Streamlining Welsh Benefits: Theory of Change for Streamlining Welsh Benefits (Phase 1)
Social research showing how changes made to the Phase 1 activities for Streamlining Welsh Benefits can improve outcomes and impacts.
This file may not be fully accessible.
In this page
Background
In January 2024, the Welsh Government launched the Welsh Benefits Charter, setting out principles for a benefits system that is person‑centred, compassionate, inclusive and coherent. A multi‑agency Steering Group was established to translate these principles into delivery, involving Welsh Government, local authorities, WLGA, CDPS and third sector partners.
The Phase 1 Route Map focuses on improving coherence between three local‑authority‑administered benefits: Council Tax Reduction Scheme (CTRS), Free School Meals (FSM) and the School Essentials Grant (SEG). Phase 1 success is defined as more coherent delivery of these benefits across all local authorities, reducing duplication for claimants so that information and evidence is provided once, wherever possible. As part of Priority 3 under the strategic objective of a future‑proof Welsh benefits system, social research was commissioned to help develop a Theory of Change (ToC) that articulates how Phase 1 activities are expected to lead to improved outcomes and impacts, and under what conditions.
Methodology
The research used a co construction approach with stakeholders to help develop a shared ToC. A stakeholder survey provided initial insight into aims, assumptions and feasibility. Stakeholder workshops explored intended impacts, realistic outcomes, required activities, risks and constraints. Participants included professionals from the Welsh Government, local authorities, delivery teams, digital and data specialists, and third sector partners.
Findings
Intended impacts
Stakeholders broadly agreed the primary long‑term change should be reduced burden for claimants through clearer, easier access to CTRS, FSM and SEG; fewer eligible people missing out; and more consistent user experience across Wales. Many stressed that any claimed impact must be credible, proportionate and evidence‑aware, especially given limitations in baseline data.
Outcomes
Stakeholders challenged the idea of a single application as a meaningful measure of success. They emphasised that a single form does not necessarily reduce claimant burden and could increase friction for some users. Instead, success was framed in terms of reduced friction for claimants via fewer repeat questions, clearer eligibility communication, avoidance of unnecessary reapplications, and enabling information to be shared or reused where appropriate rather than enforcing a uniform application process for all. Stakeholders emphasised that uniformity is not synonymous with simplicity and that forcing all users through a single process could increase burden for some.
Additional outcomes identified include more successful applications and more proportionate use of data and automation to enable proactive decision‑making.
Activities
Stakeholders proposed incremental streamlining achievable under current constraints: one enquiry leading to multiple eligibility checks, re‑use or pre‑population of known data, proactive confirmation of ongoing eligibility, and reducing duplicate evidence requests. There was strong support for embedding ongoing evaluation and learning as well as support for local authority implementation including clear delivery standards, guidance and assurance mechanisms and targeted support for authorities with lower capacity.
Inputs
Phase 1 was described as input‑intensive, particularly in terms of people and skills. Key inputs included service design, user research, business analysis and data capabilities alongside partnerships across authorities, Welsh Government, CDPS, third sector and people with lived experience. Time and access to back‑end systems are required to map processes and identify duplication. Consistent bilingual communication materials and training were also identified as important inputs.
Assumptions
The ToC relies on local authorities engaging voluntarily, staff having capacity to adapt processes, effective data sharing and interpretation, and reduced friction leading to better outcomes. These assumptions were often expressed cautiously, with participants noting they may not hold uniformly across all 22 authorities.
Risks
Identified risks include inconsistent local authority buy‑in, capacity constraints driving a “path of least resistance”, policy and legislative misalignment limiting what can be streamlined, and unintended consequences from automation or proactive decisions without robust safeguards.
Cross-cutting themes
Stakeholders emphasised that claimant experience should be the main measure of success, rather than system‑level efficiency. Ensuring equity and inclusion was also prioritised. There was strong emphasis on measurement and continuous learning, including being transparent about evidence gaps. Stakeholders highlighted the importance of sensitive language and change messaging, noting that framing improvements as staff underperformance can be demoralising.
Implications
Overall, a credible Phase 1 ToC should frame success around reduced friction for claimants, emphasize incremental and proportionate change, treat data and automation as enablers, and be explicit about capacity, risk and legislative limits. Monitoring should centre on claimant experience, supported by mixed evidence. This reframing strengthens the Theory of Change by aligning ambition with delivery reality, increasing the likelihood of local authority buy‑in and meaningful improvement for claimants.