of OFP, many will not be in receipt of OFP due to no longer being eligible. It should also be noted that lone parents may be in employment and not be in receipt of an in-work support payment like WFP or BTWFD. 21 Note that not all lone parents in employment and on WFP will be on a primary social welfare payment. 22 Absolute numbers on WFP by family type can be found in Appendix B (v).

11,819

28,414

14,144

25,702

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

No

. of

WFP

Rec

ipie

nts

Two Parent Families Lone Parents

25

Figure 14: Share of Lone Parents on WFP by Income Group %, 2009 - 2018

Source: DEASP Annual Statistical Report and Admin Data for 2018

In 2018, the largest number of lone parents on WFP were in the €400-€499 income group at 32%.

However, the €400-€499 income group experienced the greatest change over the period 2009 to 2018

as the percentage share within this income group decreased considerably. In 2008, the percentage

share in the €400-€499 income group was 60% and this fell to 32% in 2018, a reduction of 28 p.p.

This income group shift may be attributed to the tightening of eligibility as recipients gained

employment and entered WFP in lower income groups from 2013. The percentage share of lone

parent WFP recipients within the higher weekly income groups €500-€599 and €600+ have stayed

relatively stable over the period which indicates that the reforms to incentivise employment for lone

parents mostly impacted the lower income groups.

Since 2016, there have been reductions in the share of lone parents in receipt of WFP in lower

income groups, below €399, and there have been increases in share of lone parents in higher income

groups, €400 and over. This may be a result of (i) lone parents increasing their intensity of work and

earning a higher income23 or (ii) lone parents in low income group leaving the WFP payment due to

becoming unemployed. A review of employment hours for those in recipient of WFP is required to

identify work intensity.

23 It is also possible that lone parents in receipt of WFP in higher income groups exited WFP as a result of increasing work intensity and were no longer eligible. However existing recipient data does not show reductions in these higher income groups for lone parents on WFP, further analysis into the exits of lone parent from WFP by income group would be required.

10% 5%5%11%

24%22%20%

31%

29%

26%

60%

40%

27%32%

11% 11% 8% 12%

3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

% S

har

e o

f R

ecip

ien

ts b

y In

com

e G

rou

p

€100-€199 €200-€299 €300-€399 €400-€499 €500-€599 €600+

26

Figure 15: Share of Two Parent Families on WFP by Income Group %, 2009 – 2018


Figure 15 illustrates the share of two parent family recipients on WFP by weekly income group from

2009 to 2018. In 2018, there was a greater share of recipients in higher income groups (€400+) than

in the lower income groups (less than €399). The largest number of recipients (over 7,800) are within

the €400-€499 income group, at 28% of total two parent families on WFP in 2018. This remains the

largest group despite a reduction of 6 percentage points since 2009. The higher income groups of

€500-€599 and €600+ experienced the greatest relative growth in the share of two parent families on

WFP over the period, 2009-2018. The composition and pattern is similar to lone parents in receipt of

WFP.

While there are clear differences in the overall distribution of the income groups for lone parent

and two parent families in receipt of WFP, both cohorts have the largest number24 and percentage

share of recipients within the €400-€499 income group. This is despite two parent families having

twice the earnings potential to that of a lone parent. This suggests that two parent families in receipt

of WFP may only have one parent working and raises the question of the labour market status of the

other adult in the family, for example whether they are inactive or unemployed.

24 Absolute figures of WFP by family type can be seen in Appendix B (v).

9% 7% 9%

25%22% 19%

34%

30% 28%

21%

25%24%

10% 14% 18%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

% S

har

e o

f R

ecip

ien

ts b

y In

com

e G

rou

p

€100-€199 €200-€299 €300-€399 €400-€499 €500-€599 €600+

27

A 2014 DEASP Policy Review of the Family Income Supplement (now WFP), found that 48% of all FIS

recipients were in a two parent family, with only one earner present, working an average of 35 hours

per week. Further analysis may be required to identify the labour market status of the second adult in

the household, particularly for WFP recipient with older children25, in the context of encouraging

labour force participation and reducing inactivity26 as part of wider government strategies for example

Pathways to Work and Future Jobs 2020.

G. Recipients of Multiple Payments

Figure 16 shows the number of people in receipt of multiple social welfare payments, such as being

in receipt of OFP and WFP or in receipt of more than one in-work support (WFP and BTWFD). In 2018,

there were 5,388 people in receipt of both WFP and OFP, and 4,269 people in receipt of both WFP

and the BTWFD. The number of recipients on more than one payment at a time has reduced by over

5,500 from 2015 to 2018, with over 4,500 or 82% of this relating to reductions in recipients on two in-

work supports (WFP and BTWFD). This is expected given that the BTWFD is limited to a maximum of

two years.

Figure 16: Number of People on More than One Scheme, 2015 - 2018


25 WFP is payable to qualifying families meeting criteria up to their youngest child becoming 18 years old or 22 years old if in full-time education. 26 For example DEASP have developed a pilot programme as a pro-active approach towards the activation of qualified adults

(QA) to meet objectives under the Pathways to Work and Future Jobs Strategy. It involves issuing letters to the QA informing 16 (cont.) them of the options available to them as regards training and also encouraging them to engage with the PES. The programme has been rolled out into a total of 10 INTREO centres to date.

6,328 6,055 5,747 5,388

8,921 10,123

5,0474,269

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

2015 2016 2017 2018No. on OPF & WFP No. on BTWFD & WFP

28

From 2015 to 2018, the number of recipients on both OFP and WFP have reduced slightly compared

to the large reduction in recipient numbers on both WFP and BTWFD. This potentially reflects the

improved labour market and the reduced requirement for in-work supports. Equally, it may point to

an incentive issue for lone parents in receipt of OFP who are not taking up WFP or employment.

This suggests that budget measures introduced in recent years increasing WFP income thresholds

and earnings disregards do not appear to have not resulted in more lone parents on OFP taking up

employment and availing of WFP, however, these changes may have incentivised lone parents on

both OFP and WFP to remain in their employment.

