Application and Award Responses to Stricter Screening in Disability Insurance

GATE Working Paper, WP 2012 – April 2020

53 Pages Posted: 2 May 2020

See all articles by Mathilde Godard

Mathilde Godard

GATE-LSE, Lyon

Pierre Koning

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, School of Business and Economics

Maarten Lindeboom

VU University Amsterdam

Date Written: April 6, 2020

Abstract

We examine the targeting effects of stricter screening in the Dutch Disability Insurance (DI) program induced by a major nationwide reform. The drastic 2003 “Gatekeeper Protocol” raised DI application costs and revealed more information about individual true ability to work. Discontinuity-in-Time regressions on administrative data show substantial declines in DI application rates (a 40% decrease in one year), with the largest decline occurring in difficult-to-diagnose impairments and less severe health disorders. This resulted in a more deserving pool of applicants. At the same time, those who stopped applying had worse health, worked less, and were more likely to be on UI and social assistance than workers who did not apply in the old system. There are no additional targeting gains at the point of the award decision, implying that changes in average health conditions of awardees were fully driven by self-screening and work resumption in the DI waiting period.

Keywords: Disability Insurance, Screening, Targeting Efficiency

JEL Classification: H2, I3

Suggested Citation

Godard, Mathilde and Koning, Pierre and Lindeboom, Maarten, Application and Award Responses to Stricter Screening in Disability Insurance (April 6, 2020). GATE Working Paper, WP 2012 – April 2020, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3569683 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3569683

Mathilde Godard (Contact Author)

GATE-LSE, Lyon ( email )

Lyon
France

Pierre Koning

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, School of Business and Economics ( email )

De Boelelaan 1105
Amsterdam, 1081HV
Netherlands

Maarten Lindeboom

VU University Amsterdam

Netherlands

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
58
Abstract Views
343
Rank
659,613
PlumX Metrics