Non‑statutory guidance for public services boards and regional partnership boards: Assessments, data and evidence - 2. Opportunities for alignment of work

PSBs and RPBs often work with the same communities and draw on similar evidence. Where alignment is pursued, partnerships have reported benefits for communities and organisations, including reduced consultation fatigue, clearer narratives for the public, more efficient use of analytical capacity, and stronger shared understanding across sectors.

This section sets out the main areas where alignment may be helpful. Partnerships may wish to adopt some or all of these approaches, depending on what best fits their locality and region.

The table below provides a high-level view of the typical focus areas for PSBs and RPBs, alongside the shared space where joint working can add value. These are not statutory duties – those are outlined in Section 1 – but represent the practical areas where the work of both partnerships overlaps. Partnerships may find it useful to use this table during early planning discussions to identify where aligned approaches are most helpful.

PSBs and RPBs may choose to produce either 2 separate assessments or one single combined assessment. Both models are supported within this guidance. What matters is that whichever approach you choose provides the greatest value and benefit for your locality and region.

Considering a single combined assessment

Some regions may wish to produce a single, combined assessment that fulfils the statutory requirements of both the PSB well-being assessment and the RPB Population Needs Assessment. This approach is permitted within existing legislation and supported where it adds value locally. The key requirement is that the combined product clearly and transparently meets both statutory duties. Where a single assessment approach is adopted, joint correspondence from PSB and RPB Chairs is required setting out consideration and support.

Some regions have already demonstrated that a well-structured single assessment can successfully fulfil both duties, improve coherence and reduce duplication across partners and communities. 

A single combined assessment may be particularly suitable where:

• PSBs and RPBs already share evidence, engagement or analytical work
• Themes and priorities overlap significantly
• A single narrative would support clearer communication region‑wide
• Local capacity is limited and two separate assessments would be unnecessarily duplicative
• Partners wish to create a single, accessible product for the public or scrutiny

If your partnership chooses this approach, you should ensure that:

• All statutory requirements for both assessments are clearly identifiable
• Compliance and accountability are maintained
• The assessment remains concise, proportionate and purposeful
• Priorities for each partnership are clearly set out
• Detailed evidence is linked via annexes, data catalogues or dashboards that enables findings and priorities to be traced back to the evidence on which they are based
• The product is bilingual, accessible and easy to navigate

Many partnerships may continue to produce 2 separate assessments, The alignment opportunities described below apply equally to partnerships producing separate assessments. Even where the final products remain distinct, there is value in sharing evidence, coordinating engagement or aligning analytical work to strengthen the overall quality of both assessments.

For partnerships producing separate assessments, alignment should be proportionate and pragmatic. Alignment does not require identical content or joint publication. It may be demonstrated through shared or jointly commissioned evidence products, coordinated engagement activity, aligned analytical assumptions, or explicit signposting between assessments.

Partnerships should be able to explain how alignment has reduced duplication, strengthened insight, or improved coherence for communities, rather than meeting a fixed or standardised threshold.

Section 5.3 sets out publication expectations for joint assessments and annex a and annex b for separate assessments.

1. Shared evidence foundation

Both assessments draw on demographic trends, inequalities, Welsh language needs, community insight and emerging pressures. Partnerships may also wish to draw on relevant national and regional evidence sources where available, such as national reports, regional assessments and thematic evidence produced by partners. For example, environmental evidence from the State of Natural Resources Report (SoNaRR) and Natural Resources Wales Area Statements may help provide context on environmental pressures and opportunities within the region which underpin both assessments. Area Statement boundaries broadly align with RPB footprints, which may help partnerships draw on shared regional environmental evidence. Developing a shared evidence spine based on recognised national and local datasets can improve consistency, support comparability across Wales, reduce duplication and strengthen confidence in assessment findings.

2. Coordinated or integrated engagement activities

Citizens, carers, service providers and community groups often contribute to both assessments. Coordinating engagement can reduce fatigue and create a more coherent evidence base. Partnerships may also benefit from jointly delivered engagement or analytical sessions with external partnerships such as Hwb Dyfodol.

3. Aligned timelines and milestones

Mapping the PSB and RPB cycles together at the outset can help partners identify opportunities for shared work on evidence gathering, futures thinking, drafting, review and formal statutory sign‑off. Although the statutory cycles do not automatically align, there is scope for them to run at similar times. PSB well‑being assessments are required once every local government electoral cycle, while RPBs must publish a Population Needs Assessment once per electoral cycle under the Social Services and Well‑being (Wales) Act 2014. Because legislation does not prescribe a different timetable for RPBs, partnerships may choose to coordinate their key milestones. Creating a simple joint timeline showing evidence‑gathering phases, engagement windows, drafting periods and publication points for both duties can support shared planning, reduce duplication and highlight where analytical or engagement activity can be jointly commissioned.

4. Collaborative analytical working

Joint task and finish groups, aligned quality assurance or shared analytical expertise can support consistency and reduce pressure on regional analytical teams. Partnerships may find value in working collaboratively not only between PSBs and RPBs, but also with national or external agencies such as Public Health Wales, Natural Resources Wales, or academic and analytical centres to draw on specialist expertise.

5. Joint futures thinking

Both assessments benefit from looking ahead. A shared approach to futures and scenario planning can help create a coherent, forward-looking narrative across both products.

6. Shared products where they add value

These may include regional evidence summaries, thematic sections, demographic profiles, engagement findings or data catalogues that support both assessments without duplicating work.

Taken together, the above opportunities can help create assessments that are more coherent, more manageable and better aligned to collective action.