Table 5 below shows the number of recipients on more than one payment as a share of the total

number in receipt of the payment, from 2015 -2018. In 2018, approximately 14% of total OFP

recipients are on WFP and are therefore in employment. While only 8% of total WFP recipients were

on both WFP and BTWFD. In 2018, the proportion of BTWFD recipients who were also on WFP was

60% (both in-work supports)27. It demonstrates that the vast majority of BTWFD recipients (those who

exited a primary social welfare payment and went into employment) are on two in-work supports and

are getting a further financial incentive to support them in employment.

Table 5: Recipients on Multiple Schemes as Proportion of Total Scheme Recipients %, 2015- 2018

OFP & WFP

% of Total OFP

WFP & BTWFD

% of Total WFP

WFP & BTWFD

% of Total BTWFD

2015 15% 16% 84%

2016 15% 18% 77%

2017 15% 9% 65%

2018 14% 8% 60%


27 BTWFD is a much smaller in-work support scheme than and has fewer recipients.

29

Summary of Key Findings on Recipient Profiles

People on In-Work Supports tend to be: People on Lone Parent Supports tend to be:

Be in a couple with the female claiming

Be female

Have two children Have one child

Be aged 35-39 or 40-44 years Be younger; aged 25-29 or 30-34 years

Stay on the payment for mostly short term durations or very long term (5+ years)

Stay on payments longer often until ineligible

Located in Dublin, Mid-East Located predominately in Dublin

Be in the €400-€499 income group Be in the €400-€499 income group

Be on one In-Work support payment Not be in employment28 or in receipt of an

in-work support payment.

Other Key Findings from Recipient Profiles, 2008-2018

1. Duration

The majority of JST recipients are staying on the payment until they become ineligible. For JST

recipients with one child this will be a duration of 7 years, or more than 7 years depending on

number of children and age of the youngest child. In 2018, 8,000 or 53% have stayed on the

scheme for over 6 years, compared to 1,500 or 10% recipients staying on the scheme for

between 1-2 years in 2018.

2. Geographic Location

Dublin is the now the only county in which there are still greater numbers of OFP recipients

than WFP recipients; the opposite is true for every other county.

The number of OFP recipients are concentrated in Dublin at 36% of all recipients in 2018.

3. Income & Earnings

The largest share of lone parent recipients are within the €400-€499 income group at 32% in

2018, although this share has decreased in recent years.

For two parent families on WFP (with greater earning potential), the greatest share is also

within the €400-€499 income group at 28%, and this income group has remains the largest

share of recipients.

28Further analysis is required to assess the employment status of those on OFP as they may be working but not meeting the required hours to be eligible for the WFP payment.

30

3. Scheme Developments

From Budget 2016 to Budget 2019, there were a number of changes to lone parent and in-work

support schemes. These changes include increases to the income thresholds for WFP; increases to

income disregards; a series of social welfare payment rate increases and increases to the rates of

qualified child payment29. See Appendix C for further detail on these changes.

Table 6 shows the estimated costs of changes to the schemes in Budget 2016 to Budget 2019. Budget

2016 measures cost €26m; €11.9m in Budget 2017; €38.1m in Budget 2018; and €36.2m in Budget

2019. Incremental changes to these four schemes since 2016 has cost an additional €112.2m. For a

more detailed breakdown of each of the estimated costs of the changes see Appendix C.

Table 6: Cost Estimates of Budget Measures for Lone Parents and In-Work Supports

Budget 2016 Budget 2017 Budget 2018 Budget 2019 Total Cost

€m €m €m €m €m

OFP 8.7 15.5 15.3 39.5

JST 8 3.2 5.1 4.4 20.7

BTWFD 1.5 2.5 4

WFP 18 16 14 48

Total Cost 26 11.9 38.1 36.2 112.2 Source: DEASP Admin data & authors’ calculations of estimated costs

Figure 17 below shows the number of lone parents according to their labour force status. Over the

period 2012 to 2018, the number of lone parents employed increased by over 33,000. However, since

mid-2018, the number of lone parents employed shows a downward movement. Similarly, the

number of lone parents outside the labour force has started to increase since mid-201830.

This may suggest that the measures and increased were effective in getting more lone parents into

employment up to mid-2018, but that the effect of the financial incentives may be beginning to

diminish. This is also likely to be influenced by lone parents continuing to be a relatively harder to

reach cohort and the evidence of high replacement rates for this cohort31.

29 Recent increases to lone parents’ earnings disregards unwound the successive decreases to earnings disregards from Budget 2012. 30 Note: The total quantum of lone parents has increased by about 10,000 over the full period 2012-2018 so this growth is likely to have had impacts on the relative composition of the lone parent population, however the number of lone parents in total has decreased marginally. 31 Analysis conducted in the Spending Review 2018 Replacement Rates paper showed that for one parent families the 2018 maximum rate of payment did not produce disincentive effects but higher disincentives were found when households were

31

Figure 17: Lone Parents by ILO Economic Status, 2012 Q1-2018 Q4

Source: CSO LFS

Figure 18 below shows the employment rate of lone parents by the age of their youngest child. It

suggests that the potential barriers to employment entry are linked to the age of the child; those with

youngest child (under 5 years) have the lowest employment rates at 53%, despite an increase in the

employment rate of 15.6 p.p. over the period 2012-2018.

The cohort with the second lowest employment rate are those with the youngest child aged 18 years

or greater with an employment rate of 59% in 2018. This cohort of lone parents also had the smallest

growth32, with the employment rate growing by just 4.7 p.p. from 2012-2018.

It is likely that the barrier to employment for this cohort is the scarring and discouraged worker

effect due to very long durations out of the labour force for lone parents who did not take up any

employment while in receipt of lone parent supports.

entitled to additional allowances and payments, with the largest disincentive effect found in single income households with low wage levels. Paper is available here: https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/13.-An-Analysis-of-Replacement-Rates.pdf 32 The barrier of providing childcare for this cohort may be replaced by caring duties for example lone parents who’s child has a disability.

