The question of how lone parents cycle in and out of NDLP and benefits over time is best addressed by looking at the more frequent patterns of sequences of labour market spells in our data.
For people who have been NDLP participants during the ‘participation window’ (see Section B.2 for the definition), Table 3.7 presents, in order, reading down the chart, the 15 most common sequences of spells, and Figure 3.23 graphs from left to right the average length of these spells – for each spell, for the people who have that sequence. Table 3.8 and Figure 3.24 perform the same analysis for the NDLP non- participants defined in the ‘participation window’. Figures 3.23 and 3.24 show the sequence of states with most people in them at the top of the figure and the least common sequences at the bottom. Also the length of each bar is directly proportional to the time spent in each state (for the sample who have that sequence of states) – hence the longest bars represent the longest durations in the states. In addition each separate state in the sequence has a separate element to the bar in a different colour making the visual interpretation straightforward.
The 15 highest frequency sequences account for 77.67 per cent of the labour market histories of the non-participants but only 62.39 per cent of the histories of the NDLP participants. This means that a higher proportion of participants have more complex labour market histories involving longer sequences of states with fewer people in them than those of the non-participants.
For NDLP participants the first, most common sequence it is to have a continuous spell claiming IS, with nearly 17 per cent (698 people) falling into this category. Figure 3.23 then shows that among this group the average duration claiming IS is 329 weeks. The third most common sequence of spells among the NDLP participants is a spell of IS followed by a spell of employment. Table 3.7 shows that 8.35 per cent of the NDLP participants have this sequence and Figure 3.23 then shows that among this group the average spell length is 212 days on IS followed by 117 days in employment.
Table 3.7 Spell sequences for NDLP participants from the ‘participation window’ April 2001 to August 2004
Sequence Freq. Per cent Cum.
IS 698 16.66 16.66 EMP 368 8.78 25.44 IS, EMP 350 8.35 33.79 IS, NDLP, EMP 247 5.89 39.69 IS, EMP_BEN 165 3.94 43.63 EMP_BEN 152 3.63 47.26 EMP_BEN, EMP 103 2.46 49.71 EMP_BEN, IS 102 2.43 52.15 NDLP, EMP 97 2.32 54.46 IS, NDLP 87 2.08 56.54
EMP, NOTHING, EMP 58 1.38 57.92
IS, NOTHING, EMP 57 1.36 59.28
IS, NOTHING, IS 49 1.17 60.45
IS, EMP, NOTHING, EMP 41 0.98 61.43
IS, EMP, IS 40 0.95 62.39
Total 4,190 100
Nothing: Used in the administrative data for those spells in which the individual was neither on benefit nor present in the employment data.
Figure 3.23 Average spell duration for sequences (NDLP
participants from ‘participation window’), April 2001 to August 2004
The similar analysis for the NDLP non-participants is presented in Table 3.8 and Figure 3.24. The NDLP participant group can be broadly compared with the non- participant group using Tables 3.7 and 3.8 against Figures 3.23 and 3.24. It is apparent that a high proportion of non-participants simply remain claiming IS for the whole period. This sequence occupies only 16.66 per cent of participants but 41.54 per cent of non-participants.
Looking at Tables 3.7 and 3.8 and comparing Figures 3.23 and 3.24, the complexity of the labour market spell sequences of the NDLP participants and non-participants can be examined. This comparison shows that fewer sequences involve a spell in employment for the non-participants (only four out of the most popular 15) than for the NDLP participants (eight out of the most popular 15) and that a sequence which involves an employment spell occurs with a higher frequency among NDLP participants. For example the sequence which involves IS then employment occurs for 8.35 per cent of NDLP participants but only 6.35 per cent of non-participants. The duration of the spell in employment is also typically longer than the equivalent spell for non-participants across most sequences, – for example looking at the
sequence of IS then employment, for the participants this involves an average employment spell of 117 days but among non-participants this spell was, on average, only 92 days long. Overall, relative to their non-participant counterparts, the NDLP participants:
• have more spells in employment; • have longer spells in employment;
• make less frequent changes in labour market state;
• cycle between benefit and employment states less frequently.
These tables and figures indicate that among the group of lone parents overall there is considerable cycling in and out of unemployment and different benefits but that the NDLP participants are subsequently likely to be in work for a greater proportion of the time on average. These facts are borne out in Figures 3.25, 3.26, 3.27 and 3.28, which graph the proportion of people in each state.
Table 3.8 Spell sequences for non participants at the participation window, April 2001 to August 2004
Sequence Freq. Per cent Cum.
IS 26,338 41.54 41.54 IS, EMP 4,024 6.35 47.88 IS & IB 3,458 5.45 53.33 EMP_BEN 2,642 4.17 57.5 EMP_BEN, IS 2,540 4.01 61.51 EMP 2,101 3.31 64.82 IS, EMP_BEN 1,777 2.8 67.62 IS, NOTHING, IS 1,458 2.3 69.92 IS, EMP_BEN, IS 808 1.27 71.2
IS, NOTHING, EMP 797 1.26 72.45
IS & IB, IS 795 1.25 73.71 IS, NDLP, EMP 733 1.16 74.86 NOTHING, IS 690 1.09 75.95 IS, JSA 552 0.87 76.82 IS, NDLP 539 0.85 77.67 Total 63,411 100
Nothing: Used in the administrative data for those spells in which the individual was neither on benefit nor present in the employment data.
Figure 3.24 Average spell duration by sequence of benefit (non participants at the participation window), April 2001 to August 2004