CAPÍTILO II: MARCO TEÓRICO
2.1 ANTECEDENTES INVESTIGATIVOS
2.2.10 De control
within the Existing Framework
In September 1976 a team of DHSS officials was set up by
comprehensive review of the Supplementary Benefits
scheme. The resulting report (DHSS.1978) indicates that
this was carried out very thoroughly; the team heard a
great deal of evidence and sought advice from independent
researchers, from the Supplementary Benefits Commission
and from the analytic groups within DHSS.
Due to constraints on public expenditure the team decided
not to consider wider reforms but to concentrate on how
best to deploy existing resources within the
Supplementary Benefit framework, whilst taking account of
the implications of the changes for other Government
programmes. The team also tried to bear in mind the
changes in demography and social behaviour which had
important implications for the system.
The team concluded the underlying need was to simplify
the system. Although many of the changes advocated in the
report have been implemented the fundamental problem of
over complexity still remains and the review of social
security set up by the Thatcher Government in 1984 is
likely to address similar issues.
Accordingly this section draws on the 1976 review to
identify the issues likely to be examined in the present
review or any similar study and the considerations which
were felt to be important when the options were being
The basic aim of the Supplementary Benefits scheme is to
provide a minimum standard of living for everyone in the
country. To define minimum standard of living is
extremely difficult and the harder the scheme strives to
achieve equity, so that every claimant has the same
standard of living, the more complicated the rules
become. Consequently, in a study such as this, where the
principal objective is to simplify the administration of
the scheme, there is always a trade-■ off between simplification and equity. The standard indices for
simplification and equity used in the study were
estimates of numbers of staff saved and ' better-off/
worse-off' tables respectively, and in some cases
'attraction rates', that is the number of people newly
entitled to benefit. In considering the simplification of
the system the way in which provisions interact and
overlap was also taken into account.
Apart from the trade-off between simplicity and equity
the other factors which were important in all the
possible changes were the implications for total costs
and the possible consequences for financial incentives to
work for unemployed claimants. Also it was decided when
studying the adequacy of the rates that need was greatest
amongst families with children and so this was borne in
mind when evaluating the other possible changes and it
was regarded as a priority to devote any additional
The inter-relationships of the changes, that is their
implications for each other, were generally borne in mind
but this can become very difficult and the ability to
assess the net effect of a package of changes would be an
essential feature of an information system to aid the
evaluation of benefit policy analyses. Although each
change was analysed in depth and its effects on total
costs and staffing requirements were estimated it is the
combined effect of the package of changes on total income
support and marginal tax rates of claimants which really
matters. Without an indication of the overall cost and
distributional effects of a set of packages there is a
danger that an attempt such as this to take a
comprehensive view of the system in order to make it more
consistent will only serve to replace one set of
anomalies and complexities with another.
Superficially a model which is intended to be capable of
studying the implications of detailed changes to existing
benefits - basically the manner of change addressed in
the 1976 Supplementary Benefit Review - requires largely
the same qualities as a model capable of assessing the
full implications of the annual uprating of benefits to
allow for inflation. An 'uprating model' requires
descriptions of the characteristics of the existing
claimant population and the current rules for determining
that population in order to be able to describe and
explain the current distribution of benefits and estimate
such a description of the future claimant population. It
should be noted that the population will change to a
limited extent as a result of the uprating because the
eligible population for means-tested benefits is
dependent upon the needs allowances and there is also
evidence that take-up increases with the level of benefit
entitlement (Supplementary Benefits Commission, 1978). If
the model is also to be able to analyse detailed changes
to existing benefit rules, however, it will generally
have to tackle two further problems.
Firstly the characteristics which determine claimants'
benefit title may be changed. This may require
information concerning a characteristic not previously
tested or information presented in a different form to
which it has previously been arranged in the
administrative records. Examples of the latter case would
be the alteration of the children's scale rates in the
Supplementary Benefit Review and the altering of the
linking rules in the review of National Insurance
Short-Term Benefits discussed in Section 3.4.
Secondly the introduction of new rules may or may not
alter the eligible or claimant populations, whether it
These become important points when considering
alternative sources of data on which to base a benefit
evaluation model. Administrative records provide a great
deal of information on the existing claimant population
and would be a valuable source of data on which to base
any analysis of policies which do not introduce new rules
and do not increase the eligible population in any way.
If information is required on people other than existing
claimants, however, or if new information concerning
existing claimants or possibly just similar information
on existing claimants as already exists but arranged in a
different form is required, then either the data of
administrative records must be supplemented by additional
data or demographic modelling, or an alternative data
source must be used.
Any application of a benefit evaluation model would need
to assess the forecast implications of the proposed
policies against the expected consequences of a policy of
no change. The ability to analyse fully the implications
of the annual uprating would also give the model a
valuable ongoing applicability.
The worth of a model to examine the functioning of the
present system in detail should not be devalued by the
inadequacies of that system, therefore, but, on the other
hand, it should aim to do rather more than this given the
The following two sections consider two possible
directions reform of the present system might take.