93.7

127.2

27.8

12.6

103.8

91.1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

20

12

Q1

20

12

Q2

20

12

Q3

20

12

Q4

20

13

Q1

20

13

Q2

20

13

Q3

20

13

Q4

20

14

Q1

20

14

Q2

20

14

Q3

20

14

Q4

20

15

Q1

20

15

Q2

20

15

Q3

20

15

Q4

20

16

Q1

20

16

Q2

20

16

Q3

20

16

Q4

20

17

Q1

20

17

Q2

20

17

Q3

20

17

Q4

20

18

Q1

20

18

Q2

20

18

Q3

20

18

Q4

Nu

mb

er o

f p

erso

ns

In Employment Unemployed Not in labour force

https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/13.-An-Analysis-of-Replacement-Rates.pdf

32

Figure 18: Employment rate of Lone Parent by Age of Youngest Child %, 2012 Q1 – 2018 Q4

Source: CSO LFS

The largest growth in employment rates was for the cohort whose youngest child was between 6-11

years old, growing by 16.7 p.p. from 2012 to 2018. The JST payment was introduced in 2013 for lone

parents with the youngest child aged 7-13 years and it is likely that the employment rate growth for

this cohort was as a result of these reforms.

37

45.8

53

48

53

6459

70

54

60.4

59

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

20

12

Q1

20

12

Q2

20

12

Q3

20

12

Q4

20

13

Q1

20

13

Q2

20

13

Q3

20

13

Q4

20

14

Q1

20

14

Q2

20

14

Q3

20

14

Q4

20

15

Q1

20

15

Q2

20

15

Q3

20

15

Q4

20

16

Q1

20

16

Q2

20

16

Q3

20

16

Q4

20

17

Q1

20

17

Q2

20

17

Q3

20

17

Q4

20

18

Q1

20

18

Q2

20

18

Q3

20

18

Q4

Emp

loym

ent

Rat

e %

Youngest child aged 0-5 Youngest child aged 6-11

Youngest child aged 12-17 Youngest child aged 18 or greater

33

4. Gross Inflows and Outflows

Gross inflows and outflows are useful to demonstrate the volume of movement into and out of

schemes each year.

In-Work Supports

Figure 19 and 20 demonstrates the significant gross movements of people in and out of in-work

supports every year. WFP has a large volume of inflows and outflows (Figure 19). In 2016, over 15,000

new people entered WFP and over 22,000 people exited. Both the inflows and outflows of WFP have

reduced since 2016, while the stock of people remaining on WFP are on the payment for longer

durations (negative net33 reduction).This is consistent with the claim durations reviewed earlier. There

is a large stock of people staying on WFP each year, in 2018, approximately 46,500 WFP recipients

remained on the scheme (i.e. were on WFP in 2017) as outlined in Table 7.

Figure 19: WFP Inflows and Outflows, 2014 – 2018

Source: DEASP Admin Data (end December figures)

33 Net effect across all schemes of the inflows and outflows is shown in Appendix D.

15,162 15,51512,812

-21,822

-16,943 -16,747

-25,000

-20,000

-15,000

-10,000

-5,000

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

2016 2017 2018

WFP

Flo

ws

Inflows Outflows

34

Table 7: Number of WFP Recipients remaining on the Scheme, 2016 - 2018

2016 2017 2018

Recipient Stock 49,472 47,691 46,459


As demonstrated in Figure 20, inflows to BTWFD were 4,500, with just under 2,000 people exiting the

scheme in 2016. In 2017, the inflows stayed relatively static while there was a large increase in

outflows, reflecting the two year duration limit for the scheme. This is consistent with trends in the

stock of recipients remaining on BTWFD as shown in Table 8. Between 2016 and 2017, the numbers

remaining on BTWFD decreased considerably from over 8,000 in 2016 to over 3,200 recipients.

Figure 20: BTWFD Inflows and Outflows, 2014 – 2018

Source: DEASP Admin Data end December figures; 2018 BTWFD Inflow data not readily available

Table 8: Number of BTWFD Recipients remaining on the Scheme, 2016 - 2017

2016 2017

Recipient Stock 8,161 3,285

Source: DEASP Admin Data end year figures; 2018 BTWFD inflow data not readily available34

34 As a result of BTWFD inflow data not being readily available in 2018, the 2018 stock data for BTWFD is not quantifiable.

4,504 4,707

-1,962

-9,913

-4,697

-12,000

-10,000

-8,000

-6,000

-4,000

-2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

2016 2017 2018

BTW

FD F

low

s

Inflows Outflows

35

Lone Parents

Figure 21 shows the gross inflows and outflows to OFP from 2016 to 2018. From 2016 to 2018, the

volume of inflows and outflows each year were similar, at around 8,000. This resulted in the net

number of OFP recipients remaining relatively static over the period as seen in Figure 3 earlier. Table

9 below shows the stock of recipients remaining on OFP each year from 2016 to 2018. The majority of

OFP recipients are staying on the scheme each year and the volume of recipient stock remains

relatively similar each year.

Figure 21: OFP Inflows and Outflows, 2016 - 2018

Source: DEASP Admin Data (end December Figures)

Table 9: Number of OFP Recipients remaining on the Scheme, 2016 - 2018

2016 2017 2018

Recipient Stock 32,884 32,059 31,715


As Figure 22 shows, the annual inflows and outflows to JST are of similar volumes, this results in

inflows being offset by outflows and the total JST recipients remaining flat year on year.

As a result, the number of recipients on lone parent supports has remained the same in recent years.

Similarly, as Table 10 shows, the majority of JST recipients are remaining on the scheme (recipient

stock).

8,073 7,827 8,057

-9,337-8,898

-8,171

-12,000

-10,000

-8,000

-6,000

-4,000

-2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

2016 2017 2018

OFP

Flo

ws

Inflows Outflows

36

Figure 22: JST Inflows and Outflows, 2016 - 2018

Source: DEASP Admin Data (end December figures); 2018 JST inflow data not readily available

Table 10: Number of JST Recipients remaining on the Scheme, 2016 - 2017 2016 2017

Recipient Stock 10,895 10,915

Source: DEASP Admin Data end year figures; 2018 JST inflow data not readily available35

While inflows and outflows are useful to demonstrate the volume of movement into and out of

schemes each year. It is also important to determine where those exiting these schemes are going to,

in order to assess if people are moving off social welfare entirely or transferring to another DEASP

scheme.

1. Movements between Lone Parent Supports and the Live Register

i) Lone Parent exits to Live Register (LR)

Table 11 below shows movements of OFP recipients (inclusive of JST36) to the LR each year37.

In 2014, over 4,000 OFP recipients exited to the LR. Over 3,500 or 87% were on the LR one

year later in 2015, and 2,000 or 51% were still on the LR in 2018, 4 years after entering the LR.

In 2015, 4,500 OFP recipients exited to the LR, of which 3,700 or 82% remained on the LR the

following year in 2016. In 2018, over 2,500 or 57% were still on the LR 3 years after entering.

35 As a result of JST inflow data not being readily available in 2018, the stock data for JST is not quantifiable 36 The majority of OFP closures will be JST closures who have become ineligible for the scheme, or OFP recipients who were ineligible for JST when the reforms were introduced i.e. lone parents with children older than 14 years. 37 Some of the lone parent cohort may be entering the LR but working part-time, known as a jobseeker casual. Analysis conducted by DEASP showed that the WFP is always a financially better option for lone parents than jobseeker casual. Therefore, it is assumed for the purposes of this analysis that lone parents entering the LR are fully unemployed.

4,099 4,149

-4,495-4,079 -3,884

-5,000

-4,000

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

2016 2017 2018JST

Flo

ws

Inflows Outflows

37

In 2016, over 2,000 exited to the LR, of which 1,700 or 78% were on the LR the following year

in 2017, and almost 1,400 or 63% were still on the LR in 2018.

Table 11: OFP exits to the Live Register, 2014 - 2018 Exits to LR

No. of exits

Still on LR after One year

%

Still on LR in 2018

% 2014 4,188 87% 51%

2015 4,518 82% 57%

2016 2,162 78% 63%

2017 1,924 89% 89%

2018 1,731 - NA

Average 2,905 84%


This shows that many OFP recipients are becoming unemployed when no longer eligible for lone

parent supports, and many are staying on the LR for very long durations. At least, 9,000 of those on

the LR in 2018 were ex-OFP recipients who entered the LR between 2014 and 2018.

This demonstrates that significant employment barriers exist for a subset of the lone parent cohort

who have not taken up employment while in receipt of lone parent supports.

ii) Live Register exits to Lone Parent supports

Table 12 below shows the exits from the LR to the OFP payment from 2014 to 2018. In 2014, over

5,500 persons on the LR entered into OFP, this has reduced to just over 2,500 in 2018.

Comparing OFP entries from the LR to the total annual inflows into OFP discussed above in Figure

21 indicates that 32% of OFP recipients in 2018 were on the LR before becoming eligible for OFP and

the proportion was higher in previous years, with 52% of all OFP entries coming from the LR in 2015.

This highlights that many OFP recipients were unemployed before becoming a lone parent. In addition,

the OFP and JST recipients, who did not take up some form of employment while on lone parent

supports, can have spent a minimum of 14 years outside the labour force.

38

Table 12: Live Register exits to OFP, 2015 – 2018 OFP entries % of OFP Entries

2014 5,537 NA

2015 4,185 52%

2018 2,569 32%

Average 4,097 51%

Source: DEASP Admin Data (end Dec figures)

Lone parents are required to transition out of lone parent support schemes once their youngest child

reaches 14 years old. At this stage, the primary barrier to employment will likely be the significant

amount of time spent outside the labour force and unemployed.

This might go some way in explaining the low employment rates for lone parents with adult aged

children; it is likely that the scarring effect and very low labour market attachment from many years

or even decades out of the labour force is making a transition into employment very challenging for

this cohort of lone parents.

2. Movements from Lone Parent Supports to In-work Supports

iii) Lone Parent exits to In-Work supports

Table 13 shows the OFP exits to the WFP from 2014 to 2018:

In 2014, 4,250 OFP recipients exited into WFP, with 53% or 2,200 still on WFP in 2018, 4 years

after entering.

In 2015, there was a sharp rise in the OFP exits into WFP at 11,400, as a result of the OFP reforms.

Of these, 92% were still on WFP the following year in 2016. By 2018, 71% or 8,000 of these were

still on WFP. This may be a result of the OFP reforms between 2013 and 2015 as lone parents

exited OFP, and gained employment and entered WFP.

OFP exits into WFP reduced in 2016, to 3,300. By 2018, 2,800 or 86% were still on WFP.

39

Table 13: OFP exits to WFP, 2015 - 2018

WFP entries Still on LR after One year

Still on LR in 2018

2014 4,250 NA 53%

2015 11,400 92% 71%

2016 3,264 NA 86%

2017 2,695 91% 91%

2018 2,450 - NA

Average 4,812 91.5%


Around a third of total OFP exits OFP are to WFP, and the majority are staying on WFP and in

employment for more than a year. This suggests WFP has been effective in transitioning lone parents

into employment, however, as set out earlier many recipients are remaining on WFP for long

durations. The lack of conditionality for WFP recipients, particularly those with older children, may be

acting as a potential impediment for recipients to increase their work intensity gradually over time. It

would be necessary to review the hours worked38, particularly for WFP recipients with older children,

to assess if WFP is effective in supporting recipients to increase work intensity.

3. Movements from In-work Supports to Unemployment

iv) In-Work supports to Live Register

Table 14 below shows the movement of WFP recipients into the LR.

In 2014, almost 2,800 WFP exits moved onto the LR, with 91% or 2,560 on the LR in 2015. By 2018,

1,550 or 56% were still on the LR.

In 2015, 1,400 WFP recipients exited to the LR, with almost everyone (97%) on the LR in 2016. By

2018, 67% or 970 were still on the LR.

In 2016, over 3,000 WFP recipients exited to the LR with just under 2,700 or 82% on the LR in 2017.

By 2018, 2,200 or 69% were still on the LR.

In 2017, 2,700 WFP recipients exited to the LR. Of these, 82% or 2,200 were on the LR in 2018.

There were similar numbers of WFP exits to the LR in 2018.

38 Employment hours for WFP recipients over time was not readily available for this review.

40

Table 14: WFP exits to the Live Register, 2014 - 2018

Exits to LR Still on LR after One year

Still on LR in 2018

2014 2,780 92% 56%

2015 1,438 97% 67%

2016 3,188 83% 69%

2017 2,714 82% 82%

2018 2,364 - NA

Average 2,497 88.5%


Since 2014, volumes exiting WFP to the LR have reduced, although when compared to overall WFP

exits approximately 15% of all WFP exits are going to the LR and many are staying on the LR for longer

than one year. However, the remaining 85% of WFP recipients are not exiting to the Live Register.

4. Movements from Unemployment to Employment

v) Live Register to In-Work supports

Table 15 below shows how many people exited the LR and entered WFP between 2015 and 2018. This

analysis can determine if WFP is incentivising those currently unemployed to take up work or if WFP

entries are predominately those already in employment.

In 2015, over 8,200 people exited the LR to WFP. Of these, 92% remained on WFP one year

later in 2016, and 91% were still on the payment in 2018.

In 2016, LR exits to WFP were 4,000, 97% of whom were on WFP a year later in 2017 and 84%

still on WFP in 2018.

In 2017, over 6,000 LR exits entered WFP, with everyone still on the payment in 2018. In 2018,

5,000 people left the LR and entered into WFP.

41

Table 15: LR Exits to WFP, 2015 - 2018

LR Closures WFP entries Still on LR after One year

Still on LR in 2018

2015 8,217 92% 91%

2016 3,836 97% 84%

2017 6,192 102% 102%

2018 5,147 - NA

Average 5,848 97%


In 2015, 22% of all LR exits went to WFP and this was 14% of all LR exits in 2018. The data shows

that the vast majority entering the WFP from the LR are staying on the payment and in employment

for long durations, demonstrating that it is providing a sustained work incentive for people.

However, as mentioned earlier an examination of WFP hours of employment, particularly for

claimants with older children, would be required to assess if recipients are increasing their work

intensity over time while on WFP.

Conclusions

Lone Parents

OFP recipients have decreased in all counties, however there continues to be a high concentration

of OFP recipients in Dublin despite the introduction of reforms from 2013.

Dublin is now the only county with more recipients on OFP than in-work supports (WFP).

This may be demonstrating that lone parents in Dublin are a harder to reach cohort and may be

less likely to take up employment and avail of in-work supports.

Significant gender imbalances remain with 99% of lone parents being female, this is likely

contributing to a reliance on these payments and lower female labour force participation rates.

In 2018, 32% of recipients on lone parent supports moved onto the LR, with a significant number of

the OFP inflows coming from the LR in the first instance. The lone parents on supports who have

not taken up some form of employment, have been out of the labour force for a very significant

amount of time (at least 14 years).

42

Since 2014, almost 14,000 lone parents have entered the LR and 9,000 of these were still on the

LR four years later in 2018.

The majority of JST recipients are staying on the payment until becoming ineligible. For lone

parents with one child this is equivalent to seven years or longer if the recipient has more than

one child.

These findings are also reflected in the profile of those remaining on the LR in 2018, which was

examined in the Budget 2019 paper ‘Analysis of Live Register Related Expenditure’39. This showed

that many of those remaining on the LR were those with long durations, greater than 5 years with

child dependants.

There are significant structural barriers for lone parents who have not taken up some form of

employment while on lone parent supports. It is likely that the scarring effect and very low labour

market attachment as a result of many years out of the labour force is making a transition into

employment very challenging.

Future considerations

1. A consistent approach to the activation of, and engagement with lone parents is required to

minimise the time they spend out of the labour force or unemployed. This could focus on earlier

and more frequent engagement, particularly for individuals on the Jobseeker’s Transitional

Payment.

2. Additional analysis is required to better understand why Dublin continues to have more people

on One Parent Family Payment than on the Working Family Payment. This should identify if

employment barriers are greater in Dublin when compared to other areas of the country, and

what these employment barriers are.

39 Paper can be accessed here: http://www.budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2019/Documents/Live_Register_Related_Expenditure.pdf

http://www.budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2019/Documents/Live_Register_Related_Expenditure.pdf

43

In-Work Supports

Since 2017, the take-up of WFP for lone parents and OFP recipients has remained flat despite a

series of Budget measures to financially incentivise employment for this cohort from 2013.

There has been no growth in the take up of WFP by lone parents since 2015. However, the majority

of lone parents on WFP have stayed on the scheme, which suggests that the Budget measures

were effective in incentivising this cohort to remain in their employment40.

The take up of WFP by lone parents exiting OFP between 2014 and 2015 increased from 4,250 to

11,400, an increase of 7,150 people or 168%. This appears to be as a result of the OFP reforms

and the tightening of eligibility for the scheme rolled out between 2013 and 2015.

WFP recipients are either staying on the payment for short periods of time (less than one year) or

are staying on the payment for very long durations (more than five years).

In 2018, 32% of WFP recipients stayed on the payment for less than one year, and 19% of

recipients had a duration of more than five years.

The high proportion of individuals staying on the scheme for more than 5 years may be indicating

issues in increasing work intensity.

More research is needed to assess if people on WFP are being incentivised to increase their hours

worked. This should include examining the Genuinely Seeking Work (GSW) conditionality attached

to the WFP.

For both lone parents and two parent families on WFP, the greatest number of recipients are within

the €400-€499 income group.

The majority of recipients across both family types are in the same income group, despite two

parent families having twice the earnings potential.

Since 1989, WFP criteria allows partners to share the hours worked to meet the requirement,

which includes full transferability. Further analysis may be required into the impact of the sharing

of hours worked under WFP in two parent families.

40 The employment status of JST recipients was not readily available, the budget measures may have increased employment for this cohort while they are on the JST payment but further analysis would be required to assess this.

44

Future Considerations

1. Further analysis should be undertaken to identify the split of hours worked within two parent

families on the Working Family Payment scheme. This should consider the potential impact of

the transferability of work hours for two parent families and to identify if only one person in

the household is working, what the labour market status of the other adult is. This would

provide insights for future policy on increasing female participation rates and reducing labour

force inactivity.

2. An examination of the number of hours worked by Working Family Payment recipients is

required to determine if the payment is effective in incentivising recipients to increase their

work intensity beyond the minimum 19 hours per week. In particular, this research could focus

on the hours worked by WFP recipients with older children, and the impact of having no

conditions that require WFP recipients to increase hours worked above the threshold.

45

Appendix

Appendix A: Overview of Schemes

1. Working Family Payment

The WFP (formerly Family Income Supplement) is a tax-free, targeted in-work support, targeted at

low-income families and lone parents. FIS was first introduced in 1984 to encourage low-income

families to either take-up or remain in employment. It is designed for people who may only be

marginally better off financially in employment and seeks to incentivise people to enter and remain

in employment. More recently, reducing child poverty was included as a key objective for the WFP.

Incentivising employment is two-fold: (i) incentivising entry to employment (ii) incentivising the move

towards full-time employment through increased work intensity with a view to increasing income

from employment while simultaneously reducing the need for social welfare payments.

WFP is calculated at 60% of the difference between the income limit (Table 16) for the family size and

the assessable income of the family41. An individual must work 19 hours per week or 38 hours over a

fortnight (if hours are irregular week to week) to be eligible. Since 1989, hours worked can be

distributed between parties in a two parent family household.

Table 16: Income Thresholds by Family Size for WFP, 2008-2019 Family Size Income

Thresholds for

WFP (weekly)

2008

€

2009

€

2010

€

2011

€

2012

€

2013

€

2014

€

2015

€

2016

€

2017

€

2018

€

2019

€

1 Child 490 500 506 506 506 506 506 506 516 516 521 521

2 Children 570 590 602 602 602 602 602 602 612 612 622 622

3 Children 655 685 703 703 703 703 703 703 713 713 723 723

4 Children 760 800 824 824 824 824 824 824 834 834 834 834

5 Children 870 920 950 950 950 950 950 950 960 960 960 960

6 Children 970 1,030 1,066 1,066 1,066 1,066 1,066 1,066 1,076 1,076 1,076 1,076

7 Children 1,090 1,160 1,202 1,202 1,202 1,202 1,202 1,202 1,212 1,212 1,212 1,212

8 Children or More 1,170 1,250 1,298 1,298 1,298 1,298 1,298 1,298 1,308 1,308 1,308 1,308


41 The WFP qualifying rate is applicable for a duration of 52 weeks without increase/decrease even if there are changes in the recipient’s income. Hours worked must be at least 38 hours over a period of 2 weeks.

46

Currently, the Qualified Child payment (QC) is not payable alongside the WFP however, if the claimant

is eligible for BTWFD this can be payable concurrently with WFP without the BTWFD being taken into

account for the WFP income assessment42. The BTWFD payment criteria is outlined in the next

paragraph. WFP is linked to employment and entitlement to WFP ceases if the recipient loses or

changes job. An individual can re-apply for WFP once they are again employed subject to full

compliance with the eligibility criteria. There is no Genuinely Seeking Work (GSW) requirement with

the WFP scheme therefore a recipient is not required to be increasing their work intensity although

they are financially incentivised to do so.

All income from maintenance is assessed in the means test for WFP. This includes maintenance for

the claimant and maintenance for any children. Housing costs up to a maximum of €95.23 per week

can be offset against maintenance payments. Half the balance is then assessed as means.

Depending on individual and family circumstances, those working part-time may be eligible for WFP

or a Jobseeker payment, and the recipient may opt for the one payment which is most financially

beneficial to them. An individual is eligible for a jobseeker casual payment if they are working part-

time but are unemployed for 4 out of 7 days. In many cases, the jobseeker casual claim option is more

financially beneficial for a two parent/couple family where only one adult works and there are less

than three children. In contrast, the WFP is always a financially better option than a JA casual claim

for a lone parent in part-time employment.

2. Back to Work Family Dividend

The Back to Work Family Dividend43 was introduced in Budget 2015 as an in-work support and was

designed to help low-income families transition from primary social welfare payments (JA, JB, OFP,

JST) towards employment. Given that BTWFD can be paid alongside WFP, it provides an additional

incentive for primary social welfare recipients to enter employment.

The objectives of the BTWFD align with those of WFP. However, given that it is directed at those who

are on a jobseeker payment or lone parent payment and exit that payment as a result of employment,

it is a more targeted incentive towards employment for these cohorts. It is specifically targeted at

42 Similarly, income for WFP is not taken into account in the assessment for a medical card. Recipients may also be entitled to the Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance alongside WFP. 43 BTWFD is a non-taxable income support that can be in conjunction with WFP. Further information relating to scheme

eligibility criteria can be accessed here: https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/BTWFD.aspx

https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/BTWFD.aspx

47

jobseekers who are long-term unemployed.44 The payment is equivalent to the payment for qualified

children, subject to a maximum of four children. Child dependants are eligible up to the age of 18

years or 22 years if in full-time education. The full QC rate is payable for the first year, decreasing to

half the QC rate per child in the second year45.

3. One Parent Family Payment

One parent family payment (OFP) is a taxable, means assessed, primary social welfare payment for

lone parents aged under 66 years bringing up children without the support of a partner46. The payment

rate is €203 per week, with increases for any qualified children (€34 per week for each child under 12,

€37 for each child over 12). All income from maintenance is assessed as means47 however, half of all

maintenance paid is disregarded. Additionally, if a recipient has housing costs (rent or mortgage) then

a maximum of €95.23 per week can be offset against maintenance payments, with half of the

remaining balance assessed as means.

Recipients of OFP are eligible for WFP, if they find and take up employment of at least 19 hours per

week or 38 hours fortnightly (if hours are irregular week to week)48. OFP recipients who leave the

scheme and take up employment are also eligible for the BTWFD payment49. There are also income

disregards for lone parents who take up employment, with the first €150 of gross weekly earnings

disregarded, and 50% of any additional earnings up to €425 per week assessed as means. Those with

gross earnings in excess of €425 per week are not eligible for OFP.

Reductions to the age thresholds for the youngest child of an OFP recipient were introduced on a

phased basis over the period 2013 to 2015. When the youngest child turns 7 years of age, the lone

parent in receipt of OFP is no longer eligible for the scheme and may transfer to a transition payment

- Jobseekers Transition Payment (JST). Prior to the reforms of the OFP eligibility criteria and the

44 Eligible persons must be at least 12 months in receipt of qualifying payment of which at least 6 months must have been in

the 12 months immediately preceding the end of the payment. 45 Currently, the full rate of QC per child is €34 per week for children under 12 and is €37 per week for children 12 and over. 46 The lone parent must be the sole carer and live with the child, and must not be living with a spouse/partner or cohabiting 47 Men and women are required, under the law, to pay maintenance to a dependent spouse, civil partner or former cohabitant and any dependent children who are not living with them, called 'liable relatives'. Failure to pay maintenance requires that the liable relative must contribute to the One Parent Family payment that the family receives. The Liable Relatives Unit of the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection will contact the liable relative if they have not paid enough maintenance. In order to qualify for OFP the applicant must demonstrate that efforts have been made to get maintenance from the liable relative. 48 Only one WFP payment can be made in respect of any family which means that if a WFP applicant is receiving maintenance from a liable relative, then the liable relative must not be getting WFP. 49 This may occur when the OFP recipient is not eligible for the WFP i.e. not enough hours of work.

48

introduction of the new JST payment, lone parents could stay on OFP until their youngest child turned

18 years of age or 22 years of age if they were in full time education.

There are some exceptions to the age limits to qualify for OFP. For example if the recipient is

getting Domiciliary Care Allowance (DCA) for a child, they can qualify for OFP on behalf of that child

provided the other conditions are met. This means that they can apply for or continue to claim OFP

until the child reaches 16 or DCA stops. They will also get an Increase for a Qualified Child (IQC) for

any other children in the family until they reach 18 (or 22 if in full-time education) while DCA (and

OFP) is in payment. Similarly, if an individual is in receipt of OFP and providing full-time care for one

of child or an adult (such as a parent or a sibling), the person can continue to receive the OFP and also

claim half-rate Carer’s Allowance, provided that their youngest child is aged under 16 years. This

means that the person can claim both OFP and a half-rate Carer’s Allowance (CA) until the youngest

child turns 16, for as long as they continue to meet the conditions for both schemes. They will also

receive an Increase for a Qualified Child (IQC) for any other children in the family until they reach 18

(or 22 if in full-time education) while CA and OFP are in payment.

4. Jobseekers Transition Payment

This payment was introduced incrementally from 2013 to help bridge the transition from OFP to

employment. JST is a special arrangement under the Jobseeker’s Allowance (JA) scheme, the

payment rates are the same50, however it is designed for lone parents whose youngest child is aged

between seven and 13 years. JST recipients are not required to be genuinely seeking work (GSW)

but are required to attend DEASP activation services and engage with INTREO case officers. They

may also take up education, training or a place on an employment scheme. When the youngest child

turns 14 years old, the lone parent on JST is required to move to the Jobseekers Allowance (JA)

payment (if they have not transitioned to employment) and is subject to the full conditionality of that

payment. They are required to be available for and genuinely seeking work, along with full

engagement with activation case officer and mandatory attendance at activation meetings.

Unlike the OFP scheme, the JST is not payable with WFP. JST recipients are subject to the JA means

test, however JST recipients can work and still receive the payment and means are accounted for

differently than a JA payment. Since 28 March 2019, the first €150 of your gross weekly earnings is

disregarded (or not taken into account). 50% of the balance is assessed as means. There is no limit on

the number of days or hours you can work while in receipt of JST.

50 Maximum personal payment rate of €203 per week and in addition will receive qualified child increases.

49

5. Childcare Supports

Targeted childcare supports are available for both lone parents and families on low-incomes that are

aimed at supporting them in taking up employment or education/training. The After-School Child Care

Scheme (ASCC) supports low-income people to return to work. The scheme provides subsidised after-

school childcare places to people with children of primary school age who find employment, increase

their employment or take up a place on an employment support scheme (except the Community

Employment (CE) scheme). In order to qualify, the claimant must have 1 or more children aged

between 4 and 13 years who are in primary school and be in receipt of either JA/JB, JST, OFP or on

an employment support programme (not CE) for at least 3 months. In 2015, ASCC was available to

people in receipt of WFP (for any duration) who increase their hours of work (work intensity).

The Community Childcare Subvention (CCS) programme is also available for low income families and

parents in training, education or low-paid employment can avail of childcare at reduced rates.

Eligibility for CCS is dependent on being in receipt of a medical card and/or certain social welfare

payments. As such, families on lone parent supports and those on in-work supports may qualify for

CCS. The range of targeted childcare programmes available is examined in the 2018 Social Impact

Assessment ‘Targeted Childcare Programmes’51.

Appendix B: Profile of Recipients

(i) Age and Gender

Table 17: Percentage share of scheme recipients by Age and Gender, 2018

JST OFP BTWFD WFP

Age Cohort (yrs.) Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females

Under 34 18% 32% 34% 66% 20% 32% 18% 26%

35 to 39 21% 24% 22% 18% 23% 27% 24% 23%

40 to 44 21% 21% 18% 10% 25% 21% 25% 22%

45 to 49 18% 16% 13% 5% 18% 13% 19% 17%

Over 50 22% 7% 13% 1% 13% 7% 15% 12% Source: DEASP admin data

51 Paper is available to read here: https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/SIA-Series-Targeted-Childcare-Programmes.pdf

https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/SIA-Series-Targeted-Childcare-Programmes.pdf

https://igees.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/SIA-Series-Targeted-Childcare-Programmes.pdf

50

(ii) BTWFD by Age

Figure 23: Recipients of BTWFD by Age, 2015 -2018


Table 17 shows the percentage share of total recipients for each of the schemes using 2018 recipient

data. It shows that for the lone parent support schemes (JST and OFP), female recipients are more

likely to be younger (under 34 years) and male recipients are more likely to be older. For in-work

supports schemes (BTWFD and WFP), there is a more even distribution of recipients across age cohorts

and gender.

(iii) OFP Recipients by Family Size

Table 18: Percentage Share of OFP recipients by Family Size

Family Size 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

1 child 57% 56% 56% 56% 56% 53% 53% 49% 48% 48% 47%

2 children 28% 28% 28% 29% 29% 31% 31% 31% 32% 32% 32%

3 children 10% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 13% 13% 14% 14%

4 or more 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 5% 5% 6% 7% 7% 7%


3,256

2,867

1,824

1,588

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

18-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55+

Rec

ipie

nts

of

BTW

FD

2015 2016 2018

51

(iv) BTWFD Recipients by Family Size

Figure 24: BTWFD Recipients by Family Size, 2015 – 2018


(v) WFP Recipients by Income Group

Table 19: Number of Lone Parents in receipt of WFP by Income Group, 2009 - 2018 Income Group

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Change

2009 - 2018

€100-€199 126 144 133 144 548 901 2,684 2,128 1,655 1,194 1,068

€200-€299 752 696 623 673 1,779 2,601 6,551 6,495 6,274 5,745 4,993

€300-€399 2,825 2,889 3,345 3,759 6,083 7,656 7,968 8,247 7,710 6,774 3,949

€400-€499 8,506 8,216 7,563 8,205 9,695 9,819 7,535 7,898 8,419 8,167 -339

€500-€599 1,598 1,910 1,845 1,999 2,350 2,565 2,360 2,687 2,913 2,959 1,361

€600+ 337 540 553 619 762 765 740 870 877 863 526

Total 14,144 14,395 14,062 15,399 21,217 24,307 27,838 28,325 27,848 25,702 11,558


5,293

2,270

3,255

2,670

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

2015 2016 2017 2018

Re

cip

ien

ts o

f B

TWFD

by

Fam

ily S

ize

1 child 2 children 3 children 4 or more

52

Table 20: Number of Two Parent Families in receipt of WFP by Income Group, 2009 - 2018 Income Group

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Change 2009 - 2018

€100-€199 253 314 313 278 468 609 831 806 814 655 402

€200-€299 1,045 1,211 1,173 1,172 1,621 1,981 2,547 2,693 2,840 2,678 1,633

€300-€399 2,910 3,187 3,239 3,545 5,048 5,959 6,351 6,471 6,240 5,441 2,531

€400-€499 4,011 4,484 4,770 5,333 6,882 7,729 8,058 8,260 8,376 7,819 3,808

€500-€599 2,427 3,006 3,481 4,140 5,654 6,065 6,415 6,632 6,832 6,783 4,356

€600-€699 877 1,202 1,363 1,822 2,360 2,661 2,858 3,115 3,363 3,486 2,609

€700+ 296 424 475 618 909 995 1,015 1,265 1,432 1,552 1,256

€600+ 1,173 1,626 1,838 2,440 3,269 3,656 3,873 4,380 4,795 5,038 3,865

Total 11,819 13,828 14,814 16,908 22,942 25,999 28,075 29,242 29,897 28,414 16,595 Source: DEASP Annual Statistical Report and Admin Data for 2018

Appendix C: Budget Measures 2016-2019

Table 21: Recent Scheme Developments, Budget 2016 - Budget 2019 Scheme Budget 2016

Measures

Budget 2017

Measures

Budget 2018

Measures

Budget 2019

Measures

OFP Income disregard:

increase from €90 to

€110

Rates: Increase by €5


Qualified Child:

Increase by €2

Income disregard:


€130


Income disregard:


€150

Qualified Child:

Increase by €2.20 for

under 12s

JST Income disregard:

Increase from €60 to

€90

Income disregard:


€110



Qualified Child:

Increase by €2

Income disregard:


€130


Income disregard:


€150

Qualified Child:


under 12s

WFP Income thresholds: €5

increase for one child;

€10 increase for 2 or

more children

Income thresholds:

€10 increase for

families with up to 3

children

Maintenance

disregard: introduce

disregard of €95.23 for

housing costs

BTWFD Qualified Child:

Increase by €2

Qualified Child:


53

under 12s and €5.20

for over 12s

Source: http://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/home.aspx

Table 22: Cost Estimates of Budget Measures

Measure Budget

2016 Budget

2017 Budget

2018 Budget

2019 Total Cost

€m €m €m €m €m

Qualified Child Increases

OFP

7.5 8.3 15.8

JST

2 2.4 4.4

BTWFD

1.5 2.5 4

Rate Increase

OFP

2.1 2 2 6.1

JST

0.8 0.8 0.8 2.4

Income Thresholds/Disregards

WFP 18

16

34

OFP

6.6 6 5 17.6

JST 8 2.4 2.3 1.2 13.9

Maintenance Disregards

WFP

14 14

Total Cost 26 11.9 38.1 36.2 112.2 Source: DEASP Admin data & authors’ calculations of estimated costs

Appendix D: Aggregate Scheme Flows

Table 23: Net effect of the Inflows and Outflows of scheme recipients, 2016 - 2018 2016 2017 2018

WFP -6,660 -1,428 -3,935

BTWFD 2,542 -5,206 NA

OFP -1,264 -1,071 -114

JST -396 70 NA Source: DEASP Admin data, 2018 data for net effect unavailable for BTWFD and JST

54

Quality Assurance Process

To ensure accuracy and methodological rigour, the author engaged in the following

quality assurance process.

Internal/Departmental

Line management

Spending Review Sub-group and Steering group

Other divisions/sections – Central Votes Section and the Public Service

Reform and Delivery Office.

Peer review (IGEES network, seminars, conferences etc.)

External

Other Government Department

Advisory group

Quality Assurance Group (QAG)

Peer review (IGEES network, seminars, conferences etc.)

External expert(s)

Other